| Literature DB >> 26029171 |
Dea Shahinas1, Anjan Debnath2, Christan Benedict1, James H McKerrow2, Dylan R Pillai3.
Abstract
Hsp90 is an essential chaperone responsible for trafficking a vast array of client proteins, which are substrates that Hsp90 regulates in eukaryotic cells under stress conditions. The ATP-binding N-terminal domain of Hsp90 (also known as a GHKL type ATPase domain) can serve as a specific drug target, because sufficient structural diversity in the ATP-binding pocket of Hsp90 allows for ortholog selectivity of Hsp90 inhibitors. The primary objective of this study is to identify inhibitors specific for the ATP-binding domain of Entamoeba histolytica Hsp90 (EhHsp90). An additional aim, using a combination of site-directed mutagenesis and a protein in vitro assay, is to show that the antiparasitic activity of Hsp90 inhibitors is dependent on specific residues within the ATP-binding domain. Here, we tested the activity of 43 inhibitors of Hsp90 that we previously identified using a high-throughput screen. Of the 43 compounds tested, 19 competed for binding of the EhHsp90 ATP-binding domain. Five out of the 19 EhHsp90 protein hits demonstrated activity against E. histolytica in vitro culture: rifabutin, rutilantin, cetylpyridinium chloride, pararosaniline pamoate and gentian violet. These five top E. histolytica Hsp90 inhibitors showed 30-100% inhibition of E. histolytica in culture in the micromolar range. These data suggest that E. histolytica-specific Hsp90 inhibitors are possible to identify and provide important lead compounds for the development of novel antiamebic drugs.Entities:
Keywords: EhHsp90 inhibitors; cetylpyridinium chloride; gentian violet; pararosaniline pamoate; rifabutin; rutilantin
Year: 2015 PMID: 26029171 PMCID: PMC4429810 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1Illustration of ATP binding pocket differences. (A) Molecular model of adenosine diphosphate (ADP) in the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) binding pocket of human (2FWZ) Hsp90 (HsHsp90). (B) Molecular model of ADP in the ATP binding pocket of P. falciparum (3K60) Hsp90 (PfHsp90). (C) Molecular model of ADP in the ATP binding pocket of E. histolytica Hsp90 (EhHsp90) (based on PfHsp90 template: 3K60). (D) Summary of the unique residues in the ATP binding pockets of HsHsp90, PfHsp90 and EhHsp90. Please note that these residues are at conserved positions in the 3D model. These residues were mutated by site-directed mutagenesis to examine alterations in binding specificity.
Figure 2Competitive binding assay using the fluorescent probe bis-ANS for the identification of EhHsp90 inhibitors at a final concentration of 2.5 μM. The error bars represent standard deviation of duplicate readings. Inhibition is defined as >70% reduction of fluorescence in this assay. Compounds 1–43 are listed in Supplementary File 1. Please note that 48 compounds are shown, of which five could not be obtained any longer from the manufacturer. Therefore, the manuscript focuses on the rest 43 compounds, which were used for downstream assays.
Figure 3Drug binding specificity of the Hsp90 ATP binding domains and their mutants. Top 10 inhibitors are shown for each of the wild-type (WT) or site-directed mutant ATP binding domains. Any inhibitors in overlapping ovals are not selective. Inhibition was evaluated by competition for bis-ANS binding. Top 10 inhibitors of the HsHsp90 (A), PfHsp90 (B), EhHsp90 (C) ATP binding domains and the mutants generated in each domain, respectively. (D) Top 10 inhibitors of HsHsp90 and mutants that mimic HsHsp90 residues at the corresponding positions (1). (E) Top 10 inhibitors of HsHsp90 and mutants that mimic HsHsp90 residues at the corresponding positions (2). (F) Top 10 inhibitors of PfHsp90 and mutants that mimic PfHsp90 residues at the corresponding positions. (G) Top 10 inhibitors of EhHsp90 and mutants that mimic EhHsp90 residues at the corresponding positions. The abbreviations for the drugs displayed in this figure are listed in Supplementary File 1.
Summary of inhibition results for the EhHsp90 protein screen and the effect of the inhibitors on .
| GW5074 | 70.5 | – |
| Sanguinarine sulfate | 71.3 | – |
| Rifabutin | 73.7 | 30 |
| Bilirubin | 73.7 | – |
| Clofazimine | 73.7 | – |
| Purpurin | 75.0 | – |
| Tyrphostin AG 538 | 75.0 | – |
| Rutilantin | 77.1 | 100 |
| Rifaximin | 78.2 | – |
| Berberine chloride | 78.3 | – |
| Chlorophyllide | 78.9 | – |
| Amodiaquindihydrochloride dihydrate | 82.1 | – |
| Daunorubicin hydrochloride | 83.2 | – |
| WB 64 (Malachite Green) | 84.9 | – |
| Hycanthone | 90.9 | – |
| Mitoxantronedihydrochloride | 95.3 | – |
| Cetylpyridinium chloride | 95.9 | 42 |
| Pararosanilinepamoate | 99.0 | 81 |
| Gentian Violet | 99.3 | 35 |
Summary of biochemical specificity results for inhibitors of .
| Rifabutin (RIF) | PfHsp90 | PfHsp90: A38 + N92 + R98 | |
| Rutilantin (RUT) | HsHsp90 & PfHsp90 | HsHsp90: N106 PfHsp90: N92 | |
| Cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) | EhHsp90 | EhHsp90: C49 + C103 + R109 | |
| Pararosaniline pamoate (PSP) | EhHsp90 | EhHsp90: C49 + C103 + R109 | |
| Gentian Violet (GVI) | EhHsp90 | EhHsp90: C49 + C103 + R109 HsHsp90: S52A or Kll2R |
The chemical structures shown here have been adapted from ChemDB (Pavithra et al., .
Figure 4Anti-amebic activity of (A) pararosaniline pamoate (IC50 = 1.1 μM) and (B) rutilantin (IC50 = 2.0 μM) using a standard cell-based assay. Mean IC50 curves are shown. Error bars represent standard deviation of triplicate samples.