Sylwia Czarnota1,2, Linus O Johannissen1, Nicola J Baxter3, Felix Rummel1,2, Alex L Wilson1,2, Matthew J Cliff1, Colin W Levy1, Nigel S Scrutton1,2, Jonathan P Waltho1,2,3, Sam Hay1,2. 1. Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, The University of Manchester, 131 Princess Street, Manchester, M1 7DN, United Kingdom. 2. School of Chemistry, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom. 3. Krebs Institute for Biomolecular Research, Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, The University of Sheffield, Firth Court, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) is a model S-adenosyl-l-methionine (SAM) dependent methyl transferase, which catalyzes the methylation of catecholamine neurotransmitters such as dopamine in the primary pathway of neurotransmitter deactivation in animals. Despite extensive study, there is no consensus view of the physical basis of catalysis in COMT. Further progress requires experimental data that directly probes active site geometry, protein dynamics and electrostatics, ideally in a range of positions along the reaction coordinate. Here we establish that sinefungin, a fungal-derived inhibitor of SAM-dependent enzymes that possess transition state-like charge on the transferring group, can be used as a transition state analog of COMT when combined with a catechol. X-ray crystal structures and NMR backbone assignments of the ternary complexes of the soluble form of human COMT containing dinitrocatechol, Mg2+ and SAM or sinefungin were determined. Comparison and further analysis with the aid of density functional theory calculations and molecular dynamics simulations provides evidence for active site "compaction", which is driven by electrostatic stabilization between the transferring methyl group and "equatorial" active site residues that are orthogonal to the donor-acceptor (pseudo reaction) coordinate. We propose that upon catecholamine binding and subsequent proton transfer to Lys 144, the enzyme becomes geometrically preorganized, with little further movement along the donor-acceptor coordinate required for methyl transfer. Catalysis is then largely facilitated through stabilization of the developing charge on the transferring methyl group via "equatorial" H-bonding and electrostatic interactions orthogonal to the donor-acceptor coordinate.
Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) is a model S-adenosyl-l-methionine (SAM) dependent methyl transferase, which catalyzes the methylation of catecholamine neurotransmitters such as dopamine in the primary pathway of neurotransmitter deactivation in animals. Despite extensive study, there is no consensus view of the physical basis of catalysis in COMT. Further progress requires experimental data that directly probes active site geometry, protein dynamics and electrostatics, ideally in a range of positions along the reaction coordinate. Here we establish that sinefungin, a fungal-derived inhibitor of SAM-dependent enzymes that possess transition state-like charge on the transferring group, can be used as a transition state analog of COMT when combined with a catechol. X-ray crystal structures and NMR backbone assignments of the ternary complexes of the soluble form of humanCOMT containing dinitrocatechol, Mg2+ and SAM or sinefungin were determined. Comparison and further analysis with the aid of density functional theory calculations and molecular dynamics simulations provides evidence for active site "compaction", which is driven by electrostatic stabilization between the transferring methyl group and "equatorial" active site residues that are orthogonal to the donor-acceptor (pseudo reaction) coordinate. We propose that upon catecholamine binding and subsequent proton transfer to Lys 144, the enzyme becomes geometrically preorganized, with little further movement along the donor-acceptor coordinate required for methyl transfer. Catalysis is then largely facilitated through stabilization of the developing charge on the transferring methyl group via "equatorial" H-bonding and electrostatic interactions orthogonal to the donor-acceptor coordinate.
S-Adenosyl-l-methionine (SAM) dependent methyl transferases
(MTases) are ubiquitous bisubstrate Mg2+-dependent enzymes
found in plants, animals, and microorganisms. Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) is an archetypal MTase, which catalyzes
the methylation of catecholamine neurotransmitters such as dopamine
in the primary pathway of neurotransmitter deactivation in animals.
Consequently, inhibition of COMT is a key strategy for the treatment
of a range of neurological disorders including Parkinson’s
disease.[1−3] COMT also has potential as a biocatalyst for regiospecific
alkylation reactions, for example, refs (4 and 5), and has long served as a model
MTase enzyme. In this family of enzymes, methyl transfer is proposed
to occur by a common SN2 mechanism with nucleophilic attack
on the SAM methyl group from the methyl accepting substrate (catechol
hydroxyl in COMT). The Mg2+ ion is bound between the catecholoxygens, facilitating deprotonation of the catechol in order to render
it a more potent nucleophile. The transferring methyl group proceeds
with net inversion of configuration, adopting an sp2-like
geometry in the transition state (TS; Figure ). For COMT, the catalytic enhancement has
been estimated from experimental data to be on the order of 109 to 1016.[6,7]
Figure 1
A, The structures of
A, S-adenosyl-l-methionine (SAM,
RA=S+, RB=CH3), and sinefungin (RA=CH,
RB=NH3+), B, 3,5-dinitrocatechol
(DNC, RC=RD=NO2) and dopamine (RC=CH2CH2NH2, RD=H). C,
The proposed mechanism of SAM demethylation catalyzed by COMT. For
many catecholamine substrates both oxygen atoms can act as the methyl
acceptor, with the stereochemistry determined by the catecholamine
binding position; the oxygen closer to the transferring methyl is
the acceptor.
A, The structures of
A, S-adenosyl-l-methionine (SAM,
RA=S+, RB=CH3), and sinefungin (RA=CH,
RB=NH3+), B, 3,5-dinitrocatechol
(DNC, RC=RD=NO2) and dopamine (RC=CH2CH2NH2, RD=H). C,
The proposed mechanism of SAM demethylation catalyzed by COMT. For
many catecholamine substrates both oxygen atoms can act as the methyl
acceptor, with the stereochemistry determined by the catecholamine
binding position; the oxygen closer to the transferring methyl is
the acceptor.A major feature of the
COMT reaction is that the reactant state
comprises oppositely charged reactants, which combine to form neutral
products; that is, a CH3+ group is formerly
transferred. This might suggest that electrostatics (pre/re-organization)
should play a major role in the reaction of COMT and related MTases,
as has been argued by some, for example, refs (6 and 8−10). However, kinetic
isotope effect (KIE) measurements from the Schowen group in the late
1970s showed an unusually large and inverse CH3/C2H3 KIE of ∼0.8 for the COMT reaction[11] with much smaller KIEs observed on uncatalyzed
model methyl transfer reactions.[7] These
data, alongside more recent KIE measurements from the Klinman group
showing a correlation between kcat/Km and CH3/C3H3 KIEs on the COMT reaction,[12] have been
used as evidence for the role of active site compression or “compaction”
during the reaction;[7,13] essentially the squeezing together
of the reacting methyl donor and acceptor moieties, which promotes
the reaction. This description is couched within the framework of
the “promoting vibration” hypothesis, which has been
used to interpret isotope effects on H-transfer reactions.[14−16] The unusual deuterium KIE on the COMT reaction has also received
much attention from the computational community, with a number of
proposals put forward to describe catalysis by COMT. Ground state
near attack conformers (NACs) have been proposed by Bruice,[17,18] whereas Warshel has recently argued against compaction and NACs
in favor of electrostatic preorganization.[8] Williams and colleagues also saw no evidence for compaction[6,19,20] and highlighted the role of equatorial
H-bonding to the transferring methyl group.[21] Finally, Klinman and Martinez recently observed a trend in donor–acceptor
distance in the ground state that they correlate with catalytic efficiency,
in favor of the compaction hypothesis.[12,13]It would
appear that there is no consensus view of the physical
basis of catalysis in COMT. A major issue is that computational studies
are based on relatively few experimental data: X-ray crystal structures
of nonreactive inhibitor (e.g., DNC; Figure ) and drug complexes, KIE measurements of
COMT and reference reactions and steady state inhibition assays, for
example. ref (22).
We suggest that progress toward a consensus description of catalysis
by COMT, and by extension the MTase enzyme family, requires new experimental
data that directly probes active site geometry, protein dynamics and
electrostatics, ideally in a range of positions along the reaction
coordinate; at a minimum the reactant state and TS.Sinefungin
(adenosyl-l-ornithine), a fungal-derived inhibitor
of SAM-dependent MTases,[23] is a nonreactive
SAM-analogue with an amine group in place of the transferring methyl
group and a CH in place of the sulfur (Figure A). As the amine group is likely to be protonated,[24] it should have a more TS-like charge distribution
than SAM. Sinefungin derivatives are also known to be good TS analogues
of the SAM-dependent lysine methyl transferase,[25] so ternary complexes of COMT containing sinefungin, Mg2+ and an appropriate catechol should provide a means to probe
COMT in a more TS-like conformation. X-ray crystal structures of sinefungin
complexes of MTases have been solved including ratCOMT (PDB 4P7K; binary complex
without catechol) and “humanized” ratCOMT (PDB 4PYL; ternary complex
containing the drug tolcapone).[26] Here
we have determined the X-ray crystal structures and NMR backbone assignments
of the ternary complexes of the soluble form of humanCOMT (S-COMT)
containing DNC, Mg2+ and both SAM or sinefungin. These
complexes are compared and further analyzed with the aid of density
functional theory (DFT) calculations and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations.
We find evidence for active site compaction and propose that this
is driven by H-bonding between the transferring methyl group and “equatorial”
active site residues, rather than by “pushing” along
the donor–acceptor axis.
Results and Discussion
As sinefungin contains partial TS character, the sinefungin complex
will represent a reactant pose that is positioned along the reaction
coordinate between the ground state and TS (or further) and any conformational
change/reorganization that occurs between SAM and sinefungin ternary
complexes is likely to be relevant to catalysis. It should therefore
be possible to experimentally probe COMT reorganization during the
reaction by comparing equivalent ternary complexes containing sinefungin
and SAM.We screened a range of catecholamine substrates and
inhibitors
and were able to obtain crystals of S-COMT complexes containing Mg2+, DNC and both sinefungin or SAM. These diffracted to 1.3–1.5
Å and the structures were readily solved by molecular replacement
(Figure and Supporting Information (SI) Table S1). The sinefungin
complex crystallized as a dimer while the SAM complex crystallized
as a monomer (see also SI Figure S1), but
the structures are largely superimposable and are similar to existing
structures of S-COMT containing SAM and DNC (e.g., PDB 3BWM(27) and SI Table S2). The two monomers
in the sinefungin complex are not identical, but are very similar,
with key active site distances differing by <0.03 Å (Table , SI Figure S2). S-COMT is known to dimerize[28] and each monomer is structurally nearly identical to the
SAM-bound structure (Figure ), so we propose these structures are likely to represent
active conformations of the enzyme.
Figure 2
X-ray crystal structures of S-COMT ternary
complexes containing
DNC, Mg2+ and either SAM (magenta) or sinefungin (cyan,
light green). Structures are aligned over all atoms and the bottom
panel shows an overlay of the active site region with selected residues
displayed as wireframes, SAM, sinefungin, and DNC shown as sticks
and the Mg2+ ion indicated as a sphere. The O–CH3 distance is indicated with a dashed black line.
Table 1
Key Reactant Distances (R) and Angles (A)a Observed
in The X-ray Crystal Structures in Figure and SI Figure S2
ternary
complex
SAM
sinefunginb
R(D-A),
Å
4.57
4.20, 4.22
R(X-A),
Å
2.81
2.71, 2.74
R(D-X),
Å
1.78
1.51, 1.50
A(D-X-A),
°
169
170, 169
A(X-A-CA), °
114
115, 117
D, donor; A, acceptor; X, transferring
group (CH3 or NH3); C, DNC CA (Figure ).
Measured in chain A and chain B,
respectively.
X-ray crystal structures of S-COMT ternary
complexes containing
DNC, Mg2+ and either SAM (magenta) or sinefungin (cyan,
light green). Structures are aligned over all atoms and the bottom
panel shows an overlay of the active site region with selected residues
displayed as wireframes, SAM, sinefungin, and DNC shown as sticks
and the Mg2+ ion indicated as a sphere. The O–CH3 distance is indicated with a dashed black line.D, donor; A, acceptor; X, transferring
group (CH3 or NH3); C, DNC CA (Figure ).Measured in chain A and chain B,
respectively.Within the
respective ternary complexes, SAM and sinefungin adopt
very similar conformations and the only large difference is the position
of the DNC, which is closer to the sinefungin than to SAM (Figure ; Table ). This may arise, in part,
as the C–NH3 bond of sinefungin is significantly
shorter than the S–CH3 bond of SAM (Table ).The distances observed
between the acceptor oxygen atom and transferring
CH3 or NH3 groups (denoted R(X-A) here) are both shorter than the expected sum of van der Waals
radii. This behavior is observed in the X-ray crystal structures of
other COMT ternary complexes (SI Table S2) and has been suggested to arise due to the presence of the anionic
(deprotonated) form of the catechol.[13] Further
inspection of other X-ray crystal structures of ternary complexes
of COMT show considerable variability in the R(X-A)
distances and those between the donorsulfur and acceptor oxygen (denoted R(D-A)). However, when only considering relatively high-resolution
structures (<2.0 Å) containing DNC, the R(X-A) values are in good agreement at ∼2.7–2.8 Å
and those structures containing SAM have R(D-A) values
of ∼4.5–4.6 Å. The sinefungin R(D-A) values determined in the current study and previously in the
sinefungin-tolcapone ternary complex (PDB 4PYL) are notably shorter, likely due at least
in part to the shorter C–NH3 bond of sinefungin.
In the present study, R(X-A) and R(D-A) are shorter by ∼0.1 and 0.35 Å, respectively, in
the sinefungin complex vs the SAM complex. While the shorter R(X-A) may not be statistically significant, collectively
this movement is consistent with the movement of the catecholamine
toward the SAM, which is expected to occur upon moving from the reactant
state to the TS in order to facilitate O–CH3 bond
formation.As the reaction occurs via an SN2 mechanism,
the angle
between the donorsulfur, transferring methyl carbon and acceptor
oxygen should ideally be ∼180° in the transition state.
This angle is very similar for both sinefungin and SAM complexes,
and as this angle is almost 170°, there is minimal reorganization
required to achieve an ideal SN2 geometry. Similarly, the
angle formed between the transferring group, catecholamine acceptor
oxygen, and catecholamine CA (Figure ) should ideally be ∼110–120°.
It is ∼115° and is slightly larger in the sinefungin complex.
Together, these data show a structurally preorganized active site
with only minimal rearrangement of substrate (catecholamine) required
to reach the anticipated TS geometry.As mentioned above, the
crystal structures for the SAM and sinefungin
complexes are nearly identical. However, X-ray crystallography may
not have sufficient resolution to resolve subtle protein reorganization,
so we next turned to NMR to further probe these complexes. We have
previously reported the backbone 1H, 15N and 13CNMR chemical shift assignments of the S-COMT:SAM:DNC:Mg2+ ternary complex.[28] We used the
same approach here to determine the equivalent assignments in the
S-COMT:sinefungin:DNC:Mg2+ ternary complex. The S-COMT
construct contains 233 residues, and excluding the 10 proline residues
and 8 residues of the N-terminal His-tag there are 215 observable
residues. 204 of these residues were assigned in the 1H–15N TROSY spectrum of the sinefungin complex (SI Figure S3). Protein secondary structure prediction using
the backbone 1HN, 15N, 13Cα, 13Cβ, and 13C′ chemical shifts and the TALOS+ and TALOS-N algorithms,
which are empirically defined models based on a correlation of experimental
NMR chemical shift and X-ray crystal structure data,[29,30] is consistent with the solution conformation being very similar
to both our, and previous X-ray crystal structures (SI Figure S4).[27]Comparison
of the differences in NMR chemical shifts between assigned
residues in the SAM and sinefungin ternary complexes allows changes
in the local environment of the protein backbone to be determined. Figure shows the residue-by-residue
difference in backbone amidenitrogen (NH) chemical shift
between the two complexes. These can be mapped onto the X-ray crystal
structure and most differences are seen to be in the active site.
A similar pattern is observed when analyzing the equivalent differences
in HN, Cα, Cβ, C′, and N–H chemical
shifts (SI Figure S5).
Figure 3
Differences in NMR chemical
shift of the backbone amide atoms (NH) between the S-COMT:SAM:DNC:Mg2+ and S-COMT:sinefungin:
DNC:Mg2+ ternary complexes shown as a function of residue
number (above) and as a putty diagram rendered on the X-ray crystal
structure of the SAM complex (bottom). Active site residues within
4 Å of the SAM or DNC are shown as blue bars in (A) and the putty
diagram is colored from low (white) to high (red) difference in chemical
shift. The O–CH3 distance between SAM and DNC is
indicated with a dashed black line. The equivalent differences in
HN, Cα, Cβ, C′, and N–H chemical
shifts are shown in SI Figure S5.
Differences in NMR chemical
shift of the backbone amide atoms (NH) between the S-COMT:SAM:DNC:Mg2+ and S-COMT:sinefungin:
DNC:Mg2+ ternary complexes shown as a function of residue
number (above) and as a putty diagram rendered on the X-ray crystal
structure of the SAM complex (bottom). Active site residues within
4 Å of the SAM or DNC are shown as blue bars in (A) and the putty
diagram is colored from low (white) to high (red) difference in chemical
shift. The O–CH3 distance between SAM and DNC is
indicated with a dashed black line. The equivalent differences in
HN, Cα, Cβ, C′, and N–H chemical
shifts are shown in SI Figure S5.The general trend in NH chemical shift changes is an
increase in chemical shift from the SAM to the sinefungin ternary
complex (Figure ).
This trend is also reflected in the HN chemical shifts
(SI Figure S5) and is consistent with an
increase in proximity of the hydrogen bond acceptor for the amide.[31] However, the residues with the largest chemical
shift differences are not all involved in structural hydrogen bonds
and the chemical shift differences will also include contributions
from torsional angle changes and hydrogen bond donor to the peptide
carbonyl. The largest NH chemical shift differences observed
are in the following residues: V42, which is hydrogen-bonded to the
carboxyl oxygens of SAM/sinefungin and the neighboring N41 and M40
residues, which are also in close proximity to the transferring methyl
group; Y68, which is positioned behind the SAM sulfur (relative to
the transferring group) and the neighboring G66 and A67 residues;
H142 and W143, which are both in van der Waals contacts with the adenine
moiety of SAM; D141, which is hydrogen-bonded to the amino group of
the methionine moiety of SAM and also coordinates the Mg2+ ion. These chemical shift differences can all be rationalized in
terms of subtle conformational differences in the active sites of
the two ternary complexes, which may not be observable in the comparison
of ∼1.4 Å resolution X-ray crystal structures (as in Figure ). To extend this
analysis, we next turned to computational chemistry.First,
active site “cluster” models were used to
analyze the change in charge distribution of SAM between the reactant
and TS states. These models were based on the X-ray crystal structure
of the SAM ternary complex and comprised the active site region containing
Mg2+, SAM and catechol in place of the nonreactive DNC.
Two sets of models were used to ensure that qualitatively the charge
distribution is not model specific; one was comprised of ∼580
atoms, many of which had positional constraints (SI Figure S6) while the other was comprised of ∼220
atoms, with minimal positional constraints (SI Figure S7). The DFT models are described further in the SI and key parameters are given in Table and SI Table S4. An approximate TS was determined for the reaction
by performing a (partially) relaxed scan and the potential energy
barrier was found to be 66 kJ mol–1 and 59 kJ mol–1 for the large and smaller models, respectively. The
free energy barrier for the smaller model was also estimated to be
62 kJ mol–1 using normal-mode analysis. These values
are comparable to the experimental free energy of activation, which
is ∼75 kJ mol–1,[32] and to previous QM/MM-computed free energy barriers of, for example,
87 kJ mol–1,[6] 69 kJ mol–1,[33] and 67 kJ mol–1.[34]
Table 2
Selected Distances
(R, Å), Angles (A, °)
and Charges in the
∼220 Atom DFT Cluster Models
SAM:catechol.:Mg2+a
DNC:Mg2+,b
reactant
TS
SAM
sinefungin
R(D-A)c
4.61
4.55
4.63
4.30
R(X-A)c
2.79
2.08
2.82
2.80
R(D-X)c
1.83
2.48
1.82
1.51
A(D-X-A)
172
177
172
172
A(X-A-CA)
99
110
101
114
q(D)c
0.81
0.39
0.81
0.20
q(A)c
–0.91
–0.81
–0.79
–0.80
q(XH3)c
0.08
0.36
0.06
0.63
Reactant state and approximate TS
in a model containing SAM, Mg2+ and catechol in place of
DNC. The approximate TS geometry was obtained from a relaxed scan
of R(X-A).
Reactant state models containing
DNC, Mg2+ and SAM or sinefungin.
Distances (R) and
angles (A) are equivalent to those given in Table ; q(D), q(A) and q(XH3)
are the natural charge on the donor, acceptor and summed over the
transferring group, respectively.
Reactant state and approximate TS
in a model containing SAM, Mg2+ and catechol in place of
DNC. The approximate TS geometry was obtained from a relaxed scan
of R(X-A).Reactant state models containing
DNC, Mg2+ and SAM or sinefungin.Distances (R) and
angles (A) are equivalent to those given in Table ; q(D), q(A) and q(XH3)
are the natural charge on the donor, acceptor and summed over the
transferring group, respectively.As expected, in both cluster models R(D-A) and R(X-A) are shorter in the TS than the
reactant state, while R(D-X) is longer. The reduction
in R(D-A)
is smaller in the smaller cluster model (∼0.1 cf. ∼
0.2 Å), which may be due to the absence of the Y68 in this model
as Y68 has previously been suggested to play a role in maintaining
a short D–A distance.[13] In both
models the charge on the transferring methyl group significantly increases
upon moving from the reactant to TS, with a concomitant decrease in
charge on the SAM sulfur. There is little change in the acceptor oxygen,
which is consistent with the dissociative TS proposed for similar
MTases.e.g.[24,35]Next, the two models were
modified to describe ternary complexes
containing Mg2+, DNC and SAM or sinefungin (Table , SI Table S4 and Figures S6 and S7). As DNC is nonreactive, only the
reactant state was considered. In both the smaller and larger models, R(D-A) is ∼0.3 Å shorter in the sinefungin complex
than the SAM complex, suggesting that the sinefungin complex adopts
a more TS-like geometry. Additionally, the larger cluster models support
the protonation state of the sinefungin NH3+ group, as replacing this with NH2 causes a significant
shift in the position of DNC that is inconsistent with the crystal
structure (SI Figure S6d).Crucially,
the differences in charge distribution between the reactant
state and TS of the SAM-catechol model is qualitatively similar to
the difference in charge distribution of the SAM and sinefunginDNC
models; that is, the positive charge that develops on the transferring
SAM methyl group is similar to that observed on the sinefungin NH3 group (Table and SI Table S4), and there is little
change to the charge on the acceptor oxygen. On the other hand, the
partial charge on the sinefungin NH3 is larger than that
on the SAMCH3 in the TS, suggesting that any resulting
protein electrostatic rearrangement upon sinefungin binding may be
somewhat greater than for the actual reaction. Nevertheless, these
calculations suggest that the COMT:sinefungin:DNC:Mg2+ ternary
complex has considerable TS character, both in terms of overall geometry
and electrostatics.MD simulations were next performed on the
S-COMT:SAM:DNC:Mg2+ and S-COMT:sinefungin:DNC:Mg2+ ternary complexes,
using the X-ray crystal structures as input structures. DFT cluster
models were used to parametrize the substrates and octahedral Mg2+ (see SI for details) and the
sinefungin complex was treated as a monomer to aid in the comparison
with the SAM complex. Simulations were typically run for 50–100
ns using the Amber 14 force field (note that we are only looking at
small changes in the active site). To check the consistency between
NMR, crystallography, and MD data, phi (Φ) and psi (Ψ)
torsion angles values obtained using the three approaches were compared
(SI Figures S8 and S9) and show generally
good agreement between all methods.Analysis of MD data to determine
differences between the two complexes
focused on the distance between the donor atom, D (S1 in SAM) and
the Cα of the first-shell active site residues that exhibit,
or are neighboring residues that exhibit large differences in NMR
chemical shifts (Figure ). This reveals a compression or compaction between residues 40–42
and 141–142, which are situated in loops on either side of
the catecholamine binding pocket, in the sinefungin complex relative
to the SAM complex (Figure and SI Figure S10). Such compaction
is consistent with these regions showing large changes in NMR chemical
shift. The donor–Y68Cα distance is longer in the sinefungin
complex than in the SAM complex, which is also consistent with the
NMR shift differences observed in Figure and SI Figure S5. This is qualitatively consistent with the crystal structures, where
a (albeit negligible) 0.03–0.04 Å increase in the donor–Y68Cα
distance is observed between the SAM and sinefungin structures. It
has been proposed that Y68 is crucial for the positioning of SAM and
maintaining an optimal donor–acceptor distance.[13] Our results are consistent with this as the
difference observed here arises in part due to the extra hydrogen
atom in sinefungin (as S1 is replaced by CH; see SI) as well as the stronger compaction causing M40 to push
against Y68 (SI Figure S11).
Figure 4
Active site
compaction. S1–M40O (a), S1–D141O (b),
S1–D141OD2 (c), M40Cα-D141Cα (d) distance distributions
during MD simulations of tertiary complexes containing SAM (black),
SAM* (red) and sinefungin (blue). An active site illustration showing
distances a-c is shown in (e). Additional distances are plotted in SI Figure S10.
Active site
compaction. S1–M40O (a), S1–D141O (b),
S1–D141OD2 (c), M40Cα-D141Cα (d) distance distributions
during MD simulations of tertiary complexes containing SAM (black),
SAM* (red) and sinefungin (blue). An active site illustration showing
distances a-c is shown in (e). Additional distances are plotted in SI Figure S10.To determine whether the observed active site compaction
is purely
driven by electrostatics, MD simulations were also performed with
an artificial SAM molecule containing sinefungin-like charges on the
donor and transferring methyl groups. This molecule is denoted SAM*
and SI Table S5 contains more details of
the charges used. The degree of compaction was found to be greater
for sinefungin than SAM*, likely reflecting differences in the chemical
structure (NH3 can form stronger H-bonds than CH3) and geometry between SAM and sinefungin, but confirming that electrostatics
clearly also plays a key role in this compaction. The increased positive
charge on the sinefungin NH3+ (and SAM* methyl
group) pulls nearby oxygen atoms toward it; these atoms include the
backbone oxygen of M40, the backbone oxygen of D141 and the carboxyl
group of D141 (Figure ). Notably, there is a compaction of the loops on either side of
the DNC, with a 0.5 Å decrease in the average M40Cα–D141Cα
distance (Figure d).
Again, this is qualitatively consistent with the crystal structure,
where a 0.2 Å decrease is observed. This active site compaction
is also consistent with the role of equatorial CH–O hydrogen
bonds proposed by Wilson and Williams.[21]To assess whether our proposed active site compaction is consistent
with experimental data, we also ran MD simulations with selected backbone
dihedrals restrained to values derived from our NMR data. Thus, restraints
were applied to the backbone torsion angles of those residues with
the largest differences observed between the SAM and sinefungin Φ
and Ψ values derived using the TALOS-N algorithm. For all three
complexes (SAM, SAM* and sinefungin), constraining selected Φ
and Ψ torsion angles to the values from the sinefunginNMR data
leads to active site compaction relative to simulations constrained
to the SAMNMR values (SI Figure S12).
Again, this confirms that the effects seen in the MD simulations are
consistent with the NMR data and shows that compaction is driven,
at least in part, by the protein backbone (cf. side chains).Finally, the effect of active site compaction on the electrostatic
stabilization of sinefungin, and by inference the TS, was analyzed
using energy decomposition; the energy of the system during each MD
simulation was recalculated with and without charges on selected amino
acids, and with either SAM or sinefungin charges applied to the SAM,
SAM* or sinefungin molecule. This gives the relative stabilization
energy, ΔE, of sinefungin relative to SAM by
the amino acid in question. This analysis reveals that D141 dominates
the electrostatic stabilization of sinefungin and SAM* (Figure and SI Figure S13). D141 and M40 both preferentially stabilize sinefungin
over SAM during the SAM simulation (ΔE <
0), then as the SAM transferring methyl group acquires positive charge
and the oxygen atoms of these two residues move closer in the SAM*
and sinefungin simulations, this stabilization effect increases. On
the other hand, K144 (the active site amino acid that initially deprotonates
the substrate; Figure C) destabilizes sinefungin (ΔE > 0), as
expected
for a positively charged residue. However, the change in ΔE for both K144 and M40 between the SAM, SAM* and sinefungin
simulations is much smaller than that for D141, likely due to the
net negative charge of D141 and its closer proximity to the developing
positive charge on the transferring group.
Figure 5
(a) Electrostatic stabilization
of sinefungin and SAM* relative
to SAM during SAM (black line), SAM* (red line) and sinefungin (blue
line) MD simulations. Correlations between active site compaction.
The M40Cα–D141Cα distance (b) and donor–acceptor
distance (c) vs. D141 stabilization energy for the SAM (black), SAM*
(red) and sinefungin (blue) simulations.
(a) Electrostatic stabilization
of sinefungin and SAM* relative
to SAM during SAM (black line), SAM* (red line) and sinefungin (blue
line) MD simulations. Correlations between active site compaction.
The M40Cα–D141Cα distance (b) and donor–acceptor
distance (c) vs. D141 stabilization energy for the SAM (black), SAM*
(red) and sinefungin (blue) simulations.As ΔE is calculated for each MD snapshot,
it is possible to observe how this fluctuates throughout the MD simulation.
A significant correlation between the M40Cα–D141Cα
distance and ΔE for D141 was observed, with
larger stabilization observed when this distance is shorter and thus
the active site is more compact along the “equatorial”
plane orthogonal to the donor–acceptor axis.[21] This can be rationalized in terms of the expected distance
dependence of the Coulombic interaction between D141 and the transferring
group (which sits between M40 and D141) and shows a clear link between
electrostatic stabilization and active site geometry (Figure b). Motion along the M40Cα–D141Cα
and donor–acceptor coordinates are not correlated (SI Figure S14) and there is little correlation
between ΔE and the donor–acceptor distance
(Figure c). Our DFT
calculations show small-negligible charge transfer from the acceptor
oxygen to methyl group (Table , SI Table S4), which is consistent
with previous proposals that MTases possess a loose or dissociative
TS (for example, refs (24 and 35)). We cannot rule out a role for donor–acceptor sampling in
methyl transfer in COMT, particularly during the proton transfer from
catechol to Lys 144, which apparently leads to the formation of a
highly preorganized active site with short R(D-A).
However, our NMR data and MD simulations do reveal that increased
electrostatic stabilization at the methyl transfer TS is coupled to
protein motion orthogonal to the donor–acceptor coordinate
that allows the formation and/or strengthening of “equatorial”
H-bonding and/or electrostatic interactions. This is likely to be
consistent with the proposal that the unusual deuterium[11] and tritium[12] KIEs
observed on the reaction arise, at least in part, through perturbations
to the equatorial H-bonding.[21]In
summary, ternary complexes of COMT containing sinefungin, Mg2+ and a suitable catechol such as DNC possess some TS-like
character; that is, they can be considered to be TS analogs. By comparison
with the equivalent reactant state complex containing SAM, we can
experimentally probe the protein reorganization relevant to catalysis.
With the aid of DFT calculations and MD simulations, we have shown
that active site compaction along the “equatorial” plane
orthogonal to the donor–acceptor axis plays a key role in stabilizing
the positive charge that develops on the transferring methyl group.
As these interactions are largely independent of the catecholamine
methyl acceptor, such “equatorial” H-bonding and electrostatic
interactions may be a general feature of catalysis by the SAM-dependent
MTase family of enzymes.
Experimental Details
Full computational
and experimental details are given in the Supporting Information. X-ray crystal structure
models of the S-COMT:SAM:DNC:Mg2+ and S-COMT:sinefungin:DNC:Mg2+ complexes have been deposited in the protein data bank with
the accession codes 6I3C and 6I3D,
respectively. The backbone 1H, 13C and 15N chemical shift assignments for S-COMT:SAM:DNC:Mg2+ and S-COMT:sinefungin:DNC:Mg2+ have been deposited in
the BioMagResBank under the BMRB accession codes 26848 and 26851,
respectively.
Authors: M Fava; J F Rosenbaum; A R Kolsky; J E Alpert; A A Nierenberg; M Spillmann; C Moore; P Renshaw; T Bottiglieri; G Moroz; G Magni Journal: J Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 3.153
Authors: Maite Roca; Sergio Martí; Juan Andrés; Vicent Moliner; Iñaki Tuñón; Juan Bertrán; Ian H Williams Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2003-06-25 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Shuaihua Gao; Emily J Thompson; Samuel L Barrow; Wenju Zhang; Anthony T Iavarone; Judith P Klinman Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Jianyu Zhang; Jeremy L Balsbaugh; Shuaihua Gao; Natalie G Ahn; Judith P Klinman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Eman Abdelraheem; Benjamin Thair; Romina Fernández Varela; Emely Jockmann; Désirée Popadić; Helen C Hailes; John M Ward; Adolfo M Iribarren; Elizabeth S Lewkowicz; Jennifer N Andexer; Peter-Leon Hagedoorn; Ulf Hanefeld Journal: Chembiochem Date: 2022-07-05 Impact factor: 3.461
Authors: Pedro Cruz-Vicente; Ana M Gonçalves; Octávio Ferreira; João A Queiroz; Samuel Silvestre; Luís A Passarinha; Eugenia Gallardo Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2021-12-31