In order to identify the most attractive starting points for drugs that can be used to prevent malaria, a diverse chemical space comprising tens of thousands to millions of small molecules may need to be examined. Achieving this throughput necessitates the development of efficient ultra-high-throughput screening methods. Here, we report the development and evaluation of a luciferase-based phenotypic screen of malaria exoerythrocytic-stage parasites optimized for a 1536-well format. This assay uses the exoerythrocytic stage of the rodent malaria parasite, Plasmodium berghei, and a human hepatoma cell line. We use this assay to evaluate several biased and unbiased compound libraries, including two small sets of molecules (400 and 89 compounds, respectively) with known activity against malaria erythrocytic-stage parasites and a set of 9886 diversity-oriented synthesis (DOS)-derived compounds. Of the compounds screened, we obtain hit rates of 12-13 and 0.6% in preselected and naïve libraries, respectively, and identify 52 compounds with exoerythrocytic-stage activity less than 1 μM and having minimal host cell toxicity. Our data demonstrate the ability of this method to identify compounds known to have causal prophylactic activity in both human and animal models of malaria, as well as novel compounds, including some exclusively active against parasite exoerythrocytic stages.
In order to identify the most attractive starting points for drugs that can be used to prevent malaria, a diverse chemical space comprising tens of thousands to millions of small molecules may need to be examined. Achieving this throughput necessitates the development of efficient ultra-high-throughput screening methods. Here, we report the development and evaluation of a luciferase-based phenotypic screen of malaria exoerythrocytic-stage parasites optimized for a 1536-well format. This assay uses the exoerythrocytic stage of the rodent malaria parasite, Plasmodium berghei, and a humanhepatoma cell line. We use this assay to evaluate several biased and unbiased compound libraries, including two small sets of molecules (400 and 89 compounds, respectively) with known activity against malaria erythrocytic-stage parasites and a set of 9886 diversity-oriented synthesis (DOS)-derived compounds. Of the compounds screened, we obtain hit rates of 12-13 and 0.6% in preselected and naïve libraries, respectively, and identify 52 compounds with exoerythrocytic-stage activity less than 1 μM and having minimal host cell toxicity. Our data demonstrate the ability of this method to identify compounds known to have causal prophylactic activity in both human and animal models of malaria, as well as novel compounds, including some exclusively active against parasite exoerythrocytic stages.
Entities:
Keywords:
drug discovery; exoerythrocytic-stage malaria; high-throughput screening; liver-stage malaria; malaria
Despite being an ancient
disease, malaria is still responsible for over a half million deaths
and substantial morbidity, poverty, and suffering for hundreds of
millions of people each year.[1−3] It is a vector-borne disease caused
by infection with Plasmodium parasites
transmitted through the bite of Anopheles mosquitoes. While eradication campaigns have been successful in
most of North America and Europe, malaria continues to devastate developing
regions of Asia, Africa, and South America.[4] The mortality rates are highest among African children, with an
estimated one death per minute (WHO). The emergence of resistance
to all of the current frontline antimalarial drugs warrants global
concern.[5] It is therefore critical that
new drugs are developed that not only treat disease symptoms but also
contribute toward the elimination and eradication of malaria infections.
In order to achieve eradication, new drugs should inhibit multiple
developmental stages of the parasite. Following the blood meal of
an infected Anopheles mosquito, Plasmodium sporozoites travel through the bloodstream
to reach the liver. The sporozoites traverse multiple cells within
the liver before establishing productive invasion within hepatocytes,
where they transform into exoerythrocytic-stage exoerythrocytic forms
(EEFs).[6] Depending on the species, these
exoerythrocytic forms enter one of two developmental pathways: they
can form mature exoerythrocytic-stage schizonts, or they can enter
a dormant phase called hypnozoites. The determinant factors guiding
exoerythrocytic-stage development toward hypnozoite formation in P. vivax and P. ovale are not understood. Hypnozoites can reinitiate development and give
rise to malaria relapses weeks, months, or even years after the initial
infection.[7] Fully developed exoerythrocytic-stage
merozoites within schizonts eventually egress from the liver and re-enter
the bloodstream.[6] The continuous replication
of asexual blood stages within red blood cells (RBCs) causes RBC destruction
and leads to the characteristic symptoms associated with malaria:
anemia, fever, and chills.[8] A small percentage
of these asexual blood stage parasites will then differentiate into
sexual erythrocytic-stage parasites as female and male gametocytes,
and the transmission of the sexual blood stage back to the mosquito
vector during a subsequent blood meal completes the life cycle.[9]The majority of the current antimalarials
only treat the symptom-causing erythrocytic stages of the parasite.[10] A few classes, including cytochrome bc1 inhibitors (such as atovaquone) and antifolate drugs
(such as pyrimethamine), are active against developing exoerythrocytic
forms as well as erythrocytic forms and are able to prevent the establishment
of infection (causal prophylactic activity) as well as relieve symptoms.[10] Antibiotics, such as doxycycline, clindamycin,
and azithromycin, are also an important class of antimalarial drugs.
Doxycycline is commonly prescribed to travelers to endemic areas and
is especially useful for its casual prophylaxis and slow acting blood
schizontocidal activity.[11] The 8-aminoquinolines
(such as primaquine and tafenoquine) are a unique class in that they
can eliminate hypnozoites as well and can provide a radical cure for P. vivax and P. ovale.[7,10] Having new classes of drugs that could be used prophylactically
and/or to provide a radical cure would be desirable. Resistance is
developing to both napthoquinones and antifolates, and 8-aminoquinolines
can be toxic to individuals with glucose-6-phosphate deficiency.[10,12] Drugs targeting the exoerythrocytic stage only would also offer
the reduced potential for drug resistance, as there are far fewer
parasites at this “bottleneck” compared to the replicative
erythrocytic stages.[10] Accordingly, the
development of an exoerythrocytic-stage-specific high-throughput screening
assay is necessary in order to identify the next generation of antimalarial
drugs.Although it is possible to create new chemical derivatives
of existing drugs with improved therapeutic and resistance profiles,
phenotypic screening offers the opportunity to find entirely new classes
of small molecules that are active against exoerythrocytic stages
of the life cycle.[13] We have previously
reported an immunofluorescence-based malaria exoerythrocytic-stage
assay that we used to screen a library of >4000 commercially available
compounds with erythrocytic-stage activity.[14] While this platform led to the identification of 275 exoerythrocytic-stage
active compounds, the assay is limited to a 384-well throughput and
is therefore not suitable for the screening of larger chemical libraries,
in part because of the high cost of sporozoites obtained by manual
mosquito dissections ($1.00 per well screened). In addition, the requirement
for a specialized high-content imaging device limits the accessibility
of the assay. Other malaria exoerythrocytic-stage drug screens have
utilized P. berghei sporozoites that
express a luciferase reporter (Pb-Luc);[15−17] however, these assays
are also limited by a 384-well assay throughput. In this report, we
describe the development of a high-throughput luciferase-based assay
that can be used to screen chemical libraries in a 1536-well plate
format. We demonstrate that the assay is highly sensitive, reproducible,
and efficient. As a proof of concept, we use this assay to screen
the Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV) Malaria Box for compounds
with exoerythrocytic-stage activity[18] as
well as a larger collection of chemical compounds from the Broad Diversity-Oriented
Synthesis Library, a set that includes compounds with and without
demonstrated erythrocytic-stage antimalarial activity.
Results and Discussion
Development
of a Luciferase-Based High-Throughput Exoerythrocytic-Stage Assay
In order to develop a high-throughput exoerythrocytic-stage malaria
assay capable of screening large libraries of chemical compounds,
a number of tests were performed to optimize a 48 h in vitro PbGFP-Luc-SMCON[19] infection of HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP hepatocytes[20] (Figure S1). This rodent Plasmodium strain was previously generated through the integration of a GFP-Luc
cassette into the c-rrna locus and selecting transgenic P. berghei by flow sorting GFP-expressing parasites.
For simplicity, we will refer to this strain as Pb-Luc. For these
tests, HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP cells were seeded in 1536-well
plates 24 h prior to infection and luciferase bioluminescence measured
48 h postinfection to detect parasite viability. We found the ideal
ratio of sporozoites to cells per well to be 1:3, respectively (1
× 103 sporozoites in 5 μL to 3 × 103 cells in 5 μL) (Figure a and Figure S1a). At these
concentrations, the cells were ideally confluent, and the infection
rate produced luciferase values that were significantly greater than
background values at 48 h postinfection (Figure S1a). Furthermore, tests without hepatocytes showed that there
was no residual luciferase activity from Pb-Luc sporozoites at 24
h postinfection at 37 °C (Figure S1b), eliminating the possibility that sporozoites, which had not invaded,
contribute to the luciferase signal. We also tested different DMSO
concentrations (added 18 h preinfection) to assess their impact on
parasite viability and found that concentrations up to 0.88% DMSO
had an insignificant effect on luciferase activity 48 h postinfection
(Figure S1c). The final protocol was to
add 50 nL of compound in DMSO (resulting in 50 μM compound and
0.5% DMSO concentration in the assay plates) 18 h preinfection in
the optimized screening assay (Figure a). An example of the luciferase signal for two replicate
plates seeded with a representative small molecule library is shown
in Figure b. Z factor for these plates was between 0.7 and 0.9, an excellent
value for a phenotypic screen.
Figure 1
Luciferase-based high-throughput screening
assay to identify malaria exoerythrocytic-stage inhibitors. (a) Assay
workflow. Twenty-four hours prior to infection, 3 × 103 HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP cells in 5 μL media were added
to wells in a 1536-well assay plate. Then 1–4 h later, 50 nL
of compound dissolved in DMSO was added to the wells. At the time
of infection, Pb-Luc sporozoites were freshly prepared from infected A. stephensi mosquitoes and diluted to a concentration
of 1 × 103 in 5 μL media per well. After 48
h, Pb-Luc growth within hepatocytes was measured by bioluminescence.
(b) As a proof of concept, we screened two plates containing 2816
natural compounds (GNF) in replicate. One set of replicates is shown
here. The average Z factor for these plates was 0.82.
Luciferase-based high-throughput screening
assay to identify malaria exoerythrocytic-stage inhibitors. (a) Assay
workflow. Twenty-four hours prior to infection, 3 × 103 HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP cells in 5 μL media were added
to wells in a 1536-well assay plate. Then 1–4 h later, 50 nL
of compound dissolved in DMSO was added to the wells. At the time
of infection, Pb-Luc sporozoites were freshly prepared from infected A. stephensi mosquitoes and diluted to a concentration
of 1 × 103 in 5 μL media per well. After 48
h, Pb-Luc growth within hepatocytes was measured by bioluminescence.
(b) As a proof of concept, we screened two plates containing 2816
natural compounds (GNF) in replicate. One set of replicates is shown
here. The average Z factor for these plates was 0.82.
Assay Validation through
Screening of Known Antimalarial Compounds
To validate this
assay further, we next examined several compound collections. We first
evaluated 50 established antimalarial clinical or tool compounds (Table S1) that have been tested in other antimalarial
phenotypic assays.[10] The most active compounds
included the electron transport chain inhibitor atovaquone, antifolate
pathway inhibitors P218·HCl, pyrimethamine and cycloguanil, the
protein biosynthesis inhibitor cycloheximide, and the glutathione
reductase inhibitor methylene blue. For these compounds, the exoerythrocytic-stage
half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) values were
similar to the P. falciparum erythrocytic-stage
IC50 values. Compounds that were less active relative to
erythrocytic stages, on the other hand, included 4-aminoquinolines,
amino alcohols, and endoperoxides, which presumably act primarily
against hemoglobin degradation, a process that does not occur during
hepatic stages. Overall, these results were highly consistent with
our previously established high-content imaging (HCI) assay of the
hepatic stages against the related rodent parasite, Plasmodium yoelii.[10]For active compounds, we also compared the IC50 values
for Pb-Luc generated by the luciferase-based enzymatic assay to values
produced by screening Pb-Luc parasites using our previously established
(HCI) assay that uses polyclonal PlasmodiumHSP70 antibody staining at 48 h as an indicator of infection[14] (Figure ). We found that there was a strong correlation between compound
activities in both assays, as indicated by an R2 of 0.83, but the high-throughput luciferase-based assay resulted
in IC50s roughly 10× lower (Figure ). Since luciferase is relatively unstable,
with a half-life of less than 2 h,[21] this
may lead to a higher rate of reporter turnover and therefore increased
sensitivity to compounds that inhibit parasite growth at later stages
compared to that of parasite HSP70 (as measured in the HCI assay).
Additionally, nonviable parasites may be stained using the HCI assay,
whereas they may not produce luciferase.
Figure 2
A 1536-well luciferase-based
screening assay is higher-throughput and more sensitive than former
384-well HCI assay. Pb-Luc IC50 values for the MMV validation
set of antimalarials screened by the luciferase-based 1536-well assay
and by the 384-well high-content imaging (HCI) assay are compared.
Each data point represents a single antimalarial compound. The most
active compounds in both assays are labeled. The assays generate Pb-Luc
IC50 values that correlate very well with each other, as
demonstrated by an R2 value of 0.83; however,
the luciferase-based assay resulted in IC50 values roughly
10× lower than that in the HCI assay.
A 1536-well luciferase-based
screening assay is higher-throughput and more sensitive than former
384-well HCI assay. Pb-Luc IC50 values for the MMV validation
set of antimalarials screened by the luciferase-based 1536-well assay
and by the 384-well high-content imaging (HCI) assay are compared.
Each data point represents a single antimalarial compound. The most
active compounds in both assays are labeled. The assays generate Pb-Luc
IC50 values that correlate very well with each other, as
demonstrated by an R2 value of 0.83; however,
the luciferase-based assay resulted in IC50 values roughly
10× lower than that in the HCI assay.
Screening the MMV Malaria Box for Exoerythrocytic-Stage Inhibitors
After establishing the high-throughput luciferase-based assay quality,
reproducibility, and sensitivity, we sought to test its validity as
a platform to screen diverse chemical libraries by screening the MMV
Malaria Box.[18] This open-access set consists
of 400 compounds that were selected from a group of ∼20 000
antimalarial hits generated from a large-scale erythrocytic-stage
screening of >4 000 000 compounds by St. Jude Children’s
Hospital, Novartis, and GSK (Figure S2).
The library contains 200 “probe-like” and 200 “drug-like”
compounds, selected based on their chemical diversity, erythrocytic-stage
antimalarial activity, and commercial availability. The Malaria Box
compounds have erythrocytic-stage activity ranging from an IC50 of 30 nM to 4 μM.[18] Compounds
originating in the Novartis collection had been previously tested
in the P. yoelii assay,[14] but others had not, providing valuable internal
controls.After a first-round screening of the MMV Malaria Box
at compound concentrations of 50 μM in duplicate plates, 48
compounds were selected for reconfirmation based on Pb-Luc inhibition
of more than 90% and HepG2cytotoxicity of less than 25% in both assay
plates, a hit rate of 12%. These were tested in a 12-point serial
dilution dose response beginning at 10 μM. Of those retested,
36 had a Pb-Luc IC50 < 10 μM, and counter-screening
for HepG2cytotoxicity and luciferase inhibition produced IC50 values greater than 10 μM (Figure ; see additional file 1 for full screening results), leading to a confirmation rate
of 75%. Furthermore, more than half of these compounds were very active
against Pb-Luc exoerythrocytic stages with IC50 values
of less than 1 μM (Figure ). Six of the compounds which had been previously tested
and confirmed[14] were reconfirmed here,
but there were 18 compounds that were considered exoerythrocytic-stage
active hits in the HCI assay and not in the luciferase-based assay.
This is likely due to the higher initial screening concentrations
used in the luciferase-based assay (50 μM compared to 10 μM
in the HCI assay), leading to increased HepG2cytotoxicity, as all
of these compounds inhibited Pb-Luc activity but were toxic at 50
μM. It should be noted that due to the sensitivity of the luciferase
assay and to minimize cytotoxicity, we advise starting with lower
initial screening concentrations for future high-throughput screening.
Figure 3
MMV Malaria
Box compounds are identified as potent malaria exoerythrocytic-stage
inhibitors: 36 exoerythrocytic-stage active MMV Malaria Box hits with
a Pb-Luc IC50 of less than 10 μM are shown with their
respective IC50 values. Hits were also selected to demonstrate
a HepG2 IC50 and a Luc IC50 of more than 10
μM. A line at 1 μM highlights that almost half of the
exoerythrocytic-stage active hits display nanomolar potency. Error
bars represent the 95% confidence interval.
MMV Malaria
Box compounds are identified as potent malaria exoerythrocytic-stage
inhibitors: 36 exoerythrocytic-stage active MMV Malaria Box hits with
a Pb-Luc IC50 of less than 10 μM are shown with their
respective IC50 values. Hits were also selected to demonstrate
a HepG2 IC50 and a Luc IC50 of more than 10
μM. A line at 1 μM highlights that almost half of the
exoerythrocytic-stage active hits display nanomolar potency. Error
bars represent the 95% confidence interval.
Screening the Broad Diversity-Oriented Synthesis Library
To assess performance in an unbiased screening library, two sets
of diversity-oriented synthesis (DOS)-derived compounds were screened
(outlined in Figure S3). These diverse
compounds combine the stereochemical and skeletal complexity of the
entire ensemble of natural products and the efficiency of high-throughput
synthesis.[22,23] This is an attractive validation
library because multiple stereoisomers of each structural type are
included, which permits a unique type of structure–activity
relationship measurements. The first set included 9886 compounds selected
to represent the structural diversity of the scaffolds from the Broad
Institute’s 100 000 DOS compound library. This “informer
set” was tested as a naïve library with respect to activity
against Plasmodium. The second set
comprised 89 compounds previously shown to be active in a P. falciparum erythrocytic-stage assay (IC50 < 2 μM, Nobutaka Kato et al., unpublished results). Compounds
that inhibited the luciferase signal >75% were scored as hits.
From the informer set (hit rate = 0.6%), 60 hits and 4 inconclusive
(only active in one replicate) were identified, and 12 hits were identified
from the erythrocytic-stage active set (hit rate = 13.4%). All available
compounds (58) plus 25 additional weak actives (60–74% inhibition)
from the informer set were tested in dose response in the primary
exoerythrocytic-stage assay and also in a SYBR Green erythrocytic-stage
assay.[24] All of the compounds from the
erythrocytic-stage active set were retested at a dose with IC50 < 5 μM, and 10 of these compounds had an IC50 < 1 μM. In all, 72% (60 compounds) of the naïve
informer set hits retested with IC50 < 5 μM. A
third of these had an IC50 < 1 μM (see additional file 2 for full screening results).
Finally, stereoisomers for selected hits were also examined in dose
response. These data (Figure a) showed stereoselective inhibition; for example, only the S,S,S stereoisomer, BRD0326,
is active (IC50 = 0.152 μM) in a set of eight stereoisomers
tested.
Figure 4
DOS compounds exhibit stereoselective inhibition of Pb-Luc exoerythrocytic-stage
parasite growth. (a) Representative compounds and activity profiles
with activity against P. berghei in
HepG2 cells. Stereocenters (C) are listed below the corresponding chemical structure. Pb-Luc
exoerythrocytic-stage activity was measured for each of the eight
possible stereoisomers (SRR, SSR, SRS, SSS, RRR, RSR, RRS, and RSS) of each compound. Three of the eight possible stereoisomers of
BRD9781 have exoerythrocytic-stage activity, two with potent activity
(SRR and SSS, IC50 <
0.1 μM) and another with moderate activity (RSS, IC50 < 1 μM). One stereoisomer of BRD0326 (SSS) is active (IC50 < 1 μM). Two stereoisomers
of BRD47390 have significant exoerythrocytic-stage activity (SSR, IC50 < 0.1 μM; SRS, IC50 < 0.1 μM). (b) Compounds were tested in
dose in the P. berghei/HepG2 assay,
a Dd2 erythrocytic-stage assay, and in a mammalian cell cytotoxicity
assay. Compounds from three scaffold libraries are shown. Compounds
were tested twice in the exoerythrocytic-stage assay; values from
the second assay are shown in parentheses.
DOS compounds exhibit stereoselective inhibition of Pb-Luc exoerythrocytic-stage
parasite growth. (a) Representative compounds and activity profiles
with activity against P. berghei in
HepG2 cells. Stereocenters (C) are listed below the corresponding chemical structure. Pb-Luc
exoerythrocytic-stage activity was measured for each of the eight
possible stereoisomers (SRR, SSR, SRS, SSS, RRR, RSR, RRS, and RSS) of each compound. Three of the eight possible stereoisomers of
BRD9781 have exoerythrocytic-stage activity, two with potent activity
(SRR and SSS, IC50 <
0.1 μM) and another with moderate activity (RSS, IC50 < 1 μM). One stereoisomer of BRD0326 (SSS) is active (IC50 < 1 μM). Two stereoisomers
of BRD47390 have significant exoerythrocytic-stage activity (SSR, IC50 < 0.1 μM; SRS, IC50 < 0.1 μM). (b) Compounds were tested in
dose in the P. berghei/HepG2 assay,
a Dd2 erythrocytic-stage assay, and in a mammalian cell cytotoxicity
assay. Compounds from three scaffold libraries are shown. Compounds
were tested twice in the exoerythrocytic-stage assay; values from
the second assay are shown in parentheses.
MMV Malaria Box and Broad Library Exoerythrocytic-Stage Active Chemical
Clustering Identifies Active Scaffolds and Important Targets
To cross-validate these data, we first identified scaffolds that
were enriched for compounds with exoerythrocytic-stage activity (relative
to erythrocytic stage or no antimalarial activity) using compound
clustering. Given the small size of our initial compound set, we combined
the MMV Malaria Box compounds with a GNF library consisting of 4422
compounds that were previously screened for exoerythrocytic-stage
activity in P. berghei.[14] Merging the libraries allowed us to determine
if there was any overlap in scaffold hits between the two compound
sets. The 4822 compounds were clustered using a hierarchical clustering
method based on substructure similarity. To define scaffold groups,
we separated clusters based on a minimum Tanimoto coefficient requirement
of 0.65, resulting in 2335 total clusters that ranged in size from
1 to 45 compounds. DOS library compounds were also included, but given
that the library was designed to eliminate structural redundancy,
it was expected that DOS compounds would not contribute significantly
to any scaffold clusters.We identified 15 scaffold series that
showed specific enrichment in exoerythrocytic-stage activity with
rates higher than expected by chance (p < 0.001)
(Figure ). The scaffold
clustering showed multiple scaffold families already known to be active.
One is the diaminotriazine scaffold (1228) similar to the diaminopyrimidine
found in antifolate drugs such as pyrimethamine (probability of enrichment
by chance = 4.29 × 10–7). Another is a tetracyclic
benzothiazepine scaffold, cluster 1096, that has shown to target the
Q0 site of cytochrome bc1.[25] Several enriched quinolone compounds (GNF-Pf-2549,
GNF-Pf-4577, GNF-Pf-5037; cluster 342) were similar to ELQ300, a possible
Q1 site cytochrome bc1 inhibitor[26] with known causal prophylactic activity in mouse
models of malaria.[27] In addition, cluster
1096 may contain inhibitors of the electron transport chain (DHOD
or cytochrome bc1) as do the three 4-quinolinol scaffolds
(clusters 1122, 1613, and 2061). The compounds that were the precursors
of the imidazolopiperazine compound in clinical trials, KAF156,[28] were also found in a cluster of three compounds
(GNF-Pf-5069, GNF-Pf-5179, GNF-Pf-5466; cluster 849). These compounds
work by an unknown mechanism of action, but resistance is conferred
by mutations in the P. falciparum cyclic
amine resistance locus (Pfcarl).[14] Additionally, compounds in cluster 2045 have some structural
similarity to P. falciparum histone
methyltransferase inhibitors.[29]
Figure 5
Exoerythrocytic-stage
active MMV compounds display unique chemical scaffold clustering.
Compounds of the GNF and MMV Malaria Box were clustered by their substructure
similarity, binning sets based on main common substructure (Tanimoto
average compound similarity ≥0.85). Out of 2335 cluster sets,
15 were significantly enriched for exoerythrocytic-stage active compounds
(depicted above). GNF Malaria Box compounds are shown as circle nodes,
and MMV Malaria Box compounds as square nodes. Active compounds are
indicated in red and blue for MMV and GNF compounds, respectively.
Dark red/blue signifies IC50 < 1 μM, while light
red/blue signifies IC50 < 10 μM. Inactive compounds
are shown in black, and base scaffolds are shown in gray. It is important
to note that of the 16 MMV compounds represented in the scaffold clustering,
13 of them were structurally identical to compounds also screened
by the Novartis library using high-content imaging (TC = 1).
Exoerythrocytic-stage
active MMV compounds display unique chemical scaffold clustering.
Compounds of the GNF and MMV Malaria Box were clustered by their substructure
similarity, binning sets based on main common substructure (Tanimoto
average compound similarity ≥0.85). Out of 2335 cluster sets,
15 were significantly enriched for exoerythrocytic-stage active compounds
(depicted above). GNF Malaria Box compounds are shown as circle nodes,
and MMV Malaria Box compounds as square nodes. Active compounds are
indicated in red and blue for MMV and GNF compounds, respectively.
Dark red/blue signifies IC50 < 1 μM, while light
red/blue signifies IC50 < 10 μM. Inactive compounds
are shown in black, and base scaffolds are shown in gray. It is important
to note that of the 16 MMV compounds represented in the scaffold clustering,
13 of them were structurally identical to compounds also screened
by the Novartis library using high-content imaging (TC = 1).Although most of the over-represented
scaffolds have been investigated as starting points of antimalarial
drug discovery in recent years, there were also novel notable singleton
molecules whose hepatic stage activity had not been previously described.
For example, MMV666693 (the most potent compound from the exoerythrocytic-stage
screen of the MMV Malaria Box) also strongly inhibits erythrocytic-stage P. falciparum with IC50 values reported
below 100 nM (Table S1 and additional file 1). This compound was previously
identified as an allosteric inhibitor of P. falciparum kinesin-5, a microtubule cross-linking enzyme required for cell
division.[4] It is therefore interesting
to speculate that targeting this enzyme may be an efficient means
to inhibit parasite replication across multiple developmental stages.
Compounds with Exclusive Activity against Exoerythrocytic Stages
Compounds that are active only against exoerythrocytic stages,
but not erythrocytic stages, may represent new opportunities for development
of drugs for which resistance acquisition may be less of a problem.
While 42 of the 63 exoerythrocytic-stage DOS compounds were active
in both the exoerythrocytic- and erythrocytic-stage assays, others
could be starting points for such drugs. Several of the compounds
that were identified in the DOS library unbiased screen are highlighted
in Figure a. In particular,
cyanoazetidine and a bicyclic azetidine series are shown. Although
BRD7539 is active in both the exoerythrocytic- and asexual erythrocytic-stage
assays, BRD9781 (its stereoisomer) is only active in the exoerythrocytic-stage
assay. Although BRD7539 targets the Plasmodium DHODH enzyme,[30] based on its profile
across life cycle stages, we suspect that BRD9781 has a different
target. These results suggest the important role of stereochemistry
in inhibiting different biological targets. BRD47390 appears to result
in specific activity in the exoerythrocytic-stage assay, whereas the
DOS phenylalanine–tRNA ligase inhibitor is active against blood
and exoerythrocytic stages. BRD0326, which has a stereochemistry identical
to that of BRD7539 but different functionality at the azetidinenitrogen,
also has no erythrocytic-stage activity and may have yet another target.
Further testing in a DHODH assay[31] confirmed
that BRD0326 and BRD9781 are inactive (data not shown). BRD0326, BRD9781,
and BRD47390 were all retested at dose along with all of their stereoisomers.
With the exception of BRD7539, which targets DHODH, these compounds
displayed stereoselective activity (Figure b). Overall, these data show that up to a
third of the hits in a screen of an unbiased library might have exclusive
exoerythrocytic activity, targeting either unique EEF parasite targets
or the host factors needed to support parasite replication.
Cross-Validation
Using Phenotypic Assays To Assess Time of Action during Exoerythrocytic-Stage
Development
We sought to further confirm exoerythrocytic-stage
activity for the three most potent MMV Malaria Box hits by an orthogonal
and complementary assay. This assay utilizes a previously described
flow-cytometry-based method[32,33] to measure four specific
metrics during exoerythrocytic-stage development: (1) sporozoite traversal,
(2) sporozoite invasion, (3) EEF frequency, and (4) EEF development.
The assay uses P. berghei expressing
GFP (Pb-GFP) infection of Huh7.5.1 cells (Figure ), a related exoerythrocytic cell line that
can also be used to study EEF development (Figure S4), and measurements are taken at 2 and 48 h postinfection.
Figure 6
Validation
of exoerythrocytic-stage activity using an established flow-cytometry-based
assay. (a) Flow cytometry plots measuring traversal and invasion (at
2 h postinfection) and EEF frequency and development (at 48 h postinfection)
of exoerythrocytic-stage malaria parasites in Huh7.5.1 cells as previously
described for three of the most potent compounds. Cytochalasin D was
used as a positive control for traversal and invasion; KDU691 was
used as a positive control for EEF frequency, and atovaquone was used
as a positive control for EEF frequency and development. While traversal
was measured by the percentage of rhodamine–dextran single-positive
cells, invasion was measured by the percentage of Pb-GFP single-positive
cells at 2 h postinfection. At 48 h postinfection, EEF frequency was
measured by the percentage of Pb-GFP-positive cells, and EEF development
was measured by the relative mean fluorescence intensity (MFI). Representative
flow cytometry plots are shown. Atovaquone was tested at 1 μM
(due to slight cytotoxicity at 10 μM in Huh7.5.1 cells, Figure S4), and cytochalasin D and KDU691 were
tested at 10 μM. (b) Mean and SEM are shown graphically from
the traversal/invasion, EEF frequency, and EEF size control experiments
shown in panel (a) (cytochalasin D, atovaquone, and KDU691, respectively).
Values are normalized to the DMSO control. (c) Exoerythrocytic-stage
traversal, invasion, EEF frequency, and EEF development are shown
for MMV666693, MMV007160, and MMV665916. Mean and SEM from three replicate
experiments are shown. MMV66693 was tested at 1 μM (due to slight
cytotoxicity at 10 μM in Huh7.5.1 cells, Figure S4), and MMV007160 and MMV665916 were tested at 10
μM.
Validation
of exoerythrocytic-stage activity using an established flow-cytometry-based
assay. (a) Flow cytometry plots measuring traversal and invasion (at
2 h postinfection) and EEF frequency and development (at 48 h postinfection)
of exoerythrocytic-stage malaria parasites in Huh7.5.1 cells as previously
described for three of the most potent compounds. Cytochalasin D was
used as a positive control for traversal and invasion; KDU691 was
used as a positive control for EEF frequency, and atovaquone was used
as a positive control for EEF frequency and development. While traversal
was measured by the percentage of rhodamine–dextran single-positive
cells, invasion was measured by the percentage of Pb-GFP single-positive
cells at 2 h postinfection. At 48 h postinfection, EEF frequency was
measured by the percentage of Pb-GFP-positive cells, and EEF development
was measured by the relative mean fluorescence intensity (MFI). Representative
flow cytometry plots are shown. Atovaquone was tested at 1 μM
(due to slight cytotoxicity at 10 μM in Huh7.5.1 cells, Figure S4), and cytochalasin D and KDU691 were
tested at 10 μM. (b) Mean and SEM are shown graphically from
the traversal/invasion, EEF frequency, and EEF size control experiments
shown in panel (a) (cytochalasin D, atovaquone, and KDU691, respectively).
Values are normalized to the DMSO control. (c) Exoerythrocytic-stage
traversal, invasion, EEF frequency, and EEF development are shown
for MMV666693, MMV007160, and MMV665916. Mean and SEM from three replicate
experiments are shown. MMV66693 was tested at 1 μM (due to slight
cytotoxicity at 10 μM in Huh7.5.1 cells, Figure S4), and MMV007160 and MMV665916 were tested at 10
μM.At 2 h postinfection, the number
of hepatocytes that have been traversed and invaded is measured. Sporozoite
traversal is inferred based on the observation that traversal temporarily
ruptures the plasma membrane of hepatocytes, allowing high molecular
weight rhodamine–dextran to stain cells that have been traversed
but not invaded.[34] Sporozoite invasion
is measured by the percentage of cells expressing GFP and not rhodamine–dextran,
as the parasite enters the cells via a moving tight junction, excluding
rhodamine–dextran.[34] Double-positive
cells, expressing both GFP and rhodamine–dextran, likely represent
a population of nonproductively infected cells or cells in the process
of being traversed by parasite and are therefore not used in the measurements
of traversal and invasion.[33] Cytochalasin
D, a potent inhibitor of actin polymerization, is used as a positive
control for traversal and invasion inhibition at 2 h postinfection
as it has been previously demonstrated to reduce sporozoite motility
(Figure a).[33]At 48 h postinfection, the frequency and
development (size) of exoerythrocytic-stage EEFs can be measured.
The frequency of EEFs is determined by the percentage of cells expressing
GFP at 48 h postinfection. KDU691, which inhibits Plasmodium phosphatidylinositol 4-kinase (PI(4)K), an enzyme that phosphorylates
its phosphoinositide substrate to regulate intracellular signaling
and trafficking,[35] was used as a positive
control because it was shown to significantly decrease the number
of exoerythrocytic-stage EEFs (Figure a). At the same time, the assay measures EEF development
by reporting GFP mean fluorescence intensity), an indicator of EEF
size. Here, atovaquone serves as a positive control (Figure a).As predicted, all
compounds led to changes in cell populations that were detectable
by flow cytometry (Figure b). At 48 h postinfection, all of the compounds tested led
to a significant decrease in the EEF size, but not frequency, similar
to that of atovaquone (Figure b). In addition, MMV666693 also appears to have a slight effect
on sporozoite traversal of hepatocytes at 2 h postinfection (Figure b). Somewhat unexpectedly,
sporozoite invasion at 2 h postinfection was not affected by MMV666693
but was even slightly increased. Unlike KDU691, none of these compounds
affected EEF frequency. While further investigation is needed to better
understand the specific mode of action, these results suggest that
these compounds are acting primarily during EEF development. An important
caveat of the flow-cytometry-based assay is that there may be prolonged
fluorescence well after parasites have lost viability.[36]To provide further validation of EEF development
inhibition, MMV666693, MMV007160, and MMV665916 were characterized
in an exoerythrocytic-stage time of action assay and compared to compounds
with known activity in hepatic stages. This included atovaquone, which
targets mitochondrial cytochrome bc1 complex and
therefore inhibits the parasite’s electron transport chain
during all developmental stages[5] (Figure b). Pyrimethamine
inhibits dihydrofolate reductase and thus the synthesis of purines
and pyrimidines required for DNA synthesis.[37] We also included several compounds in development such as DDD107498,
which inhibits Plasmodium translation
elongation factor 2 (eEF2),[38] as well as
KDU691.[35] A third compound, GNF179, whose
target has not been elucidated but which has potent causal prophylactic
activity in mice and resistance mediated by mutations in the aforementioned Pfcarl gene, was also included.[14] Compounds were added in 12-point serial dilutions
(10 μM to 56 pM) or washed out to be present during specific
time frames throughout exoerythrocytic-stage development. Their activity
was measured using a modified 384-well version of our high-throughput
luciferase assay, and bioluminescence was recorded at 48 h postinfection.
Figure 7
Exoerythrocytic-stage
active compounds display unique potencies during exoerythrocytic-stage
EEF development. (a) Diagram illustrating the major stages of malaria
parasite exoerythrocytic-stage development, including invasion, parasitophorous
vacuole membrane (PVM) remodeling, trophozoite development, and EEF
schizont development. During the first 4 h after sporozoite invasion,
the parasite dramatically remodels its parasitophorous vacuole membrane
by degrading host-cell-derived proteins and at the same time inserting
its own parasite-derived proteins.[6] During
the next 18 h, the sporozoites transform from their elongated motile
form to round, nonmotile, and metabolically active trophozoites. The
trophozoites undergo impressive nuclear replication starting at around
24 h postinfection, displaying one of the fastest replication rates
known to eukaryotic organisms to develop into mature EEFs.[6] Drug treatments 1–6, corresponding to
compound incubation during the exoerythrocytic developmental stages
indicated, are shown. (b) Pb-Luc IC50 data for established
antimalarial compounds (atovaquone and pyrimethamine), antimalarials
in development (GNF179, KDU691, DDD107498), and the three MMV Malaria
Box compounds (MMV666693, MMV007160, and MMV665916) added during Pb-Luc
exoerythrocytic-stage development in a modified 384-well luciferase-based
assay (discussed in Materials and Methods)
are shown. Likewise, the Pb-Luc IC50 fold changes normalized
to the 2–50 h drug-treated controls are shown and colored based
on the indicated heat map.
Exoerythrocytic-stage
active compounds display unique potencies during exoerythrocytic-stage
EEF development. (a) Diagram illustrating the major stages of malaria
parasite exoerythrocytic-stage development, including invasion, parasitophorous
vacuole membrane (PVM) remodeling, trophozoite development, and EEF
schizont development. During the first 4 h after sporozoite invasion,
the parasite dramatically remodels its parasitophorous vacuole membrane
by degrading host-cell-derived proteins and at the same time inserting
its own parasite-derived proteins.[6] During
the next 18 h, the sporozoites transform from their elongated motile
form to round, nonmotile, and metabolically active trophozoites. The
trophozoites undergo impressive nuclear replication starting at around
24 h postinfection, displaying one of the fastest replication rates
known to eukaryotic organisms to develop into mature EEFs.[6] Drug treatments 1–6, corresponding to
compound incubation during the exoerythrocytic developmental stages
indicated, are shown. (b) Pb-Luc IC50 data for established
antimalarial compounds (atovaquone and pyrimethamine), antimalarials
in development (GNF179, KDU691, DDD107498), and the three MMV Malaria
Box compounds (MMV666693, MMV007160, and MMV665916) added during Pb-Luc
exoerythrocytic-stage development in a modified 384-well luciferase-based
assay (discussed in Materials and Methods)
are shown. Likewise, the Pb-Luc IC50 fold changes normalized
to the 2–50 h drug-treated controls are shown and colored based
on the indicated heat map.The assay supported the flow cytometry data and showed that
MMV666693 and MMV007160 inhibit parasite replication during all time
points during exoerythrocytic-stage EEF development and seem to be
most potent when added during trophozoite development 6–24
h postinfection (Figure b). Unlike the other compounds tested, MMV665916 may need longer
incubation in vitro in order to achieve optimal activity against exoerythrocytic-stage
parasites, as all of the developmental time points tested resulted
in a more than 10-fold IC50 change compared to the 2–50
h postinfection control (Figure b). These data highlight how exoerythrocytic-active
compounds may be further classified and how this assay may reveal
information about a compound’s mechanism of action.
Conclusions
The assays described here provide a high-throughput approach to
identify scaffolds or scaffold families that will have causal prophylactic
activity. Although our assay depends on rodent malaria parasites,
which are not infectious to humans, they have an advantage over human
parasites because mosquitoes infected with P. berghei or P. yoelii can be handled and shipped
more easily. In addition, the number of sporozoites per mosquito is
high (∼20 000), enabling higher-throughput methods and
evaluation of more starting points. This reduces cost (20 cents per
well) as mosquito production and mosquito dissection are very labor-intensive.
One concern is that activity tests using rodent malaria parasites
might not translate into activity against human parasites. In cases
where a compound is also active against P. falciparum erythrocytic stages, this is less likely to be a concern. In the
small number of cases where compounds are not active in erythrocytic
stages, additional testing using exoerythrocytic stages of P. falciparum or P. vivax may be warranted. Compounds of this class could be particularly
interesting as leads for drugs that could be used in malaria elimination
and eradication campaigns because they could be developed into drugs
that could provide long-acting protection and which would not have
the same resistance-development liabilities as compounds that act
against the billions of erythrocytic-stage parasites that teem in
an infected human. There is also the possibility that P. falciparum- or P. vivax-specific hits may be lost; however, this is likely a small number
of compounds given the screening throughput capacity of the assay.An unanswered question is whether leads identified with this assay
will have radical cure activity. Primaquine and tafenoquine are the
only two compounds that can provide radical cures, and both behave
poorly in cellular assays such as those described here because they
depend on host organismal metabolism. These compounds are not even
particularly active in assays that involve primary hepatocytes.[39] Likewise, we have recently tested a number of
MMV Malaria Box screening hits in an ex vivo P. cynomolgi model of hypnozoite development;[40] however,
only one compound, MMV007224, had moderate activity (at 10 μM)
against small or large forms in the assay (Table S2). Interestingly, this was also the only compound of the
set tested with any pharmacokinetic exposure in vivo.[41] This highlights the utility of using hepatoma cells rather
than primary hepatocytes for screening purposes, as compounds with
less than favorable pharmacokinetic properties can be evaluated for
activity. As exoerythrocytic-stage active compounds identified in
this report will also likely include inhibitors of Plasmodium exoerythrocytic-stage hypnozoites, it
will be important to address compound metabolic stability in vitro
and bioavailability in vivo during the development of novel hypnozoite
models. This class of compounds will represent an important starting
point for the development of novel treatments capable of providing
a malaria radical cure.
Materials and Methods
Compound
Libraries
MMV Validation Set of Antimalarials
This collection
of 50 known antimalarial powders were obtained from the MMV and are
all commercially available and active primarily against erythrocytic-stage
malaria parasites.
MMV Malaria Box
This open source
compound library comprises 400 diverse open source compounds with
proven antimalarial activity. Two hundred of these compounds are described
by MMV as “drug-like” and 200 as “probe-like”
compounds.[18] They have been distilled down
from ∼20 000 hits generated from a screening campaign
of 4 million compounds from the libraries of St. Jude’s Children’s
Hospital, Novartis, and GSK. All compounds are commercially available,
and the library is also available for free from MMV as long as the
resulting data are published and placed in the public domain.
Broad
Diversity-Oriented Synthesis Library
Two sets of compounds
were tested from the DOS library of 100 000 compounds. The
first set included 9886 compounds selected to represent the structural
diversity of all of the scaffolds. This “informer” set
was used as a naïve library to screen for compounds with unknown
activity against Plasmodium. The second
set comprised 89 compounds previously shown to be active in a P. falciparum erythrocytic-stage assay (IC50 < 2 μM, Nobutaka Kato, unpublished results).
Parasites
P. berghei-ANKA-GFP-Luc-SMCON (Pb-Luc)[42] and P. berghei-GFP (Pb-GFP)[35] sporozoites were obtained
by dissection of infected Anopheles stephensi mosquito salivary glands. Dissected salivary glands were homogenized
in a glass tissue grinder and filtered twice through nylon cell strainers
(20 μm pore size, Millipore SCNY00020) and counted using a Neubauer
hemocytometer. The sporozoites were kept on ice until needed. Both
Pb-Luc- and Pb-GFP-infected A. stephensi mosquitoes were obtained from the Insectary Core Facility at New
York University.
Cell Lines
HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP[20] cells stably transformed to express
a GFP-CD81 fusion protein were cultured at 37 °C and 5% CO2 in DMEM (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, USA) supplemented with 10%
FCS, 0.29 mg/mL glutamine, 100 units of penicillin, and 100 μg/mL
streptomycin. Huh7.5.1 cells were cultured at 37 °C and 5% CO2 in DMEM (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, USA) supplemented with 10%
FCS (Corning cat# 35-011-CV), 200 U/mL penicillin, 200 μg/mL
streptomycin (Invitrogen cat# 15140-122), 10 mM Hepes (Invitrogen
cat# 15630-080), 1× Glutamax (Invitrogen cat# 35050-061), and
1× nonessential amino acids (Invitrogen). During infection, cell
medium was supplemented with 50 μg/mL gentamycin and 50 μg/mL
neomycin. After infection, the antimycotic 5-fluorocytosine at a final
concentration of 50 μg/mL was added to the media.
High-Content
Imaging
The high-content imaging experiments were performed
as previously described.[14] Briefly, we
used the HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP host cells and either the P. yoelii or Pb-Luc rodent malaria parasites. We
seeded the cells in 384-well plates and infected them with a ratio
of 2:1 (cells/sporozoites). After the parasites were stained with
a polyclonal mouse anti-PyHSP70 antibody, these data
were acquired (image analysis) with the PerkinElmer Opera. Average
parasite size per well served as the primary readout for compound
effectiveness.
Luciferase-Based High-Throughput Screening
Sporozoite
Infection
For the Pb-Luc high-throughput screen, we utilized P. berghei because its higher infection rates of
immortal human hepatocyte cell lines are more conducive to high-throughput
screening than the infection rates of humanmalaria parasites. P. berghei is able to infect human hepatocarcinomaHepG2 cells expressing the tetraspanin CD81 receptor.[20] HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP cells (3 × 103) in 5 μL of medium (2 × 105 cells/mL, 5% FBS,
5× Pen/Strep/Glu) were seeded into 1536-well, white, solid-bottom
plates (ref# 789173-F, Greiner Bio-One) 20–26 h prior to the
actual infection. Eighteen hours prior to infection, 50 nL of compound
in DMSO (0.5% final DMSO concentration per well) was transferred with
a PinTool (GNF Systems) into the assay plates (10 μM final concentration).
Atovaquone (12-point serial dilution starting at 10 μM) and
0.5% DMSO were used as positive and negative controls, respectively.
Pb-Luc sporozoites were freshly dissected, and their concentration
was adjusted to 200 sporozoites/μL. Penicillin and streptomycin
were added at 5× concentration for a final 5× concentration
in the well. The increased antibiotic concentration did not interfere
with parasite or HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP growth. The HepG2-A16-CD81EGFP cells were then infected with 1 × 103 sporozoites
per well (5 μL) using a single tip bottle valve liquid handler
(GNF), and the plates were centrifuged for 3 min at room temperature
and at 330g (Eppendorf 5810 R centrifuge) on lowest
acceleration and brake setting. The plates were then incubated at
37 °C for 48 h in 5% CO2 with high humidity to minimize
media evaporation and edge effect.
Bioluminescence Quantification
of Exoerythrocytic Forms
After incubation, the parasite EEF
growth was quantified by bioluminescence measurement. Medium was removed
by spinning the inverted plates at 150g for 30 s.
Two microliters of BrightGlo reagent (Promega) was dispensed with
the MicroFlo liquid handler (BioTek). Immediately after addition of
the luminescence reagent, the plates were vortexed at median intensity
setting for 10 s and read by an EnVision Multilabel plate reader (PerkinElmer).
IC50 values were obtained using measured bioluminescence
intensity and a nonlinear variable slope four-parameter regression
curve fitting model in Prism 6 (GraphPad Software Inc.).
Bioluminescence
Quantification of HepG2 Cytotoxicity
After incubation, the
HepG2cytotoxicity was assessed by removing the media through an inverted
spin of the plates at 150g for 30 s and addition
of 2 μL of CellTiterGlo reagent (Promega diluted 1:2 with deionized
water) per well using the MicroFlo liquid handler (BioTek). Immediately
after addition of the luminescence reagent, the plates were vortexed
for 10 s and read with an EnVision Multilabel reader (PerkinElmer).
Bioluminescence Quantification of Compound Luciferase Inhibition
After a 3 h incubation period, 2 μL of BrightGlo (Promega)
was added to the wells with the MicroFlo liquid handler (BioTek).
Immediately after addition, the plates were read by an EnVision Multilabel
reader (PerkinElmer).
Bioinformatic Analysis of EEF Inhibition,
HepG2 Cytotoxicity, and Luciferase Inhibition
For the first
screening round, the luminescence reads from each 1536-well plate
were analyzed separately. Briefly, a lack of inhibition was defined
as the average DMSO readings (64 wells) minus the baseline inhibition
readings. For both the first and second round of screening, the baseline
for the EEF inhibition was defined as the average of the five highest
atovaquone concentrations (10 wells); the baseline for the HepG2cytotoxicity
was defined as the average of the highest puromycin concentrations
(8 wells), and the baseline of the luciferase inhibition assay was
defined as the average of 48 wells with 500 μM resveratrol.
For the first round of screening, we determined the inhibition percentage
relative to the normalized well concentrations for each compound.
This analysis was repeated for every 1536-well plate. For the second
reconfirmation round of screening, IC50 values were obtained
using the average normalized bioluminescence intensity of 4 wells
per concentration and plate (96 wells in total for each compound)
and a nonlinear variable slope four-parameter regression curve fitting
model in Prism 6 (GraphPad Software Inc.).
Culturing Asexual
Erythrocytic-Stage Parasites
P. falciparum parasites were cultured in complete medium containing 5% hematocrit
in a low-oxygen atmosphere composed of 1% oxygen, 3% carbon dioxide,
and 96% nitrogen at 37 °C. Complete medium consists of RPMI medium
1640 (with l-glutamine, without phenol red, Thermo Fisher
Scientific) supplemented with 4.3% heat-inactivated O+ human
serum, 0.2% AlbuMAX II lipid-rich BSA, 0.014 mg/mL hypoxanthine, 3.4
mM NaOH, 38.4 mM Hepes, 0.2% glucose, 0.2% sodium bicarbonate, and
0.05 mg/mL gentamicin.
Asexual Erythrocytic-Stage Screening in a
1536-Well Plate format
Pathogenic asexual erythrocytic-stage
parasites were screened using a modified fluorescence-based proliferation
assay described previously.[10] Briefly, P. falciparum 3D7 parasites were cultured until a
parasitemia of 3–6% was reached. The level of erythrocytic-stage
parasitemia was determined by microscopic inspection of Giemsa-stained
blood smears for the presence of parasites. A parasite suspension
with 0.3% parasitemia and 4% hematocrit was prepared in screening
medium consisting of RPMI medium 1640 (with l-glutamine,
without phenol red) supplemented with 0.4% AlbuMAX II lipid-rich BSA,
0.014 mg/mL hypoxanthine, 3.4 mM NaOH, 38.4 mM Hepes, 0.2% glucose,
0.2% sodium bicarbonate, and 0.05 mg/mL gentamicin. The parasite culture
was gassed with 1% oxygen, 3% carbon dioxide, and 96% nitrogen and
stored at 37 °C until used. Next, 3 μL of screening medium
was dispensed into 1536-well, black, clear-bottom plates (ref# 789092-F,
Greiner Bio-One, Kremsmünster, Austria) using the MultiFlo
microplate dispenser (BioTek Instruments, VT, USA). For determining
the IC50 values, 50 nL of compounds dissolved in DMSO (12-point
serial dilutions (1:3) starting at 10 mM) was transferred into the
assay plates (62.5 μM final drug concentration, 0.625% final
DMSO concentration) using the Biomek FXP Laboratory Automation Workstation
(Beckman Coulter, CA, USA) with a PinTool (V&P Scientific, CA,
USA). Artemisinin and DMSO were included as background and baseline
controls, respectively. Next, 5 μL of prepared parasite suspension
was dispensed into the 1536-well plates, resulting in a final parasitemia
of 0.3% and a final hematocrit concentration of 2.5% (MultiFlo microplate
dispenser). The assay plates were transferred into Ziploc bags and
gassed with a gas mixture of 1% oxygen, 3% carbon dioxide, and 96%
nitrogen. After a 72 h incubation at 37 °C, 2 μL of detection
solution consisting of 10× SYBR Green I (Thermo Fisher Scientific)
in lysis buffer (20 mMTris/HCl, 5 mM EDTA, 0.16% saponin, 1.6% Triton
X-100) was added to the plates (MultiFlo microplate dispenser) and
incubated for 24 h at room temperature in the dark. After 24 h, fluorescence
signals were measured at 530 nm with a 485 nm excitation from the
bottom using the 2104 EnVision Multilabel reader (PerkinElmer, MA,
USA). After the signal of the highest concentration of artemisinin
(background) was subtracted from all output values and the values
to the average DMSO signal normalized, the IC50 values
were calculated by using a nonlinear variable slope regression curve-fitting
model in GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software Inc.).
Computational
Compound Clustering
To evaluate clustering of exoerythrocytic-stage
hits and enrichment of compound groups, the 400 compound MMV set was
coclustered with a set of >4000 compounds that had previously been
evaluated in a P. yoelii high-content
imaging assay.[14] Briefly, SMILESL (simplified
molecular-input line-entry system) strings were loaded into R, and
the maximum common substructure Tanimoto coefficient (MCS-TC) was
calculated using the fmcsR package.[43] The
compounds were then subsequently hierarchically clustered with the
hclust package, using the ward.D2 agglomeration method pair clusters.
To create compound bins, the tree branches were separated at a maximum
pairwise distance of 0.4. Hypergeometric mean statistical tests were
applied to each compound bin to identify sets where exoerythrocytic-stage
activity was enriched.
Flow Cytometry Assay
Exoerythrocytic-stage
Pb-GFP traversal, invasion, and schizont development were measured
using a previously established flow-cytometry-based method.[33] Briefly, 24 h prior to infection, 1.75 ×
105 Huh7.5.1 cells were seeded in 24-well plates in 1 mL
of DMEM hepatocyte culture medium for the traversal and invasion assay,
as well as for the quantitation of EEF size and frequency. Pb-GFP
sporozoites were freshly isolated from infected Anopheles
stephensi mosquitoes as described above, and 3.5 ×
104 or 7.0 × 104 sporozoites were added
to the cells for the traversal/invasion assay or EEF quantitation
assay, respectively, and incubated for 2 h. Rhodamine–dextran
was added to the wells at a final concentration of 1 mg/mL for the
traversal and invasion assay. The cells were washed after the 2 h
infection and assayed using flow cytometry for rhodamine–dextran
and GFP signal (traversal and invasion, respectively) or incubated
for 48 h and assayed by flow cytometry for GFP frequency and MFI (EEF
frequency and size, respectively). Data were analyzed using the FlowJo
software.
Pb-Luc Time of Action Assay
For
the Pb-Luc time-course assay, we seeded 1 × 104 Huh7.5.1
cells in 30 μL of hepatocyte culture media per well in a 384-well
plate (Greiner Bio) 24 h before infection. Pb-Luc sporozoites were
freshly dissected from infected Anopheles stephensi mosquitoes, and 5 × 103 sporozoites in 30 μL
were added to each well. The plates were centrifuged for 5 min at
330g and incubated for 2 h at 37 °C and 5% CO2. After incubation, medium was removed and 50 μL of
fresh culture media was added. The 12-point serial dilutions of compound
in DMSO were added and removed from the plates at the indicated time
points postinfection. At 48 h postinfection, medium was removed from
the plates and 20 μL of BrightGlo reagent (Promega) was added
to each well. Luciferase light units were measured by bioluminescence
using an EnVision Multilabel plate reader (PerkinElmer).
P. cynomolgi Liver Assay
The P. cynomolgi assay was performed as previously reported
by Zeeman et al.[40] All Rhesus macaques
(Macaca mulatta) used in this study
were bred in captivity for research purposes and were housed at the
Biomedical Primate Research Centre (BPRC; AAALAC-certified institute)
facilities under compliance with the Dutch law on animal experiments,
European directive 2010/63/EU, and with the “Standard for Humane
Care and Use of Laboratory Animals by Foreign institutions”
identification number A5539-01, provided by the Department of Health
and Human Services of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The
local independent ethical committee first approved all protocols.
Authors: M M Mota; G Pradel; J P Vanderberg; J C Hafalla; U Frevert; R S Nussenzweig; V Nussenzweig; A Rodríguez Journal: Science Date: 2001-01-05 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Carolyn K Dong; Sameer Urgaonkar; Joseph F Cortese; Francisco-Javier Gamo; Jose F Garcia-Bustos; Maria J Lafuente; Vishal Patel; Leila Ross; Bradley I Coleman; Emily R Derbyshire; Clary B Clish; Adelfa E Serrano; Mandy Cromwell; Robert H Barker; Jeffrey D Dvorin; Manoj T Duraisingh; Dyann F Wirth; Jon Clardy; Ralph Mazitschek Journal: Chem Biol Date: 2011-12-23
Authors: David Plouffe; Achim Brinker; Case McNamara; Kerstin Henson; Nobutaka Kato; Kelli Kuhen; Advait Nagle; Francisco Adrián; Jason T Matzen; Paul Anderson; Tae-Gyu Nam; Nathanael S Gray; Arnab Chatterjee; Jeff Janes; S Frank Yan; Richard Trager; Jeremy S Caldwell; Peter G Schultz; Yingyao Zhou; Elizabeth A Winzeler Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-06-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Thomas Spangenberg; Jeremy N Burrows; Paul Kowalczyk; Simon McDonald; Timothy N C Wells; Paul Willis Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-06-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marianne E Sinka; Michael J Bangs; Sylvie Manguin; Yasmin Rubio-Palis; Theeraphap Chareonviriyaphap; Maureen Coetzee; Charles M Mbogo; Janet Hemingway; Anand P Patil; William H Temperley; Peter W Gething; Caroline W Kabaria; Thomas R Burkot; Ralph E Harbach; Simon I Hay Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Beatriz Baragaña; Irene Hallyburton; Marcus C S Lee; Neil R Norcross; Raffaella Grimaldi; Thomas D Otto; William R Proto; Andrew M Blagborough; Stephan Meister; Grennady Wirjanata; Andrea Ruecker; Leanna M Upton; Tara S Abraham; Mariana J Almeida; Anupam Pradhan; Achim Porzelle; María Santos Martínez; Torsten Luksch; Judith M Bolscher; Andrew Woodland; Suzanne Norval; Fabio Zuccotto; John Thomas; Frederick Simeons; Laste Stojanovski; Maria Osuna-Cabello; Paddy M Brock; Tom S Churcher; Katarzyna A Sala; Sara E Zakutansky; María Belén Jiménez-Díaz; Laura Maria Sanz; Jennifer Riley; Rajshekhar Basak; Michael Campbell; Vicky M Avery; Robert W Sauerwein; Koen J Dechering; Rintis Noviyanti; Brice Campo; Julie A Frearson; Iñigo Angulo-Barturen; Santiago Ferrer-Bazaga; Francisco Javier Gamo; Paul G Wyatt; Didier Leroy; Peter Siegl; Michael J Delves; Dennis E Kyle; Sergio Wittlin; Jutta Marfurt; Ric N Price; Robert E Sinden; Elizabeth A Winzeler; Susan A Charman; Lidiya Bebrevska; David W Gray; Simon Campbell; Alan H Fairlamb; Paul A Willis; Julian C Rayner; David A Fidock; Kevin D Read; Ian H Gilbert Journal: Nature Date: 2015-06-18 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Hai-Hua Lu; Sergey V Pronin; Yevgeniya Antonova-Koch; Stephan Meister; Elizabeth A Winzeler; Ryan A Shenvi Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Katherine M Ellis; Leonardo Lucantoni; Marina Chavchich; Matthew Abraham; Amanda De Paoli; Madeline R Luth; Anne-Marie Zeeman; Michael J Delves; Fernando Sánchez-Román Terán; Ursula Straschil; Jake Baum; Clemens H M Kocken; Stuart A Ralph; Elizabeth A Winzeler; Vicky M Avery; Michael D Edstein; Jonathan B Baell; Darren J Creek Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2021-08-30 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Daniela Diedrich; Katharina Stenzel; Eva Hesping; Yevgeniya Antonova-Koch; Tamirat Gebru; Sandra Duffy; Gillian Fisher; Andrea Schöler; Stephan Meister; Thomas Kurz; Vicky M Avery; Elizabeth A Winzeler; Jana Held; Katherine T Andrews; Finn K Hansen Journal: Eur J Med Chem Date: 2018-09-07 Impact factor: 6.514
Authors: Marcel K W Mackwitz; Eva Hesping; Yevgeniya Antonova-Koch; Daniela Diedrich; Tamirat Gebru Woldearegai; Tina Skinner-Adams; Mary Clarke; Andrea Schöler; Laura Limbach; Thomas Kurz; Elizabeth A Winzeler; Jana Held; Katherine T Andrews; Finn K Hansen Journal: ChemMedChem Date: 2019-02-19 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Theresa Hermann; Patrick Hochegger; Johanna Dolensky; Werner Seebacher; Robert Saf; Marcel Kaiser; Pascal Mäser; Robert Weis Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2021-04-27