Using activity-based protein profiling (ABPP), functional proteins can be interrogated in their native environment. Despite their pharmaceutical relevance, G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been difficult to address through ABPP. In the current study, we took the prototypical human adenosine A2A receptor (hA2AR) as the starting point for the construction of a chemical toolbox allowing two-step affinity-based labeling of GPCRs. First, we equipped an irreversibly binding hA2AR ligand with a terminal alkyne to serve as probe. We showed that our probe irreversibly and concentration-dependently labeled purified hA2AR. Click-ligation with a sulfonated cyanine-3 fluorophore allowed us to visualize the receptor on SDS-PAGE. We further demonstrated that labeling of the purified hA2AR by our probe could be inhibited by selective antagonists. Lastly, we showed successful labeling of the receptor in cell membranes overexpressing hA2AR, making our probe a promising affinity-based tool compound that sets the stage for the further development of probes for GPCRs.
Using activity-based protein profiling (ABPP), functional proteins can be interrogated in their native environment. Despite their pharmaceutical relevance, G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been difficult to address through ABPP. In the current study, we took the prototypical humanadenosine A2A receptor (hA2AR) as the starting point for the construction of a chemical toolbox allowing two-step affinity-based labeling of GPCRs. First, we equipped an irreversibly binding hA2AR ligand with a terminal alkyne to serve as probe. We showed that our probe irreversibly and concentration-dependently labeled purified hA2AR. Click-ligation with a sulfonated cyanine-3 fluorophore allowed us to visualize the receptor on SDS-PAGE. We further demonstrated that labeling of the purified hA2AR by our probe could be inhibited by selective antagonists. Lastly, we showed successful labeling of the receptor in cell membranes overexpressing hA2AR, making our probe a promising affinity-based tool compound that sets the stage for the further development of probes for GPCRs.
The adenosine receptors,
belonging to the family of G protein-coupled
receptors (GPCRs), have been coined adenosine A1, A2A, A2B, and A3. These receptors are
widely distributed through the human body and are considered promising
targets for a wide range of diseases.[1] Regadenoson,
a selective humanadenosine A2A receptor (hA2AR) agonist used to increase vasodilation during cardiac imaging,
has been approved by the FDA, exemplifying the potential therapeutic
applications for the hA2AR. Likewise, hA2AR
antagonists are currently being pursued as potential treatment of
Parkinson’s disease[2] and as adjuvants
in cancer immunotherapy.[3]The hA2AR was one of the first GPCRs for which a crystal
structure was elucidated.[4] However, the
challenges in structural biology of GPCRs, including the low expression
level in native tissue and inherent poor protein stability,[5] still exist. To overcome these obstacles, covalent
probes have been developed as useful pharmacological tools. Such probes,
also named affinity labels, represent compounds that feature a reactive
cross-linking moiety, which can irreversibly and specifically bind
to a receptor. For example, an irreversible antagonist was used to
stabilize the adenosine A1 receptor for cocrystallization,
resulting in the visualization of key amino acids important for ligand–receptor
binding.[6]The design of covalent
probes for GPCRs generally follows a similar
strategy, which is to incorporate a warhead in a high-affinity, reversibly
binding ligand. Based on the type of warhead used, two categories
of irreversible ligands can be discerned: photoaffinity and chemoreactive
ligands.[7,8] Whereas in the former type a photoreactive
warhead is employed, the latter is equipped with an electrophilic
chemical moiety capable of binding nucleophilic residues in the target
protein. A commonly used warhead is aryl sulfonyl fluoride, which
is capable of covalently binding to many nucleophilic amino acid residues,
such as serine, threonine, lysine, and cysteine.[9] This warhead has been incorporated in several reported
covalent ligands for the adenosine receptors, including FSCPX,[10] FSPTP,[11] fluorosulfonyl-functionalized
pyrimidine derivatives,[12] and LUF7445.[13] Likewise, fluorescent tags have been incorporated
into adenosine receptor ligands to visualize the receptor, which yielded,
e.g., FITC-ADAC,[14] MRS5422,[15] and NBD-NECA.[16] However,
fluorescent moieties are of significant size, and a priori derivatization
of a ligand with such a group may negatively affect receptor affinity.
Here two-step affinity-based probes (AfBPs) might be a better alternative,
as a reporter tag is added after the reactive ligand has bound its
target.[17]Interestingly, from the
field of activity-based protein profiling
(ABPP), combined with click chemistry, many techniques have emerged
that could potentially be applied to GPCRs using our covalent ligand.
Normally in ABPP, an irreversible ligand is equipped with a ligation
handle and after binding to the protein of interest is paired with
a clickable fluorophore. In this way, via a Huisgen 1,3-dipolar cycloaddition,
a stable triazole-linked product is formed, effectively attaching
a fluorescent label to the protein.[18−20] Currently, this technique
serves as a tool to profile the activities of drug targets (currently
mainly enzymes) in native biological systems. One-step labeling, where
the reporter group is preattached to the probe, has been applied on
GPCRs previously.[21−23] Moreover, similar two-step labeling strategies have
been applied for other targets.[24,25] However, due to their
low abundance, GPCRs are difficult to address with this otherwise
promising technique. Within the entire GPCR family with over 800 members,
until recently, only the mGlu5 receptor had been the subject
of this approach, albeit with limited success.[26] Very recently, the type 2 cannabinoid receptor (CB2R) has been probed with a two-step photoaffinity probe, leading
to great insights into receptor localization and target engagement.[27]In this study, we describe our efforts
to obtain a clickable affinity-based
probe, with an electrophilic warhead, as a logical extension of our
previous research on the successful design of a covalent antagonist
of hA2AR, compound 1 (LUF7445).[13] We used the antagonist ZM241385 as the starting
point in our design efforts and synthesized a series of fluorosulfonyl
derivatives with diverse linker lengths (compounds 1–3, Figure ). The most potent ligand, with low nanomolar affinity, was retained
for further structural modification and was equipped with an alkyne-click
handle, resulting in probe 4, as shown in Figure . We then validated that the
ligand’s binding to the receptor was wash-resistant. Additionally,
we demonstrated the ligand’s covalent labeling capacity for
purified receptors via a bioorthogonal copper-catalyzed azide–alkyne
ligation reaction with a fluorescent moiety, sulfonated cyanine 3
((E)-2-((E)-3-(1-(6-((3-azidopropyl)amino)-6-oxohexyl)-3,3-dimethyl-5-sulfo-3H-indol-1-ium-2-yl)allylidene)-3,3-dimethyl-1-(3-sulfopropyl)indoline-5-sulfonate).
Finally, this probe was able to profile the presence of hA2AR in a relatively complex biological sample. Hence, this is one of
the first AfBPs for a GPCR and may set the stage for similar probes
to facilitate target discovery and bioanalysis of GPCRs associated
with human disease.
Figure 1
Chemical structures of the hA2AR antagonists
examined
in this study. The lead compound ZM241385, a selective hA2AR antagonist, inspired the design of covalent antagonist 1.[13] In the current study, the effect of
the linker length between scaffold and warhead on affinity was further
examined, yielding compound 2 and, preferably, compound 3. The affinity-based probe 4 was then synthesized
from compound 3, bearing an alkyne ligation-handle and
a fluorosulfonyl electrophilic warhead. The electrophilic warhead
is in red and the click-ligation handle is in blue.
Chemical structures of the hA2AR antagonists
examined
in this study. The lead compound ZM241385, a selective hA2AR antagonist, inspired the design of covalent antagonist 1.[13] In the current study, the effect of
the linker length between scaffold and warhead on affinity was further
examined, yielding compound 2 and, preferably, compound 3. The affinity-based probe 4 was then synthesized
from compound 3, bearing an alkyne ligation-handle and
a fluorosulfonyl electrophilic warhead. The electrophilic warhead
is in red and the click-ligation handle is in blue.
Results and Discussion
Chemistry
Our
research group has been evaluating structural
modifications of triazolotriazine derivatives based on the selective
adenosine A2A antagonist 4-(2-(7-amino-2-(furan-2-yl)-[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-a][1,3,5]triazin-5-ylamino)ethyl)phenol (ZM241385), to obtain
a covalent ligand for the hA2AR. The rational design of
this covalent ligand originated from a reported hA2AR crystal
structure (PDB: 4EIY) in complex with ZM241385.[4] In it, the
ligand binding pocket demonstrated a deep, planar, and narrow cavity
embracing the aromatic core and furan ring of ZM241385. Therefore,
an extension of the hydroxyphenethylamine moiety into the extracellular
domain of the receptor offered us the playground for integration of
the electrophilic reactive groups. Our earlier covalent antagonist,
compound 1 (Figure ), in which the 4-hydroxyphenylethylamine side chain
in ZM241385 was replaced with a similar side chain harboring an electrophilic
fluorosulfonyl moiety, was recognized by hA2AR with an
apparent pKi of 8.99.[13] To optimize the irreversible binding potential of our compound,
with our current aim of developing an AfBP in mind, an exploration
of linker length was performed, varying the linker between the fluorosulfonyl
warhead moiety and the aromatic recognition element from three to
five carbon atoms. To this end, compounds 2 and 3 were synthesized as detailed in Scheme . The synthesis starts from 2-(furan-2-yl)-5-(methylsulfonyl)-[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-a][1,3,5]triazin-7-amine 5, synthesized as
previously reported,[13] and involves a linear
sequence comprising aromatic substitution with either commercially
available mono-Boc-protected butyldiamine or pentyldiamine and subsequent
Boc-deprotection toward intermediates 8 and 9. Introduction of the fluorosulfonylbenzoyl warhead proceeded with
low yields due to difficult purification, providing ligands 2 and 3 in 4% and 2% yield, respectively.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of Compounds 2–4
Reagents and conditions: (a) tert-butyl (4-aminobutyl)carbamate or tert-butyl (5-aminopentyl)carbamate, DiPEA, MeCN, 70–85 °C,
46–74%; (b) TFA, quant; (c) 4-fluorosulfonylbenzoyl chloride,
DiPEA, MeCN, 70 °C, 2–4%; (d) Boc2O, DCM, quant;
(e) PPh3, CBr4, 90%; (f) propargylamine, DiPEA,
46%; (g) 4-fluorosulfonylbenzoyl chloride, DiPEA, MeCN, quant; (h)
i. 5, TFA, DCM, ii. DiPEA, MeCN, 70 °C, 45%.
Synthesis of Compounds 2–4
Reagents and conditions: (a) tert-butyl (4-aminobutyl)carbamate or tert-butyl (5-aminopentyl)carbamate, DiPEA, MeCN, 70–85 °C,
46–74%; (b) TFA, quant; (c) 4-fluorosulfonylbenzoyl chloride,
DiPEA, MeCN, 70 °C, 2–4%; (d) Boc2O, DCM, quant;
(e) PPh3, CBr4, 90%; (f) propargylamine, DiPEA,
46%; (g) 4-fluorosulfonylbenzoyl chloride, DiPEA, MeCN, quant; (h)
i. 5, TFA, DCM, ii. DiPEA, MeCN, 70 °C, 45%.The synthetic route toward probe 4 (LUF7487, Figure ) is depicted in Scheme . First, the amino
group of 5-aminopentanol was protected with a Boc group and the hydroxyl
was converted to a bromide using an Appel reaction, providing intermediate 12. Nucleophilic substitution of the bromide with propargylamine
afforded amine 13, which was acylated with 4-fluorosulfonylbenzoyl
chloride to give Boc-protected bifunctional spacer 14 uneventfully. Finally, in a two-step process, the spacer was deprotected
and coupled to scaffold 5, to provide probe 4 in 45% yield.
Biology
To assess the affinity for
the hA2AR, compounds 2 and 3 were
tested in [3H]ZM241385 displacement experiments (n =
3), which demonstrated a concentration-dependent inhibition of radioligand
binding to hA2AR overexpressed in HEK293 cells. To better
understand the time-dependent binding characteristics of these compounds,
we then carried out displacement assays performed with two different
incubation times. Representative graphs for these experiments are
given in Figure a
and 2b, in which the concentration-dependent
inhibition of specific [3H]ZM241385 binding shifted to
the left with an incubation time extension from 0.5 h (standard) to
3 h. As detailed in Table , the affinities of both compound 2 and 3 significantly increased by approximately 5-fold to subnanomolar
values with longer incubation times. In other words, both designed
covalent ligands became more potent in displacing the radioligand
[3H]ZM241385 from the receptor over time. Similarly to 1,[13] this pronounced affinity increase
may be attributed to an irreversible binding nature of the compounds,
leading to a higher receptor occupancy with a longer incubation time.
It should be kept in mind that due to the covalent nature of the interaction,
affinity values can only be apparent as no dynamic equilibrium can
be reached.
Figure 2
Displacement of specific [3H]ZM241385 binding from HEK293
cell membranes stably expressing the hA2AR receptor at
25 °C by compound 2 (a), 3 (b), and 4 (c) with an incubation time of 0.5 h (blue curve) and 3
h (red curve), respectively. Representative graphs are from one experiment
performed in duplicate.
Table 1
(Apparent) Affinities of Synthesized
Ligands for the Human Adenosine A2A Receptora
compoundb
pKic (0.5 h)
pKid (3 h)
pKi shifte
1f
8.27 ± 0.04
8.99 ± 0.01***
0.72
2
8.20 ± 0.13
9.05 ± 0.07***
0.85
3
8.56 ± 0.03
9.21 ± 0.01***
0.65
4
8.41 ± 0.02
8.82 ± 0.02***
0.41
Data are expressed as means ±
SEM of three separate experiments each performed in duplicate. ***P < 0.001 compared with the pKi values in displacement experiments with a 0.5 h incubation time;
Student’s t test.
For all the designed covalent antagonists,
pKi values can only be apparent, as true
equilibrium cannot be reached.
Affinity, expressed as pKi value, determined
from displacement of specific
[3H]ZM241385 binding from the hA2AR at 25 °C
during a 0.5 h incubation.
Affinity, expressed as pKi value, determined
from displacement of specific
[3H]ZM241385 binding from the hA2AR at 25 °C
during a 3 h incubation.
Affinity shift was calculated as
[pKi (3 h) – pKi (0.5 h)].
Data previously reported provided
for comparison.[13]
Displacement of specific [3H]ZM241385 binding from HEK293
cell membranes stably expressing the hA2AR receptor at
25 °C by compound 2 (a), 3 (b), and 4 (c) with an incubation time of 0.5 h (blue curve) and 3
h (red curve), respectively. Representative graphs are from one experiment
performed in duplicate.Data are expressed as means ±
SEM of three separate experiments each performed in duplicate. ***P < 0.001 compared with the pKi values in displacement experiments with a 0.5 h incubation time;
Student’s t test.For all the designed covalent antagonists,
pKi values can only be apparent, as true
equilibrium cannot be reached.Affinity, expressed as pKi value, determined
from displacement of specific
[3H]ZM241385 binding from the hA2AR at 25 °C
during a 0.5 h incubation.Affinity, expressed as pKi value, determined
from displacement of specific
[3H]ZM241385 binding from the hA2AR at 25 °C
during a 3 h incubation.Affinity shift was calculated as
[pKi (3 h) – pKi (0.5 h)].Data previously reported provided
for comparison.[13]Compound 3 inhibited the specific [3H]ZM241385
binding to the hA2AR with a pKi of 9.21, compared to the affinity of compound 2 (pKi = 9.05 ± 0.07) and 1 (pKi = 8.99 ± 0.01). Thus, the extension of
the linker to five carbon atoms slightly increased the apparent affinity.
This could be caused by more steric freedom, allowing the fluorosulfonyl
group to orient toward the adjacent nucleophilic residue in the receptor
binding site compared to ligands with a shorter linker. A similar
example is an electrophilic probe for the cannabinoid CB1 receptor, 7′-NCS-1′,1′-DMH-Δ8-THC, in which lengthening the C-3 alkyl side chain to seven carbons
resulted in a significantly improved affinity.[28] Above all, high affinity is a key requirement for the development
of irreversible ligands, as it increases the presence of the chemoreactive
moiety in proximity to a nucleophilic residue in the binding site,
thereby improving receptor occupancy and causing a decrease in nonspecific
binding to other unrelated targets. As we anticipated a greater demand
for steric freedom for the incorporation of the alkyne group and the
subsequent ligation between the alkyne moiety and a bulky fluorescent
dye, we retained the preferable five-carbon atom linker length for
the design of our probe.Inspired by the most promising compound 3, we incorporated
the alkyne click-handle to afford a novel covalent probe, compound 4 (LUF7487, Figure ). As detailed in Table , affinity-based probe 4 demonstrated
a high affinity, displacing [3H]ZM241385 with an apparent
pKi value of 8.82. Under these conditions 4 was at least 10-fold selective over human A1 and
A3 receptors (SI Table S1).
In a time-dependent study, probe 4 generated a significant
increase in specific [3H]ZM241385 displacement over time
(Table ). In analogy
to the covalent ligand 3, the designed probe was markedly
influenced by prolonged incubation times (Figure c), suggesting an increasing level of covalent
binding over time. However, compared to 3, the slight
decrease in affinity may be attributed to the incorporation of the
click handle, possibly leading to a steric hindrance in the ligand–receptor
complex and/or the formation of a covalent bond between the warhead
and other nucleophilic residues.To better understand the receptor–ligand
binding nature,
the novel affinity-based probe was then evaluated for its covalent
nature by determining its capacity to irreversibly block [3H]ZM241385 to hA2AR binding sites. Membranes overexpressing
hA2AR were pretreated with probe 4 or ZM241385
at the indicated concentration (IC50 or 0.3 fold IC50) for 3 h, followed by a three-cycle washing step to remove
the noncovalently bound material. The membranes pretreated with probe 4 (Figure a) at increasing concentrations revealed a concomitant decline in
specific [3H]ZM241385 binding, which was reduced from 65
± 2% to 43 ± 2%. However, membranes pretreated with the
reversible antagonist ZM241385 (Figure b) at increasing concentrations showed no decrease
in specific [3H]ZM241385 binding, proving that the washing
procedure was extensive enough to remove all noncovalently binding
compound. Meanwhile, the affinity of unlabeled ZM241385 was not influenced
significantly by the preincubation and washing procedure, indicating
that the extensive washing did not damage the membrane integrity or
alter the membrane binding sites (SI Table
S2). Therefore, it could be concluded that the concentration-dependent
decrease in specific [3H]ZM241385 binding observed with
probe 4 resulted from an irreversible occupancy of the
hA2A receptor binding pocket. Similar results have been
obtained on other GPCRs, e.g., for the adenosine A1 receptor
irreversible antagonist FSCPX[29,30] and the covalent histamine
H4 receptor partial agonist VUF14480,[31] although these compounds lack the alkyne moiety to perform
a click chemistry approach.
Figure 3
Probe 4 irreversibly binds to hA2AR HEK293
cell membranes stably expressing hA2AR, and they were preincubated
with probe 4 (a) or ZM241385 (b) at the indicated comparable
concentrations. Pretreated membranes were washed three times extensively
before further displacement studies of specific [3H]ZM241385
binding from the hA2AR at 25 °C by nonlabeled ZM241385
were performed. Representative graphs are from three independent experiments
performed in duplicate with error bars representing SEM values.
Probe 4 irreversibly binds to hA2ARHEK293
cell membranes stably expressing hA2AR, and they were preincubated
with probe 4 (a) or ZM241385 (b) at the indicated comparable
concentrations. Pretreated membranes were washed three times extensively
before further displacement studies of specific [3H]ZM241385
binding from the hA2AR at 25 °C by nonlabeled ZM241385
were performed. Representative graphs are from three independent experiments
performed in duplicate with error bars representing SEM values.
Fluorescent Labeling of
the hA2AR
Having
shown that the designed probe 4 meets the requirement
of covalent binding, we then set out to evaluate its ability to function
as an affinity-based probe. Purified hA2AR was first incubated
with the alkyne-containing probe 4 to ensure formation
of a covalent probe–hA2AR adduct. Then all samples
were subjected to a copper(I)-catalyzed sulfonated cyanine 3-azide
(Cy3-azide) attachment to the terminal alkyne.[32,33] The subsequent fluorescence scanning of a SDS-PAGE showed that in
the presence of fluorescent dye Cy3-azide (Figure a), probe 4 was concentration-dependently
incorporated into a fixed amount of purified hA2AR, while
in the absence of probe, little fluorescence intensity was detected.
Importantly, Western blot analysis using the purified hA2AR receptor and specific antihistidine antibodies unambiguously validated
that the labeling band was hA2AR (Figure a). Interestingly, a second band was observed
in both affinity labeling results and Western blots, most likely resulting
from posttranslationally modified receptors,[34] as has been shown previously on CB2R.[27] Quantification of the fluorescence intensity of the main
labeling bands in the hA2AR is reflected in the concentration–effect
curve in Figure b.
This revealed that clickable probe 4 labeled hA2AR with a pEC50 value of 6.10 ± 0.04, resulting in
a maximal labeling achieved with 10 μM probe 4 when
incubated with 0.1 mg mL–1 of purified hA2AR. Collectively, these data demonstrate that probe 4 can be used as an affinity-based probe for purified hA2AR.
Figure 4
Concentration-dependent affinity labeling of purified, His-tagged
hA2AR by probe 4. (a) Purified hA2AR material was incubated with the indicated concentrations of probe 4 or vehicle (1% DMSO) and subjected to click chemistry ligation
with Cy3-azide, followed by SDS-PAGE separation and in-gel fluorescence
scanning (left). The blotted membranes were probed with antihistidine
antibody, wherein bands corresponding to purified hA2AR
molecular weight (∼47 kDa) were evident in all samples (right).
(b) Quantification of fluorescence intensity from purified hA2AR labeled by probe 4 clicked to Cy3-azide. Representative
graphs are from three independent experiments, with errors bars representing
SEM values. In-gel fluorescence of the hA2AR band at ∼47
kDa was normalized to the corresponding hA2AR immunoreactivity
in each sample.
Concentration-dependent affinity labeling of purified, His-tagged
hA2AR by probe 4. (a) Purified hA2AR material was incubated with the indicated concentrations of probe 4 or vehicle (1% DMSO) and subjected to click chemistry ligation
with Cy3-azide, followed by SDS-PAGE separation and in-gel fluorescence
scanning (left). The blotted membranes were probed with antihistidine
antibody, wherein bands corresponding to purified hA2AR
molecular weight (∼47 kDa) were evident in all samples (right).
(b) Quantification of fluorescence intensity from purified hA2AR labeled by probe 4 clicked to Cy3-azide. Representative
graphs are from three independent experiments, with errors bars representing
SEM values. In-gel fluorescence of the hA2AR band at ∼47
kDa was normalized to the corresponding hA2AR immunoreactivity
in each sample.To further characterize
our affinity-based probe, we then investigated
whether competitive antagonists could inhibit the labeling of purified
receptors by probe 4. We chose to evaluate reversible
antagonist ZM241385 and irreversible compound 1, at saturating
concentrations (10 μM, i.e., 10 times higher than the concentration
of the clickable probe 4). Purified hA2AR,
preincubated with the competitors and subsequently treated as mentioned
previously to incorporate the sulfonated cyanine 3 fluorophore, showed
little if any fluorescence intensity of labeling bands under these
conditions. This revealed that both a reversible and an irreversible
antagonist competed with probe 4 (Figure a, left panel) for the same binding site
at the hA2AR, which was available at identical amounts
in all conditions (as evidenced by His-tagging: Figure a, right panel). Theoretically, both reversible
and irreversible ligands inhibit affinity labeling, provided that
they target the same receptor binding site and are present in a sufficient
concentration. Of note, in practice, this is not always easily observed,
as in the competition between reversible ligand and covalently binding
probe there is an inherent bias toward the irreversible pathway, hindering
the interaction between the receptor and a reversible ligand. For
instance, in the few other studies where an AfBP has been used on
GPCRs it was found that a reversible mGlu5 negative allosteric
modulator, MPEP, could not inhibit the tandem photoaffinity labeling
of purified mGlu5, whereas on CB2R, inhibition
of labeling by various competitors was observed.[26,27] Apparently, this was less of a problem on the hA2AR.
Our results demonstrate that the developed AfBP system can serve as
an effective chemical tool for profiling the purified hA2AR in vitro, prompting us to further evaluate the potency and selectivity
of probe 4 in profiling the activity of the adenosine
A2A receptor in more complex biological samples.
Figure 5
Competitive
affinity labeling of the purified hA2AR
by probe 4 (a) Affinity labeling of purified hA2AR by probe 4 (1 μM) is inhibited by preincubation
with either compound 1 (10 μM) or ZM241385 (10
μM) (left). The blotted membranes were probed with antihistidine
antibody, wherein bands corresponding to purified hA2AR
molecular weight (∼47 kDa) were evident in all samples (right).
(b) Quantification of fluorescence intensity from pretreated purified
hA2AR labeled by probe 4 clicked to Cy3-azide.
Representative graphs are from three independent experiments, with
errors bars representing SEM values. ***P < 0.001
compared with the fluorescent intensity of purified hA2AR labeled by probe 4 (1 μM); Student’s t test. In-gel fluorescence of the hA2AR band
at ∼47 kDa was normalized to the corresponding hA2AR immunoreactivity in each sample.
Competitive
affinity labeling of the purified hA2AR
by probe 4 (a) Affinity labeling of purified hA2AR by probe 4 (1 μM) is inhibited by preincubation
with either compound 1 (10 μM) or ZM241385 (10
μM) (left). The blotted membranes were probed with antihistidine
antibody, wherein bands corresponding to purified hA2AR
molecular weight (∼47 kDa) were evident in all samples (right).
(b) Quantification of fluorescence intensity from pretreated purified
hA2AR labeled by probe 4 clicked to Cy3-azide.
Representative graphs are from three independent experiments, with
errors bars representing SEM values. ***P < 0.001
compared with the fluorescent intensity of purified hA2AR labeled by probe 4 (1 μM); Student’s t test. In-gel fluorescence of the hA2AR band
at ∼47 kDa was normalized to the corresponding hA2AR immunoreactivity in each sample.We further explored the ability of probe 4 to
label
hA2AR in cell membranes prepared from HEK293 cells, which
were transiently transfected with N-terminally FLAG-tagged and C-terminally
His-tagged human adenosine A2A receptors (FLAG-hA2AR-His). Therefore, FLAG-hA2AR-His cell membranes were
incubated with probe 4 at room temperature for 1 h, followed
by click ligation to Cy3-azide treatment. As detailed in Figure , a band corresponding
to the molecular weight of the FLAG-hA2AR-His was observed
upon fluorescent SDS-PAGE scanning, which was then validated by Western
blot using specific anti-FLAG antibodies. In these initial proof-of-concept
experiments we highlighted the versatility of probe 4, which can be efficiently used to label the adenosine A2A receptor in cell membrane samples.
Figure 6
Affinity labeling of hA2AR
in HEK293 cell membranes
transiently expressing FLAG-tagged hA2AR using probe 4. (a) Cell membranes overexpressing FLAG-tagged hA2AR were incubated with either 1 μM probe 4 or vehicle
(1% DMSO) and then subjected to click chemistry ligation with Cy3-azide,
followed by SDS-PAGE separation and in-gel fluorescence scanning (left).
The blotted membranes were probed with anti-FLAG antibody, wherein
bands corresponding to the hA2AR molecular weight (∼50
kDa) are evident in all samples.
Affinity labeling of hA2AR
in HEK293 cell membranes
transiently expressing FLAG-tagged hA2AR using probe 4. (a) Cell membranes overexpressing FLAG-tagged hA2AR were incubated with either 1 μM probe 4 or vehicle
(1% DMSO) and then subjected to click chemistry ligation with Cy3-azide,
followed by SDS-PAGE separation and in-gel fluorescence scanning (left).
The blotted membranes were probed with anti-FLAG antibody, wherein
bands corresponding to the hA2AR molecular weight (∼50
kDa) are evident in all samples.Background signals caused by nonspecific labeling of abundant
proteins
in the complex proteomes may sometimes confound the analysis of on-target
labeling of low expression proteins such as GPCRs. Thus, we utilized
cell membranes transiently transfected with FLAG-hA2AR-His,
which have a relatively high level of receptor expression. Additionally,
instead of premixing the copper sulfate and sodium ascorbate reagents,
we slightly altered the click procedure by adding the copper sulfate
last to achieve efficient and selective labeling of the A2A receptors.[35,36] Although we were able to decrease
the strong background signals, a significant nonspecific labeling
was still observed. Several explanations may be put forward, such
as a low efficiency of the click reaction between the fluorescent
dyes and labeled receptors, nonspecific protein binding of the probe
due to the inherently reactive warhead, and the sensitivity of the
used detection method. Hence, further technological refinement should
help us in achieving better labeling of endogenously expressed GPCRs,
e.g., in human tissues as has been shown recently on CB2R.[27] The monitoring of endogenous GPCR
expression and target engagement in human cells holds promise for
future GPCRs studies.
Conclusion
Starting from a selective
antagonist, ZM241385, we designed and
synthesized a series of covalent ligands using the electrophilic nature
of sulfonyl fluorides, eventually yielding probe 4, the
first affinity-based probe for the hA2AR. We successfully
demonstrated a concentration-dependent labeling of purified receptor
by probe 4 via an experimental two-step labeling strategy,
which could be inhibited by both reversible and irreversible competing
ligands. Additionally, probe 4 displayed target selectivity
in cell membranes overexpressing the hA2AR, indicating
that it may become a useful pharmacological tool to identify the hA2AR in living organisms for target validation or to assess
receptor subtype distribution. In this strategy a probe depicts the
native binding with less perturbation, which bridges the chemical
biology study with molecular pharmacology to better investigate receptor–ligand
interactions.In future research, different tags may be introduced;
for instance
a biotin-tag would allow for streptavidin-mediated receptor enrichment
followed by LC/MS analysis. Similarly, the approach developed in this
study may be applied to other GPCRs, such as the other adenosine receptor
subtypes.
Experimental Section
All
solvents and reagents were purchased
from commercial sources and were of analytical grade. 1H NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker AV 400 liquid spectrometer
(1H NMR, 400 MHz) at ambient temperature. Chemical shifts
are reported in parts per million (ppm) and are designated by δ.
Coupling-constants are reported in hertz (Hz) and are designated as J. Analytical purity of the final compounds was determined
by high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) with a Phenomenex Gemini
3 μ C18 110A column (50 × 4.6 mm, 3 μm), measuring
UV absorbance at 254 nm. Sample preparation and HPLC method was as
follows: 0.5 mg of compound was dissolved in 1 mL of a 1:1:1 mixture
of CH3CN/H2O/tBuOH and eluted from the column
within 15 min, with a three-component system of H2O/CH3CN/1% TFA in H2O, decreasing polarity of the solvent
mixture in time from 80/10/10 to 0/90/10. All compounds showed a single
peak at the designated retention time and are at least 95% pure. Liquid
chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analyses were
performed using Thermo Finnigan Surveyor – LCQ Advantage Max
LC-MS system and a Gemini C18 Phenomenex column (50 × 4.6 mm,
3 μm). The sample preparation was the same as for HPLC analysis.
The elution method was set up as follows: 1–4 min isocratic
system of H2O/CH3CN/1% TFA in H2O,
80:10:10; from the fourth min, a gradient was applied from 80:10:10
to 0:90:10 within 9 min, followed by 1 min of equilibration at 0:90:10
and 1 min at 80:10:10. Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) was routinely
performed to monitor the progress of reactions, using aluminum-coated
Merck silica gel F254 plates. Purification by column chromatography
was achieved by use of Grace Davison Davisil silica column material
(LC60A 30–200 μm). Solutions were concentrated using
a Heidolph Laborota W8 2000 efficient rotary evaporation apparatus
and by a high vacuum on a Binder APT line vacuum drying oven.
Previously synthesized N5-(4-aminobutyl)-2-(furan-2-yl)-[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-a][1,3,5]triazine-5,7-diamine 8 (TFA salt,
250 mg, 0.40 mmol, 1.0 equiv) was suspended in acetonitrile (10 mL)
and purged with N2. Then DiPEA (0.42 mL, 2.4 mmol, 6.0
equiv) was added after which 4-fluorosulfonylbenzoyl chloride (134
mg, 0.60 mmol, 1.5 equiv) was added last and the mixture was heated
to 70 °C for 7 h and then stirred at room temperature for another
17 h. A flash column (MTBE + 1% AcOH → 90% MTBE + 10% EtOAc
+ 1% AcOH), a subsequent preparative TLC (1:1 MTBE:EtOAc + 1% MeOH),
and an extraction using acetonitrile (10 mL) and petroleum ether (4
× 10 mL) afforded the product as a white solid (8 mg, 0.017 mmol,
4% yield). 1H NMR (DMSO-d6,
400 MHz): δ 8.29–8.18 (m, 5H), 7.75 (s, 1H), 7.40 (br
s, 2H), 7.05 (d, J = 3.2 Hz, 1H), 6.73 (m, 1H), 6.62
(s, 1H), 3.55–3.46 (m, 4H), 1.75–1.74 (m, 4H). HPLC:
96.5%, RT 7.478 min. LC-MS: [ESI + H]+: 475.20
2-(Furan-2-yl)-5-(methylsulfonyl)-[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-a][1,3,5]triazin-7-amine 5 (280 mg, 1.0 mmol,
1.0 equiv) and commercially available tert-butyl
(5-aminopentyl)carbamate (0.2 mL, 1.0 mmol, 1.1 equiv) were put in
a microwave tube and dissolved in acetonitrile (1.5 mL). DIPEA (0.3
mL, 1.7 mmol) was added, and the tube was charged with a stirring
bar, sealed, and heated at 70 °C for 1.5 h. After 1.5 h, HPLC
analysis indicated full conversion. The mixture was concentrated,
and EtOAc (50 mL) and HCl (1 M in H2O, 50 mL) were added
for extraction. The organic layer was washed with H2O (50
mL) and brine (50 mL). After drying over MgSO4, the solvent
was removed in vacuo to give the title compound as a yellow foam (186
mg, 0.46 mmol, 46% yield). 1H NMR (DMSO-d6, 400 MHz,) δ 8.48–7.96 (m, 2H), 7.86 (s,
1H), 7.48 (t, J = 5.1 Hz, rotamer, 0.38H), 7.41 (t, J = 5.7 Hz, rotamer, 0.62H), 7.10–7.01 (m, 1H), 6.77
(t, J = 5.0 Hz, 1H), 6.67 (dd, J = 3.0, 1.7 Hz, 1H), 3.28–3.17 (m, 2H), 2.90 (d, J = 6.6 Hz, 2H), 1.57–1.44 (m, 2H), 1.44–1.21 (m, 13H).
TFA (3 mL, 40 mmol, 50 equiv) was added to the suspension of Boc-protected
amine 7 (324 mg, 0.8 mmol, 1 equiv) in DCM. Once the
reaction was completed, the solvent was removed and the mixture was
coevaporated twice with water and dried using high vacuum. This gave
a brown oil (556 mg, 0.8 mmol, quantitative yield) as a TFA salt.
The crude product was used without further purification.
tert-Butyl (5-Hydroxypentyl)carbamate (11)
5-Amino-1-pentanol 10 (4.2 mL, 38.8
mmol) was dissolved in DCM (20 mL). Di-tert-butyl
dicarbonate (8.4 g, 38.8 mmol) was slowly added as a solid. The reaction
was left stirring at rt for 18 h, and then the solvent was removed
to give a yellow oil (8.83 g, quantitative yield, some t-BuOH left). 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ
4.57 (s, 1H), 3.65 (t, J = 6.5 Hz, 2H), 3.13 (t, J = 6.5 Hz, 2H), 1.67–1.35 (m, 15H (under water peak)).
tert-Butyl (5-Bromopentyl)carbamate (12)
tert-Butyl (5-hydroxypentyl)carbamate 11 (8.83 g, 38.8 mmol, 1eq) and PPh3 (15.3 g, 58.2
mmol, 1.5 equiv) were dissolved in THF (120 mL). A solution of CBr4 (19.3 g, 58.2 mmol, 1.5 equiv) in THF (40 mL) was added over
2 h using a syringe pump. After 3 h at room temperature, the reaction
mixture was filtered and the filtrate was concentrated. This crude
product was dissolved in DCM (∼5 mL) and purified by flash
column chromatography (100% PE → 90% PE + 10% EtOAc). This
gave the product as a colorless oil (9.31 g, 35.0 mmol, 90% yield). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 4.54 (s, 1H), 3.41
(t, J = 6.7 Hz, 2H), 3.13 (d, J =
5.9 Hz, 2H), 1.97–1.80 (m, 2H), 1.58–1.36 (m, 13H) ppm. 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3) δ 40.5, 33.8, 32.5,
29.4, 28.6, 25.5.
tert-Butyl (5-(prop-2-yn-1-ylamino)pentyl)carbamate 13 (664 mg, 1.38 mmol, 1 equiv) was dissolved in acetonitrile
(10 mL), and 4-fluorosulfonyl benzoyl chloride (338 mg, 1.52 mmol,
1.1 equiv) was added and followed by the addition of DiPEA (0.75 mL,
4.14 mmol, 3 equiv). Once the reaction was completed, the solvent
was removed and the crude mixture purified by flash column chromatography
(DCM + 5% MTBE → DCM + 7.5% MTBE). This yielded a yellow oil
(586 mg, 1.52 mmol, quantitative yield). 1H NMR (DMSO-d6, 332 K, 400 MHz) δ 8.19 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 2H), 7.77 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 2H),
6.37 (s, 1H), 4.16 (s, 2H), 3.37 (s, 2H), 3.15 (s, 1H), 2.90 (s, 2H),
1.61 (s, 2H), 1.44–1.29 (m, 9H), 1.29–1.14 (m, 4H),
1.11 (d, J = 16.6 Hz, 2H).The radioligand [3H]ZM241385 with
a specific activity of 50 Ci mmol–1 was purchased
from ARC Inc. (St. Louis, MO). Unlabeled ZM241385 was a kind gift
from Dr. S. M. Poucher (Astra Zeneca, Macclesfield, UK). 5′-N-Ethylcarboxamidoadenosine (NECA) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
(Steinheim, Germany). Adenosine deaminase (ADA) was purchased from
Sigma-Aldrich Chemie N.V. Bicinchoninic acid (BCA) and BCA protein
assay reagent were obtained from Pierce Chemical Company (Rockford,
IL). Humanembryonic kidney (HEK) 293 cells stably expressing the
hA2A receptor (hA2AR-WT) were kindly provided
by Dr. J. Wang (Biogen/IDEC, Cambridge, MA). The purified hA2A receptor material was kindly provided by Dr. Niek Dekker and Dr.
Euan Gordon (AstraZeneca). All other chemicals were of analytical
grade and obtained from standard commercial sources.
Cell Culture,
Transfection, and Membrane Preparation
We followed the procedures
reported previously.[13,37] Briefly, HEK293 cells were grown
as monolayers in Dulbecco’s
modified Eagle’s medium supplemented with 2 mM glutamine, 10%
newborn calf serum, 50 μg mL–1 streptomycin,
and 50 IU mL–1 penicillin at 37 °C and 7% CO2 atmosphere. Cells were subcultured twice a week at a ratio
of 1:20 on 10 cm ⌀ culture plates. The cells were transfected
with pcDNA3.1(−) plasmid containing the hA2AR with
N-terminal FLAG and C-terminal His tags (FLAG-hA2AR-His[4]) using the calcium phosphate precipitation method
(1 μg of plasmid DNA), followed by a 48-h incubation, as previously
described.[38] Stably transfected hA2AR-WT cells were grown in the same medium but with the addition
of G-418 (500 mg mL–1). Both transiently transfected
cells and stably transfected hA2AR-WT cells were detached
from the plates by scraping them into PBS and centrifuged to remove
PBS buffer. The pellets were resuspended in ice-cold Tris-HCl buffer
(50 mM, pH 7.4) and then homogenized. The cell membrane suspensions
were centrifuged at 100 000g at 4 °C
for 20 min, after which the procedure was repeated one more time.
After this, the same Tris-HCl buffer was used to resuspend the pellet,
and adenosine deaminase was added to break down endogenous adenosine.
HEK293 cells stably expressing hA2AR were grown as monolayers
in the same culture medium and detached from plates by the same treatment
for membrane preparation. Both membranes were stored in 250 μL
aliquots at −80 °C until further use. Membrane protein
concentrations were measured using the BCA method.[39]
[3H]ZM241383 Radioligand Displacement
Assay
Radioligand displacement experiments were performed
as previously
described.[13] hA2AR-WT cell membrane
aliquots containing 10 μg of protein were incubated in a total
volume of 100 μL of assay buffer to obtain an assay window of
approximately 3000 DPM of receptor-specific radioligand binding. Nonspecific
binding was determined in the presence of 100 μM NECA and represented
less than 10% of the total binding. Briefly, to each tube were added
25 μL of cell membranes (10 μg of protein), 25 μL
of radioligand [3H]ZM241383, 25 μL of assay buffer
[25 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4 at 25 °C, supplemented with 5 mM MgCl2 and 0.1% (w/v) CHAPS], and 25 μL of the indicated compounds
in increasing concentrations in the same assay buffer. The mixture
was incubated at 25 °C for 60 min to reach equilibrium. Incubations
were terminated by rapid vacuum filtration to separate the bound and
free radioligand through 96-well GF/B filter plates using a PerkinElmer
Filtermate-harvester (PerkinElmer, Groningen, Netherlands). Filters
were subsequently washed three times with 2 mL of ice-cold buffer
(25 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, supplemented with 5 mM MgCl2).
The filter-bound radioactivity was determined by scintillation spectrometry
using a P-E 1450 Microbeta Wallac Trilux scintillation counter (PerkinElmer).
Heterologous Displacement Binding of Probe 4 and
ZM241385 to hA2AR-WT Cell Membranes
To assess
the irreversible binding level, cell membranes stably expressing hA2AR were incubated with either 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH = 7.4) or
two concentrations (0.3 IC50 and IC50) of probe 4 or ZM241385 for 3 h at 25 °C on an Eppendorf Thermomixer.
Subsequently, the mixture was centrifuged at 16 100g at 4 °C for 5 min, and the supernatant was removed,
followed by a resuspension of the pellet in 1 mL of assay buffer and
spun again for 5 min at 16 100g at 4 °C.
This washing procedure was repeated three times. The 50 μL aliquots
of these pretreated membranes were incubated with 25 μL of radioligand
[3H]ZM241383 and 25 μL of a concentration range (100
pM to 1 μM) of unlabeled ZM241385 for 1 h at 25 °C. Incubation
was terminated as described under [3H]ZM241385 radioligand
displacement assay.
Expression and Purification of Wild-Type
hA2AR
The gene coding for hA2AR (residues
1–316) was
synthesized by Genscript and cloned into pPICZb with an N-terminal
α-factor signal sequence from Saccharomyces cerevisiae (MRFPSIFTAVLFAASSLAAPVNTTEDETAQIPAAVIGYSDLEDFDVAVLPSNSTNNGLLINTTIASIAAEEGVSLERLVPRGS),
followed by hA2AR and a C-terminus biotinylation domain
from Propionibacterium shermanii (TSEFENLYQGQFGGGTG APAPAAGGAGGKAGEGEIPALAGTVSKILVEGDTVKAGQVLVLEAMKMEEINA
PTDGKVEKVLKERDAVQGQGLIKI) for enhanced expression[40] and a decaHis tag (GHHHHHHHHHGS).The receptor was expressed in Pichia pastoris SMD1168
at 3 L scale in a fermentor essentially as described,[41] except that dissolved oxygen was maintained at 25%, and
2.5% DMSO and 10 mM theophylline were included in the fermentation
media. Approximately 200 g of wet cells were harvested per liter.
Cells (200 g) were resuspended using a Turax in 600 mL ice-cold lysis
buffer (50 mM HEPES pH 7.4, 200 mM NaCl, Complete EDTA free protease
inhibitor tablets (Roche) at 1/50 mL). Cells were lysed by a single
passage through a Constant Cell system at 30 kpsi with extensive cooling.
Cell debris was removed by centrifugation at 1000g for 10 min at 4 °C. Membranes were collected by ultracentrifugation
at 100 000g for 45 min at 4 °C. Membrane
pellet was resuspended in buffer to a total protein concentration
of 20 mg mL–1 (final volume of 180 mL) and stored
at −80 °C.Membranes (20 mL) were resuspended in
200 mL of solubilization
buffer (25 mM HEPES, pH7.4, 300 mM NaCl, 20% glycerol, 1% DDM/0.1%
CHS, Complete tablets (1/50 mL), 200 μM theophylline). The suspension
was incubated for 2 h at 4 °C on a rolling table, prior to centrifugation
for 30 min at 100 000g to remove unsolubilized
material. Imidazole was added to a final concentration of 15 mM, and
the clarified solution was loaded on a 5 mL HisTrap crude column at
2.5 mL min–1. The column was washed with 100 mL
buffer A (25 mM HEPES, 25 mM imidazole pH 7.4, 300 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol,
0.05% DDM/0.0005% CHS, 100 μM theophylline) to which imidazole
was added to final concentration of 25 mM to reduce nonspecific binding,
followed by stepwise washes with increasing concentrations of imidazole
in this buffer (50 mM and 75 mM), and hA2AR was eluted
in 25 mM HEPES pH 7.4, 300 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 0.05% DDM/0.0005%CHS,
300 mM imidazole, 100 μM theophylline. Fractions were analyzed
on SDS-PAGE, and those containing hA2AR were pooled and
concentrated to 2.5 mL using a 50 kDa filter. High concentrations
of imidazole are harmful to hA2AR, and the buffer was changed
to buffer A on a PD10 G25 column. The eluted fraction was further
concentrated to 0.5 mL and loaded on a Superdex-200 10/30 column running
in 25 mM NaPi pH 7.2, 100 mM NaCl, 10 μM LMNG, 500 μM
caffeine. Fractions were analyzed on SDS-PAGE. hA2AR eluted
as single peak at expected position for the detergent–protein
complex (around 80 kDa). Fractions were pooled and concentrated on
a 50 kDa filter to final volume of 0.4 mL and stored at −80
°C. Protein concentration was determined using absorbance measurement
against buffer A (Abs280(0.1%) = 1.05). Final concentration
was 7 mg mL–1 with a total of ∼2 mg hA2AR.
Affinity-Based Protein Labeling Assay on
Purified hA2AR with Probe 4
For purified
hA2AR, both affinity labeling and click reactions were
performed on ice,
unless indicated otherwise. Purified hA2AR was diluted
to a concentration of 0.1 mg mL–1 in assay buffer
(25 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, and 10 μM LMNG). The 38 μL
samples were incubated with 2 μL of probe 4 at
indicated concentrations or vehicle control (1% DMSO) for 1 h. To
initiate the click reaction, 5.6 mM CuSO4 (2.5 μL/reaction,
from a 100 mM stock solution in water) was mixed vigorously with 33
mM sodium ascorbate (1.5 μL/reaction, freshly made as a 1 M
stock solution in water) to obtain a yellow mixture, followed by the
immediate addition of 1.1 mM THPTA (0.5 μL/reaction, from a
100 mM stock solution in water) and 4.4 μM fluorescent tag Cy3-azide
(0.5 μL/reaction, from a 400 μM stock solution in DMSO).
The reaction mixtures were incubated for 1 h and quenched with 15
μL 4×SDS loading buffer. Proteins in the mixture were separated
by SDS-PAGE on 10% polyacrylamide gels. In-gel fluorescence was detected
with a ChemiDoc MP system (605/50 filter). Proteins were transferred
from gel to a PVDF membrane by Trans-BlotTurbo (BioRad). Then the
membrane was washed in 20 mL of TBS for 10 min on a roller bench,
followed by a three times wash with TBST (PBS with 0.1% Tween-20).
Afterward, the membrane was blocked in 5% (w/v) nonfat milk for 1
h at room temperature and probed with rabbit-anti-His antibody (Rockland)(1:1000
[v/v] dilution in blocking buffer) overnight at 4 °C, washed
three times again with TBST, and incubated with goat-antirabbit IgG-HRP
(1:5000 in 5% milk in TBST; Santa Cruz) for 1 h at room temperature.
After two wash cycles in TBST and one in TBS, the blot was developed
in the dark using a 10 mL luminal solution, with 100 μL of ECL
enhancer and 3 μL of H2O2. Chemiluminescence
was visualized with ChemiDoc XRS (BioRad).
Competitive Labeling Assays
in Purified hA2AR by
Probe 4
Prior to the two-step labeling experiment,
purified hA2AR was diluted to a concentration of 0.1 mg
mL–1 in assay buffer and incubated with 10 μM
compound 1, ZM241385, or vehicle control (1% DMSO) for
1 h on ice, followed by labeling with 1 μM probe 4 for 0.5 h on ice. Samples were then subjected to the click chemistry
procedure using the protocol described above.
Affinity-Based Protein
Labeling of Membranes Transiently Overexpressing
FLAG-hA2AR-His
FLAG-hA2AR-His membranes
were diluted to a concentration of 1 mg mL–1 in
50 mM Tris-HCl (pH = 7.4 at 25 °C). Either 2 μL of probe 4 at indicated concentrations (0.1 μM, 0.3 μM,
1 μM, and 3 μM) or vehicle control (1% DMSO) was added
to 38 μL samples for 1 h incubation at room temperature. Then
all samples were subjected to the click chemistry conjugation reaction.
The click reagents were added in the following sequence: 4.4 μM
fluorescent Cy3-azide (0.5 μL/reaction, 400 μM stock in
DMSO) was added to the mixture followed by 33 mM sodium ascorbate
(1.5 μL/reaction, freshly made in 1 M stock in water) and 1.1
mM THPTA (0.5 μL/reaction, 100 mM stock in water). Finally,
5.6 mM CuSO4 (2.5 μL/reaction, 100 mM stock in water)
was added to start and run the cycloaddition reaction for 1 h at room
temperature. Then the reaction was quenched with 15 μL 4×SDS
loading buffer and protein material denatured for 30 min at 37 °C.
Proteins (60 μL sample) were separated by SDS-PAGE on 10% polyacrylamide
gels. In-gel fluorescence was detected with the ChemiDoc MP system
(605/50 filter). Proteins were transferred from gel to a PVDF membrane
by Trans-BlotTurbo (BioRad). Then the membrane was washed in 20 mL
of TBS for 10 min on a roller bench, followed by a three times wash
with TBST (PBS with 0.1% Tween-20). Then the membrane was blocked
in 5% (w/v) nonfat milk and incubated with mouse-anti-FLAG (Sigma)
(1:5000 [v/v] dilution in blocking buffer) as primary antibody. Thereafter,
the membrane was washed in TBST three times and incubated with goat-antimouse
HRP (Sigma) (1:5000 [v/v] dilution in blocking buffer) as secondary
antibody. After two wash cycles in TBST and one in TBS, the blot was
developed in the dark using a 10 mL luminal solution, with 100 μL
of ECL enhancer and 3 μL of H2O2. Chemiluminescence
was imaged using a ChemiDoc XRS (BioRad).
Authors: M Macchia; F Salvetti; S Bertini; V Di Bussolo; L Gattuso; M Gesi; M Hamdan; K N Klotz; T Laragione; A Lucacchini; F Minutolo; S Nencetti; C Papi; D Tuscano; C Martini Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Lett Date: 2001-12-03 Impact factor: 2.823
Authors: S Nijmeijer; H Engelhardt; S Schultes; A C van de Stolpe; V Lusink; C de Graaf; M Wijtmans; E E J Haaksma; I J P de Esch; K Stachurski; H F Vischer; R Leurs Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Veli-Pekka Jaakola; Mark T Griffith; Michael A Hanson; Vadim Cherezov; Ellen Y T Chien; J Robert Lane; Adriaan P Ijzerman; Raymond C Stevens Journal: Science Date: 2008-10-02 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Marjolein Soethoudt; Sara C Stolze; Matthias V Westphal; Luuk van Stralen; Andrea Martella; Eva J van Rooden; Wolfgang Guba; Zoltan V Varga; Hui Deng; Sander I van Kasteren; Uwe Grether; Adriaan P IJzerman; Pal Pacher; Erick M Carreira; Herman S Overkleeft; Andreea Ioan-Facsinay; Laura H Heitman; Mario van der Stelt Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Aaron D Trowbridge; Ciaran P Seath; Frances P Rodriguez-Rivera; Beryl X Li; Barbara E Dul; Adam G Schwaid; Benito F Buksh; Jacob B Geri; James V Oakley; Olugbeminiyi O Fadeyi; Rob C Oslund; Keun Ah Ryu; Cory White; Tamara Reyes-Robles; Paul Tawa; Dann L Parker; David W C MacMillan Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 12.779
Authors: Adriaan P IJzerman; Kenneth A Jacobson; Christa E Müller; Bruce N Cronstein; Rodrigo A Cunha Journal: Pharmacol Rev Date: 2022-04 Impact factor: 25.468
Authors: Jim Voorneveld; Bogdan I Florea; Thomas Bakkum; Rafal J Mendowicz; Miriam S van der Veer; Berend Gagestein; Sander I van Kasteren; Mario van der Stelt; Herman S Overkleeft; Dmitri V Filippov Journal: Chembiochem Date: 2020-05-13 Impact factor: 3.164
Authors: Mark Soave; Leigh A Stoddart; Carl W White; Laura E Kilpatrick; Joëlle Goulding; Stephen J Briddon; Stephen J Hill Journal: FEBS J Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 5.542