Inhibition of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) family of enzymes has become an attractive therapeutic strategy in oncology and beyond; however, chemical tools to profile PARP engagement in live cells are lacking. Herein, we report the design and application of PARPYnD, the first photoaffinity probe (AfBP) for PARP enzymes based on triple PARP1/2/6 inhibitor AZ9482, which induces multipolar spindle (MPS) formation in breast cancer cells. PARPYnD is a robust tool for profiling PARP1/2 and is used to profile clinical PARP inhibitor olaparib, identifying several novel off-target proteins. Surprisingly, while PARPYnD can enrich recombinant PARP6 spiked into cellular lysates and inhibits PARP6 in cell-free assays, it does not label PARP6 in intact cells. These data highlight an intriguing biomolecular disparity between recombinant and endogenous PARP6. PARPYnD provides a new approach to expand our knowledge of the targets of this class of compounds and the mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitors in cancer.
Inhibition of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) family of enzymes has become an attractive therapeutic strategy in oncology and beyond; however, chemical tools to profile PARP engagement in live cells are lacking. Herein, we report the design and application of PARPYnD, the first photoaffinity probe (AfBP) for PARP enzymes based on triple PARP1/2/6 inhibitor AZ9482, which induces multipolar spindle (MPS) formation in breast cancer cells. PARPYnD is a robust tool for profiling PARP1/2 and is used to profile clinical PARP inhibitor olaparib, identifying several novel off-target proteins. Surprisingly, while PARPYnD can enrich recombinant PARP6 spiked into cellular lysates and inhibits PARP6 in cell-free assays, it does not label PARP6 in intact cells. These data highlight an intriguing biomolecular disparity between recombinant and endogenous PARP6. PARPYnD provides a new approach to expand our knowledge of the targets of this class of compounds and the mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitors in cancer.
Poly(ADP-ribose)
polymerases (PARPs) represent an important enzyme
family that catalyzes protein ADP-ribosylation, transferring one or
more units of ADP-ribose from an NAD+ cofactor to specific
biomolecular substrates.[1] Of these 17 human
enzymes, PARPs 1 and 2 and the tankyrases (PARP5a/5b) can catalyze
transfer of longer/branched chains of poly(ADP-ribose) (PARylation),
while the remaining family members transfer a single unit of ADP-ribose
to their molecular targets (mono ADP-ribosylation, MARylation), with
the exception of PARP13 which appears to be catalytically inactive.[2,3]PARPs are implicated in a variety of cellular metabolic processes
including DNA-damage repair,[4] transcriptional
regulation,[5] cell death,[6] immune responses,[7] and mitotic
spindle formation.[8] In particular, PARP1
is essential in repairing DNA single- and double-strand breaks, and
pharmacological inhibition of PARP1 with agents such as olaparib (Figure A) has been demonstrated
to be an effective synthetic lethal strategy in certain tumors deficient
in homologous recombination-mediated DNA repair.[9] Since the approval of olaparib in 2014, multiple PARP1
inhibitors have been introduced in the clinic including niraparib,
talazoparib, and rucaparib, and there is growing interest in targeting
other members of the PARP family.[10]
Figure 1
A photoaffinity-based
probe (AfBP) PARPYnD was designed
and synthesized for target profiling of AZ9482 and AZ0108. (A) Top: structures of clinical PARP1/2 inhibitor
olaparib and MPS-inducing agents AZ0108 and AZ9482, the latter of which was diversified into the AfBP used in this
study. Bottom: table showing the biochemical and biophysical parameters
associated with olaparib, AZ9482, AZ0108, and PARPYnD.[11,12] Table footnote a: data
generated in this work, experiments performed in triplicate (±SEM);
graphical analysis can be seen in Figure , and Supporting Information Figures S1 and S2 for multipolar spindle (MPS)
induction data, PARP binding data, and cytotoxicity data (MDA-MB-468
cells), respectively. Table footnote b: cytotoxicity value represents
a GI50 value previously generated in MDA-MB-468 cells.[12] (B) Schematic of the photoaffinity labeling
(PAL) workflow used for target profiling. The gray ball represents
the recognition element of the probe that is designed based on the
parent compound.
A photoaffinity-based
probe (AfBP) PARPYnD was designed
and synthesized for target profiling of AZ9482 and AZ0108. (A) Top: structures of clinical PARP1/2 inhibitor
olaparib and MPS-inducing agents AZ0108 and AZ9482, the latter of which was diversified into the AfBP used in this
study. Bottom: table showing the biochemical and biophysical parameters
associated with olaparib, AZ9482, AZ0108, and PARPYnD.[11,12] Table footnote a: data
generated in this work, experiments performed in triplicate (±SEM);
graphical analysis can be seen in Figure , and Supporting Information Figures S1 and S2 for multipolar spindle (MPS)
induction data, PARP binding data, and cytotoxicity data (MDA-MB-468
cells), respectively. Table footnote b: cytotoxicity value represents
a GI50 value previously generated in MDA-MB-468 cells.[12] (B) Schematic of the photoaffinity labeling
(PAL) workflow used for target profiling. The gray ball represents
the recognition element of the probe that is designed based on the
parent compound.
Figure 2
Validation of PARPYnD as
a suitable probe for parent
molecule profiling. (A) Crystal structure of parent molecule AZ9482 bound in the NAD+-binding pocket of PARP5a
(PDB ID: 5ECE), with key interactions highlighted in orange. The red star highlights
the solvent exposed position at which modification is expected to
minimally perturb the binding of a probe into this pocket of the PARP
enzymes. (B) Quantification of the percentage of mitotic cells with
MPS phenotype (>2 spindle poles per cell) after treatment with AZ9482 (N = 2) and PARPYnD (N = 2), both at 41 nM, versus DMSO (N =
4); double asterisk (**) represents raw P value <0.001
in unpaired Student’s t test; raw data found
in the Supporting Information, Extended Data S1. (C) PARP6 activity assay: recombinant GST-tagged PARP6 was incubated
with biotinylated NAD+ and varying concentrations of PARPYnD. GST-PARP6 auto-MARylation was measured by immunoblotting
against NeutrAvidin-HRP; decreased signal with increasing PARPYnD concentration indicated catalytic inhibition of PARP6. (D) Gel and
Western blot analysis of live cells labeled with PARPYnD and ligated to AzTB (Figure S3A) with/without
cotreatment with various competitor molecules. In-gel fluorescence
was used to qualitatively assess TAMRA-tagged proteins, and streptavidin-based
enrichment and immunoblot analysis was used to validate specific targets.
I = input (whole lysate); P = pull down (enriched fraction); >
indicates
competition seen on gel, validated as PARP1 by immunoblot. Uncropped
gels and immunoblots associated with all figures can be found in Figure S7.
We recently reported
a triple PARP1/2/6 inhibitor, AZ0108 (Figure A), which
elicited therapeutic effects in breast cancer models in vivo by generating a cytotoxic multipolar spindle (MPS) phenotype in
cancer cells but not in somatic tissue.[11,12] The mechanism
of action of AZ0108 is proposed to be via cellular inhibition
of PARP6 MARylation of downstream substrates, one of which was identified
as checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1). MARylation of CHK1 by PARP6 was proposed
to regulate the phosphorylation of CHK1; AZ0108 treatment
prevented CHK1 MARylation and induced hyperphosphorylation of CHK1,
contributing to MPS formation and dysregulation of the cell cycle.
However, AZ0108 also displayed toxicity in vivo, the molecular basis of which is currently undefined,[11] limiting pharmacological evaluation of AZ0108. Furthermore, while substantial in vitro evidence of the mechanism of action has been presented, bona fide target engagement of PARP6 by AZ0108 has not been reported in intact cells, and limited literature reports
on alternative pharmacological modulators of PARP6 have restricted
orthogonal validation of this mechanism of action.[13−15] Therefore,
generation of a complete cellular target profile of AZ0108 would be beneficial for both target validation and off-target identification.Photoaffinity labeling (PAL) is a robust and increasingly popular
strategy to profile the cellular interactome of a molecule with a
noncovalent binding profile (Figure B).[16−18] The methodology utilizes a photoaffinity-based probe
(AfBP) that retains the binding profile and phenotypic properties
of the parent compound but is modified with a photoreactive group
activated with a specific wavelength of light to generate a covalent
bond directed by the probe’s reversible, noncovalent interaction(s).
Incorporation of a bioorthogonal handle allows downstream attachment
of a capture reagent to probe tagged proteins via bioorthogonal ligation
chemistry, resulting in an AfBP.[17] The
reporter can include a fluorophore for gel-based visualization of
the probe interactome, or an enrichment handle such as biotin allowing
for de novo target identification by tandem mass
spectrometry or specific target interrogation by immunoblot.[19] Ideally the photoaffinity group and bioorthogonal
handle should be small and structurally discrete, allowing retention
of biological mode of action, cell permeability, and live cell target
protein profiling.Herein, we describe the design and synthesis
of a novel AfBP PARPYnD for phthalazinonePARP inhibitors.
We show that PARPYnD retains an MPS phenotype and in vitro PARP binding profile comparable to parent compounds AZ9482 and AZ0108. PARPYnD enriches
PARP1 following
crosslinking in intact cells by both proteomics and immunoblot, and
PARP1 and PARP2 binding can be efficiently competed in cellulo by AZ9482, AZ0108, and olaparib in proteomics
studies. PARPYnD thus constitutes the first cell-active
AfBP for the PARP protein class, and we demonstrate its utility in
profiling novel off-target interactions of both AZ0108 and the clinical PARP inhibitor olaparib. Furthermore, we show that PARPYnD can be applied to probe the potential mode of action
of PARP6 inhibitors, generating novel hypotheses for future investigation.
Results
and Discussion
Lead compound AZ9482 was found
to be a potent MPS-inducing
agent (Figure A) discovered
via a high-content screen of the AstraZeneca collection of phthalazinone-based
NAD+ mimetics.[12] Due to the
poor pharmacokinetic properties of AZ9482, we previously
performed a lead optimization study which resulted in AZ0108, a molecule with comparable cellular effects to AZ9482 (Figure A) but with
greatly improved in vivo characteristics; however,
we chose to adopt the more synthetically tractable AZ9482 scaffold over AZ0108 as the basis for a novel AfBP.
While there is currently no structural information available for PARP6,
we previously crystallized AZ9482 with PARP5a (Figure A), and given the structural similarity of the NAD+-binding pocket throughout the family,[1] this model was used to design an AfBP. As with all olaparib-like
molecules, the AZ9482 phthalazinone core mimics the adenine
of NAD+ and is essential for PARP family binding; this
moiety was retained in our AfBP design, along with the central phenyl
ring present in all potent compounds in our published series. During
the pharmacokinetic optimization of AZ9482, we demonstrated
that altering the pyridine group is tolerated in MPS assays, and while
the 3-nitrile is a key backbone hydrogen bond acceptor, the 5-position
(Figure A, red star)
represents a convenient point from which to build out into a solvent
channel with a small photocrosslinkable clickable moiety.[12,20] This resulted in probe PARPYnD (Figure A), the synthesis of which is described in
the Supplementary Methods section; briefly,
commercially available 2-(piperazin-1-yl)pyridine-3-carbonitrile was
Boc protected and brominated, and a copper-catalyzed amination[21] was used to install the key aniline group that
allowed coupling of the photoaffinity molecule.[18] Boc deprotection and coupling to the phthalazinone core
generated AfBP PARPYnD.Validation of PARPYnD as
a suitable probe for parent
molecule profiling. (A) Crystal structure of parent molecule AZ9482 bound in the NAD+-binding pocket of PARP5a
(PDB ID: 5ECE), with key interactions highlighted in orange. The red star highlights
the solvent exposed position at which modification is expected to
minimally perturb the binding of a probe into this pocket of the PARP
enzymes. (B) Quantification of the percentage of mitotic cells with
MPS phenotype (>2 spindle poles per cell) after treatment with AZ9482 (N = 2) and PARPYnD (N = 2), both at 41 nM, versus DMSO (N =
4); double asterisk (**) represents raw P value <0.001
in unpaired Student’s t test; raw data found
in the Supporting Information, Extended Data S1. (C) PARP6 activity assay: recombinant GST-tagged PARP6 was incubated
with biotinylated NAD+ and varying concentrations of PARPYnD. GST-PARP6 auto-MARylation was measured by immunoblotting
against NeutrAvidin-HRP; decreased signal with increasing PARPYnD concentration indicated catalytic inhibition of PARP6. (D) Gel and
Western blot analysis of live cells labeled with PARPYnD and ligated to AzTB (Figure S3A) with/without
cotreatment with various competitor molecules. In-gel fluorescence
was used to qualitatively assess TAMRA-tagged proteins, and streptavidin-based
enrichment and immunoblot analysis was used to validate specific targets.
I = input (whole lysate); P = pull down (enriched fraction); >
indicates
competition seen on gel, validated as PARP1 by immunoblot. Uncropped
gels and immunoblots associated with all figures can be found in Figure S7.PARPYnD was first tested for its MPS activity in the
same fluorescence microscopy assay used in the original high-content
library screen[12] and was found to induce
the MPS phenotype with comparable potency to AZ9482 (Figure B) or AZ0108.[11] Furthermore, it possesses a similar
profile to AZ9482 in fluorescence polarization competition-based
binding assays with recombinant PARPs 1, 2, and 6 (Figure A, Figure S1), with PARPYnD being an even more potent PARP6
binder than AZ9482. PARPYnD also displayed
similar cytotoxic properties to the parent compounds against the triple
negative breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-468 previously used in AZ0108 target validation studies (Figure A, Figure S2).[11] Finally, recombinant glutathione S-transferase (GST)-tagged PARP6 was incubated with a biotinylated
analogue of NAD+ and increasing concentrations of PARPYnD. The reactions were separated by gel electrophoresis,
transferred to nitrocellulose, and immunoblotted with NeutrAvidin-HRP
(Figure C);[22] dose-dependent inhibition of PARP6 auto-MARylation
was observed, indicating that PARPYnD binds to PARP6
and inhibits its catalytic activity.These data support the
proposal that PARPYnD is an
effective tool to interrogate the biomolecular profile of AZ9482 and AZ0108, and therefore, the molecule was taken forward
to preliminary live cell profiling studies. MDA-MB-468 cells were
cultured in 6-well plates and treated with either DMSO, PARPYnD alone, or cotreated with PARPYnD and either AZ9482, AZ0108, or olaparib at various concentrations (Figure D). After 3 h of
treatment, cells were irradiated with 365 nm UV light, lysed, and
subjected to copper(I)-catalyzed alkyne–azide cycloaddition
(CuAAC) to an azido-TAMRA/biotin capture reagent previously reported
by our laboratories (AzTB, Figure S3A).[19] Qualitative assessment of PARPYnD-labeled proteins by in-gel fluorescence revealed a dose-dependent
profile (Figure D,
lanes 1–3), indicating robust labeling efficiency and cell
permeability. PARPYnD competition against the parent
compounds AZ9482 or AZ0108 was used to identify
targets against the background of nonspecific probe interactions,
characterized experimentally by dose-dependent reduction in band labeling
intensity as a result of target-specific blockade of probe binding.
One band (Figure D)
appeared to be depleted in a dose-dependent manner by AZ9482, and to a lesser extent AZ0108, at around 110 kDa,
corresponding to the molecular weight of PARP1. Further competition
experiments with PARP1 inhibitor olaparib also resulted in depletion
of this band (Figure D, lanes 10–12).To validate target engagement with
PARP1, the labeled proteome
was enriched on streptavidin beads and the pull-down fraction interrogated
by immunoblotting (Figure D).[23,24] PARP1 was enriched by PARPYnD but not in the vehicle (DMSO) control, and dose-dependent reduction
in enrichment by competition against AZ9482, AZ0108, or olaparib was in line with what was observed in-gel. These results
demonstrate the utility of PARPYnD as the first AfBP
for the PARP enzymes, providing a useful tool molecule that can assess bona fide target engagement for PARP1 by a molecule of interest
in a live cell setting. Surprisingly, PARPYnD did not
enrich PARP6 in a similar fashion (Figure D), even when cells were treated with up
to 10 μM probe, a concentration >10-fold the IC50 of PARPYnD for PARP6 as determined by the in
vitro binding assay (Figure S4). We hypothesized that antibody efficiency or low expression may
render immunoblotting insufficient to detect PARP6, and so PARPYnD was taken on to unbiased proteomics studies.MDA-MB-468 cells
were treated with either DMSO, PARPYnD alone (1 μM),
or cotreated with PARPYnD (1 μM) and either AZ9482 (5 μM), AZ0108 (5 μM), or olaparib (5 μM).
Cells were
irradiated at 365 nm, lysed, and subjected to CuAAC with AzRB (Figure S3B), a biotin-containing reporter molecule
with a trypsin-cleavable linker previously developed in our laboratories.[25] Labeled proteins were enriched on NeutrAvidin
agarose resin, reduced and alkylated, digested into constituent peptides
using trypsin, and labeled with tandem mass tag (TMT) reagents for
quantification. Samples were combined, fractionated, and analyzed
by nanoscale liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry on a high-resolution
QExactive orbitrap mass spectrometer (nanoLC-MS/MS). Comparing PARPYnD-treated samples to untreated samples revealed the
probe–protein interaction profile (Figure A), the diverse enrichment of proteins corresponding
to the variety of bands observed by in-gel fluorescence (Figure D). Enrichment of
these proteins was found to be entirely dependent on UV irradiation
and was not the result of any unanticipated covalent reactivity of PARPYnD (Figure S5E–G).
Furthermore, we observed significant enrichment of PARP1, confirming
the results from immunoblotting, and also PARP2. Of the other proteins
enriched, many are well-known targets of the diazirine motif which
previous work has shown tend to be strongly enriched regardless of
the core probe scaffold.[26] These include
voltage-dependent anion-gated channel 1 (VDAC1), cathepsin D (CTSD),
and enoyl-CoA hydratase 1 (ECH1); enrichment of these proteins provides
a useful internal control for successful intracellular diazirine-based
photoaffinity labeling. Competition studies confirmed that these proteins
are targets of the probe rather than the parent molecules, since no
significant depletion of these proteins was observed upon cotreatment
with any competitor molecule (Figure B–D).
Figure 3
Target engagement profiles of PARPYnD, AZ9482, AZ0108, and olaparib. (A–D)
Proteomics analysis
of live cells labeled with PARPYnD and ligated to AzRB
(Figure S3B) with/without cotreatment with
parent competitor molecules. Tagged proteins were enriched on NeutrAvidin
agarose, digested into peptides, and tandem mass tag (TMT) labeled
for identification and quantification by LC-MS/MS. Volcano plots demonstrate
enrichment (x axis) of one sample versus another
and the associated significance (y axis), determined
by pairwise Student’s t test (cut off: A, S0 = 0.1, false discovery rate (FDR) = 5%; B–D, S0 = 0.1, FDR = 15%). Red diamonds = PARP family,
blue dots = other significantly enriched/depleted hits, green squares
= known background photocrosslinking binders,[26] gray dots = nonsignificant proteins. Significant hits are annotated
with their gene names only when they are appear significantly enriched/depleted
across more than one pairwise comparison, with the exception of the
known background binders. Larger, fully annotated plots can be found
in Figure S5A–D, and complete raw
data can be found in the Supporting Information, Extended Data S2. (A) PARPYnD (1 μM) versus
DMSO. (B) PARPYnD (1 μM) and AZ9482 (5 μM) versus PARPYnD (1 μM) only. (C) PARPYnD (1 μM) and AZ0108 (5
μM) versus PARPYnD (1 μM) only. (D) PARPYnD (1 μM) and olaparib (5 μM)
versus PARPYnD (1 μM) only. (E)
Transient overexpression of FLAG-PARP6 and attempted enrichment of
the overexpressed protein and identification by Western blot. I =
input (whole lysate); P = pull down (enriched fraction).
Target engagement profiles of PARPYnD, AZ9482, AZ0108, and olaparib. (A–D)
Proteomics analysis
of live cells labeled with PARPYnD and ligated to AzRB
(Figure S3B) with/without cotreatment with
parent competitor molecules. Tagged proteins were enriched on NeutrAvidin
agarose, digested into peptides, and tandem mass tag (TMT) labeled
for identification and quantification by LC-MS/MS. Volcano plots demonstrate
enrichment (x axis) of one sample versus another
and the associated significance (y axis), determined
by pairwise Student’s t test (cut off: A, S0 = 0.1, false discovery rate (FDR) = 5%; B–D, S0 = 0.1, FDR = 15%). Red diamonds = PARP family,
blue dots = other significantly enriched/depleted hits, green squares
= known background photocrosslinking binders,[26] gray dots = nonsignificant proteins. Significant hits are annotated
with their gene names only when they are appear significantly enriched/depleted
across more than one pairwise comparison, with the exception of the
known background binders. Larger, fully annotated plots can be found
in Figure S5A–D, and complete raw
data can be found in the Supporting Information, Extended Data S2. (A) PARPYnD (1 μM) versus
DMSO. (B) PARPYnD (1 μM) and AZ9482 (5 μM) versus PARPYnD (1 μM) only. (C) PARPYnD (1 μM) and AZ0108 (5
μM) versus PARPYnD (1 μM) only. (D) PARPYnD (1 μM) and olaparib (5 μM)
versus PARPYnD (1 μM) only. (E)
Transient overexpression of FLAG-PARP6 and attempted enrichment of
the overexpressed protein and identification by Western blot. I =
input (whole lysate); P = pull down (enriched fraction).As expected, PARP1 and PARP2 labeling were significantly
depleted
by AZ9482, AZ0108, and olaparib (Figure B–D), demonstrating
the utility of PARPYnD for assessing target engagement
of purported PARP1/2 inhibitors in a live cell setting. Strikingly,
several other proteins enriched by PARPYnD were outcompeted
by both AZ0108 and olaparib and represent potentially
important off-target interactions for both molecules. Among these
identified proteins, nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT)
stands out as an off-target for both AZ0108 and olaparib
as it is a key enzyme in the biosynthetic pathway for NAD+ and a promising anticancer target in its own right, with drug discovery
campaigns already reported in the literature.[27,28] Proteins involved in sterol biosynthesis and metabolism are also
significantly competed by both molecules, including lanosterol synthase
(LSS),[29] the NADPH-dependent reductase
Δ(24)-sterol reductase (DHCR24),[30] and the NAD(P)-independent oxidases prenylcysteine oxidase (PCYOX1)[31] and mitochondrial sterol 26-hydroxylase (CYP27A1—engaged
by AZ0108 only).[32] These proteins
represent novel off-targets for both AZ0108 and olaparib
and, for the latter, have not been reported in previous protein profiling
campaigns.[33,34]PARP6 was not enriched
in these proteomics experiments, confirming
the results obtained from immunoblotting. To investigate whether the
expression level of this protein precluded detection by Western blot
and LC-MS/MS, a FLAG-tagged version of PARP6 was transiently overexpressed
in MDA-MB-468 cells, and target engagement experiments with PARPYnD were repeated. After transfection with the corresponding
construct, cells were treated with PARPYnD with/without
competition, irradiated, lysed, and ligated to AzTB. The labeled proteome
was once again incubated with streptavidin beads, and the enriched
fraction was immunoblotted against the FLAG epitope, with no FLAG-PARP6
enrichment detected (Figure E). Given that PARPYnD binds strongly to PARP6
in in vitro binding assays, the failure of PARPYnD to engage the corresponding endogenous protein was
unanticipated. To investigate this disparity, recombinant GST-tagged
PARP6 used in in vitro binding assays was spiked
into MDA-MB-468 lysates and the lysate treated with PARPYnD with or without competitor AZ0108, irradiated with
365 nm UV light and ligated to AzTB. In-gel fluorescence showed clear
labeling of a band corresponding to the molecular weight of GST-PARP6 (98 kDa) which was depleted by PARP6
inhibitor AZ0108 (Figure ). Confirming these results, the same samples were
enriched on streptavidin
and immunoblotted against PARP6, demonstrating significant enrichment
of recombinant protein by PARPYnD compared to DMSO control,
which could be depleted in the presence of AZ0108. Importantly,
labeling of endogenous PARP6 in lysate lacking recombinant
GST-PARP6 protein was again not observed, reinforcing the results
from live cell experiments. Finally, to rule out the possibility that
the GST-fusion tag influences binding of PARPYnD and AZ0108 to the recombinant protein, the same lysate-based photocrosslinking
experiment was performed before and after cleavage of the GST tag
from the protein using an internal HRV3C cleavage site present in
the linker between PARP6 and GST tag (Figure S6). In both cases, labeling of the 71 kDa band corresponding to the
intact PARP6 protein was demonstrated, showing that the GST tag is
neither the site of probe binding, nor does it bias the conformation
of PARP6 in such a way that artificially promotes binding. These results
imply that PARPYnD can bind to and label recombinant
but not endogenous PARP6, raising interesting questions regarding
the activity and inhibitor binding affinity for PARP6 in cellulo.
Figure 4
Successful engagement of recombinant but not endogenous PARP6 in
lysate-based crosslinking experiments. In-gel fluorescence (top) and
immunoblot (bottom) analysis of lysates labeled with PARPYnD and ligated to AzTB with/without cotreatment with AZ0108. Left panel—lysates were spiked with recombinant GST-PARP6
before treatment. Ligated samples were further enriched on streptavidin
beads and all samples analyzed as above: > GST-PARP6 (98 kDa);
* PARP6
(71 kDa). More recombinant protein is labeled/enriched compared to
vehicle (DMSO) control, where residual signal can be observed through
nonspecific interaction of the recombinant protein with the beads.
No enrichment of endogenous PARP6 is observed.
Successful engagement of recombinant but not endogenous PARP6 in
lysate-based crosslinking experiments. In-gel fluorescence (top) and
immunoblot (bottom) analysis of lysates labeled with PARPYnD and ligated to AzTB with/without cotreatment with AZ0108. Left panel—lysates were spiked with recombinant GST-PARP6
before treatment. Ligated samples were further enriched on streptavidin
beads and all samples analyzed as above: > GST-PARP6 (98 kDa);
* PARP6
(71 kDa). More recombinant protein is labeled/enriched compared to
vehicle (DMSO) control, where residual signal can be observed through
nonspecific interaction of the recombinant protein with the beads.
No enrichment of endogenous PARP6 is observed.
Conclusion
In this work we have developed PARPYnD as the first
photoaffinity-based probe (AfBP) for the PARP family and have shown
that it can effectively label PARP1/2 in a live cell setting, highlighting
this AfBP as a useful tool molecule to validate target engagement
of PARP inhibitors in cellulo. Previous studies using
the label-free approach of the cellular thermal shift assay (CETSA)
have similarly measured target engagement of PARP1 by drug molecules
in live cell systems;[35,36] photoaffinity labeling with PARPYnD complements this work while additionally being able
to identify and quantify interactions of PARP inhibitors with other
proteins. In particular, we highlight that PARPYnD is
able to covalently engage several non-PARP proteins in intact cells,
and competitive affinity-based protein profiling experiments have
identified several of these proteins as novel off-targets of olaparib
and AZ0108. Further investigation is required to demonstrate
that these proteins are truly engaged by PARPYnD and
are not enriched due to an orthogonal interaction between the protein
and PARP1/2 that brings the identified protein in close proximity
to the photoaffinity element of the probe while bound to the PARP
enzyme. However, this is unlikely since none of the identified proteins
reported in Figure are known binding partners of PARP1 or PARP2.[37,38] These proteins may therefore represent novel biomolecular interactions
for phthalazinone-based PARP inhibitors,[33,34] and engagement of these targets may be significant for the polypharmacology
of phthalazinone-based PARP inhibitors in the clinic, leading to deeper
understanding of toxicology or novel indications. It has been discussed
that the off-target interactions identified may have an impact on
sterol metabolism, and further network analysis[37] demonstrated that off-target binding to CYP27A1 and NAMPT
may affect the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) axis
and therefore disrupt lipid biosynthesis and metabolism.[39] This could be of importance when addressing
questions of safety and efficacy of these compounds.Furthermore,
examining the full list of proteins labeled by the
probe but not necessarily depleted in competition experiments (Figure S5A), many are known binders of nucleoside
analogues, suggesting that PARPYnD may have potential
as a tool to profile nucleoside mimicking drugs outside of the PARP
inhibitor family.[40] These include NAD(P)
binding proteins prostaglandin reductase (PTGR2), NADPH-cytochrome
P450 reductase (POR), squalene synthase (FDFT1), retinal dehydrogenase
(ALDH1A1); Coenzyme A binding proteins peroxisomal acyl-coenzyme A
oxidase 1 (ACOX1), carnitine O-palmitoyltransferase
2, mitochondrial (CPT2), nuclear receptor coactivator 3 (NCOA3); and
ATP binding proteins adenosine kinase (ADK), methionine adenosyltransferase
2 subunit beta (MAT2B), and ribosomal protein S6 kinase alpha-1 (RPS6KA1).AZ0108 has been reported to be a cellular PARP6 inhibitor,
and this activity is thought to be responsible for MPS formation and
subsequent cytotoxicity.[11] However, despite
the fact that PARPYnD efficiently enters cells (based
on PARP1/2 labeling), generates an MPS phenotype, and inhibits PARP6 in vitro with comparable potency to the parent compounds,
it fails to bind or photocrosslink to endogenous PARP6, even when
transiently overexpressed. This suggests that cellular PARP6 inhibition
may not be the only mechanism that contributes to MPS induction by
these molecules. Furthermore, PARPYnD can label recombinant
but not endogenous PARP6, implying that access to the PARP6NAD+ binding site may be restricted in the endogenous protein,
for example as a result of endogenous post-translational modification
of PARP6, or complex formation with another biomolecule, that restricts
compound binding. Given the current lack of structural and biophysical
characterization of PARP6, further work is required to understand
the molecular basis for regulated access to the NAD+-binding
site.In summary, PARPYnD constitutes a novel and
useful
probe for on- and off-target profiling of PARP inhibitor interactions
and has been used to identify the need for future investigation of
the purported mechanism of action of these compounds and associated
off-target pharmacology. More generally, this work highlights the
importance of assessing target engagement in a biological system at
the earliest stages of the drug discovery and development pipeline,
and photoaffinity labeling with an AfBP provides a complementary approach
to uncover the interactome of a molecule in intact, living cells.
Authors: Sejal Vyas; Ivan Matic; Lilen Uchima; Jenny Rood; Roko Zaja; Ronald T Hay; Ivan Ahel; Paul Chang Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2014-07-21 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Anna Rutkowska; Douglas W Thomson; Johanna Vappiani; Thilo Werner; Katrin M Mueller; Lars Dittus; Jana Krause; Marcel Muelbaier; Giovanna Bergamini; Marcus Bantscheff Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Jian Jeffrey Chen; Wenyuan Qian; Kaustav Biswas; Chester Yuan; Albert Amegadzie; Qingyian Liu; Thomas Nixey; Joe Zhu; Mqhele Ncube; Robert M Rzasa; Frank Chavez; Ning Chen; Frenel DeMorin; Shannon Rumfelt; Christopher M Tegley; Jennifer R Allen; Stephen Hitchcock; Randy Hungate; Michael D Bartberger; Leeanne Zalameda; Yichin Liu; John D McCarter; Jianhua Zhang; Li Zhu; Safura Babu-Khan; Yi Luo; Jodi Bradley; Paul H Wen; Darren L Reid; Frank Koegler; Charles Dean; Dean Hickman; Tiffany L Correll; Toni Williamson; Stephen Wood Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Lett Date: 2013-09-29 Impact factor: 2.823
Authors: Joseph Shaw; Ian Dale; Paul Hemsley; Lindsey Leach; Nancy Dekki; Jonathan P Orme; Verity Talbot; Ana J Narvaez; Michal Bista; Daniel Martinez Molina; Michael Dabrowski; Martin J Main; Davide Gianni Journal: SLAS Discov Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 3.341
Authors: Damian Szklarczyk; Annika L Gable; David Lyon; Alexander Junge; Stefan Wyder; Jaime Huerta-Cepas; Milan Simonovic; Nadezhda T Doncheva; John H Morris; Peer Bork; Lars J Jensen; Christian von Mering Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Cassandra R Kennedy; Andrea Goya Grocin; Tristan Kovačič; Ravi Singh; Jennifer A Ward; Avinash R Shenoy; Edward W Tate Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2021-05-18 Impact factor: 5.100
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