Wei-Guang Seetoh1, Chris Abell1. 1. Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge , Lensfield Road, Cambridge, CB2 1EW, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Identifying small molecules that induce the disruption of constitutive protein-protein interfaces is a challenging objective. Here, a targeted biophysical screening cascade was employed to specifically identify small molecules that could disrupt the constitutive, homodimeric protein-protein interface within CK2β. This approach could potentially be applied to achieve subunit disassembly of other homo-oligomeric proteins as a means of modulating protein function.
Identifying small molecules that induce the disruption of constitutive protein-protein interfaces is a challenging objective. Here, a targeted biophysical screening cascade was employed to specifically identify small molecules that could disrupt the constitutive, homodimeric protein-protein interface within CK2β. This approach could potentially be applied to achieve subunit disassembly of other homo-oligomeric proteins as a means of modulating protein function.
Protein kinase CK2
is a pleiotropic, ubiquitous and intrinsically
active eukaryotic Ser/Thr protein kinase that is overexpressed in
various cancer types.[1] In humans, CK2 forms
a heterotetrameric complex (α2/β2) consisting of two catalytic subunits (CK2α or α) attached
to a dimer of regulatory subunits (CK2β or β2).[2] The unique molecular architecture
of the CK2 holoenzyme could be exploited in the design of inhibitors
that do not target the ATP site and thus provide a more specific mode
of action, prompting the discovery of various non-ATP-competitive
inhibitors against CK2.[3] In particular,
significant efforts have been devoted to the development of compounds
that disrupt the transient, hetero-oligomeric protein–protein
interaction (PPI) between CK2α and CK2β.[4−6] Given that the function of proteins critically depend on a correct
oligomerization state, and the importance of CK2β in modulating
the catalytic activity and substrate specificity of CK2α, disruption
of the constitutive, homodimeric PPI within CK2β represents
an alternative approach to interfere with CK2 function.[7,8]Developing small molecule inhibitors to disrupt PPIs is a
challenging
task due to the typically extended and flat topology of contact surfaces,
often devoid of the well-defined deep clefts that are characteristic
of many enzyme active sites.[9−11] The difficulty is compounded
by the fact that the interacting surfaces of protein partners are
frequently segmented.[12] However, recent
successes in the development of PPI inhibitors have shown that PPIs
are amenable to targeting by small molecules.[13] While the majority of the PPI inhibitors disrupt transient, hetero-oligomeric
PPIs, only a comparatively few cases of small-molecule PPI inhibitors
that target constitutive, homo-oligomeric interfaces have been reported.[13−20]Considering that achieving small-molecule inhibition of transient,
hetero-oligomeric PPIs is already an inherently challenging effort,
the search for inhibitors that disrupt the constitutive oligomeric
interfaces within a protein is a potentially more difficult undertaking,
in part due to the typically higher affinity, larger interfaces, and
greater hydrophobic character of constitutive PPIs.[21,22] Interestingly, the hydrophobicity and the structural plasticity
of constitutive interfaces can enable small-molecule binding to form
structurally defined complexes.[14] Thus
far, small-molecule oligomeric disruptors (e.g., SPD304, BIO8898,
6-hydroxydopa) were discovered using a combinatorial library or high-throughput
library screen and targeted approach, with further studies revealing
their allosteric mode of inhibition.[14−16,18−20] Only one recent study employed a fragment-based functional
screen to identify compounds whose inhibitory basis was disruption
of the dimeric architecture of a viral protease, rather than binding
to the active site.[17]In contrast
to traditional high-throughput screening, the use of
a smaller compound library in a fragment-based screen offers the advantage
of a more efficient and rapid exploration of weaker binding, but ligand-efficient
chemical moieties.[23] Here, a biophysical
fragment-screening cascade was performed to specifically identify
and validate fragments that are able to disrupt the CK2β dimer
interface. This approach involved the sequential application of fluorescence-based
thermal shift to screen for preliminary hits, ligand-observed NMR
assays for validation of fragment binding, and native mass spectrometry
(MS) to confirm the ability of fragments to induce dimeric disruption.
An orthogonal biophysical assay using homodissociation isothermal
titration calorimetry (ITC) was also developed to probe structure–activity
relationships (SAR) governing dimerization affinity in a CK2β
mutant and confirm the dimer-disrupting nature of the fragments.
Results
and Discussion
Thermal Shift Screening
The first
screening technique
is a fluorescence-based thermal shift (FTS) assay, which monitors
protein thermal denaturation by using an extrinsic, environmentally
sensitive probe, for which the fluorescence increases upon binding
to the unfolded protein.[24,25] As a protein is incrementally
heated, it unfolds and exposes its hydrophobic core. Unfolded protein
provides more nonpolar regions for protein-dye interaction, causing
a rise in the fluorescence intensity. Fragments that bind to and stabilize
or destabilize the protein will increase or lower the melting temperature
(Tm), respectively. The difference between
the Tm of the protein-fragment complex
and the Tm of the apo protein represents the thermal shift (ΔTm).As fluorescence-based thermal shift assay is the
first screening technique, its ability to inform whether small molecules
that induced the disruption of constitutive oligomeric interfaces
would produce thermal destabilization, corresponding to a loss of
stabilizing subunit interactions, when incubated with the protein
target was first evaluated (Figure a). Two eukaryotic macromolecular targets, Rad521–209 and TNF-α were selected for validation studies,
as small molecules that disrupt the constitutive oligomeric interfaces
in both proteins have been characterized.[14,16] Binding of 6-hydroxydopa to Rad521–209 induced
an undecameric-to-dimeric transition (Figure b).[16] No melting
curve could be observed for Rad521–209, indicating
that it has an extremely high thermal stability (Tm > 99.0 °C), which is in agreement with published
data demonstrating the especially high melting temperature of a similar
Rad52 construct, Rad521–192 (Figure c).[26] In the presence
of 6-hydroxydopa, Rad521–209 displayed an observable
melting transition, registering a Tm of
85.0 °C (Figure c). SPD304, discovered from a combinatorial library screen, was observed
to eject a monomer of native trimeric TNF-α by complexing with
a dimer of TNF-α (Figure d).[14] Similarly, the apparent Tm of TNF-α decreased from 65 °C (putatively
assigned due to the broad melt curve, which prevents precise Tm determination) to 61.0 °C in the presence
of SPD304 (Figure e). The melting temperature (Tm) of both
proteins decreased in the presence of the small-molecule oligomeric
disruptor, supporting the use of negative thermal shifts to identify
molecules that cause a dehomooligomeric transition.
Figure 1
Use of fluorescence-based
thermal shift assay to detect small molecules
capable of inducing dehomooliogomerization. (a) Hypothetical scheme
illustrating whether small-molecule (triangle) disruption of a homodimeric
assembly (black) to a monomeric state (red) is translated to a negative
thermal shift. The first derivative of the melting curves are shown.
(b) Schematic showing the undecameric-to-dimeric transition of Rad521–209 induced by 6-hydroxydopa (green). (c) Rad521–209 alone (blue) did not produce a melting transition,
indicating that its Tm was more than 99
°C. In the presence of 6-hydroxydopa, Rad521–209 registered a Tm of 85.0 °C (red).
(d) SPD304 (blue) causes the dissociation of native trimeric TNF-α
(purple) into a SPD304–bound dimer (pink) and monomer (yellow).
(e) The melting curve of native trimeric TNF-α (purple) showed
that it had a putative Tm of 65 °C.
In the presence of SPD304, the melting temperature of TNF-α
decreased to 61.0 °C (pink). (f) Distribution of thermal shift
values induced by fragments in CK2β from the fluorescence-based
thermal shift screen.
Use of fluorescence-based
thermal shift assay to detect small molecules
capable of inducing dehomooliogomerization. (a) Hypothetical scheme
illustrating whether small-molecule (triangle) disruption of a homodimeric
assembly (black) to a monomeric state (red) is translated to a negative
thermal shift. The first derivative of the melting curves are shown.
(b) Schematic showing the undecameric-to-dimeric transition of Rad521–209 induced by 6-hydroxydopa (green). (c) Rad521–209 alone (blue) did not produce a melting transition,
indicating that its Tm was more than 99
°C. In the presence of 6-hydroxydopa, Rad521–209 registered a Tm of 85.0 °C (red).
(d) SPD304 (blue) causes the dissociation of native trimeric TNF-α
(purple) into a SPD304–bound dimer (pink) and monomer (yellow).
(e) The melting curve of native trimeric TNF-α (purple) showed
that it had a putative Tm of 65 °C.
In the presence of SPD304, the melting temperature of TNF-α
decreased to 61.0 °C (pink). (f) Distribution of thermal shift
values induced by fragments in CK2β from the fluorescence-based
thermal shift screen.In light of these results, 800 fragments were screened at
5 mM
against CK2β. A histogram depicting the distribution of ΔTm induced by the fragments is shown in Figure f. The average Tm of CK2β was 54.3 ± 0.1 °C.
Most of the fragments induced CK2β destabilization as shown
by the left-skewed distribution of ΔTm values. The maximum stabilizing and destabilizing ΔTm from the screen was +0.8 °C and −6.0
°C, respectively. While no fragments induced significant positive
thermal shifts, it was interesting to note that several fragments
significantly lowered the melting temperature of CK2β. Fragments
which induced a ΔTm < −1.5
°C for the negatively shifting fragments were selected for follow-up
studies. Based on this threshold value, 60 destabilizing fragment
hits were identified. Fragments that produced poorly defined melting
curves were excluded from further analysis.Ligands that increase
the Tm of a protein
are predominantly pursued for subsequent validation and optimization,
as they cause stabilization of the protein–ligand complex.[27,28] In contrast, it is commonly believed that fragments that cause negative
thermal shifts signify preferential fragment binding to the unfolded
form of the protein, and are subsequently excluded from further analysis.[27] However, this does not necessarily hold true
for all protein systems, as seen in the validation studies using Rad521–209 and TNF-α and their disruptors. To our knowledge,
only one fragment-based study selected both thermally stabilizing
and destabilizing fragments against homodimeric Mycobacterium
tuberculosis BioA (an aminotransferase that uses a pyridoxal
5-phosphate cofactor) for follow-up studies, although no rationale
was given for considering thermally destabilizing fragments.[29,30] Only one out of the 12 destabilizing fragments from the original
screen against BioA produced a structure by cocrystallization.[29] Subsequent SAR-by-catalog of fragment hits resulted
in the crystallographic and thermodynamic characterization of a series
of inhibitors.[29,30] This study has shown that thermally
destabilizing fragments can be inhibitors and that caution should
be applied before rejecting negatively shifting fragments for further
evaluation. Furthermore, it has been suggested that thermally destabilizing
fragments may have an additional value in promoting a more rapid degradation
of the target protein.[29]Both SPD304
and 6-hydroxydopa, which promoted subunit disassembly
by binding to a non-native form of their protein target, lowered the
melting temperature of their protein complexes. The disruption of
stabilizing subunit interactions between protomers in an oligomeric
protein by any ligands could be expected to decrease the protein’s
stability, which would be reflected by a lowering of its melting temperature.
Essentially, any interpretation of FTS results must take into consideration
that the FTS assay depends on fluorescent dye binding. Changes in
the Tm are a reflection of changes in
the fluorescent dye binding. A ligand that binds to and stabilizes
a protein would slow both its denaturation and exposure of its hydrophobic
region, causing a delayed rise in the fluorescence intensity to result
in an increase of the Tm. On the contrary,
a ligand that disrupts constitutive hydrophobic interfaces in an oligomeric
protein would allow the fluorescent dye access to hydrophobic environments
for binding, leading to an earlier increase in the fluorescence intensity
to produce a decrease in the Tm. Structural
analyses of both Rad521–209 and TNF-α revealed
that oligomerization is largely mediated by hydrophobic interactions
between the subunits.[31,32] By causing earlier and greater
exposure of hydrophobic areas upon subunit dissociation, SPD304 and
6-hydroxydopa stabilized non-native forms of their protein complex
that bind the dye with higher propensity than the native form, thereby
resulting in an early rise in the fluorescence intensity to eventuate
in negative thermal shifts. On the basis of this reasoning, coupled
with the hydrophobically driven nature of CK2β dimerization,
a possible model that fits our results is that thermally destabilizing
fragments are causing monomerization of CK2β.[33] A model to describe fragment-induced negative thermal shift
of CK2β is presented in Figure . Alternatively, there is also a possibility that a
small proportion of CK2β monomer could be present that provides
a rapid route for unfolding. Furthermore, in the vein of a mechanism
resembling the effect of BIO8898 on CD40, thermally destabilizing
fragments could also bind to and distort the CK2β dimer interface
without completely causing subunit dissociation.[15] In the absence of additional experimental evidence, it
is difficult to speculate whether dimer distortion translates to a
negative thermal shift. However, subsequent orthogonal assays using
native MS and homodissociation ITC would help clarify the most probable
molecular mechanism.
Figure 2
Model of fragment binding to CK2β (β2) to
rationalize negative thermal shift. Fragment-induced monomerization
of β2 results in the formation of a species (denoted
with an asterisk) with a higher hydrophobic character that promotes
earlier binding of the fluorescent dye, thereby resulting in negative
thermal shift. L and U represent fragment and unfolded protein, respectively.
Model of fragment binding to CK2β (β2) to
rationalize negative thermal shift. Fragment-induced monomerization
of β2 results in the formation of a species (denoted
with an asterisk) with a higher hydrophobic character that promotes
earlier binding of the fluorescent dye, thereby resulting in negative
thermal shift. L and U represent fragment and unfolded protein, respectively.The thermal shift screen can be
applied to proteins that experience
either reversible or irreversible denaturation. A reversible two-state
equilibrium between the structured native state and the unfolded state
can be used to describe protein unfolding, with the assumption that
only these two states exist. On a sufficiently short time scale, it
has been experimentally and computationally shown that the unfolding
process is pseudoreversible, as it is possible to generate reasonable
plots of the apparently irreversible denaturation process using the
van’t Hoff equation, which relates changes in the equilibrium
constant to temperature.[34] Over the entire
time course of a thermal shift experiment, the exposure of hydrophobic
cores during protein unfolding would ultimately lead to the formation
of irreversible aggregates. Therefore, a majority of large multidomain
proteins will eventually undergo partially or completely irreversible
denaturation.[35] Using proteins that undergo
irreversible thermal protein denaturation, such as E. coli aspartate transcarbamoylase and the core protein of the lac repressor,
it has been shown that the denaturation process obeys equilibrium
thermodynamics as characterized by the van’t Hoff equation,
thus resembling a reversible process.[36,37] Furthermore,
the data obtained from simulating an irreversible denaturation process
were similar to that of a completely reversible denaturation model.[37] Therefore, thermal shift screening could be
applied to oligomeric proteins regardless whether they undergo reversible
or irreversible denaturation.As fragments enable sampling of
a larger chemical space, fragment
libraries tend to be smaller than a high-throughput screen library.[38] Thermal shift screening is rarely rate limiting,
but could be achieved more rapidly with the use of a higher temperature
ramp rate. In general, the magnitude of thermal shift is not strongly
dependent on the temperature ramp rate when a heating rate between
1–8 °C min–1 is applied. This is supported
by a study in which thermal shifts produced by screening different
concentrations of known ligands against nine proteins did not change
significantly despite the use of ramp rates spanning 1–8 °C
min–1.[39] It was further
recommended that a heating rate of up to 4 °C min–1 could be used with minimal impact on ligand detection for most proteins.[39]
Validation of Fragment Binding by Ligand-Observed
NMR Spectroscopy
Two NMR approaches could be employed to
validate fragment binding
to the protein target: ligand-observed and protein-observed NMR. Ligand-observed
NMR assays are more popular as there is no requirement to produce
isotopically labeled proteins. As there is no upper limit on the protein
size, ligand-observed methods would be well suited for oligomeric
proteins.[40] Furthermore, the assays are
straightforward, rapid, and have relatively low protein consumption
by enabling the acquisition of multiple NMR assays on the same sample.
The principles and applications of ligand-based NMR methods have been
extensively reviewed.[40,41] Briefly, ligand-observed NMR
assays depend on monitoring differences in the properties of the ligand
spectra (e.g., magnetization transfer or relaxation) upon interaction
with the macromolecular target. Experiments based on direct or indirect
magnetization transfer (saturation transfer difference [STD] and water–ligand
observed via gradient spectroscopy [waterLOGSY]) and differential
relaxation (Carr–Purcell–Meiboom–Gill [CPMG])
are commonly used in fragment-based campaigns.[42−45] Performing three orthogonal NMR
assays, each with their own advantages and disadvantages, lowers the
chances of false positives and negatives originating from artifacts
of a single NMR experiment.All the 60 destabilizing fragment
hits identified from the thermal shift screen were validated for binding
to CK2β using a panel of three ligand-observed 1H
NMR assays (STD, waterLOGSY and CPMG). The NMR screen validated 45
of the 60 destabilizing hits, representing a 75% validation rate,
thus giving a good confidence of the binding event (Supplementary Figure S1). Among the destabilizing hits, 40
fragments showed binding in all three NMR experiments, a further 5
fragments showed binding in at least two NMR experiments (Supplementary Figure S1). No correlation between
the degree of binding observed in the NMR experiments and the magnitude
of ΔTm values was observed (Supplementary Table S1). The magnitude of thermal
shift is a combined function of the enthalpy change of protein unfolding,
enthalpy change of ligand binding and ligand affinity.[46] The magnitude of thermal shift of a set of compounds
will correlate to their binding affinities only when the compounds
possess similar binding enthalpies. This has been demonstrated by
a study in which the rank order of affinity and binding constants
of a series of chemically and structurally distinct β-site amyloid
precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) inhibitors obtained using
FTS and ITC were found to correlate well, particularly because the
ligands had similar binding enthalpies.[25] Had the binding enthalpies of the BACE1 inhibitors been very different,
the affinity ranking based on the thermal shift values would be inaccurate.
This implies that the ΔTm value
associated with fragment binding does not necessarily correlate with
its binding affinity. As the CK2β fragment hits are chemically
and structurally different, it is possible that they have different
binding enthalpies. This means that fragments with the same binding
affinity, but with different binding enthalpies will generate different
ΔTm values. Hence, the extent of
thermal destabilization cannot be used as a measure of its binding
affinity, and, by extension, its degree of binding in NMR assays.
Native MS Reveals Dimeric Dissociation of CK2β by Destabilizing
Fragments
Native or non-denaturing nanoelectrospray ionization–mass
spectrometry (nanoESI–MS) provides rapid, sensitive, label-free
and accurate detection of noncovalent assemblies, such as protein
oligomers or protein–ligand complexes, in the gas phase.[47] Various studies have shown that gas-phase proteins
retain folded conformations and possess structural features that approximate
to those in the solution state, thus providing a simulacrum of solution-phase
conditions.[48] The high separation efficiency
of MS is especially relevant for examination of the oligomeric populations
of proteins in the gas phase.[49] For similar
protein species, it has been shown that there is good agreement of
the oligomeric distribution obtained using gas-phase and solution-phase
methods, although the caveat that similar oligomeric forms may have
different efficiency of ionization, transmission and detection must
be recognized.[50−53] Nevertheless, adopting a native MS approach enables us to address
the presence and degree of oligomeric state perturbation by thermally
destabilizing fragments, which could serve as an indication of the
dimer-disrupting potency of fragments.Native MS was used to
study the effect on the oligomerization state of CK2β of the
40 destabilizing fragment hits that were shown to bind to CK2β
in all three ligand-observed NMR assays. Native mass spectra of 16
μM CK2β in the presence of 5% (v/v) DMSO were acquired
under non-denaturing conditions by nanoESI–MS. CK2β produced
two well-resolved narrow charge state distributions corresponding
to monomeric CK2β (observed mass = 22 962 ± 17 Da;
calculated mass = 22 945 Da) and dimeric CK2β (observed
mass = 45 938 ± 17 Da; calculated mass = 45 890
Da), with lowly charged ions to signify that they retain folded, native-like
structures (Figure ). The predominant species is dimeric CK2β, which is consistent
with published structural data.[33,54]
Figure 3
Native mass spectra of
16 μM CK2β, acquired in 0.5
M ammonium acetate pH 8.0, in the presence of validated thermally
destabilizing fragments (2 mM). The percentage of CK2β monomerization
induced by a fragment is indicated in orange text below the compound
number. Charge states are colored and indicated with symbols. The
observed mass and identity of each species are indicated beside the
symbols. Only one charge state of each species is indicated in the
spectra.
Native mass spectra of
16 μM CK2β, acquired in 0.5
M ammonium acetate pH 8.0, in the presence of validated thermally
destabilizing fragments (2 mM). The percentage of CK2β monomerization
induced by a fragment is indicated in orange text below the compound
number. Charge states are colored and indicated with symbols. The
observed mass and identity of each species are indicated beside the
symbols. Only one charge state of each species is indicated in the
spectra.In the presence of 2 mM fragment,
native MS showed that 18 out
of the 40 compounds induced a higher population of monomeric CK2β
by promoting the disassembly of dimeric CK2β to different extents
(18–71% monomerization) (Figure ). 1 and 2 had the greatest
effects on dimer disruption, inducing 71% and 67% monomerization of
CK2β, respectively. Both 1 and 2 possess
the 5-substituted pyrazole core, suggesting the importance of this
chemical scaffold in mediating dimer disruption. Furthermore, native
MS experiments showed 3 and 4, bearing the
pyrazole scaffold, to cause 49% and 24% monomerization of CK2β,
respectively. Apart from pyrazole-based fragments, compounds with
quinoline (5–7) and naphthol (8–11) cores were also well represented
(Supplementary Figure S2). There was no
correlation between extent of monomerization and thermal shift, as
the magnitude of thermal shift induced by a fragment is not necessarily
proportional to its affinity for the protein.[46]The two CK2β subunits associate via a zinc-finger containing
dimerization domain.[33] Ablation of the
zinc finger, by mutation of the zinc-coordinating cysteine residues,
resulted in dimerization-defective CK2β.[55] The observed mass of monomeric CK2β (22 962
Da) is in close agreement with the theoretical mass of monomeric CK2β
with one Zn2+ bound (22 945 Da), showing that fragments
do not cause monomerization by metal sequestration. Importantly, the
narrow charge state distribution observed for monomeric CK2β
signifies that the destabilizing fragments were able to cause dimeric
disruption of CK2β without denaturing the protein. Furthermore,
the clear observation of an enrichment in the monomeric species shows
that CK2β is converted to the monomer at the fragment concentration
used. This argues against the possibility that fragments were merely
distorting the CK2β dimer interface without inducing dissociation
(reminiscent of the effect of BIO8898 on CD40), as an increase in
the intensity of the monomeric species would not be expected.[15] However, it is possible that the fragments could
be both distorting and weakening the CK2β dimer interface to
the extent of causing dissociation.Information about binding
stoichiometry could not be extracted
from the native mass spectra, as only non-complexed monomeric and
dimeric CK2β were detectable. This is not unusual given that
the fragments may be potentially mediating the disruption of dimeric
CK2β by mainly engaging in hydrophobic interactions with residues
at the dimer interface. The hydrophobic effect does not apply for
proteins in the gaseous phase, and protein–ligand complexes
bound primarily by hydrophobic interactions tend to dissociate in
the gas phase.[56,57]
Structural Features of
the CK2β Dimer Interface
Four highly conserved cysteine
residues (Cys109, Cys114, Cys137 and
Cys140) in a CK2β protomer are involved in zinc coordination
to form a zinc-binding motif that constitutes the dimerization domain.[33] The dimerization of CK2β is largely driven
by hydrophobic interactions, with the β/β core composed
of nonpolar residues (Pro110, Val112, Leu124, Val143, and the hydrophobic
moieties of Tyr113 and Tyr144) (Supplementary Figure S3). Salt-bridge and hydrogen-bonding interactions (Arg111
and Asp142, backbone carbonyl and amino groups of Pro110 and Thr145,
and Val143 and Val112, respectively) also serve to stabilize the dimer
(Supplementary Figure S3). Dimerization
of CK2β results in the burial of 1766 Å2 per
protomer, a value consistent with that expected of a permanent PPI,
establishing CK2β as an obligate dimer.[9,33]
Homodissociation ITC
A homodissociation ITC assay was
developed in order to provide an orthogonal, solution-phase approach
of confirming the mechanism of fragment-induced dimer-disruption and
examine structure–activity relationships governing dimerization
affinity. In homodissociation ITC, a concentrated solution of oligomer
is titrated into a buffer cell using a series of small-volume injections.[58] The initial few injections lead to huge dilutions
of the protein concentration, and therefore promote oligomeric dissociation.
Each injection typically yields an endothermic heat pulse, which progressively
decreases in intensity over the entire course of titration due to
an increase in the protein concentration in the cell disfavoring dissociation.
The oligomer dissociation constant is determined by fitting the data
to a dissociation model, operating with the assumption that the monomer–dimer
equilibrium is reversible under the experimental conditions.Given the weak affinity expected for fragment binding, a strategy
of directed mutagenesis was adopted to systematically reduce the strength
of the dimeric CK2β interface (Supplementary Figure S3 and Supplementary Figure S4). Being core hydrophobic
residues that significantly contribute to the stabilization of the
dimer interface, Pro110 and Val143 were mutated to aspartate to attenuate
hydrophobic interactions and introduce electrostatic repulsion to
weaken subunit association. This generated a CK2β mutant, which
displayed concentration-dependent dimerization. CK2β P110D/V143D
was shown to exist in a monomer–dimer equilibrium with a KD of 90 μM in the presence of the vehicle
control, DMSO (Figure a).
Figure 4
Thermally destabilizing fragments decreased the dimerization affinity
in CK2β P110D/V143D in homodissociation ITC experiments. (a)
Homodissociation isotherm of CK2β P110D/V143D in 5% (v/v) DMSO.
(b) Homodissociation isotherms of 4 and its analogues
(4a and 4b). (c) Homodissociation isotherms
of 16 and its analogues (16a–16d). The top and bottom panels of each ITC profile illustrate
the raw calorimetric data and the integrated heats per injection,
respectively.
Thermally destabilizing fragments decreased the dimerization affinity
in CK2β P110D/V143D in homodissociation ITC experiments. (a)
Homodissociation isotherm of CK2β P110D/V143D in 5% (v/v) DMSO.
(b) Homodissociation isotherms of 4 and its analogues
(4a and 4b). (c) Homodissociation isotherms
of 16 and its analogues (16a–16d). The top and bottom panels of each ITC profile illustrate
the raw calorimetric data and the integrated heats per injection,
respectively.Generally, all the 18
fragments that induced monomerization of
CK2β dimer in native MS experiments decreased the dimerization
affinity of the double mutant, suggesting that they disrupted the
dimeric interaction in CK2β P110D/V143D (Supplementary Table S2). This was also supported by the appearance
of the dissociation isotherms, wherein the intensities of the endothermic
heat pulses increased and the dilution isotherms became more attenuated
in the presence of fragments, indicating greater dimer dissociation
(Supplementary Figure S5). There is no
correlation between the magnitude of thermal shift, or the degree
of monomerization obtained from native MS experiments and the dimerization
affinity (Supplementary Table S1). This
could be attributed to the use of a mutant construct with different
interfacial properties from that of wild-type CK2β. Out of all
the 18 fragments tested, 2 was the most potent in mediating
dimerization disruption (KD = 1010 μM).
Surprisingly, 1 only caused a modest weakening of dimerization
affinity (KD = 200 μM), despite
inducing the greatest extent of monomerization in the native MS assay.
This suggests that the binding site of 1 could have been
affected by the double mutation, and that 2 might be
binding to a different region of CK2β from 1.
Exploration of Structure–Activity Relationships of Selected
Thermally Destabilizing Fragments
Further screening of structural
analogues of 4 and 16, available from our
in-house compound collection, resulted in the identification of more
potent dimer-disrupting compounds. The effects of functional group
substitutions on 4 (KD =
460 μM) (Figure b) and 16 (KD = 230 μM)
(Figure c) were explored,
with the KD values reflecting the apparent
affinity for dimer formation, and not the affinity of compound binding.Changing the chloro group in 4 to a hydroxyl group
preserved a similar dimer-disrupting potency (4a, KD = 410 μM) (Figure b). By combining the observation that 4a was able to hinder dimerization of the double mutant with
the fact that 1 demonstrated the greatest monomerizing
effect in native MS, we examined whether 4b, with the
3-bromo and 5-phenyl groups in 1 replaced with phenolic
groups, would have a greater potency toward effecting dimeric disruption.
Indeed, 4b caused a significant decrease in the dimerization
affinity (KD = 1,200 μM) (Figure b), suggesting that
polar interactions and hydrophobic or aromatic stacking interactions
contribute to weakening dimeric association in the CK2β double
mutant.Replacing the methylene linker in 16 with
an NH group
caused approximately 2–fold increase in dimer-disrupting effect
(16a, KD = 490 μM),
suggesting a role for hydrogen bonding interactions in effecting subunit
disassembly (Figure c). Incorporation of functional groups at different positions on
the phenyl ring, however, had different effects. Addition of an ester
group at the para position of the phenyl ring resulted
in a decrease in dimer-disrupting potency (16b, KD = 230 μM). Substitutions at the meta position of the phenyl ring of 16a were
generally more favorable for dimer disruption than para substitutions as shown by the lower dimerization affinity induced
by 16c (KD = 690 μM)
and 16d (KD = 350 μM)
than 16b (Figure c).The SAR studies have demonstrated that the CK2β
P110D/V143D
mutant could potentially serve as a surrogate protein for the development
of fragments into more potent compounds that disrupt the CK2β
interface. In addition, the other CK2β mutant proteins provide
a range of weaker homodimeric interfaces (i.e., CK2β P110D/R111D,
CK2β P110D/V112D/V143D) (Supplementary Figure S3c) that could be useful for the systematic screening and
development of compounds that destabilize the homodimeric interface
of wild-type CK2β.
Potential Consequences of CK2β Monomerization
Having established that thermally destabilizing fragments drive
the
dimeric-to-monomeric transition of CK2β, what could be the potential
consequences of such an effect? Despite being able to interact with
CK2α to form the heterotetramer, the CK2β P110D/V143D
mutant decreased the catalytic activity of CK2α, highlighting
that the modulation of CK2α catalytic activity by CK2β
is highly dependent on a proper dimeric architecture of CK2β.[59] Cell studies have shown that a dimerization-incompetent
CK2β, generated by mutating two conserved cysteine residues
of the zinc finger to serine, was defective in forming the α2/β2 heterotetramer and experienced faster
degradation.[55] Together, these studies
suggest that dimer-disrupting fragments could promote CK2β degradation
and an attenuation of CK2α catalytic activity through favoring
the formation of the CK2β monomer.
Conclusion
In
summary, this study demonstrated the application of a fragment-based
approach to specifically identify small molecules with the ability
to induce disruption of the CK2β dimer. Orthogonal biophysical
experiments involving native MS and homodissociation ITC support a
mechanism that is consistent with fragment-induced dimeric disruption.
Future work in obtaining cocrystal structures of CK2β with the
destabilizing fragments would help to elucidate the structural determinants
of dimeric disruption and enable structure-guided optimization of
compounds. The approach described in this study could potentially
be applied to discover small molecules to disrupt other therapeutically
relevant and challenging homo-oligomeric proteins as a means of modulating
protein function.
Methods
Expression
and Purification of CK2β
Bacterial
expression vectors encoding sequences for Homo sapiens CK2β1–193 and CK2β1–193 mutants (all encoded within pGEX-6P-1) were transformed into E. coli BL21(DE3). A freshly transformed colony was
inoculated into LB broth supplemented with ampicillin and grown overnight
at 37 °C. After inoculation of overnight culture, LB cultures
were grown at 37 °C, induced with 0.3 mM IPTG after reaching
an optical density of 0.6 (λ = 600 nm) and allowed overnight
expression at 18 °C. Harvested cell pellets were suspended and
sonicated in cold lysis buffer A (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5, 200
mM NaCl, 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol). Cellular debris was removed
by centrifugation (20 000 rpm, 30 min, 4 °C) and CK2β
was purified using glutathionesepharose 4B beads (GE Healthcare).
The beads were washed with 20 column volumes of cold buffer A and
incubated with 3C protease at 4 °C overnight to cleave the GST
tag. The digested protein solution was loaded onto a HiTrap Q column
(GE Healthcare) and fractionated over a 0–1000 mM NaCl gradient
buffered with 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5 and 2 mM β-mercaptoethanol.
CK2β-containing fractions, analyzed by SDS–PAGE, were
concentrated and loaded onto a Superdex 200 26/60 column (GE Healthcare)
equilibrated with cold buffer B (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5, 500
mM NaCl, 2 mM β-mercaptoethanol). Fractions containing pure
CK2β were combined and concentrated.
Site-Directed Mutagenesis
Mutagenesis of Homo
sapiens CK2β1–193 to generate the
P110D, P110D/R111D, P110D/V143D and P110D/V112D/V143D mutants was
performed using the Q5 site-directed mutagenesis kit (New England
Biolabs) according to the instruction manual. Vectors of mutant clones
were sequenced (DNA Sequencing Facility, University of Cambridge)
to verify correct incorporation of mutation.
Expression and Purification
of Rad521–209
The expression vector encoding Homo sapiens Rad521–209 (cloned into pET28)
was transformed into E. coli BL21-CodonPlus(DE3)-RIPL.
Fresh transformants
were inoculated into LB broth supplemented with kanamycin and chloramphenicol,
and grown overnight at 37 °C. After inoculation of overnight
culture, LB cultures were grown at 37 °C, induced with 1 mM IPTG
after reaching an optical density of 0.6 (λ = 600 nm) and allowed
expression at 30 °C for 4 h. Cell pellets were suspended and
sonicated in buffer A (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 500 mM KCl).
Debris was removed by centrifugation (20 000 rpm, 30 min, 4
°C) and Rad521–209 was purified using Ni–NTA
beads (GE Healthcare). The beads were washed with buffer A supplemented
with 20 mM imidazole, and eluted with buffer A supplemented with 300
mM imidazole. The eluted protein solution was concentrated and loaded
onto a Superdex 200 26/60 column (GE Healthcare) equilibrated with
buffer B (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 200 mM KCl, 2 mM β-mercaptoethanol).
Fractions containing Rad521–209 were combined and
loaded onto a HiTrap Heparin HP (GE Healthcare) and washed with buffer
B. Rad521–209 was eluted using a 200–1000
mM KCl gradient over 20 column volumes. Fractions containing pure
Rad521–209, as analyzed by SDS–PAGE, were
combined and concentrated.
Protein Quality Assessment
All proteins
produced in-house
were assessed for their identity, purity, monodispersity and oligomeric
state using a combination of SDS–PAGE, amino acid analysis,
dynamic light scattering and native mass spectrometry (Supplementary Figure S6).
Fluorescence-Based Thermal
Shift
The thermal shift
assay was performed on a LightCycler 480 Real-Time PCR System (Roche)
in 96-well white plates (Roche). For Rad521–209,
each well contained 40 μL of 2 μM Rad521–209 and 2.5× SYPRO Orange in 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 200
mM KCl, with 6-hydroxydopa (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) added to a final
concentration of 2.5 mM in 5% (v/v) DMSO. For TNF-α (Gibco),
each well contained 40 μL of 10 μM TNF-α and 5×
SYPRO Orange in 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5, 200 mM NaCl, with SPD304
(Cambridge Bioscience) added to a final concentration of 200 μM
in 5% (v/v) DMSO. For CK2β, each well contained 40 μL
of 6 μM CK2β and 5× SYPRO Orange in 50 mM Tris–HCl
pH 8.5, 50 mM NaCl. Fragments were tested at a final concentration
of 5 mM in 5% (v/v) DMSO. Each plate was sealed with an optically
clear foil and centrifuged for 1 min at 1000 rpm before performing
the assay. The plates were heated from 37–85 °C at approximately
2 °C min–1. The fluorescence intensity was
measured with λex = 480 nm and λem = 580 nm. The melting temperature (Tm) was obtained by determining the minimum of the first derivative
curve of the melt curve. The thermal shift (ΔTm) was determined by computing the difference between
the Tm of the protein in the presence
of compound and that of the protein in the presence of 5% (v/v) DMSO.
Ligand-Observed 1H NMR
Ligand-observed 1H NMR experiments were performed at 278 K on a 700 MHz Bruker
NMR spectrometer fitted with a 5 mm triple TXI cryoprobe. Spectra
were analyzed using the Bruker TopSpin 3.2 software. Samples were
made up to 200 μL in 3 mm capillaries with trimethylsilylpropionic
acid-d4 (TSP) for calibration. Negative
control (no protein) experiments were performed for each compound
tested. All binding experiments were carried out using 20 μM
CK2β in 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5, 50 mM NaCl, 20 μM
TSP, 10% (v/v) D2O and 0.01% (v/v) Tween–20. Fragments
were tested at 2 mM in a final concentration of 2–4% (v/v)
DMSO-d6 in binding experiments.
Native
NanoESI–MS
Spectra were recorded on a
Synapt HD mass spectrometer (Waters) modified for studying high masses.
CK2β was exchanged into 0.5 M ammonium acetate solution pH 8.0
using Micro Bio-Spin 6 chromatography columns (Bio-Rad). Two mM of
a fragment was incubated with 16 μM CK2β for 30 min before
analysis. The final DMSO concentration was 5% (v/v). 2.5 μL
of protein solution was electrosprayed from a borosilicate emitter
(Thermo Scientific). Typical conditions were capillary voltage 1.6–1.8
kV, cone voltage 60–80 V, collision voltage 10–20 V,
with backing pressure 3–4 mbar and source temperature of 20
°C. Spectra were calibrated externally using cesium iodide. Data
acquisition and processing were performed using MassLynx 4.1.
Homodissociation
ITC
Homodissociation ITC experiments
were performed using MicroCal Auto–iTC 200 (Malvern) at 25
°C. The concentration of CK2β P110D/V143D was selected
such that the heats of dissociation afforded a good signal window
and that baseline is reach in the presence of the vehicle control,
indicating no further dissociation. The syringe solution consisted
of 600 μM CK2β P110D/V143D incubated with 5 mM fragment
in 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5, 50–500 mM NaCl. The cell solution
consisted of 50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.5, 50–500 mM NaCl.
Both the syringe and cell solutions contained DMSO at a final concentration
of 5–8% (v/v). The titration consisted of 19 injections of
2 μL of the syringe solution every 120 s. Each fragment–protein
mixture was subjected to a single titration. Errors for quoted KD values represent errors of the curve fit from
a single experiment. Data were fitted and analyzed using the dissociation
model in the MicroCal PEAQ–ITC software (Malvern).[60]
Authors: Ran Dai; Todd W Geders; Feng Liu; Sae Woong Park; Dirk Schnappinger; Courtney C Aldrich; Barry C Finzel Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Lester J Lambert; Stefan Grotegut; Maria Celeridad; Palak Gosalia; Laurent Js De Backer; Andrey A Bobkov; Sumeet Salaniwal; Thomas Dy Chung; Fu-Yue Zeng; Ian Pass; Paul J Lombroso; Nicholas Dp Cosford; Lutz Tautz Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Eleanor L Atkinson; Jessica Iegre; Paul D Brear; Elizabeth A Zhabina; Marko Hyvönen; David R Spring Journal: Molecules Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 4.411