Julia C Meier1, Cynthia Tallant1, Oleg Fedorov1, Hanna Witwicka2, Sung-Yong Hwang2, Ruud G van Stiphout3, Jean-Philippe Lambert4, Catherine Rogers1, Clarence Yapp1, Brian S Gerstenberger5, Vita Fedele1, Pavel Savitsky1, David Heidenreich6, Danette L Daniels7, Dafydd R Owen5, Paul V Fish8, Niall M Igoe8, Elliott D Bayle8, Bernard Haendler9, Udo C T Oppermann10, Francesca Buffa3, Paul E Brennan1, Susanne Müller1,11, Anne Claude Gingras4,12, Paul R Odgren2, Mark J Birnbaum13, Stefan Knapp1,11,6,14. 1. Target Discovery Institute and Structural Genomics Consortium, Oxford University , Oxford, United Kingom. 2. Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Massachusetts Medical School , Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. 3. Department of Oncology, Oxford University , Old Road Campus Research Building, Oxford OX3 7DQ, United Kingdom. 4. Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital , 600 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X5, Canada. 5. Pfizer Worldwide Medicinal Chemistry , 610 Main Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 6. Goethe-University Frankfurt, Institute of Pharmaceutical Chemistry , Riedberg Campus, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 7. Promega Corporation , Madison, Wisconsin, United States. 8. Department of Pharmaceutical & Biological Chemistry, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London , 29-39 Brunswick Square, London, WC1N 1AX, United Kingdom. 9. Drug Discovery, Bayer Pharma AG , Müllerstrasse 178, D-13353 Berlin, Germany. 10. Botnar Research Centre, Oxford University , Oxford, United Kingdom. 11. Buchmann Institute for Life Sciences (BMLS) , Riedberg Campus, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 12. Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto , Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A8, Canada. 13. Department of Biology, Merrimack College , North Andover, Massachusetts, United States. 14. German Cancer Network (DKTK) , Frankfurt site, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Abstract
Histone acetyltransferases of the MYST family are recruited to chromatin by BRPF scaffolding proteins. We explored functional consequences and the therapeutic potential of inhibitors targeting acetyl-lysine dependent protein interaction domains (bromodomains) present in BRPF1-3 in bone maintenance. We report three potent and selective inhibitors: one (PFI-4) with high selectivity for the BRPF1B isoform and two pan-BRPF bromodomain inhibitors (OF-1, NI-57). The developed inhibitors displaced BRPF bromodomains from chromatin and did not inhibit cell growth and proliferation. Intriguingly, the inhibitors impaired RANKL-induced differentiation of primary murine bone marrow cells and human primary monocytes into bone resorbing osteoclasts by specifically repressing transcriptional programs required for osteoclastogenesis. The data suggest a key role of BRPF in regulating gene expression during osteoclastogenesis, and the excellent druggability of these bromodomains may lead to new treatment strategies for patients suffering from bone loss or osteolytic malignant bone lesions.
Histone acetyltransferases of the MYST family are recruited to chromatin by BRPF scaffolding proteins. We explored functional consequences and the therapeutic potential of inhibitors targeting acetyl-lysine dependent protein interaction domains (bromodomains) present in BRPF1-3 in bone maintenance. We report three potent and selective inhibitors: one (PFI-4) with high selectivity for the BRPF1B isoform and two pan-BRPF bromodomain inhibitors (OF-1, NI-57). The developed inhibitors displaced BRPF bromodomains from chromatin and did not inhibit cell growth and proliferation. Intriguingly, the inhibitors impaired RANKL-induced differentiation of primary murine bone marrow cells and human primary monocytes into bone resorbing osteoclasts by specifically repressing transcriptional programs required for osteoclastogenesis. The data suggest a key role of BRPF in regulating gene expression during osteoclastogenesis, and the excellent druggability of these bromodomains may lead to new treatment strategies for patients suffering from bone loss or osteolytic malignant bone lesions.
Acetylation of histones and other
nuclear proteins is a key mechanism regulating gene expression, and
aberrant acetylation has been linked to a wide range of diseases.[1] Histone acetylation is introduced by histone
acetyltransferases (HATs) that transfer an acetyl moiety to the ε-amino
group of lysine residues.[2] HATs have usually
broad substrate specificity in vitro. In contrast, in vivo, HAT substrate specificity is dramatically enhanced
by scaffolding proteins that activate HATs and target them to specific
chromatin sites.Bromodomains are evolutionarily highly conserved
protein–protein interaction modules that act as acetyl-lysine
dependent epigenetic reader domains. The human proteome encodes 61
diverse bromodomains that are present in 46 proteins including the
HATs CREBBP/EP300 and PCAF/GCN5.[3] Bromodomains
share a conserved fold that comprises a left-handed bundle of four
α-helices (αZ, αA, αB, αC), linked by
loop regions of variable length (ZA and BC loops), which line the
KAc binding site and determine binding specificity. Due to its excellent
druggability, the bromodomain acetyl-lysine binding pocket has emerged
as an attractive site for the development of protein interaction inhibitors.[4] Highly potent and selective inhibitors have been
developed for BET (BRD2, BRD3, BRD4, BRDT) bromodomains,[5−8] and a number of BET inhibitors have now entered clinical testing.[9] While to date most efforts have focused on BET
inhibitor development, recent publications have demonstrated that
non-BET bromodomains can also be selectively targeted.[10−18] A first inhibitor specific for the BRPF1B bromodomain has been recently
disclosed,[19] and inhibitors that showed
dual activity for the bromodomains present in BRPF1 and TIF1α
have been developed by our laboratory and others.[20,21] However, phenotypic consequences of inhibiting protein interactions
mediated by BRPF bromodomains have not been reported so far.The MYST (MOZ, Ybf2/Sas3, SAS2 and Tip60) family of lysine
acetyl-transferases form signaling complexes with heterotetrameric
core structures comprising a MYST family member, the ING tumor suppressor,
hEAF6 (an EPC (enhancer of polycomb)-associated protein), and a central
scaffolding protein of the BRPF (Bromodomain-PHD fingers) family.
In higher eukaryotes, the BRPF family contains three members (BRPF1,
BRPF2 (also called BRD1), and BRPF3) with conserved domain architecture
of two N-terminal PHD domains linked by a Zn2+ knuckle
(PZP [PHD–Zn knuckle–PHD] domain), a bromodomain, and
a C-terminal PWWP domain.[22,23] The BRPF PHD domains
target unmethylated histone H3.[24] The PWWP
domains recognize the H3K36me3 mark, and the bromodomains preferentially
interact with H2AK5ac, H4K12ac, and H3K14ac.[25] BRPF1 associates with MOZ/MORF, assembling a signaling complex that
plays a role in maintaining anterior HOX gene expression during development.[26] MOZ is frequently translocated in acute myeloid
leukemia (AML), and it is required for hematopoietic stem cell maintenance.[27] Biochemical studies have shown that BRPF1 still
interacts with and enhances the transcriptional potential of the leukemic
MOZ-TIF2 fusion protein.[28] BRPF2 preferentially
associates with HBO1, assembling a chromatin complex required for
global acetylation of H3K14ac. HBO1/BRPF2 plays a key role in the
regulation of erythropoiesis. In mice, deletion of the BRPF2 gene
results in severe anemia due to impaired fetal liver erythropoiesis.[29] In addition, polymorphism in BRPF2 has been
recently linked to bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.[30] The related JADE scaffolding proteins that lack
the C-terminal bromo and PWWP domains can replace BRPF2 in the HBO1
complex. Intriguingly, this exchange in scaffolding protein determines
which histone tail is acetylated: the JADE complex directs HBO1 toward
the H4 tail, whereas BRPF2 confers high selectivity for H3.[24] The central role of reader domains in MYST complexes
and the key role of these complexes in hematopoiesis prompted us to
study the consequences of pharmacological targeting of BRPF readers
of the bromodomain family in monocyte differentiation, with osteoclasts
representing a particularly well-studied and clinically relevant monocyte-derived
lineage. Here, we report that selective pharmacological inhibition
of BRPF bromodomains but not of the BRPF1B bromodomain alone strongly
impaired RANKL-induced differentiation of murine and human primary
monocytes into bone resorbing osteoclasts. Genome-wide mRNA expression
analysis showed that panBRPF bromodomain inhibition suppressed transcriptional
programs required for osteoclastogenesis, establishing a role of BRPF
family members in bone degradation. The data indicate that interactions
mediated by BRPF bromodomains play a central role in bone maintenance
and may be attractive targets for the development of drugs preventing
osteoporosis and metastasis or cancer induced osteolysis.
Results and Discussion
The human BRPF family (BRPF1, BRPF2, and BRPF3) shares a conserved
domain architecture[22,23] and a high degree of sequence
homology within their bromodomains (Figure A,B). Interestingly, we found that alternative
splicing generates two BRPF1 isoforms (A and B). The longer BRPF1A
harbors a six-residue insert in the ZA-loop that prevented binding
to histone peptides as well as inhibitors (Figure C). Thus, it seems that the BRPF1 bromodomain
is regulated by alternative splicing, which generates a dominant negative
isoform. Unfortunately, we were unable to crystallize the A isoform,
but the location of the inset within the ZA loop region and the inability
of this isoform to bind inhibitors suggested that BRPF1A specific
insertion blocks access to the acetyl-lysine binding site (Figure D).
Figure 1
BRPF bromodomain family
and its inhibitors. (A) Domain organization of human BRPF proteins.
Two splice isoforms of BRPF1B are expressed (A and B) that differ
in the ZA loop of the bromodomain. In BRPF1A (or isoform 2), six residues
EVTELD (661–666) are inserted into the ZA loop. Annotated domains
are the PHD (plant homeo-domain)
connected by a zinc finger, the bromodomain (BRD), and the PWWP domain
(harboring the PWWP motif). (B) Sequence alignment of human BRPF bromodomains.
The main secondary structural elements are highlighted. (C) BLI (BioLayer
Interferometry) data measured on the two splice isoforms of BRPF1A
and BRPF1B. Shown are the raw data traces for acetylated as well as
nonacetylated peptide. (D) Location of the isoform BRPF1A specific
insertion depicted on the structure of BRPF1B.
BRPF bromodomain family
and its inhibitors. (A) Domain organization of human BRPF proteins.
Two splice isoforms of BRPF1B are expressed (A and B) that differ
in the ZA loop of the bromodomain. In BRPF1A (or isoform 2), six residues
EVTELD (661–666) are inserted into the ZA loop. Annotated domains
are the PHD (plant homeo-domain)
connected by a zinc finger, the bromodomain (BRD), and the PWWP domain
(harboring the PWWP motif). (B) Sequence alignment of human BRPF bromodomains.
The main secondary structural elements are highlighted. (C) BLI (BioLayer
Interferometry) data measured on the two splice isoforms of BRPF1A
and BRPF1B. Shown are the raw data traces for acetylated as well as
nonacetylated peptide. (D) Location of the isoform BRPF1A specific
insertion depicted on the structure of BRPF1B.To enable identification of BRPF bromodomain inhibitors,
we developed an ALPHAscreen (amplified luminescent proximity homogeneous
assay) assay using a tetra-acetylated histone 4 peptide (H4K5acK8acK12acK16ac)
and his6-tagged recombinant BRPF bromodomains. Screening
of an in-house bromodomain targeted library and fragment sets resulted
in the identification of a number of inhibitors that carried either
the benzoimidazolone or the dimethylquinolinone core structure. Purchasing
and optimization by synthetic medicinal chemistry efforts led to the
development of the potent benzoimidazolone-based inhibitors OF-1,
PFI-4, and the dimethylquinolinone NI-57 (Figure A). A detailed discussion of the SAR (structure–activity
relationship) will be reported elsewhere.[31,32] Using dose response ALPHAscreen assays, the developed chemical probes
showed potencies for BRPF1B (IC50) of 270 nM, 172 nM, and
114 nM for OF-1, PFI-4, and NI-57, respectively. These data correlated
well with temperature shift and isothermal titration calorimetry data
(ITC), but ALPHAscreen underestimated somewhat the affinity of PFI-4
for the BRPF1B isoform, which had a KD of 13 ± 1 nM using ITC (Supporting Information Tables 1–3).
Figure 2
Selectivity and potency of the three BRPF chemical
probes. (A) Chemical structure of OF-1, NI-57, and PFI-4. (B) Selectivity
screening data of OF-1, NI-57, and PFI-4 using temperature shift assays
(ΔTm). The temperature shifts (listed
in Supporting Information Table 1) were
mapped onto the phylogenetic tree using red spheres with radii corresponding
to ΔTm as indicated in the figure.
(C) ITC measurements of the OF-1 with BRPF1B and its main off-target
BRD4 domain 1 (shown in red). Raw binding heats are shown for each
injection. The insert depicts normalized binding heats and a nonlinear
least-squares fit to a single binding site model. (D) ITC measurements
of PFI-4 with BRPF1B and its main off-target CECR2. See also, Supporting Information Tables 1–4.
Selectivity and potency of the three BRPF chemical
probes. (A) Chemical structure of OF-1, NI-57, and PFI-4. (B) Selectivity
screening data of OF-1, NI-57, and PFI-4 using temperature shift assays
(ΔTm). The temperature shifts (listed
in Supporting Information Table 1) were
mapped onto the phylogenetic tree using red spheres with radii corresponding
to ΔTm as indicated in the figure.
(C) ITC measurements of the OF-1 with BRPF1B and its main off-target
BRD4 domain 1 (shown in red). Raw binding heats are shown for each
injection. The insert depicts normalized binding heats and a nonlinear
least-squares fit to a single binding site model. (D) ITC measurements
of PFI-4 with BRPF1B and its main off-target CECR2. See also, Supporting Information Tables 1–4.Next, we used temperature shift
assays (ΔTm) to evaluate the family
wide selectivity of the three developed chemical probes using a comprehensive
panel of 49 diverse bromodomains. OF-1 showed significant ΔTm shifts within the BRPF family identifying
this inhibitor as a pan-BRPF inhibitor, but also weak interactions
(2.1 °C) were observed for BRD4(1). ΔTm shifts of 1° were observed for other bromodomains
such as other BET family members, TRIM24 (TIF1α), and BRD9 (Figure B). However, such
small ΔTm shifts often represent
false positive hits or very weak interactions. Indeed, ALPHAscreen
did not reveal strong interactions of OF-1 with BRD4 and TRIM24 (TIF1α),
with IC50 values larger than 10 μM (Supporting Information Table 2). ITC determined a KD of 3.9 ± 0.3 μM for the first bromodomain
of BRD4(1), thus 39-fold selectivity when compared to the BRPF1B isoform
(Figure C). Using
ITC, we determined KD values of 0.5 ±
0.06 μM and 2.4 ± 0.2 μM for BRPF2 and BRPF3, respectively.
We did not identify any significant interaction outside subfamily
IV for NI-57, which showed only weak ΔTm shifts (∼1 °C) for the bromodomain present in
BRD9, CREBBP, and EP300, suggesting excellent selectivity for the
BRPF family. ITC revealed a KD of 0.031
± 0.002 μM for BRPF1B (Supporting Information Table 3), in agreement with ALPHAscreen data (IC50: 0.114 ± 0.061 μM). Finally, PFI-4 was highly selective
for the BRPF1B isoform. ΔTm screening
against the bromodomain family detected only a weak temperature shift
for the CECR2 bromodomain. ITC confirmed isoform selectivity for BRPF1B
(KD: 0.013 ± 0.001 μM), whereas
BRPF2 interacted with this chemical probe with a KD of 0.775 ± 0.09 μM (60-fold selectivity)
and CECR2, the only detected off-target outside family IV with only
2.35 ± 0.52 μM affinity, thus showing 180-fold selectivity.
BRD7 was detected in Tm assays, but this
interaction was not confirmed in alternative assays (DiscoverX bromoscan)
probably due to the low intrinsic stability of the protein leading
often to misleading DSF results (Figure D). It is interesting to note that in agreement
with our peptide binding data, none of the inhibitors interacted with
the BRPF1A isoform in temperature shift assays, consistent with this
splicing isoform acting as a bromodomain inactivating variant with
an inaccessible acetyl-lysine binding site. Screening of the developed
probes against a diverse panel of potential off-targets (kinases,
GPCRs) revealed no significant off-targets outside the bromodomain
family (Supporting Information Table 4).
In conclusion, medicinal chemistry and in vitro screening
efforts led to the development of three potent chemical tools with
good selectivity for the BRPF family as well as one highly isoform-selective
chemical probe. Thus, this set of three chemical probes allows independent
evaluation of phenotypic consequences of BRPF bromodomain inhibition
as well as BRPF1B specific activities in cellular systems.Following
the analysis of inhibitor potency and selectivity in vitro, we set out to demonstrate cellular “on-target” activity
of the three probe molecules. Since the developed inhibitors are anticipated
to block chromatin association of BRPF, it is expected that the inhibitors
would weaken the interactions of BRPF with histones and strongly inhibit
the recruitment of isolated BRPF bromodomains to histones. To assess
this, we developed a BRPF1A/B-Histone H3.3-nanoBRET (nano bioluminescence
resonance energy transfer) assay, which measures the energy transfer
from one NanoLuciferase coupled protein (BRPF1, donor) to the interacting
HaloTag-protein labeled with a NanoBRET 618 fluorophore (histone H3.3
acceptor). Indeed, we observed dose-dependent displacement of BRPF1B
but not of the BRPF1A isoform from histone H3.3 (Figure , Supporting Information Figure 1). Estimated IC50 values were
0.07 ± 0.0034 and 0.24 ± 0.039 μM for NI-57 and PFI-4,
respectively. We verified these data using FRAP (fluorescence recovery
after photobleaching) assays.[33] As expected
from our selectivity screening data, PFI-4 led only to the dissociation
of the bromodomain of BRPF1b, but not any of the full-length family
members from histone H3.3 (Supporting Information Figure 1B). NI-57 displaced a GFP fusion construct where the
bromodomain was triplicated as well as full-length GFP-BRPF2, but
not inactivating bromodomain mutants from chromatin, which was indicated
by significant reduction of recovery times in the presence of the
inhibitor. Acetylation dependence of the interaction was demonstrated
by adding the pan-HDAC inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA),
which leads to a global increase in histone acetylation and therefore
to stronger association of the BRPF bromodomains with histones (Figure B–D). Similar
results were observed for OF-1 and PFI-4 (Supporting Information Figure 1). Thus, the nanoBRET and FRAP experiments
demonstrated that the developed inhibitors strongly inhibit BRPF1
and BRPF2 but not BRPF1A bromodomains in the nucleus.
Figure 3
Inhibition of BRPF bromodomains
in the nucleus. (A) Dose-dependent inhibition of the BRPF1B and histone
H3.3 protein interaction with NI-57 and PFI-4 measured by NanoBRET
assay. (B) Representative confocal images of nuclei from U2OS cells
transfected with plasmids encoding triple bromodomains of BRPF1B treated
either with or without SAHA (*) and the panBRPF Inhibitor NI-57. The
bleached area is indicated by a red circle. (C) Half-times of fluorescence
recovery (t1/2) after photo bleaching
measured for the BRPF1B triple bromodomain construct. (D) Half-times
of fluorescence recovery (t1/2) after
photo bleaching measured for full-length BRPF2 (WT) after treatment
with NI-57 at different concentrations with or without SAHA. Bars
in panel C and D represent the mean t1/2 calculated from at least 10 individual recovery curves, and error
bars depict the standard error of the mean. *p <
0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001,
****p < 0.0001 significant difference from wild
type with or without SAHA (‡2.5 μM; n-way
ANOVA and Dunnett’s posthoc-test). See also, Supporting Information Figure 1.
Inhibition of BRPF bromodomains
in the nucleus. (A) Dose-dependent inhibition of the BRPF1B and histone
H3.3 protein interaction with NI-57 and PFI-4 measured by NanoBRET
assay. (B) Representative confocal images of nuclei from U2OS cells
transfected with plasmids encoding triple bromodomains of BRPF1B treated
either with or without SAHA (*) and the panBRPF Inhibitor NI-57. The
bleached area is indicated by a red circle. (C) Half-times of fluorescence
recovery (t1/2) after photo bleaching
measured for the BRPF1B triple bromodomain construct. (D) Half-times
of fluorescence recovery (t1/2) after
photo bleaching measured for full-length BRPF2 (WT) after treatment
with NI-57 at different concentrations with or without SAHA. Bars
in panel C and D represent the mean t1/2 calculated from at least 10 individual recovery curves, and error
bars depict the standard error of the mean. *p <
0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001,
****p < 0.0001 significant difference from wild
type with or without SAHA (‡2.5 μM; n-way
ANOVA and Dunnett’s posthoc-test). See also, Supporting Information Figure 1.Structural models of monoacetylated histone peptides H2AK5ac
and H4K12ac have been published recently, revealing a canonical bromodomain
acetyl-lysine interaction.[25] However, we
wanted to confirm the binding mode of peptides that we used in screening
assays and for which we detected the tightest association with BRPF1B.
In particular, we were interested in the consequences of the presence
of multiple acetylation sites on histone recognition as well as the
recognition of the histone H3 mark H3K14ac. We therefore cocrystallized
BRPF1B with peptides harboring the H3K14ac and H4K5acK8ac mark. The
H3K14ac complex revealed the canonical interaction of the acetyl-lysine
with the BRPF1B bromodomain comprising the conserved hydrogen bond
with N708 as well as the water-mediated hydrogen bond with Y665 and
additional hydrogen bonds formed by the H3R17 side chain and the backbone
carbonyl of the G650 (Supporting Information Figure 2A–C). It is interesting to note that in the H3K14ac
complex the peptide reversed its orientation when compared to complexes
of the same mark with the bromodomain of BAZ2B.[34] Co-crystallization of the diacetylated peptide H4K5acK8ac
revealed that in contrast to cocrystal structures with BRD4[35] only H4K5ac interacted with the acetyl-lysine
binding site, probably due to steric constraints of the bulky residue
F714 preventing simultaneous interaction of two acetylated lysines
in BRPF1B (Figure A). In the cocrystal structure, the H4K8ac side-chain was oriented
toward the surface but in close proximity to an area of strongly positive
electrostatic potential. It is therefore likely that neutralization
of the positive charge of the lysine by acetylation contributes favorably
to the interaction with this bromodomain.
Figure 4
Substrate recognition
and inhibitor binding modes. (A) Details of the interaction of H4K5acK8ac
with BRPF1B. The inset on the right shows a surface representation
indicating the electrostatic potential ranging from +1.5 V (blue)
to −1.5 V (red). (B) Details of the interaction of OF-1 with
the BRPF1B bromodomain. OF-1 is shown in ball and stick representation.
Hydrogen bonds are shown as dotted lines. (C) 2D projection showing
the interactions of OF-1 with the BRPF1B acetyl-lysine binding site.
Blue dashed lines represent hydrogen bonds; green solid lines, hydrophobic
interactions; and green dashed lines, π–π stacking
and edge-to-face aromatic interactions. The panel on the top right
shows a 2Fo–Fc electron density map contoured
at 1.2 σ around the inhibitor at 1.65 Å. (D) Details of
the interaction of the BRPF1B bromodomain with PFI-4. See also Supporting Information Figure 2 and Supporting Information Table 5.
Substrate recognition
and inhibitor binding modes. (A) Details of the interaction of H4K5acK8ac
with BRPF1B. The inset on the right shows a surface representation
indicating the electrostatic potential ranging from +1.5 V (blue)
to −1.5 V (red). (B) Details of the interaction of OF-1 with
the BRPF1B bromodomain. OF-1 is shown in ball and stick representation.
Hydrogen bonds are shown as dotted lines. (C) 2D projection showing
the interactions of OF-1 with the BRPF1B acetyl-lysine binding site.
Blue dashed lines represent hydrogen bonds; green solid lines, hydrophobic
interactions; and green dashed lines, π–π stacking
and edge-to-face aromatic interactions. The panel on the top right
shows a 2Fo–Fc electron density map contoured
at 1.2 σ around the inhibitor at 1.65 Å. (D) Details of
the interaction of the BRPF1B bromodomain with PFI-4. See also Supporting Information Figure 2 and Supporting Information Table 5.We cocrystallized OF-1
as well as PFI-4 to confirm the acetyl-lysine mimetic binding mode
suggested by our peptide displacement screening assays and to elucidate
the structural mechanisms of the observed selectivity. As expected,
the benzimidazolone acted as an acetyl-lysine mimetic moiety forming
in the BRPF1B complex the canonical hydrogen bond between the conserved
asparagine (N708) and the characteristic water-mediated hydrogen bond
with Y665 (Figure B,D). The inhibitor was further stabilized by a number of hydrophobic
interactions with lipophilic groups located at the rim of the Kac
binding site. The sulphonamide linker caused a 90° bend, positioning
the bromo-methylphenyl ring on top of F714, allowing an aromatic edge-face
stacking interaction and hydrophobic contacts with I713. Comparison
with the BRPF2-OF1 complex showed conservation of the binding mode,
but the bromo-methylphenyl ring assumed a position that is turned
away from F714 due to rotation of the phenyl ring (Supporting Information Figure 4D). Sequence conservation in
the acetyl-lysine binding pocket of BRPF1B and BRPF2 is high, but
the BC-loop residue I713 and the central ZA-loop residue P658 positions
are substituted by V647 and S592 in BRPF2. This creates a larger and
shallower binding pocket, resulting in repositioning of OF-1. ITC
data suggested that higher affinities of the developed inhibitors
for the BRPF1B isoform are mainly due to a more favorable binding
enthalpy (Supporting Information Table 3). It is therefore likely that the less efficient stacking of the
bromo-methylphenyl ring with F714 as well as the lack of interaction
of the halogen atom with the adjacent binding pocket formed by I713
are the main reasons for the 5-fold weaker potency of OF-1 for BRPF2.
Comparison with the BRPF1B-PFI-4 complex revealed that the amide linkage
with the benzoimidazolones ring system does not allow orientation
of the methoxybenzamide toward F714 (Figure D, Supporting Information Figure 2E,F). The orientation of the PFI-4 methoxybenzamide
ring is additionally stabilized by the presence of an intramolecular
hydrogen bond, resulting in an orientation toward the ZA loop. Together
with the 6-pyrrolidine substituent, the inhibitor shows remarkable
shape complementarity with the BRPF1B acetyl-lysine binding site,
explaining the high potency for this target. Crystallographic data
and refinement statistics are summarized in Supporting Information Table 5.To understand the complexity of
the BRPF signaling network, we used proximity-dependent protein biotinylation
(BioID) to identify physiologically relevant BRPF protein interactions
in living cells using HEK293 as a model.[36] The experiments revealed the canonical BRPF core complex structure,
comprising MYST acetyltransferases as well as MYST/Esa1-associated
factor 6, which was found preferentially associated with BRPF3, and
the general complex components ING4/5, in addition to other associated
proteins that were often isoform specific (Figure A). ING4/5 associated with all BRPF family
members, but it is interesting to note that MYST family members preferentially
associate with specific BRPF isoforms. HBO1 (KAT7) was reported to
preferentially interact with BRPF2, but significant association with
BRPF3 was also detected. KAT6A (MOZ) preferentially associated with
BRPF1B, in agreement with published data,[26] but MORF (KAT6B) also showed significant interaction with a short
isoform of BRPF2. Also interesting was the presence of Ser/Thr phosphatases
(PPP1CC) and their regulators as well as the members of the casein
kinase family, which were found in BRPF1B complexes, suggesting crosstalk
with phosphorylation dependent signaling events (Supporting Information Figure 3).
Figure 5
BRPF1B binding partners
and effect of BRPF bromodomain inhibition on gene transcription during
mouse osteoclastogenesis. (A) BioID of full-length and truncated (1–867)
BRPF2, BRPF1B, and BRPF3 in HEK293 cells. The color of the circle
represents the absolute spectral counts observed for the prey proteins.
The circle size indicates the quantitative enrichment of a prey across
all baits tested while the estimated FDR for the interaction is shown
as the color of the circle edge. (B) Inhibition of murine osteoclast
differentiation by panBRPF bromodomain inhibition. TRAP stain
of primary murine bone marrow cells (BMCs) differentiated into osteoclasts
for 3 days with 1 ng/mL RANKL plus treatment with DMSO or the panBRPF
bromodomain inhibitor OF-1. Bar scale indicates 200 μm. (C) RNA expression of
osteoclast markers and BRPF1, -2, and -3 in murine BMCs during differentiation
with 10 ng/mL RANKL and treatment with 1 μM and 2 μM OF-1
for 0, 1, 2, and 3 days measured by qPCR. Data were normalized to
day 0 of RANKL treatment. (D) Western blot analysis of NFATC1 protein
level in murine BMCs during differentiation with 10 ng/mL RANKL and
treatment with 1 μM and 2 μM OF-1 for 0, 1, 2, and 3 days.
LaminB1 was used as a loading control.
BRPF1B binding partners
and effect of BRPF bromodomain inhibition on gene transcription during
mouse osteoclastogenesis. (A) BioID of full-length and truncated (1–867)
BRPF2, BRPF1B, and BRPF3 in HEK293 cells. The color of the circle
represents the absolute spectral counts observed for the prey proteins.
The circle size indicates the quantitative enrichment of a prey across
all baits tested while the estimated FDR for the interaction is shown
as the color of the circle edge. (B) Inhibition of murine osteoclast
differentiation by panBRPF bromodomain inhibition. TRAP stain
of primary murine bone marrow cells (BMCs) differentiated into osteoclasts
for 3 days with 1 ng/mL RANKL plus treatment with DMSO or the panBRPF
bromodomain inhibitor OF-1. Bar scale indicates 200 μm. (C) RNA expression of
osteoclast markers and BRPF1, -2, and -3 in murine BMCs during differentiation
with 10 ng/mL RANKL and treatment with 1 μM and 2 μM OF-1
for 0, 1, 2, and 3 days measured by qPCR. Data were normalized to
day 0 of RANKL treatment. (D) Western blot analysis of NFATC1 protein
level in murine BMCs during differentiation with 10 ng/mL RANKL and
treatment with 1 μM and 2 μM OF-1 for 0, 1, 2, and 3 days.
LaminB1 was used as a loading control.Epigenetic mechanisms play an important role in patterning
and differentiation processes, and BRPF and its associated HATs have
been particularly associated with differentiation of hematopoietic
cells. Given our interest in bone biology, and the hematopoietic origin
of the osteoclast, we investigated the potential role of the targeted
bromodomains in osteoclastogenesis in mouse and human cells. Bone
marrow mononuclear cells were isolated from wild-type mice, cultivated
for 5 days in the presence of CSF-1, and replated in the presence
of RANKL for differentiation into osteoclasts,[28] either with DMSO as a control or with varying doses of
the BRPF inhibitors. OF-1 and NI-57 both caused significant reductions
in the number of multinucleated tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase
(TRAP) positive cells (Figure B, Supporting Information Figure 4). To understand the molecular basis for this observation, we investigated
the expression of several osteoclast marker genes using qPCR. As expected,
we found significant reductions of TRAP, the late-phase osteoclast
marker cathepsin K (CATK), the proton generator carbonic anhydrase
II (CA2), the key transcription factor NFATC1, and OC-STAMP, an essential
gene involved in cell–cell fusion (Figure C). Suppression of gene expression by OF-1
was particularly strong at day 2 after RANKL-induced differentiation.
Interestingly, the dominant negative form BRPF1A exhibited significantly
decreased RNA expression levels, whereas the active acetyl-lysine
binding isoform BRPF1B was not affected (Supporting Information Figure 4B). Additionally, BRPF bromodomain inhibitors
had no effect on the proliferation of murine monocytic RAW246.7 cells
and primary bone marrow cells, suggesting that the developed inhibitors
are not cytotoxic (Supporting Information Figure 4). At the protein level, we also observed strong down-regulation
of NFATC1 (Figure D). To further investigate other osteoclast-specific effects of the
BRPF inhibitors on gene transcription, we profiled genome-wide expression
with Illumina MouseWG-6 v2.0 Expression BeadChips at different time
points. Significant differences (α = 0.05) in gene expression
were observed at 48 and 72 h but not at 24 h of treatment (Figure ). Pathway analysis
(reactome.org) of the top 25 genes showed that differentially
expressed genes were linked either to osteoclast differentiation or
to lipid metabolism, thus two pathways relevant to osteoclast differentiation
and function. For example, RANKL-induced expression of Ppap2a and
SphK1 which play central roles in sphingolipid de novo biosynthesis, were significantly down-regulated by OF-1. These data
suggest that the fusion process from macrophages to bone-resorbing
“osteoclast-like” cells is interrupted by bromodomain
inhibition as well.
Figure 6
Microarray analysis of the effect of OF-1 on gene expression.
(A) Heat map of the top 25 significant differentially expressed genes
between DMSO and OF-1-treated BMCs based on sorted average p-value for the time points 48 and 72 h. Red indicates higher;
blue indicates lower expression. See also, Supporting Information Figures 3 and 4. (B) Venn diagram showing overlap
of 100 significantly expressed genes for each time point determined
by paired analysis (BH multiple testing, p-value
alpha adjustment) between DMSO and OF-1-treated (2 μM) murine
BMCs during 10 ng/mL RANKL-induced differentiation of 24, 48, or 72
h.
Microarray analysis of the effect of OF-1 on gene expression.
(A) Heat map of the top 25 significant differentially expressed genes
between DMSO and OF-1-treated BMCs based on sorted average p-value for the time points 48 and 72 h. Red indicates higher;
blue indicates lower expression. See also, Supporting Information Figures 3 and 4. (B) Venn diagram showing overlap
of 100 significantly expressed genes for each time point determined
by paired analysis (BH multiple testing, p-value
alpha adjustment) between DMSO and OF-1-treated (2 μM) murine
BMCs during 10 ng/mL RANKL-induced differentiation of 24, 48, or 72
h.To ensure that the inhibitors
also have activity on human cells, we used human peripheral blood
from healthy donors. Consistent with the results in murine cells,
we observed dose-dependent suppression of osteoclast differentiation
in the presence of all three inhibitors and RANKL (Figure A). OF-1 was the only inhibitor
to completely suppress the fusion into multinucleated “osteoclast-like”
cells. This suggests that during osteoclastogenesis, other BRPF family
members may, at least in part, functionally replace BRPF1B, which
was the only BRPF family member inhibited by PFI-4 at the concentrations
tested (Figure B).
To study this process in more detail, we performed fluorescence microscopy
analyses for beta-actin, VNR (vitronectin receptor; αvβ3 integrin), and DNA (DAPI), to visualize the cytoskeleton
with the osteoclast specific actin rings that assemble podosomes as
well as nuclei. The actin ring is a hallmark of osteoclasts which
forms a seal with the bone surface to create a protected compartment
for bone resorption by HCl and proteases. Treatment with all three
inhibitors led to striking decreases of F-actin rings. We also analyzed
bone-resorbing activity, first by seeding the cells onto a bone mineral
substrate (hydroxyapatite, HA; Osteosurface assay, Corning). Both
OF-1 and NI-57 led to a significant reduction in pit formation (Figure C), consistent with
observed decreases in differentiation. Second, cells were seeded on
dentine slices, a more biologically complete substrate. As with the
HA plates, resorption of dentine was also markedly reduced, including
a complete block of resorption by 1 μM OF-1 (Figure D). Consistent with this loss
of activity, osteoclast marker genes CA2, CATK, NFATC1, and ACP5 (TRAP) were also down-regulated using all three BRPF inhibitors (Figure E and F). Matrix
metallopeptidase 9 (MMP9, type IV collagenase) is a key protease secreted
by osteoclasts for matrix degradation. To determine whether BRPF bromodomain
inhibition leads to down regulation of MMP9, we used an ELISA to determine
the protein levels in the supernatant of primary osteoclasts before
and after exposure to PFI-4, OF-1, and NI-57. We found that all three
inhibitors led to significant reductions in MMP9 secretion (Figure G). Apart from its
role in normal osteoclast function, the suppression of MMP9 secretion
by the studied BRPF bromodomain inhibitors may also have important
implications for targeting cancer metastasis infiltration into bone,
since MMP9 secretion is markedly upregulated during progression toward
invasive tumors due to its central role in stromal remodelling.[37]
Figure 7
Inhibition of human osteoclast differentiation by panBRPF
bromodomain inhibition. (A) Immunofluorescence of F-actin and VNR
in primary human PBMCs differentiated into multinucleated osteoclasts
by RANKL for 14 days. Osteoclasts were treated with the indicated
doses of NI-57, OF-1, or PFI-4 (chemical probe set). Experiments were
conducted >10 times with >2 donors each. (B) Counts of TRAP-positive
multinucleated osteoclasts (n > 3) derived from
human PBMCs after 14 days of culture with RANKL, with or without indicated
doses of BRPF inhibitors. Tukey multiple comparison test *p > 0.05, **p > 0.01, ***p > 0.001, ****p > 0.0001. (C) OF-1
and NI-57 inhibited osteosurface degradation by human osteoclast-like
cells, doses indicated. (D) OF-1 (1 μM) inhibited pit formation
by human osteoclast-like cells on ivory discs. (E) RNA expression
of osteoclast markers by human osteoclast-like cells following 14
days of RANKL (+) and DMSO, NI-57, or PFI-4 treatment at 1.25 μM
or (F) OF-1 in a dose-dependent manner. (G) MMP9 concentration in
the supernatant of human RANKL-induced osteoclasts treated with either
PFI-4, OF-1, or NI-57 at a concentration of 1.25 μM for 7 days
or 11 days, respectively. See also, Supporting Information Figure 5.
Inhibition of human osteoclast differentiation by panBRPF
bromodomain inhibition. (A) Immunofluorescence of F-actin and VNR
in primary human PBMCs differentiated into multinucleated osteoclasts
by RANKL for 14 days. Osteoclasts were treated with the indicated
doses of NI-57, OF-1, or PFI-4 (chemical probe set). Experiments were
conducted >10 times with >2 donors each. (B) Counts of TRAP-positive
multinucleated osteoclasts (n > 3) derived from
human PBMCs after 14 days of culture with RANKL, with or without indicated
doses of BRPF inhibitors. Tukey multiple comparison test *p > 0.05, **p > 0.01, ***p > 0.001, ****p > 0.0001. (C) OF-1
and NI-57 inhibited osteosurface degradation by human osteoclast-like
cells, doses indicated. (D) OF-1 (1 μM) inhibited pit formation
by human osteoclast-like cells on ivory discs. (E) RNA expression
of osteoclast markers by human osteoclast-like cells following 14
days of RANKL (+) and DMSO, NI-57, or PFI-4 treatment at 1.25 μM
or (F) OF-1 in a dose-dependent manner. (G) MMP9 concentration in
the supernatant of human RANKL-induced osteoclasts treated with either
PFI-4, OF-1, or NI-57 at a concentration of 1.25 μM for 7 days
or 11 days, respectively. See also, Supporting Information Figure 5.The developed three chemical probes for the bromodomain of
BRPF led to the identification of the role of this protein interaction
domain in regulating osteoclastogenesis, suggesting a key role of
protein acetylation in regulating this process. Previously, Lamoureux et al. demonstrated that panBET inhibition also attenuates
osteoclast differentiation.[38] However,
in contrast to BET inhibitors, the inhibition of BRPF bromodomains
did not result in antiproliferative effects or cytotoxicity. Inhibition
of BRPF bromodomains may therefore be applicable for the prevention
of bone loss, and the developed chemical probes will provide an excellent
chemical starting point for translational studies. BRPF is widely
expressed in a variety of tissue types, and the developed probes will
help to elucidate further functions of these interesting epigenetic
modulators.
Methods
Protein Expression
All recombinant bromodomains were expressed as described in Filippakopoulos et al.[35]
BioLayer Interferometry
(BLI)
BLI experiments to determine binding kinetics were
done using the Octet RED384 system by fortéBIO using bromodomains of two splice isoforms of BRPF1A and BRPF1B
that were biotinylated during recombinant expression using a BirA
(Biotin transferase) overexpressing bacterial host (BL21 DE3) in conjunction
with a C-terminal AVI-tag. Biotinylated proteins were immobilized
on super streptavidin biosensors, which were subsequently quenched
with l-biotin. Data analysis software provided by fortéBIO was used to calculate binding constants
from the interference data.
AlphaScreen
Assays were performed
as described previously with minor modifications.[39] Plates filled with 5 μL of the assay buffer followed
by 7 μL of biotinylated peptide [H-YSGRGKacGGKacGLGKacGGAKacRHRK(Biotin)–OH
for BRD1, BRD4, BRPF1B, and BRPF3 or YQTARKSTGGK(ac)APRKQLATKAK(biotin)–OH
for TIF1α] and His-tagged protein to achieve final assay concentrations
of 25–100 nM depending on the dose–response curve for
each individual protein.
Murine and Human Osteoclast Differentiation
Primary mouse bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMC) were obtained,
differentiated, and stained for TRAP as previously described.[40] Briefly, marrow cell suspensions from PBS flushed
bones (two tibiae, two femora) from 2 to 3 week old mice were centrifuged
at 1000g for 5 min and plated in αMEM/10% FBS
with low MCSF (10 ng/mL, human recombinant MCSF; Chiron) and incubated
at 37 °C and 5% CO2. After 3 days, fresh medium containing
high MCSF (75 ng/mL) was added for 2 more days, and then the medium
was supplemented with RANKL (R&D Systems, Minneapolis) at 1 ng/mL
unless otherwise noted, for the times indicated. Differentiation into
osteoclasts was scored by counting multinucleated (three or more nuclei)
TRAP-positive cells. Primary human peripheral blood (Oxford NHS Blood
bank, NCI0622) mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected from a Histopaque
generated buffy coat after gradient centrifugation at 20 min and 500g, brakes off. The CD14+ monocyte fraction was
obtained by on-column CD14+-MACS bead isolation (Miltenyi
Biotech, Surrey, UK), washed twice with MACS buffer, and seeded at
a density of 50 000 c/mL in αMEM/10%FCS supplemented
with 25 ng/mL MCSF (Peprotech). After 6 days at 37 °C, 5% CO2 treatment with either OF-1, NI-57, or PFI-4 with and without
50 ng/mL RANKL (Peprotech) was started. Media were changed with fresh
compounds every 3–4 days. After 14–21 days, cells were
fixed and stained for TRAP or lysed in RLT/2-mercaptoethanol RNA lysis
buffer for RNA isolation.
Immunofluorescence
Fixed osteoclast-like
cells were permabilized in 0.5% Triton X-100 at RT (RT) for 20 min.
Blocking of nonspecific binding was carried out with 3% FBS/PBS for
at least 1 h at RT. Primary antibodies for VNR and F-actin were incubated
overnight in 3%FCS/PBS (1:500). After washes with PBS, secondary fluorescence
coupled antimouse and antirabbit antibody were applied for 1 h in
the dark, at RT. DAPI/PBS was added for 5 min, and fluorescence was
measured by confocal microscopy (Zeiss).
Bone Resorption Assays
PBMCs were isolated and seeded onto either osteosurface assay plates
(BD biosciences) or self-cut dentine slices from ivory (provided by
Edward Hookway, Botnar institute). After 14 days of differentiation,
cells were removed from osteosurface or dentine slices. The amount
of osteoclast-mediated pits in the osteosurface was assessed by phase
contrast. Dentine pits were imaged with confocal microscopy.
Western
Blot and ELISA
Murine osteoclast-like cells were PBS washed,
homogenized and lysed in RIPA buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4; 150
mM NaCl; 1% NP-40; 0.5% Na-deoxycholate; 0.1% SDS; 2 mM EDTA; 10 mM
NaF) containing protease inhibitors (Pierce, according to manufacturer’s
specifications) with a 1 mL syringe and a 23-gauge needle. After centrifugation
at 15 000 rpm at 4 °C for 10 min, supernatants were frozen
at −80 °C. Protein concentrations were assayed using a
Pierce BCA Kit, and 30 μg of protein per lane was subjected
on 10% SDS gel. Proteins were electroblotted onto PVDF, and blots
were probed overnight at 4 °C (anti-NFATc1 (1:500; 7A6: sc-7294
mouse monoclonal, Santa Cruz) or anti-Lamin B1 (1:10 000; ab133741
rabbit monoclonal, Abcam). Secondary antibodies were HRP-conjugated
sheep antimouse (1:5000 for Nfatc1; #NA93IV; GE Healthcare, Piscataway,
NJ) or HRP-conjugated goat antirabbit (1:5000 for Lamin B1; # P0448;
Dako, Carpinteria, CA). MMP9 secretion in the human osteoclast supernatant
was determined by a MMP9 ELISA (R&D, DMP900) according to the
manufacturer’s instructions. The supernatant (50 μL/well)
was collected, frozen at −20 °C, and 100-fold diluted
for the assay. Absorbance was measured at 440 nm.
Microarray
and Bioinformatics Analysis
Murine bone marrow stem cells
were differentiated into osteoclast-like cells as described above.
Cells were PBS-washed and lysed in RLT-Buffer (including 2-Mercaptoethanol;
Qiagen, UK), and RNA was isolated via RNeasy Plus
Mini Kit (Quiagen, UK). After confirmation of RNA quality (RIN = 2
± 0.1), cDNA synthesis of approximately 1000 ng of RNA with a
High Capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription Kit (Applied Biosystems,
UK) was carried out. A total of 500 ng/μL cDNA was subjected
to MouseWG-6 v2.0 Expression BeadChips (Illumina) at the Department
of Pathology, University of Cambridge. Microarray data are available
in the ArrayExpress database (www.ebi.ac.uk/arrayexpress) under accession number E-MTAB-4155. Gene expression data underwent
log2 transformation and quantile normalization. Genes were filtered
based on their variation across the experiments, i.e., excluding genes
with a standard deviation of expression lower than 0.1. For genes
with multiple probes, only the highest variable probe was selected
for further analysis. Differently expressed genes were selected using
LIMMA (Linear Models for Microarray Data) in a paired analysis for
the replicates. This method resulted in p-values adjusted for multiple
testing using the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure, and α
= 0.01 was used to define significance. Microarray analyses were performed
in R (v3.0.1) using the packages Limma (3.16.8) for differential expression
and Venn diagram (1.6.7), plotrix (3.5–7), gtools (3.4.1),
and gplots (2.14.1) for visualization. Pathway analysis of the top
25 differentially expressed genes with a Jaccard distance coefficient
of p > 0.05 (Reactome.org) was performed.
The REACT_111217 pathway (metabolism of lipids and lipoproteins) with
at least more than four enriched genes was set as the most significant
(entities p-value 0.045). Additional methods’ descriptions
are available in the Supporting Information.
Authors: Niall Igoe; Elliott D Bayle; Oleg Fedorov; Cynthia Tallant; Pavel Savitsky; Catherine Rogers; Dafydd R Owen; Gauri Deb; Tim C P Somervaille; David M Andrews; Neil Jones; Anne Cheasty; Hamish Ryder; Paul E Brennan; Susanne Müller; Stefan Knapp; Paul V Fish Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2017-01-09 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Mark A Dawson; Rab K Prinjha; Antje Dittmann; George Giotopoulos; Marcus Bantscheff; Wai-In Chan; Samuel C Robson; Chun-wa Chung; Carsten Hopf; Mikhail M Savitski; Carola Huthmacher; Emma Gudgin; Dave Lugo; Soren Beinke; Trevor D Chapman; Emma J Roberts; Peter E Soden; Kurt R Auger; Olivier Mirguet; Konstanze Doehner; Ruud Delwel; Alan K Burnett; Phillip Jeffrey; Gerard Drewes; Kevin Lee; Brian J P Huntly; Tony Kouzarides Journal: Nature Date: 2011-10-02 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Peter G K Clark; Lucas C C Vieira; Cynthia Tallant; Oleg Fedorov; Dean C Singleton; Catherine M Rogers; Octovia P Monteiro; James M Bennett; Roberta Baronio; Susanne Müller; Danette L Daniels; Jacqui Méndez; Stefan Knapp; Paul E Brennan; Darren J Dixon Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2015-04-13 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Sarah Picaud; Oleg Fedorov; Angeliki Thanasopoulou; Katharina Leonards; Katherine Jones; Julia Meier; Heidi Olzscha; Octovia Monteiro; Sarah Martin; Martin Philpott; Anthony Tumber; Panagis Filippakopoulos; Clarence Yapp; Christopher Wells; Ka Hing Che; Andrew Bannister; Samuel Robson; Umesh Kumar; Nigel Parr; Kevin Lee; Dave Lugo; Philip Jeffrey; Simon Taylor; Matteo L Vecellio; Chas Bountra; Paul E Brennan; Alison O'Mahony; Sharlene Velichko; Susanne Müller; Duncan Hay; Danette L Daniels; Marjeta Urh; Nicholas B La Thangue; Tony Kouzarides; Rab Prinjha; Jürg Schwaller; Stefan Knapp Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2015-11-09 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Matthew L Hemming; Morgan R Benson; Michael A Loycano; Justin A Anderson; Jessica L Andersen; Madeleine L Taddei; Andrei V Krivtsov; Brandon J Aubrey; Jevon A Cutler; Charlie Hatton; Ewa Sicinska; Scott A Armstrong Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 38.272
Authors: Jonathan T Lloyd; Kyle McLaughlin; Mulu Y Lubula; Jamie C Gay; Andrea Dest; Cong Gao; Margaret Phillips; Marco Tonelli; Gabriel Cornilescu; Matthew R Marunde; Chiara M Evans; Samuel P Boyson; Samuel Carlson; Michael-Christopher Keogh; John L Markley; Seth Frietze; Karen C Glass Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Mohammed Ghiboub; Ahmed M I Elfiky; Menno P J de Winther; Nicola R Harker; David F Tough; Wouter J de Jonge Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2021-04-23
Authors: Kezia C L Whatley; Gilda Padalino; Helen Whiteland; Kathrin K Geyer; Benjamin J Hulme; Iain W Chalmers; Josephine Forde-Thomas; Salvatore Ferla; Andrea Brancale; Karl F Hoffmann Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2019-11-15
Authors: Juliet O Obi; Mulu Y Lubula; Gabriel Cornilescu; Amy Henrickson; Kara McGuire; Chiara M Evans; Margaret Phillips; Samuel P Boyson; Borries Demeler; John L Markley; Karen C Glass Journal: Curr Res Struct Biol Date: 2020-05-12
Authors: Chiara M Evans; Margaret Phillips; Kiera L Malone; Marco Tonelli; Gabriel Cornilescu; Claudia Cornilescu; Simon J Holton; Mátyás Gorjánácz; Liping Wang; Samuel Carlson; Jamie C Gay; Jay C Nix; Borries Demeler; John L Markley; Karen C Glass Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-08-24 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Samuel P Boyson; Cong Gao; Kathleen Quinn; Joseph Boyd; Hana Paculova; Seth Frietze; Karen C Glass Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 6.639