Hannah Tovell1, Andrea Testa2, Houjiang Zhou1, Natalia Shpiro1, Claire Crafter3, Alessio Ciulli2, Dario R Alessi1. 1. Medical Research Council (MRC) Protein Phosphorylation and Ubiquitylation Unit, School of Life Sciences , University of Dundee , Dow Street , Dundee DD1 5EH , United Kingdom. 2. Division of Biological Chemistry and Drug Discovery, School of Life Sciences , University of Dundee , Dow Street , Dundee , DD1 5EH , United Kingdom. 3. Bioscience, Research and Early Development, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca , Cambridge , United Kingdom.
Abstract
SGK3 is a PX domain containing protein kinase activated at endosomes downstream of class 1 and 3 PI3K family members by growth factors and oncogenic mutations. SGK3 plays a key role in mediating resistance of breast cancer cells to class 1 PI3K or Akt inhibitors, by substituting for the loss of Akt activity and restoring proliferative pathways such as mTORC1 signaling. It is therefore critical to develop tools to potently target SGK3 and obstruct its role in inhibitor resistance. Here, we describe the development of SGK3-PROTAC1, a PROTAC conjugate of the 308-R SGK inhibitor with the VH032 VHL binding ligand, targeting SGK3 for degradation. SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) induced 50% degradation of endogenous SGK3 within 2 h, with maximal 80% degradation observed within 8 h, accompanied by a loss of phosphorylation of NDRG1, an SGK3 substrate. SGK3-PROTAC1 did not degrade closely related SGK1 and SGK2 isoforms that are nevertheless engaged and inhibited by 308-R. Proteomic analysis revealed that SGK3 was the only cellular protein whose cellular levels were significantly reduced following treatment with SGK3-PROTAC1. Low doses of SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.1-0.3 μM) restored sensitivity of SGK3 dependent ZR-75-1 and CAMA-1 breast cancer cells to Akt (AZD5363) and PI3K (GDC0941) inhibitors, whereas the cis epimer analogue incapable of binding to the VHL E3 ligase had no impact. SGK3-PROTAC1 suppressed proliferation of ZR-75-1 and CAMA-1 cancer cell lines treated with a PI3K inhibitor (GDC0941) more effectively than could be achieved by a conventional SGK isoform inhibitor (14H). This work underscores the benefit of the PROTAC approach in targeting protein kinase signaling pathways with greater efficacy and selectivity than can be achieved with conventional inhibitors. SGK3-PROTAC1 will be an important reagent to explore the roles of the SGK3 pathway.
SGK3 is a PX domain containing protein kinase activated at endosomes downstream of class 1 and 3 PI3K family members by growth factors and oncogenic mutations. SGK3 plays a key role in mediating resistance of breast cancer cells to class 1 PI3K or Akt inhibitors, by substituting for the loss of Akt activity and restoring proliferative pathways such as mTORC1 signaling. It is therefore critical to develop tools to potently target SGK3 and obstruct its role in inhibitor resistance. Here, we describe the development of SGK3-PROTAC1, a PROTAC conjugate of the 308-R SGK inhibitor with the VH032 VHL binding ligand, targeting SGK3 for degradation. SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) induced 50% degradation of endogenous SGK3 within 2 h, with maximal 80% degradation observed within 8 h, accompanied by a loss of phosphorylation of NDRG1, an SGK3 substrate. SGK3-PROTAC1 did not degrade closely related SGK1 and SGK2 isoforms that are nevertheless engaged and inhibited by 308-R. Proteomic analysis revealed that SGK3 was the only cellular protein whose cellular levels were significantly reduced following treatment with SGK3-PROTAC1. Low doses of SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.1-0.3 μM) restored sensitivity of SGK3 dependent ZR-75-1 and CAMA-1 breast cancer cells to Akt (AZD5363) and PI3K (GDC0941) inhibitors, whereas the cis epimer analogue incapable of binding to the VHL E3 ligase had no impact. SGK3-PROTAC1 suppressed proliferation of ZR-75-1 and CAMA-1 cancer cell lines treated with a PI3K inhibitor (GDC0941) more effectively than could be achieved by a conventional SGK isoform inhibitor (14H). This work underscores the benefit of the PROTAC approach in targeting protein kinase signaling pathways with greater efficacy and selectivity than can be achieved with conventional inhibitors. SGK3-PROTAC1 will be an important reagent to explore the roles of the SGK3 pathway.
The PI3K pathway orchestrates
vital cellular processes including metabolism, insulin signaling,
and protein synthesis as well as proliferation and growth.[1] Hyperactivating mutations in components of the
class I PI3K family (p110α, p110β, p110γ, and p110δ)
are harbored in the majority of humancancers and drive proliferation
and survival of tumors.[2] A key downstream
component of the class 1 PI3K pathway are isoforms of the serum and
glucocorticoid-induced protein kinases (SGK1, SGK2, and SGK3) that
are activated by PDK1 and mTORC2.[3−5] The kinase domains of
SGK isoforms are highly related to intensely studied Akt isoforms
that are also activated downstream of class 1 PI3K signaling via the
PDK1 and mTORC2 kinases. SGK and Akt isoforms regulate cellular processes
by phosphorylating a myriad of overlapping substrates at Ser/Thr residues
lying within RXRXXT/S substrate recognition motifs.[6,7]SGK3 is the only isoform that possesses an N-terminal phox homology
(PX) domain which interacts with high affinity and specificity to
PtdIns(3)P, generated by the class III PI3K (hVPS34) at the endosome.[8−10] Binding PtdIns(3)P promotes the phosphorylation and activation of
SGK3 by PDK1 and mTORC2 kinases.[9] In addition,
SGK3 can also be activated downstream of class 1 PI3K through a pathway
involving activation of mTORC2 and sequential dephosphorylation of
PtdIns(3,4,5)P3 to PtdIns(3)P.[8] In contrast, SGK1 and SGK2 isoforms lack a phosphoinositide binding
domain and are therefore activated in the cytosol downstream of class
1 PI3K through its activation of mTORC2, triggering PDK1 phosphorylation.[4,11] Unlike SGK3, Akt isoforms possess an N-terminal PtdIns(3,4,5)P3 binding PH domain. Activation of class 1 PI3K generates PtdIns(3,4,5)P3 at the plasma membrane that in turn promotes recruitment
and phosphorylation of Akt isoforms by PDK1 and mTORC2.Prolonged
treatment of various ER+ breast cancer cell lines with
class 1 PI3K or Akt inhibitors leads to upregulation and activation
of SGK3 through the hVPS34 pathway.[12] Under
these conditions, SGK3 substitutes for Akt by phosphorylating substrates
such as TSC2 to activate mTORC1.[12] Moreover,
a combination of Akt and SGK protein kinase inhibitors induced a more
marked regression of BT-474 breast cancer cell-derived tumors in a
xenograft model than observed with Akt inhibitors alone.[12] These data support the notion of targeting SGK3
as a therapeutic strategy for counteracting resistance to PI3K/Akt
inhibition in cancer treatment. A number of ATP competitive inhibitors
that target all SGK isoforms with similar affinity have been reported.[13−15] Due to the high homology of their SGK catalytic domains, it has
not been possible to elaborate inhibitors that display isoform specificity.[16] These compounds could have less toxicity for
treating cancer resistance than inhibitors targeting all isoforms.Proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs) are heterobifunctional
small molecules designed to induce rapid proteasome-mediated degradation
of a protein of interest.[17] They consist
of a ligand that binds to the protein of interest, joined via a short
linker sequence to an E3 ligase recruitment moiety.[18,19] A key advantage of PROTACs is that they can be deployed at much
lower doses than conventional inhibitors due to their substochiometric
catalytical mode of action efficiently degrading target proteins,
minimizing side effects.[20−22] The PROTAC approach reduces intracellular
protein levels much more rapidly than is achievable with genetic methodologies,
which can present other challenges such as lethality or genetic compensation.[23] Additionally, PROTACs can be used reversibly
and have been demonstrated to display exquisite isoform or paralog
specificity that is challenging to achieve by pan-selective inhibitors.[21,24−26] A range of PROTAC tool compounds has recently been
developed targeting protein kinases, for example, against RIPK2,[20] BCR-ABL,[27,28] CDK9,[29] and PTK2.[30,31] As recently reviewed by Ferguson
and Gray, PROTACs can evade issues with conventional chemical inhibitors
in targeting oncogenic kinases[32] and allow
targeting both kinase-dependent and kinase-independent protein functions.
Targeting of protein kinases for degradation has also allowed for
greater isoform specificity, for example, the production of a CDK6-specific
PROTAC from a CDK4/6 inhibitor.[33]In this study, we describe the optimization and characterization
of an SGK3-specific PROTAC termed SGK3-PROTAC1. This compound is a
highly selective degrader, targeting for degradation only SGK3 and
not the related SGK1 or SGK2 isoform. SGK3-PROTAC1 induces proteasomal-mediated
degradation of SGK3 at submicromolar concentrations in a panel of
cancer cell lines rendering breast cancer cells more sensitive to
PI3K and Akt inhibitors. SGK3-PROTAC1 represents a novel chemical
tool to better probe the biological roles of the SGK3 protein kinase.
Results
and Discussion
Elaboration of DAT1, a First-Generation SGK3
PROTAC
As no cocrystal structure of the SGK1–3 inhibitors
has been
disclosed, we inspected the structure–activity relationship
(SAR) of a series of structurally related SGK inhibitors reported
by Sanofi[13] (International Patent WO2014140065),
with the aim to identify strategies to elaborate PROTACs. From this
series, we have previously characterized compound 14H as an inhibitor
of SGK3 and shown that inhibition of SGK3 kinase activity with this
compound can reduce PI3K-Akt inhibitor resistant cell growth.[12] However, this compound lacks isoform specificity
and also has some potency against S6K1. Inhibitor 14H possesses an
IC50 of 4 nM for SGK3, 10 nM for SGK1, and 76 nM for S6K1.[12] A series of inhibitors that have a pyrazolopyrimidine
scaffold appeared to tolerate aliphatic and cyclic substituents at
position 4 of the pyrazolopyrimidine core, suggesting that such a
portion of the molecule could be solvent exposed. Two SGK inhibitors,
termed 290 and 308 (Figure B), were judged particularly amenable for linker conjugation,
as the morpholine ring can be selectively N-alkylated
by means of reductive amination protocols. As the inhibitors described
in the patent were racemic, we synthesized both the R and S enantiomers
of these compounds and determined by kinase screening that the R forms
were marginally more potent (data available at http://www.kinase-screen.mrc.ac.uk/kinase-inhibitors). We determined that the IC50s of these compounds for SGK1 and SGK3
were between 5 and 40 nM (Table ). The specificity of these compounds was profiled
against 140 kinases at a 1 μM concentration, revealing that
they were relatively selective (Table S1), with S6K1 being a key off target that was inhibited more potently
than SGK isoforms, with an IC50 of 1–10 nM (Table ).
Figure 1
Design and cellular activity
of first generation SGK3 PROTACs.
(A) Structure of compound 14H, previously published by Sanofi as an
inhibitor of SGK3. (B) Starting material for SGK PROTACs. PROTACs
were derived from SGK inhibitors 308-R or 290-R linked to either VH032
or pomalidomide to target the VHL or cereblon E3 ligases, respectively.
(C) Structures of first generation SGK PROTACs. SGK and E3 ligase
targeting motifs were joined by a 3xPEG linker to produce the PROTACs.
(D) HEK293 cells were treated for 48 h with increasing concentrations
of each PROTAC compound from 0.1 nM to 10 μM. Cell lysates were
subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies, and
SGK3 protein levels were quantified in Image Studio Lite software
(Licor).
Table 1
IC50 Values and Degradation
Efficiency
of SGK Inhibitors and First Generation PROTACsa
SGK3 IC50
(nM)
SGK1 IC50
(nM)
S6K1 IC50
(nM)
SGK3 degradation
efficiency
290-R
35
19
10
308-R
5
10
1
DAT1
440
1600
160
+
DAT2
190
400
180
–
DAT3
640
1000
240
–
DAT4
540
600
190
–
The structures
of the inhibitors
are shown in Figure A. For degradation efficiency, “–” = no degradation
and “+” = >50% degradation at 10 μM. Note,
IC50
measurements were not undertaken in the presence of VHL.
Design and cellular activity
of first generation SGK3 PROTACs.
(A) Structure of compound 14H, previously published by Sanofi as an
inhibitor of SGK3. (B) Starting material for SGK PROTACs. PROTACs
were derived from SGK inhibitors 308-R or 290-R linked to either VH032
or pomalidomide to target the VHL or cereblon E3 ligases, respectively.
(C) Structures of first generation SGK PROTACs. SGK and E3 ligase
targeting motifs were joined by a 3xPEG linker to produce the PROTACs.
(D) HEK293 cells were treated for 48 h with increasing concentrations
of each PROTAC compound from 0.1 nM to 10 μM. Cell lysates were
subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies, and
SGK3 protein levels were quantified in Image Studio Lite software
(Licor).The structures
of the inhibitors
are shown in Figure A. For degradation efficiency, “–” = no degradation
and “+” = >50% degradation at 10 μM. Note,
IC50
measurements were not undertaken in the presence of VHL.For the first generation of SGK
PROTAC molecules, we linked 290-R
and 308-R to the well characterized VHL ligand VH032[34,35] and to the cereblon ligand pomalidomide.[36] A medium length linker composed of three PEG units was used in the
first instance (Figure B and C). We next tested whether the resulting compounds reduced
endogenous SGK isoform or S6K1 expression when administered to HEK293
cells for 48 h at concentrations of up to 10 μM (Figure D). After 48 h of PROTAC treatment,
cell lysates were analyzed by immunoblot analysis, and protein expression
under each condition was quantified relative to the DMSO-only control.
Only one of the four compounds, in which 308-R was conjugated to the
VHL ligand VH032 (termed DAT1), markedly reduced SGK3 expression.
Levels of SGK1, SGK2, or S6K1 were not significantly impacted (Figure D). DAT1 reduced
SGK3 expression by 60% at 1 μM and 75% at 10 μM after
48 h (Figure D). Treatment
of 1 μM DAT1 maximally reduced SGK3 expression by 16 h (Figure S1A). A dose response analysis revealed
that 2 μM DAT1 maximally reduced SGK3 expression at an 8 h time
point (Figure S1B). As expected, inhibition
of CUL2 neddylation by means of the inhibitor MLN4924 (3 μM)
or proteasome inhibition (MG132, 50 μM) blocked DAT1-induced
degradation of SGK3 (Figure S1C). This
suggests that DAT1-mediated degradation of SGK3 is neddylation and
proteasome dependent.Conjugation of 308-R to VH032 or pomalidomide
markedly decreased
the inhibitory activity for SGK isoforms and S6K1 in biochemical kinase
assays (5 nM to 440 nM for SGK3 and 1 nM to 160 nM for S6K1; Table ). We found no correlation
between the potency of PROTACs for inhibiting SGK3 and the ability
to induce degradation of SGK3 in cells. For example, DAT2, which does
not impact SGK3 protein levels in HEK293 cells, inhibited SGK1 and
SGK3 2–4-fold more potently than DAT1.
Elaboration of DAT8 (SGK3-PROTAC1),
a Second Generation SGK3
PROTAC
We next generated further analogues of DAT1 by shortening
the linker length from three to two PEG units (DAT5) or extending
the linker length to four and five PEG units (DAT6,7; Figure A). The ability of each of
these compounds to decrease SGK3 expression was evaluated in HEK293
cells (Figure C).
We found that the optimal linker length was four PEG units (13 atoms),
with DAT6 displaying significant improvements both in terms of potency
and the amount of reduction of SGK3 observed compared to the original
DAT1 (Figure C). We
then changed the composition of the linkers for more lipophilic alkylic
moieties of 13 (DAT8) and 16 atoms (DAT9,10), and for this set of
compounds we also conjugated the inhibitor 290-R (DAT11,12; Figure A). The best compound
was DAT8, which we have renamed SGK3-PROTAC1 (Figure D). SGK3-PROTAC1 possesses three oxygen atoms
in the linker motif, the same number as DAT1, but one less than DAT6
(Figure A). At a concentration
of 0.1 μM, SGK3-PROTAC1 reduced SGK3 levels by 65% without effecting
SGK1, SGK2, or S6K1 (Figure D). At higher concentrations of 1–10 μM, moderate
degradation of S6K1 was also observed. SGK3-PROTAC1-mediated degradation
of SGK3 was prevented by the neddylation inhibitor MLN4924 as well
as the MG132 proteasome inhibitor (Figure S2). In biochemical assays, SGK3-PROTAC1 inhibited SGK3 with an IC50
of 300 nM and S6K1 with an IC50 of 1800 nM (Table ). As before, little correlation was observed
between compound IC50 and degradation efficiency. The IC50 of SGK3-PROTAC1
was similar to that of DAT1 (300 from 440 nM), whereas the IC50 against
S6K1 increased approximately 10-fold (0.16 μM to 1.8 μM).
The specificity of SGK3-PROTAC1 at 1 μM was assessed in a panel
of 140 kinases. This revealed a surprising increase in specificity
over the original 308-R compound, with SGK1 and S6K1 the only kinases
most potently inhibited by this compound in vitro (Table S1).
Figure 2
Design and cellular evaluation
of second and third generation SGK
PROTACs. (A) Chemical structure of compounds DAT5–12, expanding
upon DAT1. (B) Chemical structure of cisSGK3-PROTAC1. (C) HEK293 cells
were treated for 48 h with increasing concentrations of each PROTAC
compound from 1 nM to 10 μM. Cell lysates were subjected to
immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies, and SGK3 protein
levels quantified in Image Studio Lite software. (D) HEK293 cells
were treated for 48 h with increasing concentrations of each PROTAC
compound from 1 nM to 10 μM. Cell lysates were subjected to
immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies, and SGK3 and S6K1
protein levels were quantified in Image Studio Lite software.
Table 2
IC50 Values and Degradation Efficiency
of Second Generation of SGK PROTACsa
SGK3 IC50
(μM)
SGK1 IC50
(μM)
S6K1 IC50
(μM)
SGK3 degradation
efficiency
DAT1
0.44
1.6
0.16
+
DAT5
>10
>10
>10
+
DAT6
>10
>10
>10
++
DAT7
>10
>10
>10
++
DAT8 (SGK3-PROTAC1)
0.3
0.22
1.8
++++
cisSGK3-PROTAC1
0.6
1.4
1.7
–
DAT9
1.79
8.99
4.53
++
DAT10
>10
>10
>10
++
DAT11
0.73
1.34
1.80
+++
DAT12
>10
>10
>10
++
The structures
of the inhibitors
are shown in Figure A. “–” = no degradation, “+” =
>50% degradation at 10 μM, “++” = >50% degradation
at 1 μM, “+++” = >50% degradation at 0.1 μM,
“++++” = >60% degradation at 0.1 μM. Note,
IC50
measurements were not undertaken in the presence of VHL.
Design and cellular evaluation
of second and third generation SGK
PROTACs. (A) Chemical structure of compounds DAT5–12, expanding
upon DAT1. (B) Chemical structure of cisSGK3-PROTAC1. (C) HEK293 cells
were treated for 48 h with increasing concentrations of each PROTAC
compound from 1 nM to 10 μM. Cell lysates were subjected to
immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies, and SGK3 protein
levels quantified in Image Studio Lite software. (D) HEK293 cells
were treated for 48 h with increasing concentrations of each PROTAC
compound from 1 nM to 10 μM. Cell lysates were subjected to
immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies, and SGK3 and S6K1
protein levels were quantified in Image Studio Lite software.The structures
of the inhibitors
are shown in Figure A. “–” = no degradation, “+” =
>50% degradation at 10 μM, “++” = >50% degradation
at 1 μM, “+++” = >50% degradation at 0.1 μM,
“++++” = >60% degradation at 0.1 μM. Note,
IC50
measurements were not undertaken in the presence of VHL.
Characterization of SGK3-PROTAC1
To generate a control
compound for SGK3-PROTAC1 that would bind and inhibit SGK3, but not
induce recruitment of the CUL2-VHL E3 ligase complex, we synthesized
a version of SGK3-PROTAC1 termed cisSGK3-PROTAC1 that contains a hydroxyl
epimer of the VH032 moiety (Figure B). Previous work has shown that this epimer ablates
binding to VHL.[20,21,35] As expected, in biochemical assays, cisSGK3-PROTAC1 inhibited our
panel of kinases similarly to SGK3-PROTAC1 (Table S1). We also undertook IC50 measurements of the cisSGK3-PROTAC1
against SGK3, SGK1, and S6K1 and found that values were very similar
to SGK3-PROTAC1 (Table ). Cellular degradation assays confirmed that cisSGK3-PROTAC1 failed
to induce degradation of SGK3 even at concentrations of up to 3 μM
under conditions in which 0.1 μM SGK3-PROTAC1 markedly reduced
SGK3 expression (Figure A). At doses of up to 1 μM SGK3-PROTAC1, no degradation of
S6K1 was observed.
Figure 3
Characterization of cellular activities of SGK3-PROTAC1
and cisSGK3-PROTAC1.
(A) HEK293 cells were first treated for 8 h with 0.03–3 μM
SGK3-PROTAC1 and cisSGK3-PROTAC1. One hour before lysis, cells were
treated with 3 μM AZD5363. Lysates were subjected to immunoblot
analysis with the indicated antibodies. (B) HEK293 cells were treated
in the presence or absence of AZD5363 (3 μM), with SGK3-PROTAC1
(0.3 μM), cisSGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM), 14H (1 μM),
or 308-R (1 μM) for 8 h prior to lysis. Lysates were subjected
to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (C) HEK293 cells
were treated for up to 48 h with SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM), and
lysates were analyzed by immunoblot analysis using the indicated antibodies.
(D) HEK293 cells were treated for 24 h with SGK3-PROTAC1. Cells were
washed three times with DMEM to wash out the compound, and recovery
of SGK3 expression protein was analyzed by immunoblot analysis. (E–G)
As in A except that CAMA-1 (E), ZR-75-1 (F), and JIMT-1 (G) cells
were employed rather than HEK293 cells.
Characterization of cellular activities of SGK3-PROTAC1
and cisSGK3-PROTAC1.
(A) HEK293 cells were first treated for 8 h with 0.03–3 μM
SGK3-PROTAC1 and cisSGK3-PROTAC1. One hour before lysis, cells were
treated with 3 μM AZD5363. Lysates were subjected to immunoblot
analysis with the indicated antibodies. (B) HEK293 cells were treated
in the presence or absence of AZD5363 (3 μM), with SGK3-PROTAC1
(0.3 μM), cisSGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM), 14H (1 μM),
or 308-R (1 μM) for 8 h prior to lysis. Lysates were subjected
to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (C) HEK293 cells
were treated for up to 48 h with SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM), and
lysates were analyzed by immunoblot analysis using the indicated antibodies.
(D) HEK293 cells were treated for 24 h with SGK3-PROTAC1. Cells were
washed three times with DMEM to wash out the compound, and recovery
of SGK3 expression protein was analyzed by immunoblot analysis. (E–G)
As in A except that CAMA-1 (E), ZR-75-1 (F), and JIMT-1 (G) cells
were employed rather than HEK293 cells.To study the impact of SGK3-PROTAC1 on phosphorylation of a physiological
substrate, we monitored phosphorylation of NDRG1 at Thr346.[37] This site is also phosphorylated by Akt; therefore
we treated cells with increasing doses of SGK3-PROTAC1 and cisSGK3-PROTAC1
for 8 h, with the addition of an Akt inhibitor (3 μM AZD5363)
1 h before lysis, to remove the impact of Akt phosphorylation of NDRG1.
Concentrations of 0.1 μM SGK3-PROTAC1 reduced NDRG1 phosphorylation
under conditions where cisSGK3-PROTAC1 had no effect (Figure A). Concentrations of cisSGK3-PROTAC1
of above 1 μM were required to lower NDRG1 phosphorylation.
Under basal conditions with no inhibition of Akt, targeting SGK3 with
either 0.3 μM SGK3-PROTAC1 or conventional SGK kinase inhibitors
(1 μM 14H or 1 μM 308-R) for 8 h had minimal effect on
pNDRG1 phosphorylation (Figure B). In the presence of the Akt inhibitor (3 μM AZD5363),
treatment with 0.3 μM SGK3-PROTAC1 or 1 μM 14H or 1 μM
308-R markedly suppressed NDRG1 phosphorylation (Figure B). This is consistent with
previous work in HEK293 cells showing that inhibition of both Akt
and SGK3 is required to block NDRG1 phosphorylation.[8,37]A time course analysis of 0.3 μM SGK3-PROTAC1 revealed
50%
degradation within 2 h, with maximum degradation after 8 h (Figure C). This degradation
is also reversible, as washout of SGK3-PROTAC1 after 24 h of treatment
resulted in increased SGK3 expression after 1 h, with protein levels
returning to normal levels after 10 h (Figure D).We also examined the impact of
SGK3-PROTAC1 and cisSGK3-PROTAC1
in two SGK3 dependent breast cancer cell lines, CAMA-1 (Figure E) and ZR-75-1 (Figure F).[12] In these cells, concentrations of >0.1 μM SGK3-PROTAC1
induced
degradation of SGK3, but not SGK1 or S6K1. cisSGK3-PROTAC1 had no
impact. To confirm that SGK3-PROTAC1 does not induce degradation of
endogenous SGK1, we studied a breast cancer cell line termed JIMT1
that has been shown previously to possess high levels of endogenous
SGK1.[37] In these cells, concentrations
of up to 3 μM SGK3-PROTAC1 failed to induce degradation of SGK1,
under conditions where SGK3 expression was reduced (Figure G).
Striking Specificity of
SGK3-PROTAC1
To establish the
specificity of SGK3-PROTAC1 employing an unbiased approach, we performed
quantitative Tandem–Mass–Tag (TMT)-labeled global proteomic
analysis of HEK293 cells treated in the presence or absence of 0.3
μM SGK3-PROTAC1 compared to either 0.3 μM cisSGK3-PROTAC1
or DMSO for 8 h. Experiments were undertaken in triplicate, and analysis
in Proteome Discoverer v2.2 using the Mascot search engine allowed
relative quantification of 8766 proteins. This analysis revealed that
SGK3-PROTAC1 was remarkably selective with only SGK3 expression being
significantly reduced (p value <10–3; Figure and Table S2).
Figure 4
TMT proteomic analysis of HEK293 cells
treated with SGK3-PROTAC1.
(A) Cells were treated with DMSO (control), SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM),
or cisSGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) for 8 h and lysed. Lysates were
subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (B)
Lysates were examined by quantitative proteomics. Volcano plot demonstrating
global proteomic changes induced by SGK3-PROTAC1 treatment versus
cisSGK3-PROTAC1 in HEK23 cells.
TMT proteomic analysis of HEK293 cells
treated with SGK3-PROTAC1.
(A) Cells were treated with DMSO (control), SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM),
or cisSGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) for 8 h and lysed. Lysates were
subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (B)
Lysates were examined by quantitative proteomics. Volcano plot demonstrating
global proteomic changes induced by SGK3-PROTAC1 treatment versus
cisSGK3-PROTAC1 in HEK23 cells.
Effect of SGK3-PROTAC1 on SGK3-Dependent mTORC1 Activation
Previous work has demonstrated that prolonged treatment of breast
cancer cell lines such as CAMA-1 and ZR-75-1 with PI3K or Akt inhibitors
resulted in upregulation of SGK3, leading to the activation of mTORC1
signaling, mediated by SGK3 phosphorylating TSC2 at the same sites
as Akt.[12] We therefore aimed to investigate
the effect that degradation of SGK3 would have on this resistance
pathway and whether SGK3-PROTAC1 treatment could reverse inhibitor
resistance. To investigate the effect of SGK3-PROTAC1 under these
conditions, we treated CAMA-1 (Figure A,C) or ZR-75-1 (Figure B,D) for 5 days with either a class 1A PI3K inhibitor
(GDC0941 1 μM;[38]Figure A,B) or an Akt inhibitor (AZD5363,
1 μM;[39]Figure C,D). These cells were treated with SGK3-PROTAC1
or cisSGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) for either 5 days in combination
with the inhibitors or 8 h before lysis. SGK3-PROTAC1 substantially
reduced SGK3 expression in both the CAMA-1 and ZR-75-1 cells. Consistent
with SGK3-PROTAC1 blocking mTORC1 activation, we found that it also
suppressed mTORC1-mediated phosphorylation of S6K1 at Thr389, resulting
in a moderate reduction in S6 protein phosphorylation. In contrast,
cisSGK3-PROTAC1 had no significant effect on SGK3 protein level or
phosphorylation of TSC2, S6K1, or S6 protein. Moreover, we also observed
that, in both CAMA-1 and ZR-75-1 cells, SGK3-PROTAC1 inhibited mTORC1
signaling to a greater extent than an SGK inhibitor that does not
induce degradation of SGK3 (14H 1 μM;[13]Figure ).
Figure 5
SGK3-PROTAC1-mediated
degradation of SGK3 inhibits Akt-independent
activation of mTORC1 in cancer cell lines treated with Akt or PI3K
inhibitors. CAMA-1 (A, C) or ZR-75-1 (B, D) were treated for 5 days
with 1 μM GDC0941 (A, B) or 1 μM AZD5363 (C, D). Cells
were treated with the compounds indicated for either 5 days or 8 h
before lysis; cells were treated with the compounds indicated. Cell
lysates were subject to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies.
SGK3-PROTAC1-mediated
degradation of SGK3 inhibits Akt-independent
activation of mTORC1 in cancer cell lines treated with Akt or PI3K
inhibitors. CAMA-1 (A, C) or ZR-75-1 (B, D) were treated for 5 days
with 1 μM GDC0941 (A, B) or 1 μM AZD5363 (C, D). Cells
were treated with the compounds indicated for either 5 days or 8 h
before lysis; cells were treated with the compounds indicated. Cell
lysates were subject to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies.
Effect of SGK3-PROTAC1 on Proliferation of
CAMA-1 and ZR-75-1
Cells Treated with PI3K-Akt Pathway Inhibitors
Given the
impact of SGK3-PROTAC1 treatment on Akt-independent mTORC1 activation,
we expected to observe a similar effect of SGK3 degradation on cell
proliferation in the context of PI3K-Akt pathway inhibitors. We therefore
studied the effect that SGK3-PROTAC1 and cisSGK3-PROTAC1 had on the
growth of CAMA-1 (Figure A,C) or ZR-75-1 (Figure B,D) cells in the absence or presence of the class
1A PI3K inhibitor (GDC0941, 1 μM; Figure A,B) or Akt inhibitor (AZD5363, 1 μM; Figure C,D). Treatment of
CAMA-1 or ZR-75-1 cells with SGK3-PROTAC1 alone had no effect on growth
(Figure S3), consistent with previous work
undertaken with high doses of conventional SGK inhibitors.[12,40] As expected, treatment with GDC0941 or AZD5363 substantially reduced
growth of these cells (Figure ). Including SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) further reduced the
growth of these cells under conditions where cisSGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3
μM) had a minimal effect (Figure ). We also studied the effect of the conventional SGK3
inhibitor (14H, 3 μM) on the growth curves, in order to compare
the effects of degradation and kinase inhibition. As reported previously,[12] treatment with 14H further suppressed cell growth
in the context of PI3K class I or Akt inhibition. In the presence
of the PI3K inhibitor (GDC0941 1 μM), SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM)
inhibited cell growth to a greater extent than treatment with 14H
(3 μM; Figure A,B). When combined with the Akt inhibitor (AZD5363 1 μM),
14H (3 μM) and SGK3-PROTAC1 (0.3 μM) suppressed growth
to a similar extent (Figure C,D).
Figure 6
SGK3-PROTAC1-mediated degradation of SGK3 further inhibiting
the
growth of cancer cell lines treated with PI3K-Akt pathway inhibitors.
CAMA-1 (A, C) and ZR-75-1 (B, D) were treated with compounds as indicated
either as monotherapy or in combination, and confluency was measured
on the Incucyte S3 every 4 h for up to 4 weeks.
SGK3-PROTAC1-mediated degradation of SGK3 further inhibiting
the
growth of cancer cell lines treated with PI3K-Akt pathway inhibitors.
CAMA-1 (A, C) and ZR-75-1 (B, D) were treated with compounds as indicated
either as monotherapy or in combination, and confluency was measured
on the Incucyte S3 every 4 h for up to 4 weeks.
Conclusion
We describe the design and elaboration of a potent,
highly specific
PROTAC targeted against the SGK3 protein kinase. SGK3-PROTAC1 induced
potent degradation within 2 h, with a DC50 below 100 nM.
Quantitative mass spectrometry revealed degradation of SGK3 to be
highly selective, with SGK3 being the most downregulated protein.
It is particularly interesting that SGK3-PROTAC1 was revealed to be
remarkably specific for SGK3 and does not degrade the highly related
SGK1 and SGK2 isoforms or any other protein in HEK293 cells. This
was even observed in cell lines such as JIMT-1 which express high
levels of SGK1 and relatively low levels of SGK3. Recent studies attempting
to develop isoform specific chemical inhibitors of SGK3 have been
unsuccessful, due to the high structural similarity and sequence identity
of the SGK1 and SGK3 kinase domains, in particularly in the ATP binding
site.[16] This ability to generate selective
isoform specific degraders has previously been observed in PROTACs
derived from the pan-BET inhibitor JQ1[21,24,41] and PROTACs derived from the promiscuous kinase inhibitor
Foretinib[42] or TAE-684.[43] It has recently been shown that specificity and potency
of PROTACs can be dictated by the differential cooperativity and stability
of ternary complexes that form protein–protein contacts in
relatively less conserved regions outside the width of the active
site of the target protein[19,24,44] as well as the geometry/orientation of the recruited E3 ligase.[45] Future work will investigate the extent to which
these molecular recognition features contribute to the exquisite selectivity
of SGK3-PROTAC1 for SGK3 induced degradation. Measurement of the stability
of the ternary complexes of SGK3 PROTAC compounds with SGK/S6K isoforms
and the VHL E3 ligase would be important to better understand the
potency and specificity of these PROTACs.[44] Furthermore, it would be interesting to explore the effects that
SGK3 PROTAC degraders have on selective SGK3 substrates such as STX7
and STX12 that have recently been described that are not phosphorylated
by Akt isoforms.[46] The finding that growth
of SGK3 dependent cancer cell lines is suppressed more efficiently
by SGK3-PROTAC1 than achieved by the 14H non-PROTAC inhibitor provides
a further example of the benefit of the PROTAC approach in targeting
protein kinase signaling pathways with greater efficacy and selectivity
than can be achieved with conventional inhibitors. Other examples
include the recent finding that a BCR-ABL degrader displays more sustained
inhibition of chronic myelogenous leukemia cell growth than can be
achieved by a conventional ABL kinase inhibitor.[28] SGK3-PROTAC1 will be an important addition to our armory
of chemical probes to decipher the biological roles of the SGK3 signaling
pathway including in mediating resistance to PI3K and Akt inhibitor
therapy in cancer.
Methods
Biology
Materials
Triton X-100, EDTA, EGTA, sodium orthovanadate,
sodium glycerophosphate, sodium fluoride, sodium pyrophosphate, 2-mercaptoethanol,
sucrose, benzamidine, Tween 20, Tris-HCl, and sodium chloride were
from Sigma. Tissue culture reagents, Novex 4–12% Bis–Tris
gels, and NuPAGE LDS sample buffer were from Invitrogen.
Cell Culture
and Lysis
ZR-75-1, CAMA-1, and JIMT-1
cell lines were sourced as described previously.[39] HEK293 cells were purchased from the American Tissue Culture
Collection and cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% (v/v) fetal
bovineserum, 2 mM l-glutamine, 100 U/mL penicillin, and
0.1 mg mL–1 streptomycin. The cells were lysed in
a buffer containing 50 mM Tris–HCl (pH 7.5), 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM
EDTA, 1% (v/v) Triton X-100, 1 mM sodium orthovanadate, 50 mM NaF,
5 mM sodium pyrophosphate, 0.27 M sucrose, 10 mM sodium 2-glycerophosphate,
0.2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 1 mM benzamidine. Lysates
were clarified by centrifugation at 16 000g for 10 min at 4 °C. Protein concentration was calculated using
the Bradford assay (Thermo Scientific).
Cell Treatments and Immunoblot
All cell treatments
were carried out as described in figure legends, to a final DMSO concentration
of 0.1% (v/v). Lysates were quantified. Immunoblotting was performed
using standard procedures, described in brief below. Lysate concentration
was quantified by Bradford Assay, and 10 μg of lysate was loaded
in the LDS sample buffer for SDS-PAGE electrophoresis on Novex 4–12%
Bis–Tris gels. Proteins were electrophoretically transferred
onto nitrocellulose membranes (Amersham Protran 0.45 μm NC;
GE Healthcare) at 80 V for 80 min on ice in transfer buffer. Transferred
membranes were blocked with 5% (w/v) nonfat dry milk dissolved in
TBS-T [20 mM Tris/HCl, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, and 0.1% (v/v) Tween 20]
at RT for 30 min, before incubation with the primary antibody overnight
at 4 °C. The signal was produced with near-infrared secondary
antibodies and detected using a Licor Biosciences Odyssey System,
and the signal was quantified in Image Studio Lite.
Antibodies
The following antibodies were raised in
sheep, by the MRC–PPU Reagents and Services team (https://mrcppureagents.dundee.ac.uk/) and affinity purified against the indicated antigens: anti-SGK3
(S848D, sixth bleed; raised against humanSGK3 PX domain comprising
residues 1–130 of SGK3; DU2034), anti-S6K1 (S417B, second bleed;
raised against residues 25–44 of humanS6K1: AGVFDIDLDQPEDAGSEDEL),
anti-SGK1 (S062D, third bleed), anti-NDRG1 (S276B third bleed; raised
against full-length humanNDRG1; DU1557), anti-Akt1 (S695B, third
bleed; raised against residues 466–480 of humanAkt1: RPHFPQFSYSASGTA).Anti-GAPDH was from Santa-Cruz (sc-32233). Antiphospho-AktSer473
(#9271), antiphospho-NDRG1 Thr346 (#5482), antiphospho-TSC2Ser939
(#3615), anti-TSC2 (#3612), antiphospho-S6K1Thr389 (#9205), antiphospho-rpS6Ser240/244 (#2215), and anti-rpS6 (#2217) antibodies were purchased
from Cell Signaling Technology. Total anti-SGK antibody was from Sigma
(#5188).Secondary antibodies coupled to IRDye680LT or IRDye800CW
were obtained
from Licor Biosciences. Secondary antibodies coupled to horseradish
peroxidase (HRP) were obtained from Thermo Scientific. Secondary antibodies
coupled to Alexa Fluor 488 and Alexa Fluor 594 were obtained from
Thermo Scientific.
Protein Kinase Profiling
Protein
kinase profiling against
a Dundee panel of 140 protein kinases was undertaken at the International
Centre for Protein Kinase Profiling. The result for each kinase was
presented as a mean kinase activity of the reaction taken in triplicate
relative to a control sample treated with DMSO. Assay conditions and
abbreviations are available at http://www.kinase-screen.mrc.ac.uk.IC50 determination was performed at the MRC PPU
International Centre for Protein Kinase Profiling, according to the
protocol previously described[47,48]
Determination
Cell Growth in Vitro
For growth assays,
ZR-75-1 cells were seeded in 96-well plates at
a density of 6000 cells/well and left to adhere overnight. Cells were
then treated with compounds as described in the figure legends and
imaged every 4 h on the Incucyte S3 (Essen Bioscience) for up to 4
weeks to give a measure of cell confluency. Media were refreshed every
4–5 days.
Supplementary Methods
Full chemistry
and mass spectrometry
methods are provided in the Supporting Information
Authors: Andrea B Sherk; Daniel E Frigo; Christine G Schnackenberg; Jeffrey D Bray; Nicholas J Laping; Walter Trizna; Marlys Hammond; Jaclyn R Patterson; Scott K Thompson; Dmitri Kazmin; John D Norris; Donald P McDonnell Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Grace Qun Gong; Ke Wang; Xin-Chuan Dai; Yan Zhou; Rajesh Basnet; Yi Chen; De-Hua Yang; Woo-Jeong Lee; Christina Maree Buchanan; Jack Urquhart Flanagan; Peter Robin Shepherd; Ying Chen; Ming-Wei Wang Journal: Acta Pharmacol Sin Date: 2018-07-23 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Krishna M Vasudevan; David A Barbie; Michael A Davies; Rosalia Rabinovsky; Chontelle J McNear; Jessica J Kim; Bryan T Hennessy; Hsiuyi Tseng; Panisa Pochanard; So Young Kim; Ian F Dunn; Anna C Schinzel; Peter Sandy; Sebastian Hoersch; Qing Sheng; Piyush B Gupta; Jesse S Boehm; Jan H Reiling; Serena Silver; Yiling Lu; Katherine Stemke-Hale; Bhaskar Dutta; Corwin Joy; Aysegul A Sahin; Ana Maria Gonzalez-Angulo; Ana Lluch; Lucia E Rameh; Tyler Jacks; David E Root; Eric S Lander; Gordon B Mills; William C Hahn; William R Sellers; Levi A Garraway Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2009-07-07 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Eeva M Sommer; Hannah Dry; Darren Cross; Sylvie Guichard; Barry R Davies; Dario R Alessi Journal: Biochem J Date: 2013-06-15 Impact factor: 3.857
Authors: Nazma Malik; Raja S Nirujogi; Julien Peltier; Thomas Macartney; Melanie Wightman; Alan R Prescott; Robert Gourlay; Matthias Trost; Dario R Alessi; Athanasios Karapetsas Journal: Biochem J Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 3.857
Authors: Philip P Chamberlain; Laura A D'Agostino; J Michael Ellis; Joshua D Hansen; Mary E Matyskiela; Joseph J McDonald; Jennifer R Riggs; Lawrence G Hamann Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: Bingqi Tong; Jessica N Spradlin; Luiz F T Novaes; Erika Zhang; Xirui Hu; Malte Moeller; Scott M Brittain; Lynn M McGregor; Jeffrey M McKenna; John A Tallarico; Markus Schirle; Thomas J Maimone; Daniel K Nomura Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2020-06-25 Impact factor: 5.100