Matthew G Alteen1,2, Verena Oehler2, Ivana Nemčovičová3, Iain B H Wilson3, David J Vocadlo1, Tracey M Gloster2. 1. Department of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University , 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada. 2. Biomedical Sciences Research Complex, University of St Andrews , North Haugh, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9ST, U.K. 3. Department für Chemie, Universität für Bodenkultur , Muthgasse 18, A-1190 Wien, Austria.
Abstract
Mammalian β-hexosaminidases have been shown to play essential roles in cellular physiology and health. These enzymes are responsible for the cleavage of the monosaccharides N-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) and N-acetylgalactosamine (GalNAc) from cellular substrates. One of these β-hexosaminidases, hexosaminidase D (HexD), encoded by the HEXDC gene, has received little attention. No mechanistic studies have focused on the role of this unusual nucleocytoplasmically localized β-hexosaminidase, and its cellular function remains unknown. Using a series of kinetic and mechanistic investigations into HexD, we define the precise catalytic mechanism of this enzyme and establish the identities of key enzymic residues. The preparation of synthetic aryl N-acetylgalactosaminide substrates for HexD in combination with measurements of kinetic parameters for wild-type and mutant enzymes, linear free energy analyses of the enzyme-catalyzed hydrolysis of these substrates, evaluation of the reaction by nuclear magnetic resonance, and inhibition studies collectively reveal the detailed mechanism of action employed by HexD. HexD is a retaining glycosidase that operates using a substrate-assisted catalytic mechanism, has a preference for galactosaminide over glucosaminide substrates, and shows a pH optimum in its second-order rate constant at pH 6.5-7.0. The catalytically important residues are Asp148 and Glu149, with Glu149 serving as the general acid/base residue and Asp148 as the polarizing residue. HexD is inhibited by Gal-NAG-thiazoline (Ki = 420 nM). The fundamental insights gained from this study will aid in the development of potent and selective probes for HexD, which will serve as useful tools to improve our understanding of the physiological role played by this unusual enzyme.
Mammalian β-hexosaminidases have been shown to play essential roles in cellular physiology and health. These enzymes are responsible for the cleavage of the monosaccharidesN-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) and N-acetylgalactosamine (GalNAc) from cellular substrates. One of these β-hexosaminidases, hexosaminidase D (HexD), encoded by the HEXDC gene, has received little attention. No mechanistic studies have focused on the role of this unusual nucleocytoplasmically localized β-hexosaminidase, and its cellular function remains unknown. Using a series of kinetic and mechanistic investigations into HexD, we define the precise catalytic mechanism of this enzyme and establish the identities of key enzymic residues. The preparation of synthetic aryl N-acetylgalactosaminide substrates for HexD in combination with measurements of kinetic parameters for wild-type and mutant enzymes, linear free energy analyses of the enzyme-catalyzed hydrolysis of these substrates, evaluation of the reaction by nuclear magnetic resonance, and inhibition studies collectively reveal the detailed mechanism of action employed by HexD. HexD is a retaining glycosidase that operates using a substrate-assisted catalytic mechanism, has a preference for galactosaminide over glucosaminide substrates, and shows a pH optimum in its second-order rate constant at pH 6.5-7.0. The catalytically important residues are Asp148 and Glu149, with Glu149 serving as the general acid/base residue and Asp148 as the polarizing residue. HexD is inhibited by Gal-NAG-thiazoline (Ki = 420 nM). The fundamental insights gained from this study will aid in the development of potent and selective probes for HexD, which will serve as useful tools to improve our understanding of the physiological role played by this unusual enzyme.
Mammals possess
four genes encoding
β-hexosaminidases. These enzymes are responsible for the cleavage
of the terminal monosaccharidesN-acetylglucosamine
(GlcNAc) and N-acetylgalactosamine (GalNAc) from
cellular substrates. The HEXA and HEXB genes encode an α subunit and a β subunit, respectively,
that dimerize to form three different isozymes: hexosaminidase A (HexA;
comprising an α subunit and a β subunit), hexosaminidase
B (HexB; comprising two β subunits), and hexosaminidase S (HexS;
comprising two α subunits).[1−3] All three isozymes localize
to the lysosome, where they hydrolyze terminal GlcNAc and GalNAc residues
from glycoconjugates and oligosaccharides to aid in the disposal of
unneeded glycoconjugates. Deficiencies in either of these genes lead
to the genetic diseases known as Sandhoff and Tay-Sachs disease.[4]O-GlcNAcase (OGA), encoded by
the HEXC gene, is a nucleocytoplasmic β-hexosaminidase.[5] This enzyme removes GlcNAc residues from proteins
bearing N-acetylglucosamine O-linked to serine and
threonine residues of nucleocytoplasmic proteins (O-GlcNAc) and has been implicated in an array of physiological processes
and also found to be essential for development of mammals.[6−8] The fourth gene encoding a mammalian β-hexosaminidase (HEXDC) was identified recently.[9] While the physiological substrate and function of the gene product,
hexosaminidase D (HexD), remain unknown, studies have indicated a
link between this enzyme and rheumatoid arthritis.[10] The intracellular and extracellular roles played by this
enzyme within cells are therefore topics of great interest.Preliminary characterization of recombinantly expressed murineHexD, which is 80% similar to humanHexD, shows it can hydrolyze substrates
containing both GalNAc and GlcNAc but with a preference for the former.[9] This differs from OGA, which exclusively hydrolyses
GlcNAc-containing substrates,[5] whereas
HexA, HexB, and HexS can hydrolyze substrates containing both GlcNAc
and GalNAc. HexD was shown, by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain
reaction (RT-PCR) experiments, to be ubiquitously expressed in all
murine tissues examined and localized to the nucleus and cytoplasm
upon being overexpressed in mammalian cells.[9] Interestingly, the biochemical properties of recombinantly expressed
murineHexD are in accord with the characteristics of an enzyme observed
in bovine brain tissue isolates decades earlier;[11,12] however, the gene encoding it was unknown, and this observation
received limited interest.Glycoside hydrolases (GHs) are classified
by sequence homology
into more than 100 families [Carbohydrate Active enZyme (CAZy) database].[13] In general, the enzyme mechanism and three-dimensional
fold are conserved among members within any family. The CAZy database
classifies HexD, along with the lysosomal β-hexosaminidases
encoded by the HEXA and HEXB genes,
into family GH20. Conversely, OGA bears no sequence similarity to
the other β-hexosaminidases and falls into family GH84. Although
there is a low degree of sequence conservation between these two families
of mammalian β-hexosaminidases, studies have shown they share
a similar, but unusual, substrate-assisted catalytic mechanism.[14−16] The three-dimensional structures of humanHexA,[17] humanHexB,[16] and bacterial
homologues of OGA[18,19] have also provided insights into
the active site architecture, revealing how these enzymes facilitate
catalysis using key enzymic residues. Together, these mechanistic
and structural studies have guided the development of potent and specific
inhibitors against β-hexosaminidases,[14,16,18−20] which have acted as
powerful tools for probing the cellular function of the enzymes and
the roles they play in disease.[21−24]Investigation into the mechanism of the family
GH20 lysosomal β-hexosaminidases
and their homologues has shown they catalyze hydrolysis with retention
of stereochemistry using a substrate-assisted catalytic mechanism
(Figure ).[25−27] This mechanism involves the 2-acetamido group of the N-acetylhexosamine residue of the substrate playing an essential role
during catalysis. In the first step of the mechanism, a conserved
active site carboxyl residue polarizes this acetamido group, increasing
its nucleophilicity and facilitating its attack at the anomeric position,
which results in the formation of an oxazoline intermediate. Concomitantly,
a second conserved aspartate or glutamate residue, the general acid/base
residue, aids glycosidic bond cleavage and leaving group departure
by providing general acid catalysis. During the second step of the
reaction, the acid/base residue acts as a general base to facilitate
attack of a water molecule at the anomeric center of the oxazoline
intermediate. The overall result is the net retention of stereochemistry
of the resulting N-acetylglycopyranose product.
Figure 1
Substrate-assisted
catalytic mechanism employed by GH20 enzymes.
Binding of substrate to the enzyme leads to formation of a Michaelis
complex in which the pyranose ring of the substrate adopts a conformation
placing the leaving group in a pseudoaxial orientation. This allows
nucleophilic attack of the anomeric center by the C2 acetamido group
and departure of the leaving group. The resulting transient bicyclic
oxazoline intermediate is then hydrolyzed by attack of a molecule
of water at the anomeric center, releasing the sugar hemiacetal product.
Two conserved enzymic carboxyl groups provide general acid and general
base catalysis during each step of the reaction.
Substrate-assisted
catalytic mechanism employed by GH20 enzymes.
Binding of substrate to the enzyme leads to formation of a Michaelis
complex in which the pyranose ring of the substrate adopts a conformation
placing the leaving group in a pseudoaxial orientation. This allows
nucleophilic attack of the anomeric center by the C2 acetamido group
and departure of the leaving group. The resulting transient bicyclic
oxazoline intermediate is then hydrolyzed by attack of a molecule
of water at the anomeric center, releasing the sugar hemiacetal product.
Two conserved enzymic carboxyl groups provide general acid and general
base catalysis during each step of the reaction.To gain insights into HexD at the molecular level, we chemically
synthesized a series of aryl N-acetylgalactosaminide
substrates and, using these, undertook a series of kinetic and mechanistic
investigations to elucidate the detailed mechanism of action of this
enzyme. While chromogenic substrates such as p-nitrophenyl
glycosides will differ in structure at the anomeric center compared
to the physiological substrate for HexD, these compounds serve as
effective tools for probing the binding affinities, kinetic properties,
and mechanistic features of glycoside hydrolases.[14,28] We envisage that by understanding the subtleties of HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis of its substrates, the design of useful tools will be enabled,
including potent and selective inhibitors that could be used to probe
the physiological function of HexD. While our knowledge of the cellular
function of HexD lags behind that of the other mammalian β-hexosaminidases,
given the increasing important roles played by β-hexosaminidases
in health and disease, gaining a clear fundamental understanding of
this unusual nucleocytoplasmically localized enzyme is important.
Materials
and Methods
HexD Protein Expression and Purification
The plasmid
containing the gene encoding humanHexD in a pET30a vector, which
has been reported previously,[9] was transformed
into Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) cells. Successful
transformants were cultured in Luria-Bertani broth supplemented with
50 μg/mL kanamycin at 37 °C until an optical density of
0.6 absorbance units was reached. Protein expression was induced with
0.5 mM isopropyl β-d-thiogalactoside at 15 °C
for 20 h. Cells were harvested and resuspended in 20 mM HEPES (pH
7.4), 150 mM NaCl, and 5 mM imidazole and incubated in the presence
of 1 mg/mL lysozyme, 0.02 mg/mL DNase, and an EDTA-free protease inhibitor
tablet (Roche) for 20 min at 4 °C. Cells were lysed by high-pressure
cell disruption (Constant Systems). Following clarification, the supernatant
was applied to a 5 mL HisTrap nickel column (GE Healthcare), pre-equilibrated
in the same buffer, and the protein was eluted from an imidazole gradient.
The elution was concentrated and applied to a HiPrep 26/10 desalting
column equilibrated in 20 mM HEPES (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl buffer to
remove the imidazole. The elution was subsequently concentrated and
applied to a S200 16/60 gel filtration column, pre-equilibrated in
the same buffer, and fractions judged to be pure were pooled for subsequent
kinetic studies.
HexD Mutagenesis
The primers listed
in Table S1 were used to amplify the plasmid
encoding
the HexD gene with the desired mutation. Reaction mixtures were subjected
to digestion with DpnI for 2 h at 37 °C and subsequently transformed
into E. coli DH5α cells. Plasmid DNA was extracted
from cells using standard procedures and subsequently sequenced (GATC
sequencing) to ensure the mutation was successfully incorporated.
Protein expression and purification were performed as described for
wild-type HexD, and the enzymes were obtained in similar yields.
General Procedures for Synthesis of Compounds
All synthetic
reagents used in this study were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (Oakville,
ON), Carbosynth (San Diego, CA), Alfa Aesar (Ward Hill, MA), or Acros
Organics (Geel, Belgium). Anhydrous reactions were conducted in flame-dried
glassware under a positive pressure of dry argon. Air- or moisture-sensitive
reagents and anhydrous solvents were transferred with oven-dried syringes
or cannulae. Flash chromatography was performed using E. Merck silica
gel (230–400 mesh). Solution-phase reactions were monitored
using analytical thin layer chromatography (TLC) with E. Merck 0.2
mm precoated silica gelaluminum plates 60 F254; compounds were visualized
by illumination with short-wavelength (254 nm) ultraviolet light and/or
staining with a ceric ammonium molybdate or potassium permanganate
staining solution. Pyridine was dried extensively over activated 4
Å molecular sieves under argon. 1H NMR (400 or 500
MHz) and 13C NMR (100 or 125 MHz) spectra were recorded
at ambient temperature on a Bruker Avance III 400 or 500 NMR spectrometer.
Deuterated chloroform (CDCl3), acetone [(CD3)2CO], dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO-d6), methanol (CD3OD), and water (D2O)
were used as NMR solvents, unless otherwise stated. Chemical shifts
are reported in parts per million downfield from tetramethylsilane
(TMS) and corrected using the solvent residual signal as a reference.
Splitting patterns are designated as follows: s, singlet; d, doublet;
t, triplet; q, quartet; quin, quintet; hex, hextet; m, multiplet;
br, broad. Low- and high-resolution mass spectrometry was performed
on a Micromass Quattro-LC electrospray spectrometer with a pump rate
of 20 μL/min using electrospray ionization (ESI).
3,4,6-Tri-O-acetyl-2-amino-2-deoxy-β-d-galactopyranosyl
bromide hydrobromide (S1, 250 mg, 0.557 mmol) was added
to a 50 mL flame-dried round-bottom flask under an atmosphere of argon.
The compound was dissolved in anhydrous CH3CN (10 mL);
sodium p-nitrophenolate (180 mg, 1.11 mmol) was added,
and the reaction mixture was stirred overnight at room temperature.
Upon completion of the reaction, the solvent was removed under vacuum,
and then CH2Cl2 (50 mL) and NaHCO3 (saturated aqueous, 50 mL) were added to the residue. The organic
layer was collected, and the aqueous layer was extracted with CH2Cl2 (3 × 50 mL). The combined organic fractions
were washed with a NaHCO3 solution (50 mL) and brine (50
mL), dried with MgSO4, filtered, and concentrated under
vacuum. Purification by flash column silica gel chromatography (97.5:2:0.5
DCM/MeOH/TEA) afforded the title compound as a yellow gum (105 mg,
44%): 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δH 8.21 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 2H), 7.12 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 2H), 5.43 (d, J = 3.3 Hz, 1H), 4.98 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 1H), 4.89 (dd, J = 10.8, 3.2
Hz, 1H), 4.23–4.08 (m, 3H), 3.52 (dd, J =
10.8, 7.9 Hz, 1H), 2.15 (s, 3H), 2.07 (s, 3H), 2.06 (s, 3H); 13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3) δC 170.44,
170.37, 170.24, 161.53, 143.23, 125.88, 116.66, 101.66, 73.24, 71.65,
66.11, 61.71, 51.41, 20.87, 20.81, 20.75; LRMS (ESI+) [M
+ H]+ calcd for C18H24N2O10m/z 427.14, found m/z 427.13.
Sodium fluoroacetate
(24 mg, 0.235 mmol) was added to a mixture of Amberlite IR-120 resin
(H+ form) in anhydrous DMF. After the mixture had been
stirred for 1 h, the fluoroacetic acid solution was added to a stirred
solution of compound S2 (100 mg, 0.235 mmol) and triethylamine
(0.12 mL, 0.823 mmol) in anhydrous DMF, and the resulting mixture
was stirred overnight at room temperature. Upon completion, the solvent
was removed under vacuum, and then CH2Cl2 (50
mL) and NaHCO3 (saturated aqueous, 50 mL) were added to
the residue. The organic layer was collected, and the aqueous layer
was extracted with CH2Cl2 (2 × 50 mL).
The combined organic fractions were washed with water (50 mL) and
brine (50 mL), dried with MgSO4, filtered, and concentrated
under vacuum. The crude product was purified by flash column silica
gel chromatography (40:60 EtOAc/hexanes) to afford the product as
white crystals (81 mg, 71%): 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) δH 8.20 (d, J = 9.3 Hz,
2H), 7.10 (d, J = 9.3 Hz, 2H), 6.50 (dd, J = 8.6, 3.4 Hz, 1H), 5.56 (d, J = 8.4
Hz, 1H), 5.52–5.47 (m, 2H), 4.76 (d, J = 47.3
Hz, 2H), 4.33 (m, 1H), 4.22–4.16 (m, 2H), 2.19 (s, 3H), 2.08
(s, 3H), 2.04 (s, 3H); 13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3) δC 170.52, 170.47, 170.23, 168.46, 161.41, 143.25,
126.87, 116.71, 97.87, 80.16, 71.63, 69.29, 66.57, 61.74, 51.22, 20.79,
20.77, 20.76; 19F NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) δF −225.54 (t, J = 47.1 Hz); LRMS (ESI+) [M + Na]+ calcd for C20H23FN2O11Na m/z 509.12, found m/z 509.11.
Compound S2 (100 mg, 0.235 mmol) and triethylamine (0.1 mL, 0.705 mmol)
were dissolved in anhydrous CH2Cl2 (10 mL) in
a 50 mL round-bottom flask. The mixture was cooled to 0 °C, and
trifluoroacetic anhydride (0.1 mL, 0.705 mmol) was added dropwise.
The contents were then stirred overnight at room temperature. Upon
completion of the reaction, NaHCO3 (saturated aqueous,
50 mL) was added, the organic layer was collected, and the aqueous
layer was extracted with CH2Cl2 (3 × 50
mL). The combined organic fractions were washed with additional NaHCO3 solution (50 mL) and brine (50 mL), dried with MgSO4, filtered, and concentrated. The crude residue was purified by silica
gel flash column chromatography using gradient elution (30:70 to 40:60
EtOAc/hexanes) to furnish the product as a white amorphous solid (49
mg, 40%): 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) δH 8.16 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 2H), 7.14 (d, J = 9.0 Hz, 1H), 7.08 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 2H),
5.47 (d, J = 3.3 Hz, 1H), 5.40 (dd, J = 11.3, 3.3 Hz, 1H), 5.37 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 1H),
4.50 (dd, J = 11.1, 8.7 Hz, 1H), 4.21–4.16
(m, 3H), 2.19 (s, 3H), 2.06 (s, 3H), 2.02 (s, 3H); 13C
NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3) δC 170.77, 170.61,
170.26, 161.34, 143.34, 125.92, 116.76, 98.16, 71.72, 69.28, 66.41,
60.64, 51.51, 20.77, 20.71, 20.55; 19F NMR (470 MHz, CDCl3) δF −72.21 (br); LRMS (ESI+) [M + Na]+ calcd for C20H21F3N2O11Na m/z 545.10, found m/z 545.09.
General Procedure A: Synthesis of Aryl 2-Acetamido-3,4,6-tri-O-acetyl-2-deoxy-β-d-galactopyranosides (S5e–j)
To a mixture of 2-acetamido-3,4,6-tri-O-acetyl-2-deoxy-α-d-galactopyranosyl chloride
(S4, 1 equiv), benzyltriethylammonium chloride (1 equiv),
and acceptor phenol (2 equiv) was added sufficient dichloromethane
(1 volume) to yield a solution of 200 mM chlorosugar. An equal volume
of 1 M sodium hydroxide was added, and the resulting biphasic mixture
was stirred vigorously at room temperature for 1–3 h. Upon
completion, ethyl acetate (5 volumes) was added, and the organic phase
was washed successively with 1 M NaOH (1 volume), water (2 ×
1 volume), and brine (1 volume). The combined organic layers were
dried (MgSO4), filtered, and concentrated under vacuum.
The crude product was purified by column chromatography to produce
aryl 2-acetamido-3,4,6-tri-O-acetyl-2-deoxy-β-d-galactopyranosides as crystalline solids in yields ranging
from 39 to 68%.
General Procedure B: Synthesis of Aryl 2-Acetamido-2-deoxy-β-d-galactopyranosides (1e–j)
To
a solution of aryl 2-acetamido-3,4,6-tri-O-acetyl-2-deoxy-β-d-galactopyranoside (1 equiv) in anhydrous methanol was added
a spatula tip of anhydrous sodium methoxide. The mixture was stirred
at room temperature (2–3 h or overnight). Amberlite IR-120
resin (H+ form, pH 4) was prerinsed with MeOH and added to the mixture,
which was stirred for an additional 10 min until a pH of 5–6
was reached. The mixture was filtered and concentrated to yield aryl
2-acetamido-2-deoxy-β-d-galactopyranoside as white
crystals (93–99%). The products were crystallized from a MeOH/Et2O solvent prior to use in biological assays.
Kinetic analyses
with 4-nitrophenyl N-acetylgalactosamine (PNP-GalNAc)
and derivatives with
mono-, di-, and trifluoroacetamido groups were conducted at 37 °C
in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) buffer (pH 7.4). Reactions were
performed in triplicate using 96-well plates (Sarstedt) with final
reaction volumes of 200 μL (100 μL of substrate and 100
μL of enzyme). Final concentrations of substrates ranged from
2 mM to 15.6 μM. Upon addition of HexD (final concentration
of 100 nM), reactions were monitored continuously using a Molecular
Devices SpectraMax M5 spectrophotometer at 400 nm. Initial velocities
were calculated within the linear region of the reaction progress
curve and compared to a standard curve of varying concentrations of
4-nitrophenol measured under identical conditions. Michaelis–Menten
kinetic parameters were calculated for all substrates through nonlinear
regression of Michaelian saturation curves using Graphpad Prism. Substrates
were predissolved in DMSO (final volume of 1–2%) to facilitate
solubility, followed by addition of PBS. Test reactions with PNP-GalNAc
revealed no significant difference in enzyme activity in the presence
or absence of DMSO.
Kinetic Characterization of Wild-Type HexD
and Its Mutants
The kinetic parameters of wild-type HexD
and its mutants were determined
essentially as described above using PNP-GalNAc and 3F4NP-GalNAc as
substrates. In addition, kinetic parameters for wild-type HexD were
determined with 4-nitrophenyl GlcNAc (PNP-GlcNAc) and 3-fluoro-4-nitrophenylGlcNAc (3F4NP-GlcNAc). Final concentrations of substrates ranged from
15.6 μM to 2 mM; final concentrations of enzyme were 100 nM
for the wild type and 100 nM to 2 μM for the mutants depending
on their activity. Reaction volumes of 200 μL were used in all
cases. The wavelengths at which measurements were taken correspond
to the absorbance maxima of the aryl leaving groups, which have been
previously determined as shown in Table S2. Michaelis–Menten parameters were calculated from nonlinear
regression of Michaelian saturation curves using GraphPad Prism. Relative
activities are reported as a ratio of the second-order rate constants
of wild-type HexD versus those of its mutants.
Brønsted
Analyses
Brønsted analyses with N-acetylgalactosamine-derived
substrates with a range of
leaving groups were performed as described above with the exception
that reactions were conducted in quartz cuvettes (Sarstedt, volume
of 200 μL, path length of 1.0 cm). Substrate concentrations
ranged from 15.6 μM to 2 mM; enzyme concentrations used for
each substrate are listed in Table S2.
Reactions were performed in duplicate and monitored using the wavelengths
listed in Table S2. Michaelian saturation
kinetics were observed for all substrates and were calculated as described
above.
pH Profiles
Reactions were conducted in 96-well plates
as described above, using PNP-GalNAc as the substrate (final concentration
between 15.6 μM and 2 mM). 50 mM citrate, 100 mM NaCl buffer
was used for reactions in the pH range of 5–5.5; 50 mM phosphate,
100 mM NaCl buffer was used for reactions in the pH range of 6.0–7.5,
and 50 mM CHES, 100 mM NaCl buffer was used for reactions in the pH
range of 8.0–9.0. The stability of HexD at each pH was verified.
Absorbance values were corrected according to the proportion of protonated
and deprotonated 4-nitrophenol at each pH value. A final enzyme concentration
of 100 nM was used for each reaction, and saturation kinetics were
observed in all cases; Michaelis–Menten parameters were calculated
from saturation curves as described above. A bell-shaped ionization
curve, described by eq , was fitted to the data.Experimental kinetic pKa values were obtained from the pH values corresponding
to
the half-maximal enzyme activity on each limb of the curve.
NMR Experiments
NMR-based monitoring of HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis was conducted using a Bruker AvanceII 500 MHz spectrometer
equipped with a 5 mm TXI inverse probe. 0.6 mg of PNP-GalNAc was dissolved
in 600 μL of deuterated phosphate-buffered saline [137 mM NaCl,
2.7 mM KCl, and 10 mM Na2HPO4 and KH2PO4 in D2O (pH 7.4)], and a t0 spectrum was recorded. HexD was exchanged into deuterated
PBS by repeated concentration using a 10 kDa molecular mass cutoff
centrifugation device and subsequent resuspension; 120 μL of
HexD was added to the substrate at a final concentration of 1 μM.
Reaction progress was monitored at 5 min intervals for 1 h, with a
final spectrum recorded 3 h after enzyme addition. Spectra were processed
using MestReNova version 10.
Inhibition Studies
Inhibition studies
of HexD with
Gal-NAG-thiazoline[29,30] were performed in 96-well plates
using PNP-GalNAc as the substrate (62.5 μM to 1 mM) with 0.0063
mg/mL enzyme. Gal-NAG-thiazoline was tested at six concentrations
ranging from 5 times above to 5 times below the apparent Ki. Data were plotted using GraphPad Prism, and Ki values were obtained using nonlinear regression
analysis with the equation for competitive binding: KM(app) = KM(1 + [I]/Ki); Y = VmaxX/[KM(app) + X].
Results
Substrate Selectivity
Gutternigg et al. qualitatively
showed previously that HexD was active on synthetic substrates containing
both GalNAc and GlcNAc β-linked to the leaving group, while
it was not active on those substrates containing an α-linkage
or on gluco- or galacto-derived substrates lacking an N-acetyl group.[9] We first set out to establish
the detailed kinetic parameters for HexD acting on both gluco- and
galactosaminide substrates. Kinetic parameters were determined with
substrates containing 4-nitrophenyl (PNP) or 3-fluoro-4-nitrophenyl
(3F4NP) leaving groups (Figure A,B,D). Measurements showed that the catalytic efficiency
as reflected in the second-order rate constant (kcat/KM) was higher for substrates
containing GalNAc than for substrates containing GlcNAc: 21-fold higher
for the 4-nitrophenyl leaving group and only 7-fold higher for the
3-fluoro-4-nitrophenyl leaving group (Table ). Interestingly, the first-order rate constants
(kcat) for each substrate were similar,
ranging between 30.4 and 122 min–1, and the difference
in catalytic efficiency between the GalNAc- and GlcNAc-containing
substrates is governed primarily by differences in the Michaelis constant
(KM). Michaelis constant values were determined
to be 72 μM for PNP-GalNAc (1a) as compared to
607 μM for PNP-GlcNAc (2a), and 172 μM for
3F4NP-GalNAc (1f) compared to 852 μM for 3F4NP-GlcNAc
(2b). These studies show HexD has a preference for galactosaminide
substrates, although glucosaminides are processed surprisingly well,
suggesting there is either plasticity in the active site region around
the C4 position or a pocket that tolerates stereoisomers at this position.
Figure 2
Determination
of substrate preference and stereochemical outcome
for HexD hydrolysis. (A) Michaelis–Menten kinetics for HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc (1a, ●) and PNP-GlcNAc
(2a, ▲). (B) Michaelis–Menten kinetics
for HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis of 3F4NP-GalNAc (1f, ●)
and 3F4NP-GlcNAc (2b, ■). Error bars represent
the SEM. (C) 1H NMR spectrum showing the progress of HexD
hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc. The initial product formed was β-GalNAc,
which was subsequently mutarotated to α-GalNAc (500 MHz, D2O). (D) Structures of PNP-GalNAc (1a), PNP-GlcNAc
(2a), 3F4NP-GalNAc (1f) and 3F4NP-GlcNAc
(2b).
Table 1
Kinetic
Parametersa for HexD Hydrolysis of Galactosaminides
vs Glucosaminides
substrate
KM (mM)
kcat (min–1)
kcat/KM (min–1 mM–1)
PNP-GalNAc (1a)
0.0721 ± 0.0048
79.3 ± 1.2
1090 ± 75
PNP-GlcNAc (2a)
0.607 ± 0.053
30.4 ± 0.89
50.1 ± 4.6
3F4NP-GalNAc (1f)
0.172 ± 0.019
122 ± 3.9
707 ± 81
3F4NP-GlcNAc (2b)
0.852 ± 0.054
92.4 ± 2.7
109 ± 7.6
Calculated kinetic
parameters represent
the mean ± SEM of triplicate values.
Determination
of substrate preference and stereochemical outcome
for HexD hydrolysis. (A) Michaelis–Menten kinetics for HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc (1a, ●) and PNP-GlcNAc
(2a, ▲). (B) Michaelis–Menten kinetics
for HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis of 3F4NP-GalNAc (1f, ●)
and 3F4NP-GlcNAc (2b, ■). Error bars represent
the SEM. (C) 1H NMR spectrum showing the progress of HexD
hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc. The initial product formed was β-GalNAc,
which was subsequently mutarotated to α-GalNAc (500 MHz, D2O). (D) Structures of PNP-GalNAc (1a), PNP-GlcNAc
(2a), 3F4NP-GalNAc (1f) and 3F4NP-GlcNAc
(2b).Calculated kinetic
parameters represent
the mean ± SEM of triplicate values.
Establishing the Stereochemical Outcome
Other β-hexosaminidases
have been shown to hydrolyze β-linked substrates and release
either β-GalNAc or β-GlcNAc products upon hydrolysis,
illustrating that they operate with retention of stereochemistry.[14,29] This outcome is enforced by participation of the N-acetamido group, employed in the substrate-assisted hydrolytic mechanism
used by these β-hexosaminidases, which limits nucleophilic attack
to only the α face of the carbohydrate. To determine whether
HexD also operates with retention of stereochemistry, we monitored
the HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis of 4-nitrophenyl GalNAc in deuterated
phosphate-buffered saline by NMR spectroscopy (Figure C). After 5 min, a new doublet at 4.65 ppm
emerges with a coupling constant of 8.4 Hz, consistent with the anomeric
proton signal of the β-anomer of GalNAc. After 15 min, an additional
peak appears at 5.23 ppm with a J of 3.4 Hz, indicative
of mutarotation from the β-anomer to the thermodynamically preferred
α-anomer. A final equilibrium 55:45 α:β anomeric
mixture is eventually reached after consumption of PNP-GalNAc. The
formation of the β-anomer as the product that is observed first,
prior to mutarotation, provides direct experimental evidence that
HexD is a retaining glycosidase.
Assessing the Extent of
the Involvement of the Substrate Acetamido
Group by Taft Analysis
To evaluate the involvement of the
substrate acetamido group in catalysis and establish whether HexD
employs a substrate-assisted mechanism like other GH20 β-hexosaminidases,
a series of galacto-configured synthetic substrates were synthesized
to modulate the nucleophilicity of the carbonyl group. Similar studies
have been used to examine β-hexosaminidases that hydrolyze glucosaminide
substrates.[14,28] Substrates that incorporated
zero, one, two, or three electronegative fluorine atoms at the N-acyl group were synthesized, and the kinetic parameters
governing their hydrolysis by HexD was determined. Panel A of Figure show the Michaelis–Menten
plots of data for HexD acting on PNP-GalNAc (1a) and
the series of fluorinated derivatives (1b–1d)
(Figure C). Incorporation
of each successive fluorine atom significantly impairs the rate of
hydrolysis, with a 34-fold reduction in kcat/KM for trifluorinated substrate 1d relative to that of nonfluorinated PNP-GalNAc 1a (Table ). A plot
of the log kcat/KM values against the Taft electronic parameter (σ*) of
the acyl groups reveals a Taft reaction constant (ρ) of −0.49
± 0.1 (Figure B). The negative slope of this correlation is consistent with the
carbonyl group of the N-acetamido group participating
as a nucleophile in the enzyme-catalyzed reaction. This provides strong
evidence of HexD employing a substrate-assisted hydrolysis mechanism,
similar to those of other mammalian β-hexosaminidases in GH
families 20 and 84.
Figure 3
HexD activity with N-fluoroacetyl PNP-GalNAc
substrates.
(A) Michaelis–Menten kinetics of N-fluoroacetyl
PNP-GalNAc derivative hydrolysis catalyzed by HexD: (●) PNP-GalNAc
(1a), (■) PNP-GalNAc-F (1b), (▲)
PNP-GalNAc-F2 (1c), and (▼) PNP-GalNAc-F3 (1d). Error bars represent the SEM. (B) Taft-like
linear free energy analysis plotting log(kcat/KM) for HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis of
substrates 1a–1d vs the Taft electronic parameter
(σ*) of the N-fluoroacetyl groups. (C) Structures
of N-fluoroacetyl PNP-GalNAc substrates (1b–1d).
Table 2
Kinetic Parametersa for HexD Hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc and Fluorinated
Derivatives
substrate
σ*b
KM (mM)
kcat (min–1)
kcat/KM (min–1 mM–1)
PNP-GalNAc (1a)
0
0.176 ± 0.014
145 ± 3.5
827 ± 71
PNP-GalNAc-F (1b)
0.8
0.533 ± 0.017
156 ± 1.9
299 ± 11
PNP-GalNAc-F2 (1c)
2.0
0.102 ± 0.016
16.2 ± 0.65
159 ± 25
PNP-GalNAc-F3 (1d)
2.8
0.103 ± 0.027
2.52 ± 0.17
24.5 ± 6.5
Calculated kinetic
parameters represent
the mean ± SEM of triplicate values.
Values of the Taft electronic parameters
for N-fluoroacetyl substituents were taken from ref (39).
HexD activity with N-fluoroacetyl PNP-GalNAc
substrates.
(A) Michaelis–Menten kinetics of N-fluoroacetylPNP-GalNAc derivative hydrolysis catalyzed by HexD: (●) PNP-GalNAc
(1a), (■) PNP-GalNAc-F (1b), (▲)
PNP-GalNAc-F2 (1c), and (▼) PNP-GalNAc-F3 (1d). Error bars represent the SEM. (B) Taft-like
linear free energy analysis plotting log(kcat/KM) for HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis of
substrates 1a–1d vs the Taft electronic parameter
(σ*) of the N-fluoroacetyl groups. (C) Structures
of N-fluoroacetyl PNP-GalNAc substrates (1b–1d).Calculated kinetic
parameters represent
the mean ± SEM of triplicate values.Values of the Taft electronic parameters
for N-fluoroacetyl substituents were taken from ref (39).
Establishing the Importance of Residues Predicted To Be Involved
in Catalysis
We next sought to identify key active site residues
involved in the substrate-assisted mechanism of HexD. By examining
sequence homology across enzymes of GH family 20 (Figure S1), we identified Asp148 and Glu149 as the predicted
candidate residues acting as the catalytic polarizing and acid/base
residues. Site-directed mutagenesis was used to produce HexD variants
in which these residues were mutated to either alanine or asparagine/glutamine.
The activity of these mutants was assessed relative to that of wild-type
(WT) HexD using PNP-GalNAc or 3F4NP-GalNAc as the substrate. Mutation
of either residue to alanine or the corresponding amide caused a loss
of activity (Table ). Full Michaelis–Menten kinetics for the D148A mutant of
HexD could be determined only when 3F4NP-GalNAc was used as the substrate,
likely because it bears a leaving group (3F4NP; pKa = 6.4) that is better than that of PNP-GalNAc (PNP;
pKa = 7.2). The decrease in second-order
rate constant kcat/KM is 870-fold for the D148A mutant compared to that of WT HexD
and >4000-fold for the D148N mutant. While the KM for both Asp148 variants increased 3–10-fold,
the
loss of overall catalytic efficiency was due primarily to a decrease
in the rate of turnover as reflected by the lower kcat values. The activity of the E149A mutant was affected
to a lesser extent, with the E149A and E149Q mutations leading to
a 1.6–2.2-fold decrease in kcat/KM when PNP-GalNAc was used as the substrate.
Table 3
Kinetic Parametersa for Hydrolysis
by Wild-Type HexD and Various Mutants
substrate
KM (mM)
kcat (min–1)
kcat/KM (min–1 mM–1)
relative
activity (WT/mutant)
WT
3F4NP-GalNAc
0.172 ± 0.019
122 ± 3.9
708 ± 83
1
WT
PNP-GalNAc
0.0721 ± 0.0048
79.1 ± 1.2
1090 ± 77
1
D148A
3F4NP-GalNAc
0.566 ± 0.068
0.461 ± 0.023
0.815 ± 0.11
868
D148N
3F4NP-GalNAc
1.73 ± 0.27
0.293 ± 0.027
0.169 ± 0.030
4190
E149A
PNP-GalNAc
0.0525 ± 0.0034
36.1 ± 0.52
691 ± 52
1.6
E149A
3F4NP-GalNAc
0.213 ± 0.018
176 ± 4.8
825 ± 74
0.85
E149Q
PNP-GalNAc
0.175 ± 0.031
89.3 ± 4.6
508 ± 94
2.2
H92A
PNP-GalNAc
0.196 ± 0.028
3.09 ± 0.13
15.8 ± 2.4
69
Calculated kinetic parameters represent
the mean ± SEM of triplicate values.
Calculated kinetic parameters represent
the mean ± SEM of triplicate values.We also tested the importance of His92, which is conserved
on the
basis of sequence alignments with the GH20 lysosomal β-hexosaminidases
(Figure S1) and is predicted to be an active
site residue on the basis of structural information from the lysosomal
β-hexosaminidases, for HexD activity. The kcat/KM for the H92A mutant
was 70-fold lower than that of the wild-type enzyme, suggesting it
makes an important contribution to catalysis and may reside in the
enzyme active site as seen for His262 in HexA and His294 in HexB.[16,17] The overall decrease in kcat/KM is contributed solely by a decrease in the
rate of turnover, whereas the KM is consistent
with the wild-type value.
Brønsted Linear Free Energy Analyses
To further
probe the importance of Asp148 and Glu149 as catalytic residues, Brønsted
linear free energy analyses were conducted for WT HexD and the D148A
and E149A mutants. A panel of aryl galactosaminide substrates (1e–1j) (Figure C) was synthesized, and Michaelis–Menten kinetic parameters
were determined for each enzyme using these substrates as well as
4-methylumbelliferyl 2-acetamido-2-deoxy-β-d-glucopyranoside
(3). The logarithm of the second-order rate constant
measured for turnover of each substrate was plotted against the pKa of the corresponding phenol leaving group
(Figure A). A βlg (V/K) value of −0.44
± 0.05 was obtained for WT HexD, indicating a moderate dependence
on leaving group ability. In contrast, more negative βlg values of −0.89 and −0.85 were obtained for the D148A
and E149A mutant enzymes, respectively. The steeper negative slopes
of both mutants relative to the WT enzyme are indicative of a stronger
dependency on leaving group ability. This perturbation may stem from
the inability of the mutants to stabilize the accumulation of charge
in the transition state as the anomeric substituent departs, leading
to a transition state in which there is greater charge development
on the departing glycosidic oxygen. Alternatively, the steeper slopes
observed for these βlg (V/K) values could be explained by the mutations causing a
change in the position of the transition state along the reaction
coordinate. In any event, these data provide strong direct evidence
that D148 and E149 are key active site residues involved in transition
state stabilization.
Figure 4
Investigation into the roles played by predicted catalytic
residues
for HexD. (A) Brønsted linear free energy plot of HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis of aryl GalNAc derivatives (1a and 1e–1j) as a function of aryl leaving group pKa: (●) wild-type HexD, (◆) D148A mutant, and (□)
E149A mutant. (B) pH dependence of HexD hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc (1a): (●) wild-type HexD (—) and (■) E149A
mutant (---). Error bars represent the SEM. (C) Structures of aryl
GalNAc substrates (1e–1j) and 4-methylumbelliferyl-GalNAc
(3) used in Brønsted analyses.
Investigation into the roles played by predicted catalytic
residues
for HexD. (A) Brønsted linear free energy plot of HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis of aryl GalNAc derivatives (1a and 1e–1j) as a function of aryl leaving group pKa: (●) wild-type HexD, (◆) D148A mutant, and (□)
E149A mutant. (B) pH dependence of HexD hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc (1a): (●) wild-type HexD (—) and (■) E149A
mutant (---). Error bars represent the SEM. (C) Structures of aryl
GalNAc substrates (1e–1j) and 4-methylumbelliferyl-GalNAc
(3) used in Brønsted analyses.
pH Dependence of HexD Activity
The pH dependence of
HexD activity was determined by measuring kcat/KM across a pH range of 5.0–9.0.
To perform these studies, we first established that HexD was stable
for at least 30 min over this pH range under the conditions used for
the assay. A plot of the logarithm of the second-order rate constant
versus pH (Figure B) displays a bell-shaped profile with a pH optimum of 6.5–7.0,
which is not unexpected given the subcellular localization of HexD
in the nucleus and cytoplasm. The pH profile for HexD is consistent
with that observed for the GH84 β-hexosaminidase OGA,[31,32] which is similarly localized to the nucleus and cytoplasm. When
a bell-shaped ionization curve (eq ) was fit to the data, the kinetic pKa values of the D148 and E149 residues can be estimated
by identifying the pH values corresponding to half of the maximum kcat/KM value on
each limb of the curve. Using this technique, the pKa values of the acidic and basic limbs were estimated
to be 5.6 and 7.8, respectively. The pH dependence of activity for
the E149A mutant displays a similar bell-shaped curve but has an alkaline
shift in comparison to wild-type HexD with a pH optimum of 7.5. This
shift suggests E149 plays a key role in catalysis but indicates at
least two other residues contribute to the pH profile. The kinetic
pKa values of the E149A pH curve are 6.7
for the acidic limb and 7.8 for the basic limb. A small decrease in
activity and a small upward shift in pH optimum were also observed
for E149A and E149Q mutants of the murineHexD (data not shown). Unfortunately,
we were unable to determine the pH dependence of activity for the
D148A mutant as its activity was extremely low even at the pH optimum.
Inhibition of HexD
NAG-thiazoline was first designed
as a mimic of the oxazoline intermediate that forms during substrate-assisted
hydrolysis for hexosaminidases,[29] and this
thiazoline feature has been successfully incorporated into inhibitors
of a range of hexosaminidases that employ a substrate-assisted catalytic
mechanism.[14,16,17,25,33] Given the
preference of HexD for galacto-configured substrates, we decided to
test the inhibition of HexD by galacto-configured NAG-thiazoline (Gal-NAG-thiazoline, 4; Figure B). Compound 4 is an effective inhibitor of HexD-catalyzed
hydrolysis of PNP-GalNAc, and the Lineweaver–Burk plot confirms
an expected competitive mode of inhibition (Figure A). Nonlinear regression reveals the Ki value to be 420 nM. A very similar value (520
nM) has been determined in preliminary studies with the murine enzyme
(data not shown). Curiously, we were unable to observe any inhibition
with gluco-configured NAG-thiazoline at a concentration of 1 mM despite
the significant activity we observe for this enzyme toward β-N-acetylglucosaminide substrates. Inhibition of HexD by 4 provides further evidence that it employs a catalytic mechanism
involving anchimeric assistance with formation of a transient oxazoline
intermediate.
Figure 5
(A) Inhibition of HexD using Gal-NAG-thiazoline (4). Lineweaver–Burk plot of HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis
of PNP-GalNAc
(1a) in the presence of varying concentrations of Gal-NAG-thiazoline
(4). Concentrations of 4 of (○) 20,
(◆) 10, (▼) 5, (▲) 2.5, (■) 1.25, and
(●) 0 μM. Error bars represent the SEM. (B) Structure
of Gal-NAG-thiazoline (4).
(A) Inhibition of HexD using Gal-NAG-thiazoline (4). Lineweaver–Burk plot of HexD-catalyzed hydrolysis
of PNP-GalNAc
(1a) in the presence of varying concentrations of Gal-NAG-thiazoline
(4). Concentrations of 4 of (○) 20,
(◆) 10, (▼) 5, (▲) 2.5, (■) 1.25, and
(●) 0 μM. Error bars represent the SEM. (B) Structure
of Gal-NAG-thiazoline (4).From this work.From ref (40).From ref (14).From ref (28).From ref (41).From ref (42).From ref (43).From ref (44).From ref (21).Not determined.
Discussion
Glycoside
hydrolases from GH families 18, 20, 56, 84, and 85 have
been shown to operate through a substrate-assisted catalytic mechanism
(Figure ) with some
mechanistic variations but usually involving two carboxyl residues
positioned within the active site.[14,15,25,32−34] One of these residues acts as a polarizing residue, hydrogen bonding
with the N–H bond of the acetamido group to both appropriately
orient and promote attack of the carbonyl oxygen at the anomeric center.
Concurrently, a general acid/base residue, acting as a general acid
in the first step of the reaction, stabilizes the developing charge
on the departing glycosidic oxygen to facilitate its departure, leading
to formation of the bicyclic oxazoline intermediate. The oxazoline
is hydrolyzed through the near microscopic reverse of the first step
where the acid/base residue acts as a base; it is considered a “near”
microscopic reverse because in the first step of the mechanism the
leaving group/nucleophile is an alcohol whereas in the second step
it is a water molecule.A distinguishing feature of the substrate-assisted
catalytic mechanism
employed by β-hexosaminidases is the participation of the 2-acetamido
group of the substrate in which the carbonyl oxygen acts as a nucleophile.
The presence of electron-withdrawing fluorine atoms on the acetamido
group of a substrate is therefore expected to decrease the level of
catalysis by reducing the electron density of the carbonyl oxygen.
HexD activity with substrates possessing zero, one, two, or three
fluorine atoms on the acetamido group was tested, and a trend (Figure A) is observed whereby
the rate of hydrolysis is reduced as the degree of fluorination increases.
The data were subjected to Taft-like linear free energy analysis,
which accounts for the influence of polar effects on a reaction rate
and can be used to determine whether the acetamido group is responsible
for the variability in reaction rate observed between substrates.
By plotting the log kcat/KM of each substrate against the Taft electronic parameter
(σ*) of the corresponding N-acyl substituent,
we obtained the Taft reaction constant (ρ) (Figure B), revealing a negative linear
correlation with an increasing degree of fluorine substitution. The
negative slope of the reaction constant (−0.49 ± 0.1)
suggests this residue interacts with a positively charged center in
the transition state, consistent with the hypothesis that the carbonyl
oxygen acts in a nucleophilic capacity to intercept the electrophilic
anomeric center. The magnitude of the reaction constant is similar
to that calculated for OGA (−0.42 ± 0.08) (Table ), in which the acetamido group
has been unambiguously shown to participate in catalysis.[14] In contrast, the value observed for HexD is
smaller than the reaction constant obtained for HexB (−1.0
± 0.1), which also operates using a substrate-assisted mechanism.[14] An important consideration, however, is that
the Taft reaction constant is governed by both a steric and electronic
component according towhere ρ* represents the
sensitivity
of the reaction to the electronic character of the substituents (σ*)
and δ represents the sensitivity of the reaction to the Taft
steric coefficients of the substrates (Es). It is, therefore, conceivable that the decrease in reaction rate
with an increasing degree of fluorine substitution is due in part
to an increased number of steric interactions caused by the difference
in size between fluorine (atomic radius of 147 pm) and hydrogen atoms
(atomic radius of 120 pm). However, though KM is a kinetic parameter and might not always reflect substrate
dissociation, particularly in cases where an enzyme-bound intermediate
accumulates, the clear dependence of the first-order rate constants
(kcat) on leaving group ability suggests
that the rate-determining step for these substrates with WT HexD is
the ring-forming step in which the leaving group is departing. Accordingly,
the relatively constant KM values observed
among these fluorinated substrates suggest that binding ability is
not substantially affected by substitution with fluorine and imply
that the electronic effects of the fluorine atoms are the major contributor
to the reduction in hydrolysis rate for HexD.
Table 4
Comparison of the Kinetic and Inhibition
Properties of Hexosaminidases HexA and HexB (GH20), OGA (GH84), and
HexD (GH20)
HexD
HexA
HexB
OGA
GlcNAc/GalNAc selectivity
0.048a
8.6b
8.6b
>50b
Taft reaction constant (ρ)
–0.49 ± 0.1a
NDj
–1.0 ± 0.1c
–0.42 ± 0.08c
βlg (V/K)
–0.44 ± 0.05a
NDj
–0.29d
–0.11 ± 0.01e
Ki for NAG-thiazoline (μM)
>1000a
0.27f
0.19f
0.070c
0.070c
Ki for Gal-NAG-thiazoline (4) (μM)
0.42a
0.82g
0.32h
poori
From this work.
From ref (40).
From ref (14).
From ref (28).
From ref (41).
From ref (42).
From ref (43).
From ref (44).
From ref (21).
Not determined.
Sequence alignments
of enzymes within a CAZy family have demonstrated
that the catalytic residues, most commonly two carboxylic acid residues,
are highly conserved. Structural and kinetic studies have demonstrated
that GH families 18 and 56 possess a DXE motif, where the aspartate
and glutamate residues are the critical residues used to effect catalysis.[32,34] The lysosomal β-hexosaminidases HexA and HexB, members of
GH family 20, use a conserved DE catalytic pair with two carboxylic
acid residues adjacent to each other[25] (Figure S1), whereas GH84 enzymes, such as OGA,
use a DD catalytic pair.[31] Unusually, GH85
enzymes possess an asparagine residue in place of the aspartate in
an NXE motif; the asparagine has been proposed to exist as the imidic
acid tautomer to accept a hydrogen bond from the substrate amide.[33]The data obtained in this study through
kinetic analyses of HexD
mutants strongly support the assignment of Asp148 and Glu149 as the
key catalytic residues. Mutation of Asp148 to either alanine or asparagine
significantly impairs the activity of the enzyme even in the presence
of substrates with activated leaving groups. Notably, mutation of
Glu149 to alanine or glutamine has a much less pronounced effect on
the rate of hydrolysis of activated substrates such as PNP-GalNAc.
These data suggest Glu149 functions as the catalytic general acid/base
during catalysis, because the modest reductions in activity observed
for the E149 mutants with activated substrates can be rationalized
by the low pKa values of the phenolic
leaving groups of PNP-GalNAc and 3F4NP-GalNAc (7.18 and 6.42, respectively).
These leaving groups cannot benefit greatly from general acid catalysis
when the microscopic pKa of the general
acid is greater than the pKa of the leaving
group. These changes in activity in association with mutating the
general acid/base catalytic residue are consistent with analysis of
the corresponding mutants of OGA.[31] Analysis
of the pH dependence of wild-type HexD activity reveals a bell-shaped
profile (Figure B),
with an acidic limb pKa of 5.6 and a basic
limb pKa of 7.8. Such pH profiles are
notoriously hard to dissect fully,[35] but
the simplest interpretation is the bell shape stems from titration
of the two catalytic residues. In such a case, the acidic limb would
reflect titration of the polarizing residue and the basic limb titration
of the acid/base residue. If this interpretation is correct, the pKa values of the activated substrates are lower
than the kinetic pKa of the general acid/base
catalytic residue. Accordingly, the general acid catalysis afforded
by Glu149 is inefficient because it cannot donate a proton to the
departing phenol. When tested against substrates bearing worse leaving
groups, the catalytic ability of the E149A mutant is significantly
impaired relative to that of wild-type HexD, as demonstrated by the
steeper negative correlation observed in the Brønsted analyses
(Figure A). It should
be pointed out here, however, that the pH dependence for the E149A
mutant also gave a bell-shaped profile, with an alkaline shift relative
to the profile for wild-type HexD. This indicates there is titration
of at least two residues other than Glu149 contributing to the pH
dependence; whether this is true only in the case of the Glu149 mutant
HexD, where the chemistry of the active site environment will have
been perturbed by removal of the charged residue or is also true for
the wild-type enzyme is difficult to know in the absence of structural
data. The low activity observed for the D148AHexD mutant, even with
activated substrates, as well as the steep negative correlation observed
in the Brønsted analyses, is consistent with this residue playing
a role in polarizing the N–H group on the acetamido group of
the substrate to aid nucleophilic attack by the carbonyl oxygen at
the anomeric position. The impact of this mutation is also reminiscent
of the effect of analogous mutations made in OGA and HexB, where impairments
of 6700- and 2400-fold have been observed, respectively.[27,31] The assignment of Asp148 as the polarizing residue and Glu149 as
the general acid/base is consistent with previous conclusions for
analogous residues in the DE motif of GH20 enzymes, such as the lysosomal
β-hexosaminidases,[27] and the DD motif
of GH84 enzymes, such as OGA.[31]The
inhibitor NAG-thiazoline was originally designed to mimic the
transient oxazoline intermediate that is formed during substrate-assisted
catalysis (Figure ).[29] Interestingly, however, Whitworth
and colleagues have since demonstrated using linear free energy relationships
that NAG-thiazoline is a mimic of the transition state for humanOGA.[36] Incorporation of the thiazoline motif during
design of inhibitors has proven to lead to effective inhibitors of
a range of hexosaminidases that employ a substrate-assisted mechanism.[14,16,17,25,33] On the basis of the mechanistic evidence
obtained from kinetic analyses in this study, we expected the galacto-configured
derivative of NAG-thiazoline, Gal-NAG-thiazoline (4),
would inhibit HexD. We observe this to be the case, with Gal-NAG-thiazoline
displaying potent competitive inhibition of HexD with a Ki value of 420 nM, which provided further experimental
support for HexD using substrate-assisted catalysis.Notably,
functionalized derivatives of NAG-thiazoline have been
developed as potent and selective inhibitors of the lysosomal β-hexosaminidases
HexA/B and OGA, which have proven to be useful tools for interrogating
the biological role of these enzymes.[14,23,37,38] Unfortunately, Gal-NAG-thiazoline
has limited use as a chemical tool for studying the physiological
role played by HexD because it also inhibits the lysosomal β-hexosaminidases
(Table ). These studies,
however, lay important groundwork for the rational design of selective
inhibitors of HexD. The inhibition of HexD by Gal-NAG-thiazoline suggests
this inhibitor scaffold may be suitable for adaptation and may allow
creation of compounds that will selectively inhibit HexD without impacting
the activity of lysosomal β-hexosaminidases. Given the limited
tolerance of HexD toward glucose-based substrates, combined with its
localization in the nucleus and cytoplasm, the enzyme likely serves
a biological role that is distinct from that of the lysosomal β-hexosaminidases
and OGA. Accordingly, the development of potent and specific probes
will be useful for investigating the potential physiological function
of HexD.
Conclusions
In summary, we have performed a detailed
kinetic characterization
of HexD using a combination of kinetic studies with wild-type and
mutant enzymes, linear free energy analyses, NMR experiments, and
inhibition studies. HexD is a retaining glycosidase, which operates
through a substrate-assisted hydrolysis mechanism consistent with
that of other mammalian β-hexosaminidases in GH families 20
and 84. The enzyme shows a moderate preference for galactosaminides
over glucosaminides and operates optimally in the pH range of 6.5–7.0.
We have dissected the catalytic roles played by Asp148 and Glu149,
which we propose act as the polarizing residue and general acid/base,
respectively. Furthermore, HexD is inhibited by Gal-NAG-thiazoline,
which is consistent with the use of a substrate-assisted mechanism,
and this observation will provide a starting point for further inhibitor
development. Despite the mechanistic similarities it shares with the
lysosomal β-hexosaminidases, which belong to family GH20, HexD
is distinct as it localizes to the nucleus and cytoplasm and shows
only weak activity against glucosaminides. We anticipate the insights
gained from this study will assist in the development of potent and
selective inhibitors of HexD as well as other research tools, which
will serve to improve our understanding of the physiological role
played by HexD in human health and disease.
Authors: Garrett E Whitworth; Matthew S Macauley; Keith A Stubbs; Rebecca J Dennis; Edward J Taylor; Gideon J Davies; Ian R Greig; David J Vocadlo Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-01-24 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: R Shafi; S P Iyer; L G Ellies; N O'Donnell; K W Marek; D Chui; G W Hart; J D Marth Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2000-05-23 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Mária Pásztói; Barbara Sódar; Petra Misják; Krisztina Pálóczi; Ágnes Kittel; Kálmán Tóth; Károly Wellinger; Pál Géher; György Nagy; Tamás Lakatos; András Falus; Edit Irén Buzás Journal: Immunol Lett Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Spencer J Williams; Brian L Mark; David J Vocadlo; Michael N G James; Stephen G Withers Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2002-08-08 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Matthew S Macauley; Abigail K Bubb; Carlos Martinez-Fleites; Gideon J Davies; David J Vocadlo Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2008-10-08 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Amarendar Reddy Maddirala; Roger Klein; Jerome S Pinkner; Vasilios Kalas; Scott J Hultgren; James W Janetka Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2019-01-02 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Yohana Camila Garay; Romina Beatriz Cejas; Virginia Lorenz; Natacha Zlocowski; Pedro Parodi; Franco Alejandro Ferrero; Genaro Angeloni; Valentina Alfonso García; Victor German Sendra; Ricardo Dante Lardone; Fernando José Irazoqui Journal: J Mol Med (Berl) Date: 2022-09-02 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Shuen-Shiuan Wang; Xuefeng Gao; Virginia Del Solar; Xinheng Yu; Aristotelis Antonopoulos; Alan E Friedman; Eryn K Matich; G Ekin Atilla-Gokcumen; Mehrab Nasirikenari; Joseph T Lau; Anne Dell; Stuart M Haslam; Roger A Laine; Khushi L Matta; Sriram Neelamegham Journal: Cell Chem Biol Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 8.116
Authors: Clara Snijders; Adam X Maihofer; Andrew Ratanatharathorn; Dewleen G Baker; Marco P Boks; Elbert Geuze; Sonia Jain; Ronald C Kessler; Ehsan Pishva; Victoria B Risbrough; Murray B Stein; Robert J Ursano; Eric Vermetten; Christiaan H Vinkers; Alicia K Smith; Monica Uddin; Bart P F Rutten; Caroline M Nievergelt Journal: Clin Epigenetics Date: 2020-01-13 Impact factor: 6.551