Christopher Merritt1, Lisseth E Silva2, Angela L Tanner2, Kenneth Stuart1, Michael P Pollastri2. 1. Seattle Biomedical Research Institute , 307 Westlake Avenue North, Suite 500, Seattle, Washington 98109-5219, United States. 2. Department of Chemistry & Chemical Biology, Northeastern University , 417 Egan Research Center, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States.
Kinetoplastid Parasites as Pathogenic Parasites:
Overview, Life Cycle, Relevance of Life Stages to Health
Over the past decade, neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) have seen
a surge in research interest in the area of drug discovery. Protozoan
pathogens that cause three of these NTDs, Chagas disease, human African
trypanosomiasis (HAT), and leishmaniasis, have been the focus of increasing
numbers of reported drug discovery focused publications. This has
been fueled by the elucidation of the pathogen genomes, and the ability
to map targets between parasite and human enzymes, for which a large
amount of target-based drug discovery has been performed, both inside
and outside the pharmaceutical industry. It has been aided by the
parasites that cause these diseases being cultivatable and amenable
to reverse genetic manipulation and by the existence of mouseinfection
model systems. Their analysis has resulted in important fundamental
discoveries, but there remain substantial gaps in knowledge, especially
with respect to characteristics that can be the foundation for needed
therapeutic interventions. In humans, kinases have been a significant
focus of the drug discovery efforts, representing nearly a third of
the “druggable genome”,[1] and
many of these enzymes have been validated with respect to a wide range
of therapeutic indications.With this
background in mind, this review will focus on tools and
approaches for understanding the essentiality of kinase targets in Trypanosoma brucei that causes HAT, T. cruzi that causes Chagas disease, and Leishmania spp.
that cause the various types of leishmaniasis, and it will describe
recent efforts to translate the understanding of these targets into
new therapeutic approaches. While kinases phosphorylate a wide variety
of molecules (e.g., lipids, carbohydrates, amino
acids, nucleotides, etc.), this review is primarily focused on protein
kinases because of their great diversity both in humans and their
pathogens. In addition, these kinases play critical biological roles
and have been shown to be valid drug targets. We do include in the Chemistry section, however, examples of small molecule
discovery efforts that focused on nonprotein kinases.These
three parasites belong to the order Kinetoplastidae and cause
extensive human suffering and death worldwide, as well as significant
economic damage due to diseases that they cause in livestock (Table 1).[2] Although they are
insect-borne, this review will center upon the human host
specific life stages of the parasite because of the relevance
to drug discovery. The full life cycles for these three pathogens
are reviewed elsewhere in this issue.[3] The
diseases due to these parasites are quite widespread, but their transmission
by insect vectors largely limits their range to tropical and subtropical
regions and primarily to poor populations and travelers to the regions
with infected vectors. However, transmission also occurs by blood
transfusion and ingestion of contaminated foods and infrequently by
direct transfer between animals.
Table 1
Summary of Epidemiological
Characteristics
of Chagas Disease, Human African Trypanosomiasis, and Leishmaniasisa
disease
causative
agent
geographic
distribution
vector(s)
reservoir
clinical
outcome
incidence
prevalence
Chagas disease
T. cruzi
Latin America
triatominae (especially Triatoma, Rhodnius and Panstrongylus)
acute phase; chronic phase:
indeterminate, cardiac and digestive infections
∼ 50 000 new
cases of Chagas disease per year
∼8 M T. cruzi infections
human African
trypanosomiasis
T. b. rhodesiense
T. b. gambiense
Africa
glossinidae G. morsitanssspp. G. fuscipessspp. G. palpalissspp.
sleeping sickness
∼10 000 new
cases per year
50 000–70 000
cases
leishmaniasis,
visceral
L. donovani L. infantum
Asia and East Africa (L..don.)
Mediterranean region, Latin America (L.inf.)
Phlebotomusspp. Phlebotomusspp. Lutzomyiaspp.
visceral leishmaniasis,
post kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis
∼500 000 new
cases visceral leishmaniasis per year
leishmaniasis, cutaneous
and mucocutaneous
L. major L. tropica
L. aethiopica L. braziliensis L. mexicana
∼1.5 to 2 M new cutaneous
leishmaniasis cases per year
NA
Taken from the
WHO report of
Research Priorities for Chagas disease, human African trypanosomiasis,
and leishmaniasis.[2]
Taken from the
WHO report of
Research Priorities for Chagas disease, human African trypanosomiasis,
and leishmaniasis.[2]These pathogens are related but
cause distinct diseases with unique
characteristics that are critical for drug development. Their genomes
have striking similarity with extensive conservation of gene content
and synteny.[4] However, the different parasites
are transmitted by different insects and cause different diseases
which is reflected in distinct genomic differences. T. brucei, but not the other two, has many hundreds
of variant surface glycoprotein (VSG) genes and characteristic telomeric
sites from which they are expressed one at a time which results in
antigenic variation and hence immune evasion. T. cruzi has multiple genomic loci with numerous tandemly repeated surface
protein genes which may also function in immune evasion although this
has been studied less extensively compared to T. brucei.[4,5]Leishmania have smaller, more numerous chromosomes,
and their differential gene content compared to the two trypanosomes
may reflect their different means of avoiding the host immune responses.
It is especially important for drug discovery strategies to consider
the different biological compartments within which each of these parasites
resides in the mammalian host and the damaging effects that they exert.
Trypanosoma brucei
The extracellular
metacyclic trypomastigote T. brucei parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infected tsetse fly
and initially proliferate in the bloodstream and lymphatic system
of their mammalian host. They evade immune elimination by periodically
switching the composition of their VSG coat (i.e., antigenic variation), and thus development of anti-HAT vaccines
is not considered feasible.[6] The mammalian
stage parasites rely on glycolysis, which primarily occurs in the
peroxisome-like glycosomes.[7] The parasites’
reliance on glycolysis, a lack of an oxidative phosphorylation system
while retaining the single mitochondrion with its hundreds of proteins,
and the unusual organellar location of glycolysis has led to its becoming
a focus for drug targeting.[8] Other features
that diverge from the host, such as trypanothione-based protection
from oxidative stress,[9] mRNA trans-splicing,[10] and purine auxotrophy,[11] have also been the targets of drug discovery efforts.T. brucei subspecies have important differences. T. brucei rhodesiense causes East African HAT and
has an animal reservoir while T. brucei gambiense causes West African HAT and has a more protracted disease course
and more limited documentation of animal reservoirs.[12] These species also have different drug susceptibilities.
For example, on the basis of invitro results, eflornithine is less effective for T. bruceirhodesiense.[13]T. evansi and T. vivax are T. brucei variants that lack
the ability to infect tsetse flies but are transmitted directly by
biting flies or by sexual transmission between animals. There are
infrequent cases of humaninfections by these species due to direct
transmission apparently by biting flies.[14] The bases for these differences in infectivity are unknown. However,
the differences between human versus animal-infective T. brucei involves the differential susceptibility
to humanserum HDL which is lethal to subspecies that infect animals
but not humans.[15] Human infective subspecies
contain a gene that encodes the serum resistance protein that is related
to VSGs.[15,16]The HAT infection proceeds through
two stages: The first, (or hemolymphatic)
stage of the infection occurs in the blood and lymph, and in this
stage the patient exhibits flu-like symptoms. After a period of time
the parasites move from the bloodstream into the central nervous system,
at which time the progression of infection leads to the characteristic
symptoms of sleeping sickness: disruption of the sleep cycle, coma,
and eventually death. The localization of the pathogen in the CNS
during this second stage of the disease therefore requires brain-penetrant
drugs to treat the infection.
Trypanosoma cruzi
Trypanosoma
cruzi are transmitted
as infective trypomastigotes in the feces that are deposited by infected
triatomine bugs when they feed, and are introduced by contact with
a break in the skin or contact with a mucosal surface. However, they
can be also transmitted by ingestion of contaminated food or beverage,
congenitally, or by transfusion of infected blood. The trypomastigotes
infect many different cell types and differentiate in the host cell
cytoplasm into amastigotes that proliferate in this intracellular
compartment. The amastigotes differentiate into nondividing trypomastigotes
that are released upon rupture of the infected cell, and the trypomastigotes
move to infect other cells. This process is repeated throughout this
acute phase of the disease. The disease subsequently enters a chronic
phase where few parasites, if any, are detectable in the bloodstream
by microscopy and other methods such as PCR, and the infection that
leads to critical pathogenesis is mainly localized in gut and heart
muscle. The chronic phase can last for decades and, over the course
of time, is accompanied by cardiac and enteric pathogenesis.[17] Cardiomyopathy entails ventricular hypertrophy
that can progress to debilitating arrhythmia, severe cardiac pathology,
and associated debility and sudden death. The pathogenesis appears
to have an immunopathological component.[18]T. cruzi strains have modest diversity that has
been cataloged on the basis of isoenzyme (zymodeme) and mitochondrial
DNA or kDNA (schizodeme) variations, and show some complex association
with disease characteristics.[19]
Leishmania sp.
Leishmania are transmitted
as metacyclic promastigotes
to the mammalian host by the bite of an infected sand fly and infect
the host macrophages that engulf them. The promastigotes differentiate
into amastigotes within the phagolysosome of the macrophages where
they proliferate. The phagolysosome is normally a hostile environment
that contains degradative enzymes and becomes acidified upon infection
with pathogens.[20] However, Leishmania have evolved mechanisms that enable them
to escape destruction, though these mechanisms are poorly understood.[20] The infected macrophages lyse and release the
proliferated amastigotes, which infect circulating and tissue macrophages
with the localization of the parasites and pathology dependent on
the Leishmania species and perhaps
host factors.Leishmania species
are much more diverse than the T. brucei and T. cruzi subspecies and they
cause a broad spectrum of diseases that generally correlate with the
species. Indeed, L. braziliensis has
a different number of chromosomes from the other species. The diseases
range from self-resolving cutaneous disease that is associated with L. amazonensis, L. major, L. mexicana, and L. tropica to lethal visceral disease that is associated
with L. chagasi/infantum, and L. donovani or the disseminating and disfiguring
mucocutaneous disease that is associated with L. braziliensis and L. guyanensis. Host genetic differences
undoubtedly contribute to the differences in pathogenesis.[21]Leishmania also
infect wild and domestic animals, including dogs, which appear to
be significant reservoirs of infection, and there appear to be many
people with asymptomatic infections, potentially making them reservoirs
for infection of others. The diversity of leishmaniasis is also reflected
in its widespread geographical and socioeconomic ranges. Poor populations
in East Africa and India are at risk of lethal visceral disease as
are more affluent populations in the Mediterranean region. Cutaneous
disease also affects rural populations who are more likely to come
into contact with infected sandflies.Leishmaniasis may, in
its earlier stages, be silent or have signs
such as fever, swollen lymph nodes, or redness at the site of bite
which develops into an ulcerating lesion in the case of cutaneous
leishmaniasis. A swollen spleen and/or liver often results in the
case of visceral leishmaniasis. The pathogenesis for each Leishmania species appears to have a substantial
immunological component which likely includes genetic characteristics
of both the host and the parasite and whether or not the parasite
harbors an RNA virus that interacts with the host immune system.[22] The cutaneous lesions typically heal, albeit
slowly, and leave a scar, but the parasites persist. Leishmania infections are thus chronic, possibly
lifelong, and drug treatment may not be curative. It is an opportunistic
pathogen, held in check by a fully functional immune system, but is
proliferative and pathogenic in immunocompromised infected hosts.
Visceral leishmaniasis is treated because it is potentially fatal.
However, treatment can result in post kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis
(PKDL), a long-lasting rash-like condition that affects skin over
much of the body.
Neglected Tropical Diseases
Neglected
tropical diseases (NTDs) are those diseases that primarily and disproportionately
affect the poorest regions in the world. Since the highly expensive
drug discovery process is, by and large, performed by the for-profit
biopharmaceutical industry, and since any drugs for NTDs are unlikely
to be profitable, there is only limited effort by industry. As a result,
NTDs are treated by drugs that are suboptimal in safety, efficacy,
cost, and convenience.Kinetoplastid diseases are perhaps central
examples of NTDs. For example, since there are only about 10 000
cases of HAT per year, this represents a DALY of disability-adjusted
life years (DALYs) of 1.6 million per year,[2] and thus is comparable to prostate cancer, which is currently a
significant focus of the pharmaceutical industry. However, since these
infections occur foremost among the very poor in sub-Saharan Africa,
there is no commercial market for developing new anti-HAT drugs. Despite
this, the World Health Organization has targeted HAT for elimination
using a combination of vector control and drug treatment. Importantly,
this disease has been on the brink of eradication many times only
to reoccur episodically. As an additional confounding factor, NTDs
are often complicated by coinfection with HIV. There is a substantial
population at risk of infection with one of these three diseases which
have a combined incidence estimated at ∼2 million new cases
a year.
Need for New Drugs for
Kinetoplastid Diseases
Most drugs for these diseases were
developed in the last century,
and they are unsuitable because of insufficient efficacy, toxicity,
prohibitive cost, and/or increasing drug resistance.
Current Drugs for Human African Trypanosomiasis
Two
drugs, pentamidine and suramin, are approved for this acute
first stage of the infection and are efficacious, though there are
toxicity concerns and resistance is developing.[23] The parasites subsequently invade the central nervous system,
resulting in second stage disease which leads to several pathogenic
consequences, with severe symptoms of lethargy, sleep disturbances,
coma, and eventually death if not treated. There are two drugs for
the second stage: one, the organoarsenical drug melarsoprol, is highly
toxic and leads to mortality in approximately 5% of patients taking
the drug. The other drug, eflornithine, is less toxic, though it is
only efficacious for the gambiense subspecies
and requires large amounts of drug which must be delivered by infusion
over 14 days. There is a new combination therapy now used in lieu
of monotherapy in gambienseinfections:
an eflornithine–nifurtimox combination therapy (NECT), which
reduces the eflornithine dose to 7 days of twice-daily infusions.[24] In addition, clinical trials continue on the
benzoxoborole SCYX-7158[25] and the nitroaromatic
compound fexinidazole.[26] The WHO has set
aspirational goals for new drugs for HAT, seeking orally bioavailable
treatments with lower toxicity, and efficacy in the blood and CNS
infections of both of the infective subspecies.[27]
Current Drugs for Chagas
Disease
Recently, a comprehensive overview of Chagas treatments
was presented
that highlights the grim status of chemotherapeutics for this disease.[28] Currently, Chagas disease is treated using nifurtimox
or benzidazole, both requiring 1–2 months of therapy. This
long treatment regimen leads to low treatment compliance, and both
drugs exert toxicity that becomes apparent over time. Importantly,
these drugs have only been definitively shown to adequately treat
the acute infection (with a modest success rate); there has been no
drug demonstrated to adequately treat the chronic stage of infection.[29]Recent work to repurpose existing antifungal
agents as Chagas disease treatments[30] has
met with mixed results in the clinic.[31] Because of the inability to adequately monitor infectionrates in
the chronic disease, clinical trials for drugs against Chagas disease
are exceedingly challenging, made further so by the low-resource regions
in which the clinical trials must be performed.
Current Drugs for Leishmaniasis
With typical cure rates
from 80% to 100%, the frontline treatment
for leishmaniasis consists of pentavalent antimonial compounds: sodium
stibogluconate and meglumine antimonate. As an alternative, ambisome,
a liposomal formulation of amphotericin B, is very efficacious for
visceral leishmaniasis, but this formulation is expensive and often
out of economic reach for most of those who need treatment. As a result,
ambisome is often utilized as a second line treatment, for patients
for whom pentavalent antimonial drugs fail. Indeed, antimony resistance
in endemic areas is increasing.[32] Use of
paromomycin (mostly for cutaneous leishmaniasis),[33] and the repurposed anticancer drug miltefosine[34] have also shown utility.
Protein Kinases as Druggable Targets
A wide range of
approaches have been pursued in the search for new
drugs for kinetoplastid diseases, including target-based[35] or cell-based[36] high-throughput
small molecule screens and identification of putative essential targets
by detailed cell biology. Following identification of chemical matter
in this way, further optimization is required in order to ensure high
potency, cellular selectivity (low host toxicity), and the ability
of new drugs to meet the target-product profiles for HAT,[37] leishmaniasis,[38] and
Chagas disease.[39] In humans, the primary
focus of drug discovery efforts has historically been upon essential
targets within the so-called “druggable genome”;[1] kinases represent the largest group of druggable
targets in the human genome (22%). Therefore, not surprisingly, a
significant amount of drug discovery focus has been placed on modulation
of kinase signaling, and this historical knowledge provides a compelling
case for drug discovery efforts in NTDs to focus in these areas.Trypanosomatid genomes code for a large number of protein kinases.
Searches for protein kinase active site motifs in predicted proteins
show that there are approximately 176, 190, and 199 protein kinases
encoded in the T. brucei, T. cruzi, and Leishmania major genomes, respectively.[40] This predicted
kinome is a relatively large proportion of all predicted protein coding
genes, at 2%. Therefore, the kinase gene family also represents a
rich family of potential biological targets for pursuit for antikinetoplastid
agents.
Biology
Overview
of Kinases in Trypanosomatid Parasites
The trypanosomatid
kinomes contain nearly all the protein kinase
groups that occur in humans, despite being smaller.[40] It completely lacks members of the receptor-linked tyrosine
and tyrosine kinase-like kinases although tyrosine phosphorylation
occurs, perhaps via dual-specificity protein kinases. The CMGC and
STE groups and NEK family kinases are expanded relative to humans.
In addition, some kinases cannot be definitively assigned to any kinase
groups, suggesting that kinases have diverged substantially, possibly
for Trypanosomatid-specific functions. Most protein kinases are highly
conserved among T. brucei, T. cruzi, and sp., suggesting
that efforts that identify essential kinases or effective kinase inhibitors
in one species would likely aid similar studies in the other trypanosomatid
species.
Strategies for Exploring the Kinetoplastid
Kinome
Protein kinase functions, and their potential as drug
targets, can be explored by genetic or chemical inhibition approaches,
summarized in Table 2. Importantly, studies
for target validation must be performed in the disease stage of the
parasite. The genetic approaches examine the consequences of manipulating
the genes of interest by targeted gene knockout, or alteration of
expression levels or gene protein product function. These approaches
need to contend with the fact that kinetoplastids are diploids and
that paralogous genes may provide functional redundancy. Importantly,
since cells with an essential kinase knocked-down generally cannot
be propagated (cells die), a conditional knockdown approach is typically
necessary to study the phenotypic impacts of the loss of an essential
kinase. Chemical inhibition of specific kinases can also be used to
study kinases and can provide potent and acute inhibition if specificity
can be achieved.
Table 2
Strategies: Advantages and Disadvantages
approach
advantages
disadvantages
Genetic Approaches
gene knockout
completely removes the gene
of interest
cannot
be used if the gene
is necessary for cell survival.
plasmid shuffle
completely removes the gene
of interest
requires
several steps of
genetic manipulation; can only analyze a population over time, phenotypic
analysis difficult
RNAi
requires minimal genetic
manipulation.
incomplete
knockdown of
the gene of interest; off-target effects could occur; only available
in T. brucei
conditional null (transcriptional
repression)
potent
repression of the
gene of interest
requires
several steps of
genetic manipulation; only available in T. brucei
degradation
domain
relatively
fast loss of
protein; can be used in systems lacking RNAi machinery or transcriptional
regulatory tools
incomplete
knockdown could
occur, and varies from protein to protein; protein of interest must
tolerate tags
Chemical
Approaches
specific inhibitors
reflect enzymatic inhibition
versus protein loss; immediate potent inhibition
specific inhibitors’
creation generally involves a tedious chemical optimization project
ATP analogue
sensitive alleles
reflect enzymatic inhibition
versus protein loss; immediate potent inhibition
cells expressing ATP sensitive
analogues must be created
Genetic Approaches
Most genetic
approaches study the loss-of-function of a protein by eliminating
the protein or reducing its cellular level. In some cases conditional
expression of functionally mutated genes can be achieved. These approaches
study the protein of interest at the DNA, RNA, or protein level.
DNA Level
Elimination of the
DNA sequence that encodes the gene of interest is a reliable way to
ensure complete elimination of the encoded protein’s function.
This is typically done by replacing the target gene with a selectable
marker that confers drug resistance. Examples of the use of this approach
in T. brucei and Leishmania can be found in Table 3. For this, DNA constructs
with a selectable marker are created with sequences that are 5′
and 3′ to the kinase coding region for targeting specific recombination.
Double recombination, i.e., at both the 5′
and 3′ ends of the gene, leads to deletion of the coding sequence
of the targeted gene. To create such gene knockout cell lines, these
DNA constructs are electroporated into an appropriate cell line, and
the transfected cells are selected by growth in media containing the
antibiotic that corresponds to the selectable marker and checked for
the proper genetic change, typically by PCR. This approach is repeated
to eliminate the second allele, i.e., generate cells
that are null for the gene. If stable cell lines are obtained this
is considered definitive proof that the gene under study is not essential
for cell viability. The inability to obtain null cell lines is evidence
that the gene may be essential. For example, evidence of Leishmania mexicana CDC2-related kinase 1 and 3 (LmCRK1
and LmCRK3) essentiality was indicated by the inability to knockout
both alleles in this diploid.[41] Since the
inability to create a null cell line can also result for technical
reasons, more thorough approaches need to be used to further assess
essentiality.
Table 3
Essential Kinases
in the Disease Stage
of Trypanosomatids
systematic
ID
name
species
description
evidence
of essentiality
Protein Kinases
Tb927.10.1070
CRK1
T. brucei
Leishmania sp.
cyclin dependent kinase
involved in progression out of G1
RNAi (T.
brucei), cannot produce null (Leishmania)[41a]
Tb927.10.4990
CRK3
T. brucei
Leishmania sp.
cyclin dependent kinase
involved in progression out of G2/M
RNAi (T.
brucei),[48b,55] cannot produce null
(Leishmania)[41b]
Tb927.2.4510
CRK9
T. brucei
cyclin dependent kinase
involved in transcriptional control
RNAi[56]
Tb11.01.4130
CRK12
T. brucei
cyclin dependent kinase
conditional null, RNAi[47,48]
Tb11.01.0330
AUK1
T. brucei
aurora kinase involved in
progression through G2
RNAi[60]
Tb927.7.6310
PLK
T. brucei
polo-like kinase involved
in progression through mitosis
RNAi[57]
Tb927.7.5770
PK53
T. brucei
nuclear DBF-2-related (NDR)
kinase
RNAi[61]
Tb927.10.4940
PK50
T. brucei
nuclear DBF-2-related (NDR)
kinase
RNAi[61]
Tb927.10.13780
GSK3
T. brucei
glycogen synthase kinase
3
RNAi[62]
Tb11.01.4230
CLK1
T. brucei
CDC2-like kinase
RNAi[46a]
Tb927.10.5140
ERK8
T. brucei
RNAi[48b]
Tb927.5.800
CK1.2
T. brucei
casein kinase 1 (CK1)
RNAi, cannot produce null[63]
Tb927.1.1930
TOR4
T. brucei
target of rapamycin 4
RNAi[64]
LmjF36.6470
MPK1
Leishmania sp.
mitogen-activated protein
(MAP) kinase
null[65]
LmjF19.1440
MPK4
Leishmania sp.
mitogen-activated protein
(MAP) kinase
cannot
produce null[66]
Carbohydrate
Tb927.3.3270
PFK
T. brucei
phosophofructokinase (PFK)
RNAi[67]
Tb927.10.14140
PyK1
T. brucei
pyruvate kinase (PyK)
RNAi[67]
Tb927.1.720
PGKA,
PGKB, PGKC
T. brucei
phosphoglycerate kinase
(PGK)
RNAi[68]
Tb927.1.710
Tb927.1.700
Tb927.10.2010
HK1, HK2
T. brucei
hexokinase
RNAi[67,69]
Tb927.10.2020
A more thorough approach to determine essentiality
at the DNA level is using an approach based on the “plasmid
shuffling” approach established in yeast.[42] In L. major, this approach
was used to show that 5,10-methylene tetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase
(DHCH) was an essential gene.[43] With this
approach, both chromosomal copies of the target gene were knocked
out while an episomal copy of DHCH was present in the background to
support viability. A negative selectable marker present on the episomal
vector was included to drive loss of this episomal vector when desired,
and a positive selectable marker (GFP) was present to verify the presence
or absence of the episomal vector. To test for essentiality, cells
were grown in media to drive the loss of the episome, and flow cytometry
was used to sort cells that either retained or lost the episome. It
was found that cloned cell lines could only grow out when the episome
was present, suggesting that expression of DHCH is essential for cell
growth. This approach can be used in cases where cell viability can
be supported with an episome. However, this approach requires a substantial
amount of genetic manipulation and cell sorting to achieve a conclusive
result.
RNA Level
RNAi approaches can
be used to specifically degrade the mRNA for a target kinase. This
approach can only be used in systems with robust RNAi machinery. As
a consequence, RNAi approaches have been used routinely in T. brucei but have not been successfully used in T. cruzi or Leishmania sp.[44] In T. brucei, RNAi is performed by
inserting a transgene that conditionally expresses the dsRNA that
is specific to a fragment of the mRNA of the target gene upon the
addition of tetracycline. Libraries of cells that contain RNAi transgenes
that target mRNAs from random regions of the genome can also be used
in conjunction with high-throughput sequencing approaches to screen
RNAi knockdown effects on a genome-wide level.[45] RNAi knockdown in T. brucei employs a single straightforward transfection but has the disadvantages
that the knockdown can be incomplete, which leads to nondefinitive
results, and may affect off-target mRNAs. This approach has been widely
used to identify likely essential kinases in T. brucei in a gene-by-gene approach (see Table 2)
or by higher-throughput RNAi screens.[45,46]Transcriptional
regulation of a gene expression can also be used to eliminate or reduce
expression of a gene of interest. This approach has been used in T. brucei in which tetracycline (tet)-regulatory
approaches have been established. For this, a tet-regulatable copy
of the gene is inserted at an exogenous locus in a strain that expresses
a copy of the tet-repressor protein that is necessary for the conditional
regulation. When this additional gene copy is expressed in the presence
of tet, the two endogenous alleles can be knocked out as outlined
above. Expression of the gene of interest can then repressed by growing
cells in media lacking tet. This approach was used to show that CDC2-related
kinase 12 (CRK12) was essential in T. brucei(47) as was observed upon RNAi knockdown.[48] A disadvantage to this approach is that it requires
several steps of genetic manipulation and has only been successfully
used in T. brucei.
Protein Level
Expression of a
protein of interest can be specifically down-regulated by knocking
in a copy of the gene coding the kinase with a destabilizing domain
(DD) tag.[49] DD tags are protein domains
that are properly folded only in the presence of a compound. When
unfolded, the DD and fused protein will be specifically targeted for
proteasomal degradation. When other endogenous copies of these genes
are knocked out, expression of this protein is then reliant on the
presence of a compound. This approach has successfully been used in
trypanosomatids and Plasmodium sp.,
including the Plasmodium falciparum protein kinase PfCDPK5.[50] One limitation
of this approach is that all proteins may not be able to be successfully
targeted this way because the toleration of tags by proteins and their
targeting to the proteasome is unpredictable. Another limitation is
that the subcellular location of a protein may impede its destruction
by the cellular protein degradation machinery.
Chemical Inhibition Approaches To Identify
Essential Kinases
Kinases can be specifically inhibited using
compounds with high selectivity. When this is possible, treatment
with a potent inhibitor can lead to almost immediate inhibition of
a specific target. Such an approach can also reveal the effects of
acute inhibition of enzymatic activity versus elimination of protein.[51]Inhibitors that are specific to a kinase
of interest can be produced utilizing medicinal chemistry approaches.
With these specific inhibitors cellular phenotypes can be examined
and essentiality can be determined. The challenge with the use of
inhibitors to examine phenotypic consequences is obtaining specific
inhibition of the kinase of interest, since it is unlikely that absolute
kinase selectivity will be achieved, which may allow confounding phenotype(s).
Nonetheless, inhibitors that have been developed and may enable this
approach are described later in this article.
ATP Analogue Sensitive Alleles
The conservation of
the ATP-binding site allows for a general strategy
for the inhibition of specific protein kinases. Within this binding
site nearly all protein kinases contain a large hydrophobic “gatekeeper”
residue.[52] When this gatekeeper residue
is mutated to a small residue (glycine or alanine), a unique pocket
is formed that will allow for the binding of promiscuous inhibitors
with bulky groups allowing specific inhibition of this mutant allele.
Cell lines can be constructed that only contain this inhibitor-sensitive
allele, allowing for potent and specific inhibition. This approach
has revealed important insights on the differences between traditional
genetic approaches to knockdown/knockout kinases of interest versus
chemical inhibition.[51] For example, genetic
studies have suggested that depletion of mammalian cyclin dependent
kinase 2 (CDK2) shows almost no effect whereas inhibition with chemical
inhibition, such as this, shows dramatic effects that cannot be attributed
to off-target effects.[53] This approach
has been used in T. brucei to study
the function of polo-like kinase (PLK), but could be applied to almost
any protein kinase of interest. This approach also allows the study
of essential protein kinases in systems with only a limited number
of genetic approaches, such as T. cruzi or Leishmania species.
Characterization of Specific
Kinases and Signaling
Cascades
Specific kinases have generally been studied on
a gene-by-gene
basis with the genetic methods outlined in section 2.2.1 These kinases are discussed in the sections below and in
Table 3. Recently, though, high-throughput
screens have been performed to elucidate the roles and essentiality,
of many, or all, kinases simultaneously.[45,46b,47,48b] These high-throughput
findings have been thoroughly compiled by others recently[46b] and will therefore not be reviewed here.
Cell Cycle Protein Kinases
Many of
the well-studied essential protein kinases in T. brucei are homologues of well-studied cell cycle regulators in other systems
(reviewed elsewhere).[54] Cell cycle kinases
shown to date to be essential are tabulated in Table 3.
Cyclin Dependent Kinases
The trypanosomatid
genomes code for 11 putative members of the cyclin dependent kinase
family[54a] referred to as CDC2-Related Kinases
(CRK). A majority of these 11 CRKs are essential in bloodstream form
(BF) T. brucei, suggesting that this
family may be an especially attractive target for chemical inhibitors.
There is evidence that CRK3 is essential in both T.
brucei(48b,55) and Leishmania.[41b] In T. brucei, CRK3 knockdown by RNA causes an increase
in G2/M cells, suggesting that this kinase is essential for exit out
of this phase of the cell cycle.[55] In T. brucei, CRK1, CRK2, and CRK11 also appear to be
essential, and their knockdown results in an accumulation of cells
in G1 phase (unpublished results).[55] CRK9
is essential in T. brucei, appears
to play a role in transcriptional regulation, and may lead to minor
defects in the cell cycle upon its depletion.[56] Finally, CRK12 has been shown to be essential in BF T. brucei, but does not appear to have cell-cycle
defects upon down-regulation.[47,48]
Polo-like Kinase (PLK)
Polo-like
kinases are involved in progression through mitosis in other organisms.
The T. brucei genome encodes one PLK
and RNAi knockdown of TbPLK in BF T. brucei resulted in a strong growth defect. PLK has a basal body localization
during early cell cycle stages and is redistributed to the flagellar
activation zone upon later stages where PLK may promote initiation
of cytokinesis,[57,58] which is distinct from PLKs in
other systems as being regulators of transition out of G2 phase.[59]
Dbf2-Related
(NDR) Kinases
TbPK50
and TbPK53 are the only homologues in T. brucei of nuclear Dbf2-related (NDR) kinases. This family of kinases has
been shown to be involved in cell cycle regulation and development
in several organisms.[70] Down-regulation
of expression of each of these kinases by RNAi leads to a strong growth
defect followed by cell death.[61] Specific
inhibition of these kinases leads to an accumulation of cells with
two nuclei and two kinetoplast DNA bodies, which suggest that these
kinases have roles in progression through cytokinesis.
Aurora Kinases
Aurora kinases have
generally been found to be involved in chromosome segregation and
cytokinesis.[71] The T. brucei genome codes for three Aurora kinases and RNAi studies have found
that at least one of these aurora kinaes, TbAUK1, is essential for
cell growth. Knockdown of TbAUK1 or overexpression of a catalytically
inactive mutant of TbAUK1 leads to pleotropic cell cycle defects including
the typically conserved chromosome segregation and cytokinesis functions.[60,72]
Mitogen-Activated Protein (MAP) Kinases
Genetic analyses of mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinases have
shown that they have various roles in parasite biology, including
parasite viability, virulence, environmental sensing, and flagellar
biogenesis. An extensive analysis of MAPKs has been performed in Leishmania sp. and has been thoroughly reviewed elsewhere.[73] There were 15 MAP kinases identified in Leishmania sp., and two have been found to be essential
in the disease stages of the parasite in Leishmania
mexicana. MPK1 has been shown to be essential for
infection,[65] and MPK4 has been shown to
be essential in promastigote and amastigote stages.[74] Interestingly, though, the orthologue of MPK4 was not found
to be essential in the bloodform stage of T. brucei.[66]
Carbohydrate
Kinases
Glycolysis is
the highly conserved process of breaking down glucose to provide energy
in the form of ATP. In kinetoplastids the components of the glycolytic
pathway for the conversion of glucose to 3-phosphoglycerate are found
in specialized peroxisome-related organelles called “glycosomes”
with other components found in the cytosol.[75] In the bloodstream form of T. brucei, import and utilization of glucose from the host is the sole source
of ATP, due to the limited function of the mitochondria in this stage
of the parasite. This makes glycolysis an especially appealing target
for targeted therapeutics. The four kinases of the glycolysis pathway
have been found to be essential in the bloodstream form of T. brucei: hexokinase (HXK) (two nearly identical
enzymes, TbHK1 and TbHK, have been found to be independently essential),[67,69] phosophofructokinase (PFK),[67] pyruvate
kinase (PYK),[67] and phosphoglycerate kinase
(PGK).[68] Glycolysis kinases shown to be
essential are tabulated in Table 3.
Identification of Kinase Targets Mediated by
Small Molecules
Druggable kinases have been identified using
several mass spectrometry-based
approaches in combination with compounds. These approaches use cell
lysates as a source of T. brucei kinase
protein and specifically enrich for kinases using different matrices
containing immobilized kinase inhibitors or other kinase-binding compounds.
Identification of Covalent Kinase Inhibitors
Hypothemycin,
a natural polyketide that covalently inhibits a subset
of protein kinases, was found to kill T. brucei and was used as probe to identify which protein kinases bind hypothemycin.[46a] Hypothemycin has been shown to covalently inhibit
protein kinases through a cysteine residue preceding the conserved
catalytic DXG motif found in all protein kinases (CDXG kinases).[76] Mass spectrometry analysis, in combination with
a hypothemycin-based probe, showed that 10 of 21 CDXG kinases in T. brucei covalently bind hypothemycin, and RNAi
analysis showed that only two of these protein kinases were essential
for growth. One of these essential CDXG kinases, CDC2-like kinase
1 (CLK1), was not known to be essential prior to this work. In the
end, this approach was able to identify novel essential protein kinases
that can readily bind an inhibitor in its active site, further suggesting
that this kinase is druggable. This approach could theoretically be
expanded to any other covalent kinase inhibitors in T. brucei to identify highly druggable targets.
Drug Elution from an ATP-Sepharose Matrix
Putative T. brucei kinase targets
of compounds that kill T. brucei that
were originally developed against humanEGFR/VEGFR were identified
using an ATP-sepharose enrichment, elution, and mass spectrometry
approach.[77] For this, T.
brucei ATP-binding proteins were enriched with an
ATP-sepharose matrix, and proteins were eluted with one of three different
kinase inhibitors (lapatinib, canertinib, and AEE788). This study
found that many protein kinases were eluted with these compounds and
five were eluted with all three compounds. This specific elution suggests
that the protein kinases may be targets of these compounds and that
these protein kinases have accessible active sites.
Drug Elution from a Kinase Inhibitor Affinity
Matrix
Another approach to determine potential targets of
kinase inhibitors with a mass spectrometry approach was originally
developed by Cellzome in efforts to identify the targets of ABL kinase
inhibitors in humans.[78] With this approach,
protein kinases from lysate are enriched on a matrix containing several
immobilized pan-kinase inhibitors. This is done with a lystate incubated
with and without inhibitors. Protein kinases that bind an inhibitor
of interest will bind the matrix less efficiently and will be found
in less abundance when eluted from the matrix and measured with quantitative
mass spectrometry (iTRAQ). This approach has been used to identify
putative targets in T. brucei against
staurosporine, BMS-387032, and several hit compounds against essential T. brucei protein kinases.[79]
Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry of
Protein Kinases
As the largest “druggable”
family of targets in the
human genome,[1] it is perhaps not surprising
that protein kinases have been of intense focus of drug discovery
efforts over the past decade. A recent report notes that 90% of these
programs have been for oncology indications, yet it appears that chronic
indications are beginning to gather increasing levels of interest.[80] The types of challenges inherent in discovery
of inhibitors of kinases are manifold. First (and perhaps foremost),
owing to the relatively high similarity one would expect from a family
of enzymes that catalyze the same (phosphoryl transfer) reaction,
achieving selectivity between kinases is a daunting task. This has
been borne out experimentally.[81] Others
have suggested that complete selectivity may not be fully warranted,
instead opting to look for some levels of nonselectivity.[82] However, it has become clear in recent years
that true kinase selectivity profiles often only become evident late
in development. The classic example of this was in the discovery of
imatinib (Gleevec); while it was originally touted as a PGDFR inhibitor,
later studies uncovered its effectiveness was due to inhibition of
other kinases (namely, cKIT and BCR-ABL).[83]Thus, while much effort has focused on achieving kinase selectivity
as ascertained by biochemical selectivity assays, there is movement
toward increased focus on cellular assays to more faithfully evaluate
the biological outcome that one wishes to effect. Indeed, cellular
assays, while perhaps noisier and more challenging to deconvolute
results, better inform the medicinal chemist with respect to the inhibitor
effects in the presence of physiological concentrations of ATP (biochemical
assays are most often performed at lower ATP concentrations, which
makes the inhibitors appear more potent than they would be in the
cellular environment). Cell assays can provide information regarding
potential compensatory mechanisms, not to mention the ability of the
inhibitor to permeate the cell membrane.A prototypical kinase
inhibitor is generally an aromatic heterocycle
that presents the classic H-bond donor/acceptor motif, which enables
binding to the hinge region of the targeted kinase. Also, increased
lipophilicity often results from optimization of compounds that extend
into lipophilic pockets near the binding site. As a result, such structural
features can adversely impact upon compound solubility and absorption
properties. Strategies to ameliorate this issue have emerged, such
as installation of planarity-breaking functionality,[84] or attachment of hydrophilic functionality that does not
directly engage with the target, but extends toward solvent.[85]In addition, an enormous amount of kinase-targeting
medicinal chemistry
has been enabled by structural biology studies that can help elucidate
the binding modalities of compounds and assist in improving potency
and selectivity profiles by informing key contacts between inhibitor
and target. This has resulted in the identification of various classes
of kinase inhibitors that bind to active kinase (type I, or DFG-in
inhibitors), or that stabilize the inactive form of the kinase (type
II, or DFG-out).[86] This structural biology
information on human targets can surely enrich and enable redirection
of previous medicinal chemistry efforts onto kinases of other species
(such as trypanosomatids).
Kinase Medicinal Chemistry
Challenges
The medicinal chemistry challenges described above
also apply to
the discovery of kinase-targeting drugs for trypanosomatid parasites.
For example, instead of working to ensure kinase selectivity within
a single species, one must focus on achieving inhibitor selectivity
against host and pathogen kinases. For tool compounds, which are molecules
developed for the primary purpose of perturbing specific targets or
pathways, a highly selective inhibitor is needed.. From a drug discovery
perspective, however, enzyme selectivity within the parasitic kinome
is unnecessary.The physicochemical properties for drugs that
target trypanosomatid parasites are also crucial beyond simply ensuring
oral bioavailability. Indeed, the types of properties that make for
good oral drugs are still applicable. However, additional consideration
must be given to biodistribution. For example, compounds that would
be effective agents for treating stage II HAT infections would need
to be brain penetrant. Historical kinase-targeting drugs have higher
molecular weight compared to other approved drugs;[87] this is due to the extended structural motifs built to
generate kinase selectivity by engaging pockets remote from the ATP
binding site. Recent reports suggest that CNS-acting drugs need to
be within a limited molecular weight, and lipophilicity/polarity range.[88] Thus, there may be a trade-off between discovery
of CNS-penetrant antitrypanosomal kinase inhibitor drugs and exquisite
host kinase selectivity.Another compound behavior driven by
physicochemical properties
(and heretofore not yet well-understood) is the ability of compounds
to permeate into parasite cells and, for intracellular parasites,
permeate into both the infected host cells and the parasite. Parasite
cell permeation is therefore a consideration that should attract future
attention.While human kinase drug discovery programs have,
to this point,
been primarily focused on cancer chemotherapies (which is considered
to be an time-bound indication compared to long-term, chronic diseases,
such as diabetes), the therapeutic regimen often extends several months.
As a result, tolerance for side effects that may emerge due to inhibition
of other kinase targets is somewhat low (though not as low as would
be required for diseases requiring life-long treatment). However,
in the case of antiparasitic drug discovery, when considering the
desired kinase selectivity profile of a new inhibitor one must realize
that such a treatment is likely to last only a week or so (for example,
see the target-product profile for HAT).[37] Therefore, a kinase that is an undesirable off-target for longer-term
treatments may not be an important off-target for short-term acute
therapies such as an anti-infective indication. Clearly, inhibitor
activity at antitargets such as the hERG ion channel (which is correlated
to sudden and fatal cardiac arrhythmia),[89] or those that are involved in any other sort of serious and acute
toxicity, must be carefully monitored. This is a balance that must
be made by antiparasitic drug hunters.
Kinase-Targeted
Medicinal Chemistry in Protozoans
Where the Biological Target Is Known
Glycogen
Synthase Kinase-3 Short (GSK-3)
Glycogen synthase kinase-3
(GSK-3), a protein kinase essential
in the cell signaling pathway in mammals,[90] has been targeted for therapeutics discovery for diseases such as
Alzheimer’s disease and diabetes mellitus.[91] The T. brucei homologue
contains differences that should conceivably allow for inhibition
selectivity over the mammalian GSK, a prediction that is borne out
experimentally.[62] Though two forms of GSK3β
are expressed (long and short), RNAi assay data suggest the short
form of TbGSK3β is essential for T. brucei parasite growth and viability in the bloodstream form.[45]Excellent correlation was observed between
the BSF cell activity and enzyme inhibition by compounds from a small
molecule inhibitor library containing 48 known protein kinase inhibitors
that were screened against T. brucei GSK3 short and T. brucei BSF parasites.
GW8510 (1), shown in Figure 1,
inhibited the T. brucei kinase and
parasite growth with an IC50 of 1 nM against the parasite
kinase, which translated to an EC50 of 119 nM against the
BSF parasite. CDK 1/2 inhibitor III (2), 2-cyanoethyl
alsterpaullone (3), and SU9516 (4, Figure 1) also showed submicromolar inhibition of both the
kinase and cellular growth. Compound 2 was the most potent
toward the whole cell parasite with an EC50 of 20 nM, and
had an IC50 of 13 nM against TbGSK. A set of 255 known
human GSK-3β inhibitors were also screened against the parasitic
enzyme and the BF T. brucei, and again,
excellent correlation between biochemical and cellular potency was
observed, reconfirming that GSK-3 is a meaningful drug target for T. brucei(92) In a subsequent
report (which used a different assay than above), compound 2 was 2-fold selective for the parasite enzyme over the host homologue:
TbGSK IC50 of 0.12 μM versus HsGSK3β 0.21 μM,
while compound 1 showed no selectivity over the human
enzyme: TbGSK and HsGSK3β IC50s of 0.02 μM.[93]
Figure 1
Protein kinase inhibitors screened against TbGSK and BSF T. brucei
Protein kinase inhibitors screened against TbGSK and BSF T. bruceiWith an eye toward repurposing existing human GSK3β
inhibitors,
Pfizer screened 16 540 of these compounds in a HTS against
TbGSK-3, counter-screened against the human homologue HsGSK3β.
In the end, 362 had potency below 1 μM IC50, and
35 had potencies below 100 nM. Two of these compounds, PF-04903528
(5) and 0181276 (6) (Figure 2), showed 7-fold selectivity for the parasitic enzyme. There
were 17 compounds with parasite kinase potencies of less than 100
nM, including 5 and 6, tested then against T. brucei cells and counter-screened against the
human fetal lung fibroblast MRC-5 cell line. Despite the inverted
biochemical selectivity between host and pathogen kinases (HsGSK3β
IC50 = 3 nM vs TbGSK3 IC50 = 99 nM), compound
CE-317112 (7), shown in Figure 2, displayed a 35-fold cellular selectivity margin. Although, generally
speaking, a direct correlation between TbGSK3 and T. brucei cellular activity was observed, there were some exceptions. For
example, CE-160042 (8) inhibited the TbGSK3 with an IC50 of 0.142 μM but showed no activity in the whole parasite
assay (>25 μM). This is likely to be partially due to lack
of
cellular permeation (a hypothesis supported in part by lack of permeability
in Caco-2 cells). From the set of screening hits, 13 compounds were
tested against a panel of 40 human protein kinases at 10 μM
to determine selectivity. Compound 8 showed high specificity
by inhibiting only HsGSK3β, however, it was inactive against T. brucei cells. Compound PF-04279731 (9) showed moderate selectivity by inhibiting only two other human
kinases besides HsGSK3β, though the compound was nonselective
between T. brucei and MRC-5 cells.
The authors conclude that, taken together, the desirable potency of 5 and selectivity of 6 in regards to the parasite
kinase, the GSK-3β selectivity of 8, and the desirable
cytotoxicity data of 7 all contribute to excellent starting
points for future TbGSK inhibitors.[94]
Figure 2
Human
GSK inhibitors screened against TbGSK-3s.
Human
GSK inhibitors screened against TbGSK-3s.Urbaniak et al. used a kinase-inhibitor matrix (kinobeads)
that
can measure a compound’s binding interaction with a wide variety
of kinases simultaneously, to profile the known mammalian kinase inhibitors
staurosporine (10) and BMS-387032 (11, Figure 3), along with four parasite kinase inhibitors identified
by the University of Dundee’s Drug Discovery Unit (structures
not disclosed). Staurosporine inhibited one-third of both the 44 human
and trypanosome kinases tested with submicromolar potencies, 10 of
which were under 100 nM. Compound 11, a known human CDK
inhibitor, was found to inhibit most of the trypanosome CDKs, including
CRK2 and CRK3, and two other kinases, CMGC and CAMK, with submicromolar
potencies. Compound DDD85893 was found to inhibit T.
brucei cells in vitro with good selectivity
over humanMRC5 cells. The kinobead profiling showed nanomolar inhibition
of TbGSK3, as well as three other trypanosome CMGC kinases at micromolar
potency. When the compound was profiled against humanMRC5 cell lysates,
GSK3α, GSK3β, and CDK9 were inhibited with nanomolar potency.
The authors concluded that compound DDD85893 shows activity against
TbGSK3 and other TbCMGC kinases; however, it shows no selectivity
over the homologous human kinases.[79]
Figure 3
Known mammalian
kinase inhibitors profiled against the T. brucei kinome using kinobead technology.[95]
Known mammalian
kinase inhibitors profiled against the T. brucei kinome using kinobead technology.[95]Recently, Woodland et al. reported
the assessment of five series
of compounds as TbGSK3 inhibitors based on a luminescence-based biochemical
assay of 4110 compounds from the kinase set at the University of Dundee
Drug Discovery Unit.[96] While some TbGSK3
inhibitors were found to be nonspecific cellular toxins, the 2-amino-1,3,5-triazine 12 showed submicromolar activity. Out of over 100 oxazole-4-carboxamides
tested, 11 showed activity against TbGSK3, including compound 13, shown in Figure 4, which had submicromolar
inhibition. However, this series was not pursued due to generally
high IC50 values and flat structure–activity relationships.
On the other hand, the singleton 2,4-diaminothiazole, 14 in Figure 4, had an IC50 value
of 0.4 μM and showed good physicochemical properties. However,
this compound was nonselective over HsGSK3 (5 nM). Nonetheless, 21
analogues of the 2,4-diaminothiazole were designed on the basis of
molecular modeling and tested against the parasite and mammalian GSK,
and against parasite cells. Compounds 15–17 showed submicromolar inhibition of T. brucei cells with selectivity over the humanMRC5 cells. While a range
of potencies against TbGSK3 was observed, none were selective over
HsGSK3β.[96]
Figure 4
Inhibitors of TbGSK3.
Inhibitors of TbGSK3.In summary, the attractiveness
of TbGSK3 remains open for discussion
at present. While a handful of leads have been discovered with potencies
in the nanomolar range, there is typically limited selectivity over
the human homologue, and host cell toxicity effects are variable.
Phosophofructokinase (PFK)
The
carbohydrate kinase phosphofructokinase (PFK) has been determined
to be an attractive antitrypanosomal drug target,[67,97] and because T. bruceiPFK and humanPFK have exceptionally different structures,[98] there is an increased likelihood for selective drug design.On the basis of previous work that showed 2,5-anhydro-d-mannitol-based
compounds led to weak inhibition of T. bruceiPFK,[99] 55 related analogues substituted
with arylamino groups were synthesized and screened against TbPFK.
Of these, 13 compounds showed over 50% inhibition at concentrations
of 5 μM. Compound 18, with an IC50 of
410 μM, showed 6-fold potency over all other compounds screened.
From compound 18, a series of compounds was synthesized
and tested against TbPFK at 1 μM concentrations. All amides
showed improved potency over 18, and compound 19, shown in Figure 5, gave the best potency
against TbPFK with an IC50 of 23 μM. The eight most
potent compounds against TbPFK were also screened against T. brucei cells. Increasing potency against TbPFK
led to a similar trend of potency against the parasitic cells. While
all compounds showed some growth inhibition, the best compound, 19, showed an EC50 of 30 μM. The correlation
between biochemical and cellular activity was suggested by the authors
to be evidence that the PFK is indeed the target of inhibition.[100]
Figure 5
2,5-Anhydro-d-mannitol analogues screened against
TbPFK.
2,5-Anhydro-d-mannitol analogues screened against
TbPFK.Ngantchou et al. tested alkaloids
from the West African rainforest
tree Polyalthia suaveolens against
TbPFK (along with T. brucei GAPDH and
aldolase enzymes). Compounds 20 (polysin) and 21 (greenwayodendrin-3-one) (Figure 6) were
obtained from Polyalthia suaveolens bark and screened along with 3-O-acetyl greenwayodendrin,
(22), N-acetyl polyveoline (23), and polyveoline (24). Compounds 20–22 and 24 showed activity against TbPFK and showed
selectivity over rabbit muscle PFK. A mixture of compounds 20 and 21 was the most potent parasite enzyme inhibitor
with an IC50 of 20 μM, only inhibiting rabbit muscle
PFK 18% at 170 μM. Compound 24 had an IC50 of 30 μM and showed no inhibition of the rabbitPFK, while
compound 22 was less potent toward the TbPFK with an
IC50 of 170 μM. Kinetic studies showed that a mixture
of compounds 20 and 21 competitively inhibits
TbPFK. The Ki value of the mixture was
measured to be 10 μM. In comparison to the natural substrate
fructose-6-phosphate, the Ki/Km ratio was equal to 0.05, suggesting that the 20 and 21 mixture is 20 times more effective than fructose-6-phosphate.
A small amount of purified 20 was isolated, and the Ki was calculated to be 9 μM, suggesting
that compound 20 may be responsible for the activity
and compound 21 may be acting synergistically.[101]
Figure 6
Alkaloids screened against T. brucei PFK.
Alkaloids screened against T. bruceiPFK.Recently, Brimacombe et al. screened
330 683 compounds against T. bruceiPFK.[102] The para-amidosulfonamide
scaffold, typified by 25 (Figure 7), was identified as a hit series.
A derivative of the antibiotic sulfamethoxazole, 25 was
a 0.41 μM inhibitor of TbPFK. SAR studies showed that the para
arrangement on the phenyl group core was necessary for activity, and
replacement of this ring with a saturated ring, an alkyl chain, or
a heteroaryl core all reduced activity. In addition, the sulfonamide
and amide functionalities were found to be crucial for enzyme inhibition.
Further exploration of the amide substituent revealed that the original
3,4-dichlorophenylacetamide functionality in 25 was optimal.
Next, the isoxazole was probed. The 5-des-methyl
analogue, shown as 26 in Figure 7, gave equivalent potency. Carboxylic acid functionality (27 and 28) further increased potency with IC50 values of 0.26 and 0.16 μM, respectively. The corresponding
ester showed a sharp decrease in potency along with pyrimidine, phenol,
and aniline replacements of the phenyl group. On the eastern end of
the molecule, a thiazole-for-phenyl replacement resulted in improved
activity (29, with TbPFK IC50 of 79 nM), while
fluoro substitution on the benzyl group led to even greater potency
(30, IC50 = 24 nM). The thiadiazole analogues 31 and 32 also gave good potency with IC50s of 112 and 15 nM for TbPFK, respectively. Compound 32 was shown to be selective over rabbitPFK. Upon screening
select compounds against T. brucei BSF, 25 and 26 showed modest parasite dose-dependent
toxicity with EC50 values equal to 34 and 17 μM,
respectively, while 32, the most potent PFK inhibitor,
did not show any significant parasite growth inhibition, for reasons
that remain uncertain. Compounds 25, 26,
and 32, however, showed no toxicity against MRC-5human
lung cell line and good ADME properties.
Figure 7
Amidosulfonamide derivatives
tested against TbPFK.
Amidosulfonamide derivatives
tested against TbPFK.
Phosphoglycerate Kinase (PGK)
Targeting another carbohydrate kinase involved in glycolysis, Bernstein
et al. targeted T. brucei phosphoglycerate
kinase (TbPGK). From PGK crystallography and sequencing data[103,103b−103d] the researchers observed that the majority
of the previously reported computational designs for inhibitors contain
an adenosine component binding to the active site. In addition, previous
SAR studies by the authors showed that the N6,2′-disubstituted
adenosine analogues inhibited TbGAPDH.[104,104b] Therefore,
several monosubstituted N6 and N2 adenosine derivatives were chosen
to screen against TbPGK. Of these, 2-amino-N6-substituted
analogues showed better activity against the parasite kinase compared
with the N6 compounds that lacked the C2 amino group, although activity
was still weak (Figure 8). A library of phenethyl
analogues was created on the basis of the most potent compound, 2-amino-N6-(2″-phenylethyl)adenosine (33 in
Figure 8), which had an IC50 of
200 μM. Attaching an additional phenethyl group to the adenine
ring (69) resulted in increased potency (IC50 = 30 μM). At 100 μM, compound 34 was selective
over rabbit muscle PGK. Compound 34 was also tested against
BSF T. brucei brucei and T. brucei rhodesiense. Screens against both subspecies
gave an EC50 of 20 μM, and 40 μM against murine
fibroblasts, representing a 2-fold selectivity.[105]
Figure 8
Adenosine derivatives tested against TbPGK and T. brucei.
Adenosine derivatives tested against TbPGK and T. brucei.
Hexokinase
As a third example
of a carbohydrate kinase targeted for inhibitor discovery, the T. brucei hexokinase is only 37% similar to the human
homologue, suggesting the possibility of selective inhibitor design.[8] Phosphorylation of glucose to glucose-6-phosphate
is catalyzed by hexokinase, and several studies have shown that analogues
of glucose, including glucosamine[106] and
2-C-hydroxymethyl glucose[107] derivatives, inhibit the reaction. Since glucose-6-phosphate has
affinity toward the active site of T. brucei hexokinase,
Willson et al. tested several glucose-6-phosphate analogues against T. brucei hexokinase. Compounds 35 and 36, shown in Figure 9, showed weak
inhibition against T. brucei hexokinase,
with 75% inhibition at 3 mM for 35 and 60% inhibition
at 0.2 mM for 36.[108]
Figure 9
Glucose-6-phosphate
derivatives tested against T.
brucei hexokinase.
Glucose-6-phosphate
derivatives tested against T.
brucei hexokinase.
Trypanosoma
cruzi
Protein kinase activity in T. cruzi has
been studied since the late 1970s. It was found thatT. cruzi’s protein kinase activity was independent
of cyclic nuleotides and stimulated up to 4-fold by different nucleosides.[109] Inosine stimulated protein kinase activity
at low concentration, and adenosine showed maximal stimulation at
0.1 mM.[109] Deoxyadenosines inhibited protein
kinase activity in T. cruzi and T. gambiense; 2′ deoxyadenosine (37, Figure 10) inhibited protein kinase activity
by 30% and 3′ deoxyadenosine (38) by 75%. Both
deoxyadenosides are competitive inhibitors of ATP (Ki = 0.11 mM and 0.8 mM, respectively).[109]
Figure 10
General protein kinase inhibitors in T.
cruzi.
General protein kinase inhibitors in T.
cruzi.
Arginine Kinase
Arginine kinase
belongs to the family of guanidine kinases. The guanidine kinases
catalyze N-phosphorylated guanidino compounds by the reversible transfer
of an ATP phosphoryl group to a guanidino acceptor in the enzyme.
Phosphoarginine plays an important role as an energy reserve due to
the high-energy phosphate transfer when a renewal of ATP is needed.[110] A correlation between enzyme activity, nutrient
availability, and cell density suggests thatarginine kinases function
as a regulator of energy reserves under starvation stress conditions.[111]T. cruziarginine
kinase is inhibited at 10 mM by the arginine analogues, agmatine (39) to 79.3%, canavanine (40) to 54.6%, nitroargine
(41) to 52.6%, and homoarginine (42) to
38.2% (Figure 11). Additionally, canavanine
and homoarginine inhibited the cell growth of epimastigotes of T. cruzi by 79.7% and 55.8% at a 10 mM drug concentration,
and their arginine kinase Ki values were
calculated to be 7.55 and 6.02 mM, respectively. These results suggest
inhibition of cell growth mediated by the inhibition of the parasite’s
arginine kinase, though the extraordinarily low potency of these inhibitors
leaves room for additional study to confirm this.[111]
Figure 11
Inhibitors of arginine kinase in T. cruzi.
Inhibitors of arginine kinase in T. cruzi.
Phosphofructokinase
Phosphofructokinase
(PFK) has recently been identified to be a potential carbohydrate
kinase drug target for T. brucei infections
(see section 5.3.1.2). This enzyme is also
present in T. cruzi with a 77% overall
sequence identity and over 90% sequence identity in the enzyme active
site when compared to the T. bruceiPFK.[102] The p-amidosulfonamide
scaffold was identified as an inhibitor series for TbPFK that shows
activity against the T. cruzi homologue.
For example, compound 25 (Figure 12) inhibits TcPFK with an IC50 of 0.23 μM. As with T. brucei, the dichlorobenzyl motif in 25 was explored, and this SAR study confirmed the importance of the
3,4-dihalophenyl substitution. Additionally, removal, extension, or
substitution of the benzylic methylene group resulted in a decrease
in potency.
Figure 12
Inhibitors
of T. cruzi PFK.
Further exploration of the SAR was undertaken at
the isoxazole position, giving compound 43 as the most
potent analogue against TcPFK with an IC50 of 0.041 μM.
Moreover, compound 26 (Figure 12) showed a modest potency of 0.13 μM against the enzyme, displaying
no toxicity against MRC-5human lung cell line, providing a promising
selectivity profile.[102] It should be noted
that these three compounds are also submicromolar inhibitors of the T. brucei homologue (section 5.3.1.2, Figure 7). Taken together with promising
ADME properties, these compounds represent a good start for exploring
the role of TcPFK in T. cruzi infections.Inhibitors
of T. cruziPFK.
Leishmania
Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3 Short (GSK-3)
Leishmania contains two GSK-3 orthologues,
similar to those of T. brucei,[112] and TbGSK3 and LmjGSK-3 short have 65% amino acid sequence
identity.[93] Therefore, compounds that inhibit
TbGSK3 may also inhibit leishmanial GSK3.The 11 kinase inhibitors
tested against T. brucei GSK by Ojo
et al. (see section 5.3.1.1) were also screened
against L. major and L. infantum GSK-3 short. Compound 1,
shown in Figure 1, inhibited LinfGSK-3 and
LmjGSK-3 with IC50 values of 0.63 and 0.84 μM, respectively,
but was more potent toward the human GSK. Compound 2 was
the most potent against LmjGSK-3 with an IC50 of 320 nM,
however, though it was a more potent inhibitor of HsGSK3 (0.21 μM).[93]There were 16 indirubins, known inhibitors
of mammalian cyclin-dependent
kinases and GSK-3,[113] tested against L. donovani promastigote growth, and 6-BIO (44), 6-BIA (45), and 5-Me-6-BIO (46, Figure 13) were found to be most potent
with an IC50 of 0.8, 0.9, and 1.20 μM, respectively.
Compounds 44–46 also inhibited L. donovani intracellular and axenic amastigotes
with IC50s ranging from 0.75 to 1 μM. Derivatives
of 44 and 45 showed that N1-methylation
diminished parasitic growth inhibition. When the most potent compounds
were tested against macrophage growth at 10 μM, no inhibition
was observed, indicating that the effect observed was due to inhibition
of parasitic targets rather than nonspecific host cell toxicity (though
concentrations in excess of 25 μM did show cellular toxicity).
The compounds were then screened against L. donovani GSK-3s and CRK3, since 6-bromo indirubins are known inhibitors of
both kinase homologues found in mammals.[113] Compound 44 showed an IC50 of 0.02 μM
for LdoCRK3 and 0.15 μM for LdoGSK-3s, showing that CRK3 is
7-fold more potently inhibited by this analogue than GSK. Compound 45 was slightly more active against the leishmanial GSK-3s
with an IC50 of 0.17 μM as opposed to 0.25 μM
for CRK3. Only 46 showed significant selectivity of the
LdoGSK-3 as the primary target with an IC50 of 0.09 μM,
as compared with 0.65 μM for LdoCRK3.[112]
Figure 13
Indirubins screened against L. donovani.
Indirubins screened against L. donovani.
Pyruvate
Kinase (PyK)
The carbohydrate
kinase pyruvate kinase (PyK) and PFK are similar in trypanosomatidae,
with over 70% sequence similarity;[100] therefore,
many PFK inhibitors are likely to also inhibit PyK. In addition, RNAi
knockdown has shown PyK to be a target for trypanosomatids.[8]The 55 analogues of 2,5-anhydro-d-mannitol with alkylamino groups that were tested by Nowicki et al.
against T. bruceiPFK (see section 5.3.1.2, Figure 5) were also
screened against L. mexicanaPyK. Of
these, 16 compounds showed over 50% inhibition of LmPyK. The most
potent compounds had a hydrophobic group at the 1-position. Compound 47, shown in Figure 14, had an IC50 of 71 μM, over 10-fold more potent than any other
compound tested. From compound 47, a series of compounds
was prepared and tested for inhibition against LmPyK at concentrations
of 1 mM. Compound 48 was the most potent against LmPyK
with an IC50 of 26 μM.[100]
Figure 14
2,5-Anhydro-d-mannitol derivatives tested against L. mexicanan PyK.
2,5-Anhydro-d-mannitol derivatives tested against L. mexicananPyK.Several saccharin
derivatives were identified as inhibitors from
a 292 740 compound screen against L. mexicanaPyK in a quantitative high-throughput screening, and NCGC00186526
(49), shown in Figure 15A, had
an IC50 of 10 μM; however, the oxo linkage was hydrolyzed
to the phenol under the assay conditions. The sulfur analogues, such
as NCGC00188411 (50), proved to be more stable to hydrolysis.
One related compound, DBS (51), was identified as a 2.9
μM enzyme inhibitor, with modest selectivity over the humanPyK [IC50 of 8 and 16.3 μM for human tissue HsRPyK
(from erythrocyte) and HsM2PyK (from embryonic or tumor cells), respectively].
This was confirmed crystallographically to be a covalent inhibitor
of LmxPyK and the human homologue (Figure 15B), following reaction with the ε-amine of Lys355. This crystal
structure was compared with the humanPyK, and differences between
the trypanosomatid and human binding pocket were noted in three amino
acid side chains (R1, R2, and R3) around the Lys335 residue, shown
in Figure 15B. This analysis suggests that
the saccharin-binding pocket may allow for other selective PyK inhibitors
to be developed.[114]
Figure 15
(A) Saccharin derivatives
screened against L. mexicana PyK. (B)
Overlaid X-ray structures of LmPyK and HsM2PyK with covalently
bound inhibitor. Reprinted with permission from ref (114). Copyright 2012 The Biochemical
Society.
Nyasse et al.
tested compound 52 (Figure 16),
taken from the bark of the African plant Entada abyssinica against L. mexicanaPyK. This compound
showed weak inhibition (IC50 of 620
μM) and selectivity over the rabbit muscle PyK (IC50 > 3 mM).[115]
Figure 16
Compound from the bark of the Entada abyssinica plant tested against LmPyK.
(A) Saccharin derivatives
screened against L. mexicanaPyK. (B)
Overlaid X-ray structures of LmPyK and HsM2PyK with covalently
bound inhibitor. Reprinted with permission from ref (114). Copyright 2012 The Biochemical
Society.Compound from the bark of the Entada abyssinica plant tested against LmPyK.
Casein
Kinase 1 (CK1)
Casein
kinase 1 (CK1), a multifunctional Ser/Thr protein kinase, may play
a role in modulating parasite–host interactions.[63] Trisubstituted pyrroles and imidazopyridines
have been found to be potent inhibitors of parasite cGMP-dependent
protein kinase (PKG) in protozoan parasites.[116] Two CK1-like kinases found in Leishmania(117) are targeted by the cyclin-dependent
kinase (CDK) inhibitor purvalanol B (53), shown in Figure 17, in L. mexicana, though no IC50 for this compound was reported for LmxCK1.[118]
Figure 17
CK inhibitors purvalanol B, and pyrrole and
imidazopyridine derivatives
screened against Leishmania.
Allocco et al. screened several pyrrole
and imidazopyridine PKG protein kinase inhibitors against LmjCK1 and L. major promastigotes, typified by compounds 54–57 in Figure 17. In whole cell assays, compounds 55–57 showed inhibition of L. major growth
with submicromolar potency. Compound 55 had an IC50 of 0.5 μM, 3 gave 0.6 μM, and 4 showed 0.2 μM potency. Compound 54 was
less active, with an IC50 of 2.1 μM. All compounds
were tested against native LmjCK1 and bacterially expressed LmjCK1;
inhibition of the kinases correlated with inhibition of the parasite.
Compounds 55–57 were potent enzyme
inhibitors, with IC50 ranging from 6 to 9 nM, while 53 was less active with an IC50 of 42 nM, thus
suggesting that LmjCK1 is indeed a primary target of these inhibitors
in L. major cells. Binding assays confirmed
this hypothesis, showing that LmjCK1 isoform 2 is the primary high-affinity
binding protein. All compounds were also tested against HeLa cells
and showed no significant toxicity at >100 μM concentrations.[119]CK inhibitors purvalanol B, and pyrrole and
imidazopyridine derivatives
screened against Leishmania.
Phospholipid-Dependent
Protein Kinase
C (PKC)
Withaferin A (58), an antitumor agent[120] (Figure 18), inhibits L. donovani PKC in vitro and kills
parasite cells by causing apoptosis. L. donovani cell lysate was treated with 58, and at 5 μM
concentration, the phosphorylation of the LdoPKC substrate peptide
HCV was inhibited by 50%. The compound also inhibited rat brain PKC
95% at 15 μM concentration. At that concentration, only 2% of L. donovani promastigotes survived after 7 h.[121]
Figure 18
Compounds shown to inhibit L.
donovani PKC.
Compounds shown to inhibit L.
donovani PKC.
Cyclin Dependent Kinase (CRK3)
Several research laboratories have tested the parasite cyclin dependent
kinase homologue CRK3 as a potential Leishmania target. Grant et al. screened 634 compounds, including analogues
of known mammalian CDK inhibitors and plant natural products in a
CRK3 histone H1 kinase assay at 100 μM concentrations. The 27
most potent compounds were tested against L. donovani amastigotes and L. mexicana promastigotes.
Compounds NG58 (59) and 60 in Figure 19 showed modest inhibition toward the L. donovani amastigotes while 61 and 62 showed weak inhibition of the L. mexicana promastigotes (EC50 values not provided). Compounds that
inhibited L. donovaniamastigote infection
were screened against the parasitic CRK3 and CDK1/cyclin B to determine
if CRK3 is the main target. Of the 12 compounds tested, nine were
more potent toward CDK1/cyclin B, and three showed comparable potency
in regards to the two kinases. The authors concluded that, of the
compounds that inhibited the parasite, none showed selectivity toward
CRK3, suggesting that this was not the primary target causing growth
inhibition.[35h]
Figure 19
Compounds screened against L. donovani amastigotes and L. mexicana promastigotes.
Compounds screened against L. donovani amastigotes and L. mexicana promastigotes.In a high-throughput
screen, 25 000 compounds were tested
against Leishmania CRK3:CYC6 and humanCDK2:CycA. Of these, 43 compounds were selective toward the Leishmania kinase over the human CDK. Of the 16 most
potent compounds (with IC50 values ranging from 2.6–11
μM), 12 were azapurine derivatives (Figure 20). To determine selectivity, the azapurine compounds were
screened against 10 mammalian protein kinases, and all 12 inhibited
Cdk4:CycD1 with IC50 < 30 μM. Eight of the most
potent compounds against the parasite kinase were tested against L. major promastigotes and amastigotes, and compounds 63 and 64, shown in Figure 20, showed modest inhibition (IC50 values of 8.6
and 38.4 μM). Additional azapurine derivatives were synthesized
and screened as well. Several compounds showed modest inhibition of
the L. major cells, such as 65–67 in Figure 20; however,
no correlation between CRK3:CYC6 and whole cell inhibition was observed.
To further pursue these results, a second screen with a kinase-targeted
library was carried out against Leishmania CRK3:CYC6 with 528 compounds at 20 μM concentrations. There
were 13 compounds selective toward the parasite kinase, and of these,
all were thiazole derivatives. There were 11 of these compounds tested
against L. major promastigote cells,
and 10 showed activity (IC50 values ranging between 3 and
27.5 μM), with compounds 68 and 69 in Figure 20 being the most active. Interestingly,
two compounds that were inactive against CRK3:CYC6 were also tested
against the whole parasite cells, and these showed inhibition, further
suggesting that the link between the Leishmania CRK3:CYC6 potency and the parasite inhibition may be tenuous.[122]
Figure 20
Compounds screened against Leishmania CRK3:CYC6, human CDK2:CycA, and L. major promastigote and amastigote cells.
Compounds screened against Leishmania CRK3:CYC6, humanCDK2:CycA, and L. major promastigote and amastigote cells.Cleghorn et al. screened 3383 compounds against Leishmania CRK3-CYC6 at 30 μM concentrations,
leading to several series that were chosen to optimize selectivity
of CRK3.[35g] From the primary screen results,
several benzimidazole and triazole derivatives were synthesized and
screened against leishmanial CRK3-CYC6 and humanCDK2-CYCA. Several
compounds gave excellent inhibition of the parasite kinase in the
nanomolar range and showed no activity against the human homologue,
such as 70 and 71 in Figure 21. The compounds showing activity and selectivity toward the Leishmania kinase were also screened against L. major promastigotes; however, only compound 72 showed moderate activity (2–10 μM). In addition,
the physicochemical properties of the compounds were measured, and
many compounds had properties suitable for membrane penetration. Since
the researchers thought that cellular penetration was not the reason
for lack of parasite activity, it was concluded that the results may
have been because the compounds were effluxed from the cell. Alternative
explanations included the possibility that CRK3 binds to a cyclin
other than CYC6 in the parasitic cells, or that the CRK3 is not essential
due to bypass mechanisms.[35g]
Figure 21
Compounds
screened against Leishmania CRK3:CYC6
and human CDK2:CycA.
Compounds
screened against Leishmania CRK3:CYC6
and humanCDK2:CycA.Although Grant et al. and Mottram et al. have done gene-knockout
experiments[41a,123] showing thatL. mexicana CRK3 is essential for the promastigote
growth, each study concluded that no correlation between leishmanial
CRK3 and parasite inhibition has been found, suggesting that CRK3
may not be a valid target for Leishmania species.
Cell-Based Optimization
Strategies via Inhibitor
Repurposing
An alternative method for identifying new kinase
inhibitor chemotypes could be to identify classes of compounds that
are known to be potent inhibitors of human homologues of essential
kinases (or families of kinases) in parasites. Direct testing of these
known inhibitor classes can reduce the requirement for large, random
screening campaigns, and provide an entry into chemotypes that have
been already shown to be drug-like, and able to be advanced into clinical
trials (often referred to as “privileged” structures”).[124] While human inhibitor compounds may already
possess the desired potency, toxicity, and physicochemical properties
for new parasitic agents (and thus be directly repurposed), it is
more likely that these compounds’ properties will necessitate
further optimization to become effective antiparasitic agents. This
approach is often referred to as “piggy-back”[125] or “target repurposing”[126] drug discovery.
Aurora
Kinase
Aurora kinases play
an important role in cell division events such as mitotic spindle
assembly, chromosomal separation, and cytokinesis. These kinases have
been pursued as targets that have led to various inhibitors that are
now in clinical trials for cancer. T. brucei expresses three aurora kinases, and TbAUK1 has been identified as
an aurora kinase paralogue that inhibits nuclear division, cytokinesis,
and growth in parasites.[60] Moreover TbAUK1
is necessary for infection in mice and has been inhibited by the human
aurora kinase inhibitors hesperadin (73)[127] and VX-680 (74, Figure 22).[128]
Figure 22
Human aurora kinase
inhibitors.
Human aurora kinase
inhibitors.An SAR exploration of
the antiparasitic activity of the hesperadin
chemotype was performed, resulting in compounds such as NEU-511 (75) and NEU-522 (76) (Figure 23).[129] Compound 73 itself
showed significant toxicity to HepG2 cells; however, modifying the
ethyl sulfonamide provided a compound (75) that had an
EC50 against T. brucei cells
of 0.01 μM and 330-fold selectivity over HepG2 cells. Another
analogue (76) was a 0.15 μM inhibitor of trypanosome
growth, with no activity against host cells. Other analogues showed
good potency against L. major, though
most were inactive against T. cruzi.
Figure 23
SAR exploration of the hesperadin chemotype.
SAR exploration of the hesperadin chemotype.Danusertib 77 (Figure 24),
a phase II clinical candidate drug against solid tumors, and its predecessor
analogue PHA-680632 78, were used to assess the SAR as
its medicinal chemistry and structural biology profiles are well-known.
Compounds 77 and 78 inhibited T. brucei growth (EC50 0.6 and 4.0 μM,
respectively).[130]
Figure 24
Repurposed human aurora
inhibitors 1 and 2, and a new analogue with
improved T. brucei selectivity.
Repurposed human aurora
inhibitors 1 and 2, and a new analogue with
improved T. brucei selectivity.Driven by docking experiments
using a homology model of TbAUK1,
analogues of 77 were designed that maintained the tetrahedral
geometry of the carbon center adjacent to the carbonyl group in the
headgroup. Analogues were tested against T. bruceirhodesiense, and none showed improved potency; however,
analogue NEU-327 79 (Figure 8)
showed increased selectivity over the MOLT-4 leukemia cell line. The
analogues synthesized were docked into the homology model of TbAUK1,
and the docking scores correlated with cellular EC50 values,
suggesting that growth inhibition may indeed be mediated by TbAUK1
inhibition. However, confirmatory biochemical IC50 determinations
were precluded by difficulties in expression of catalytically active
TbAUK1.[130]
Phosphoinosotide
3-Kinases (PI3Ks) and Mammalian
Target of Rapamycin (mTOR)
As examples of lipid kinases,
PI3Ks control growth and metabolism, and in humans, inhibitors of
these enzymes have drawn interest as a target for anticancer and anti-inflammatory
agents, and inhibitors of PI3K and mTOR (selective, or cross-reactive)
have been shown to be promising agents for cancer therapy.[131]In the trypanosomatid parasites, there
are at least 12 proteins belonging to the family of PI3K lipid kinases,
some which are unique to the parasites. Some examples of these PI3Ks
have been shown to be involved with trypanosomatid virulence and Golgi
complex segregation,[132]and the downstream
TOR complexes are critical for trypanosomal cell growth.[64,133] Hypothesizing that these parasite kinases would be susceptible to
inhibitors of their human homologues, various established PI3K and
mTOR inhibitors were selected for testing against Leishmania and Trypanosoma species. From these
inhibitors was identified NVP-BEZ235 (80) (Figure 25), an advanced drug candidate against solid tumors,
which showed high potency against all three parasites.[131] These results translated into observable cell
growth phenotypes in T. brucei and L. major that were consistent with inhibition of
the anticipated targets. In addition, in vivo efficacy
was observed in a mouse model of T. brucei bloodstream infection (7 day life extension following 4 days of
10 mg/kg treatment), though efficacy was not observed in T. cruzi or Leishmania animal models.[131]
Figure 25
NVP-BEZ235 and derivatives are potent
trypanosomatid growth inhibitors.
Tbb = T. brucei brucei; Tbr = T. brucei rhodesiense.
Subsequent analogue
design and synthesis has been undertaken in
order to improve the physicochemical properties (solubility, predicted
CNS penetration) and to reduce these compounds’ potency against
human PI3Ks and mTOR. Though these analogues showed reduced potency
against T. brucei cells, compounds
NEU-1078 (81) and NEU-1090 (82) were identified
to have improved cellular and biochemical selectivity profiles and
are predicted to be CNS-penetrant.[88,134] Phosphoproteomics
experiments indicated that these inhibitors, as well as 80, are indeed inhibiting the PI3K pathways, suggesting that inhibition
of lipid phosphorylation may indeed be a fruitful approach for parasite
growth inhibitor discovery.[134a] It is worth
noting that another lipid kinase, phosphatidylinositol 4-kinase, has
been identified to be required for Golgi maintenance in T. brucei,[135] and the
fact that the homologous enzyme in Plasmodium falciparum has been targeted with small molecules in Plasmodium
falciparum(136) confirms
druggability and bodes well for the development of inhibitors of the T. brucei enzymes.NVP-BEZ235 and derivatives are potent
trypanosomatid growth inhibitors.
Tbb = T. brucei brucei; Tbr = T. brucei rhodesiense.
Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors
Though
trypanosomatid parasites do not express tyrosine kinases,[40] Tyr phosphorylation has been observed in the
parasite. This suggests that the Tyr phosphorylation must therefore
be achieved by dual specificity-enzymes that act on Ser/Thr and Tyr
residues. The nonspecific tyrosine kinase inhibitor tyrphostin inhibited
the key cellular process of transferrin uptake, which translated to
inhibition of cell growth.[137] This phenotype
was replicated by lapatinib (83, Figure 26), a humanepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor
and orally acting therapeutic for breast cancer, and this compound
was a 1.54 μM inhibitor of T. brucei growth.[137] It also cured the bloodstream
form infection in 3 out of 4 mice,[138] and
four putative binding proteins were subsequently identified.[77] In addition, eight analogues related to lapatinib
killed T. brucei with EC50 in the low micromolar range, which prompted an SAR exploration of
this chemotype.[137] Three cycles of analogue
design exploring each region of the molecule led to NEU-369 (84), and NEU-617 (85). Both compounds have an
improved selectivity profile over HepG2 cells, and 85 is 37-fold more potent than lapatinib. Importantly, this analogue
showed excellent plasma exposure following oral dosing in mice, though
brain drug levels were low. Dosing infected animals at 40 mg/kg reduced
parasite load below detectable levels, though toxicity was observed
following extended dosing. However, IP administration of 10 mg/kg/day
twice per day led to doubling of the survival rate compared to controls.[137] Interestingly, while endocytosis of transferrin
was inhibited in the trypanosome by 83, there was no
effect on endocytosis of transferrin by 85. Instead,
this compound blocked the duplication of kinetoplast and arrested
cytokinesis without the disruption of the nucleus division on the
parasite. This is clearly suggestive that 85 is inhibiting
parasite growth via a mechanism different from lapatinib. A major
limitation of compound 85 that is preventing good CNS
exposure is the high cLogP value (7.1), and further optimization of
physicochemical properties is thus needed. Importantly, cross-screening
of these analogues against T. cruzi, L. major, and Plasmodium
falciparum shows a range of parasite-specific SAR
(unpublished results).
Figure 26
Lapatinib and derivatives that show potent
and selective T. brucei activity.
Lapatinib and derivatives that show potent
and selective T. brucei activity.
Perspective
Research performed over the last 15 years has made great headway
in elucidating the importance of kinases in cellular signaling processes
in trypanosomatid parasites, enabled by the advances in cellular and
molecular biology approaches that uncover the functions and essentiality
of a specific kinase or families of kinases. The resultant expanded
understanding of this gene family strengthens the conviction that
kinases are important targets for new antiparasitic therapeutics,
as in other species. The specific similarities of parasite kinases
to their human homologues, which have been repeatedly shown to be
“druggable”, as well as key structural, functional,
and cellular context differences make kinases attractive candidate
targets for antiparasitic agents.Trypanosomatid kinase medicinal
chemistry is in its infancy compared
to that of mammalian kinases, but the application of modern medicinal
chemistry optimization approaches has quickly led to the identification
of small (drug-like) molecules that inhibit kinase function and in
some cases have effective antiparasitic activity. However, issues
of selectivity over host kinases are neither resolved nor predictable.
The properties that are shared by human and parasite kinases that
suggest that effective parasite kinase inhibitors can be discovered
on the basis of prior knowledge also raise concern about potential
cross-species selectivity.That said, it is currently unclear
what characteristics of antiparasitic
therapies need to be avoided because of potential effects on host
kinase targets. Much of the existing understanding of the need for
selectivity is based on off-target kinase effects and the expected
dosage regimen for serious and/or chronic indications, such as cancer,
diabetes, and inflammation. The considerations of off-target effects
are likely to differ for parasitic diseases, especially in the acute
or life threatening phase, where dosing regimens may be of shorter
duration, resulting in less concern with long-term toxicity. In addition,
the uptake, metabolism and retention of inhibitors by the parasite
may either enhance or reduce efficacy during an infection. A better,
research-based understanding of required selectivity
over host kinases is therefore needed, and this may be best explored
by focusing on short-term inhibition of the current set of “untouchable”
kinase antitargets (i.e, a kinase antitarget that
is linked to acute toxicity, or genotoxicity).Parasite kinase
inhibitor discovery has employed two complementary
approaches: target-based, which focuses on selective inhibition of
specific essential parasite kinases, and phenotype-based, which focuses
on inhibition of cellular growth or other observable phenotypes that
result from treatment with an investigational agent. On one hand,
understanding mechanism-of-action may be useful, although a recent
review of drug approvals indicated that the majority of approved drugs
were discovered without initially knowing the target of action. In
some cases the mechanism of action was elucidated during or after
the drug development process was complete. This is more the case in
infectious diseases, where targets and pathways are not as well-understood
as in the mammalian system.[139] In the NTD
drug discovery space, this is illustrated by SCYX-7158, a new compound
currently in phase II clinical trials for human African trypanosomiasis
for which the mechanism of inhibition of parasite proliferation is
not yet known.[25]Combined target
and cell-based approaches during drug optimization
are useful for avoiding the apparent loss of potency that is typical
when a compound’s activity is compared between biochemical
and cellular assays. This can reflect characteristics of cellular
permeability, competition with the inhibitor by cellular molecules
such as ATP, and/or compensation by targets or pathways. Thus, driving
medicinal chemistry optimization in a cellular assay factors in cellular
permeability and provides a physiologically relevant system for testing
the inhibitor. However, when testing inhibitors only in a cell assay
we cannot say with certainty whether differences in potency among
related compounds is due to differences in activity at a specific
target, introduction of inhibition of other kinases, and/or cellular
permeability. These considerations can complicate, but certainly not
prevent, medicinal chemistry optimization. In a perfect situation,
identification of trypanosome growth inhibitors would be followed
by detailed mechanism of action studies, in order to learn what kinase
inhibition profiles lead to successful antiparasitic drugs and to
develop potent and selective probe molecules that can enable further
research into parasite kinase function. However, the resource poor
environment of neglected tropical diseases may make this combination
of experiments a luxury, although it may be the most cost-effective
in the long run.While this review primarily discusses protein
kinase inhibition
as antitrypanosomatid approach, other nonprotein kinases (e.g., lipid kinases, carbohydrate kinases) warrant further
work. As mentioned above, translation of understanding of kinase function
in these parasites is still in its infancy compared to what is known
about kinase function in humans. We expect, in time, that a broader
and deeper expansion of small molecule discovery efforts into kinases
involved in lipid metabolism or glycolysis will emerge.In summary,
great strides have been made toward understanding the
utility of kinase inhibitors as antiparasitic agents, and progress
appears to be accelerating, enabled and enhanced by new technologies
and by redirecting existing technologies originally developed for
use against mammalian kinases. Time will tell whether compounds of
clinical utility can be found that target trypanosomatid kinases and
which have the needed selectivity and physicochemical properties to
be efficacious.
Authors: M Knockaert; N Gray; E Damiens; Y T Chang; P Grellier; K Grant; D Fergusson; J Mottram; M Soete; J F Dubremetz; K Le Roch; C Doerig; P Schultz; L Meijer Journal: Chem Biol Date: 2000-06
Authors: Laura A Banaszynski; Ling-Chun Chen; Lystranne A Maynard-Smith; A G Lisa Ooi; Thomas J Wandless Journal: Cell Date: 2006-09-08 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Matthew W Nowicki; Lindsay B Tulloch; Liam Worralll; Iain W McNae; Véronique Hannaert; Paul A M Michels; Linda A Fothergill-Gilmore; Malcolm D Walkinshaw; Nicholas J Turner Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Date: 2008-03-21 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Karen M Grant; Morag H Dunion; Vanessa Yardley; Alexios-Leandros Skaltsounis; Doris Marko; Gerhard Eisenbrand; Simon L Croft; Laurent Meijer; Jeremy C Mottram Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Tyler A Smith; Gabriella S Lopez-Perez; Alice L Herneisen; Emily Shortt; Sebastian Lourido Journal: Nat Microbiol Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 30.964
Authors: ThanhTruc Pham; Madeline Walden; Christopher Butler; Rosario Diaz-Gonzalez; Guiomar Pérez-Moreno; Gloria Ceballos-Pérez; Veronica Gomez-Pérez; Raquel García-Hernández; Henry Zecca; Emma Krakoff; Brian Kopec; Ogar Ichire; Caden Mackenzie; Marika Pitot; Luis Miguel Ruiz; Francisco Gamarro; Dolores González-Pacanowska; Miguel Navarro; Amy B Dounay Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Lett Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 2.823
Authors: Dana M Klug; Laura Tschiegg; Rosario Diaz; Domingo Rojas-Barros; Guiomar Perez-Moreno; Gloria Ceballos; Raquel García-Hernández; Maria Santos Martinez-Martinez; Pilar Manzano; Luis Miguel Ruiz; Conor R Caffrey; Francisco Gamarro; Dolores Gonzalez Pacanowska; Lori Ferrins; Miguel Navarro; Michael P Pollastri Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Albert J Kooistra; Georgi K Kanev; Oscar P J van Linden; Rob Leurs; Iwan J P de Esch; Chris de Graaf Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Dana M Klug; Eftychia M Mavrogiannaki; Katherine C Forbes; Lisseth Silva; Rosario Diaz-Gonzalez; Guiomar Pérez-Moreno; Gloria Ceballos-Pérez; Raquel Garcia-Hernández; Cristina Bosch-Navarrete; Carlos Cordón-Obras; Claudia Gómez-Liñán; Andreu Saura; Jeremiah D Momper; Maria Santos Martinez-Martinez; Pilar Manzano; Ali Syed; Nelly El-Sakkary; Conor R Caffrey; Francisco Gamarro; Luis Miguel Ruiz-Perez; Dolores Gonzalez Pacanowska; Lori Ferrins; Miguel Navarro; Michael P Pollastri Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 8.039