Pregnane X receptor (PXR) is a master xenobiotic-sensing transcription factor and a validated target for immune and inflammatory diseases. The identification of chemical probes to investigate the therapeutic relevance of the receptor is still highly desired. In fact, currently available PXR ligands are not highly selective and can exhibit toxicity and/or potential off-target effects. In this study, we have identified garcinoic acid as a selective and efficient PXR agonist. The properties of this natural molecule as a specific PXR agonist were demonstrated by the screening on a panel of nuclear receptors, the assessment of the physical and thermodynamic binding affinity, and the determination of the PXR-garcinoic acid complex crystal structure. Cytotoxicity, transcriptional, and functional properties were investigated in human liver cells, and compound activity and target engagement were confirmed in vivo in mouse liver and gut tissue. In conclusion, garcinoic acid is a selective natural agonist of PXR and a promising lead compound toward the development of new PXR-regulating modulators.
Pregnane X receptor (PXR) is a master xenobiotic-sensing transcription factor and a validated target for immune and inflammatory diseases. The identification of chemical probes to investigate the therapeutic relevance of the receptor is still highly desired. In fact, currently available PXR ligands are not highly selective and can exhibit toxicity and/or potential off-target effects. In this study, we have identified garcinoic acid as a selective and efficient PXR agonist. The properties of this natural molecule as a specific PXR agonist were demonstrated by the screening on a panel of nuclear receptors, the assessment of the physical and thermodynamic binding affinity, and the determination of the PXR-garcinoic acid complex crystal structure. Cytotoxicity, transcriptional, and functional properties were investigated in human liver cells, and compound activity and target engagement were confirmed in vivo in mouse liver and gut tissue. In conclusion, garcinoic acid is a selective natural agonist of PXR and a promising lead compound toward the development of new PXR-regulating modulators.
Pregnane X receptor (PXR or NR subfamily 1, group I, member 2, NR1I2) is universally
recognized as a master regulator of key xenobiotic and drug metabolizing
genes,[1,2] such as the
cytochrome P450 isoform 3A4 (CYP3A4), several phase II genes, and the multidrug resistance
protein 1 (MDR1).[3,4]
Cloned in 1998 by two independent groups,[5,6] the PXR gene is principally expressed in
the liver and intestine.[7,8] Its activation can be elicited by a number of
ligands,[3,4] including
endogenous steroids, such as lithocholic acid and many other cholesterol metabolites,
several classes of drugs and natural products, such as antibiotics, anticancer agents, the
antihypertensive nifedipine, and the antifungal clotrimazole, herbal medicines such as the
antidepressant hyperforin from St. John’s wort,[9] the gut
microflora products indole 3-propionic acid,[10,11] and some dietary phytosterols and phenolics that include
vitamin E.[12,13] At the
same time, a limited number of PXR antagonists and activity inhibitors have also been
identified,[4,14]
including the drugs ketoconazole and A-792611, and the natural compounds sulforaphane,
sesamine, coumestrol, and camptothecin, some of which have been investigated as drug
resistance factors.PXR activity is under the influence of molecular interactions with other nuclear receptors
(NRs) and transcription factors that ultimately affect important physiological processes of
the liver and small intestine. These include the regulation of inflammatory and metabolic
pathways and the preservation of intestinal wall integrity.[15−17]Over the years, intense research has been devoted to investigate the potential of PXR as a
pharmacological target of human pathologies. The main ones include cholestatic liver
disease,[18] inflammatory bowel disease (IBD),[19,20] and dyslipidemia.[21] However, ligand promiscuity is a major obstacle in the pharmacological approach to such
NR because most of the PXR modulators identified so far have other primary targets, and PXR
itself could be considered an off-target in drug development.[22]Studies on the antibiotic rifaximin (Xifaxan),[19] a PXR agonist also used
to treat diarrhea[23] and hepatic encephalopathy,[24]
demonstrated the efficacy of this drug in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).
Such therapeutic application received FDA approval in May 2015,[25] and
further studies demonstrated effects that were independent of the antibiotic activity of
this compound on gut microbiota.[26] As a consequence, PXR has emerged as a
molecular target for the treatment of this syndrome.Together these aspects indicate the need for the identification of novel and selective PXR
agonists.Recent studies suggested that some forms and metabolites of vitamin E might fulfill this
aim. Podszun et al.[27] demonstrated in LS 180 human colorectal
adenocarcinoma cells that α-tocopherol 13′-carboxylic acid (2), a
long-chain metabolite (LCM) of α-tocopherol (3),[28,29] and δ-tocotrienol
(5) (Chart )[30,31] show PXR agonist function
up-regulating the PXR-dependent gene p-glycoprotein. Other studies by some of us[32] demonstrated an increased PXR expression in mouse brain and in vitro in
embryonal cortical astrocytes treated with a natural analogue, garcinoic acid (GA,
1) (Chart ), first described as a
bioactive compound by Mazzini and colleagues.[33] This is a plant
derivative of δ-tocotrienol (5) with different African ethno-medicine
applications.[33,34]
With this premise, herein we aim to explore the activity of GA (1) as PXR
agonist. In pursuit of this aim, we isolated of GA (1) from Garcinia
kola seeds and use the pure compound for metabolite synthesis and
characterization (Chart ). Most importantly,
binding assays, gene expression profile, cocrystallization, and in vivo experiments were
carried out to establish the efficacy of GA (1) as a PXR agonist and target
engagement.
Chart 1
Chemical Structures of Garcinoic Acid (GA, 1), α- and
γ-Tocopherol (3, 4), δ-Tocotrienol
(5), Long-Chain Metabolites (2,
6–9), and Short-Chain Carboxyethylhydroxychroman
(CEHC) Metabolites (10, 11)
Results
Isolation of Garcinoic Acid and Metabolite Synthesis
To isolate ≥95% pure GA (1) in sufficient amount for compound
characterization and metabolite synthesis, the extraction procedures from Garcinia
kola seeds available in the literature have been revised and optimized. Current
extraction methods[34,35]
are based on Terashima protocol[36] and consist of the alcoholic
extraction of the seed followed by silica gel chromatography. Using our optimized
approach, we were able to increase the purified GA (1) on the multigram
scale. Three different parameters have been investigated to improve yield of extraction:
seed mass/solvent ratio (1:1 or 2:1, w/v), temperature (25, 40, and 60 °C), and
solvent (MeOH or EtOH) (see Table S2). The best conditions were obtained using MeOH as the solvent, at
25 °C and with a seeds/solvent ratio 1:1, w/v (entry 3, Table S2). Using the optimized protocol, 1.2 kg of finely ground G.
kola seeds was extracted, affording 9.4 g of garcinoic acid (1)
(0.78% yield w/w).The synthesis of metabolites 2, 6–9 was
performed according to Scheme A. In particular,
hydrogenation of GA (1) was carried out under flow conditions using a packed
Pd/C cartridge, afforded compound 6 in quantitative yield. Next, reduction of
the carboxylic group by means of LiAlH4 in anhydrous THF at rt gave
13′-hydroxy-δ-tocopherol (8) in 87% isolated yield.
13′-Carboxy-δ-tocopherol (6) was also reacted with
(CH2O) in the presence of SnCl2 and
HCl 12 M in Et2O at 70 °C to obtain α-tocopherol
13′-carboxylic acid (2) (92% yield) readily reduced to the
corresponding alcohol derivative 7 with LiAlH4 in anhydrous THF
(62% yield).[33] The glucuronyl metabolite of GA (9) was
prepared in a three-step synthetic sequence (Scheme B). Thus, GA ester (12), prepared by reacting 1 with
CH2N2 in Et2O at −78 °C (89%), was coupled
with methyl-1-bromo-2,3,4-tri-O-acetyl-α-d-glucuronate
(13) and Fetizon reagent in toluene to give 14 in 19% overall
yield after silica gel purification.[37] Finally, mild basic hydrolysis
(Na2CO3/MeOH, rt) provided the desired glucuronide 9
in 17% isolated yield over three steps after flash chromatography.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of Metabolites 2,
6–9
Reagents and conditions: (a) 10% Pd/C cartridge (s-cart, 30 × 4 mm i.d.), 1
bar (full H2 mode), 25 °C, 1 mL min–1; (b)
LiAlH4, THF, 0 °C → rt; (c) SnCl2, HCl 12 M,
Et2O, (CH2O), 70 °C; (d)
CH2N2, Et2O, 0 °C → rt; (e)
methyl-1-bromo-2,3,4-tri-O-acetyl-α-d-glucuronate
(13), Fetizon reagent, molecular sieves, toluene; (f)
Na2CO3, MeOH, rt.
Synthesis of Metabolites 2,
6–9
Reagents and conditions: (a) 10% Pd/C cartridge (s-cart, 30 × 4 mm i.d.), 1
bar (full H2 mode), 25 °C, 1 mL min–1; (b)
LiAlH4, THF, 0 °C → rt; (c) SnCl2, HCl 12 M,
Et2O, (CH2O), 70 °C; (d)
CH2N2, Et2O, 0 °C → rt; (e)
methyl-1-bromo-2,3,4-tri-O-acetyl-α-d-glucuronate
(13), Fetizon reagent, molecular sieves, toluene; (f)
Na2CO3, MeOH, rt.
Identification of Garcinoic Acid as a Selective PXR Agonist
Ligand binding activity of GA (1) was explored via AlphaScreen technology
over a panel of NRs that, along with hPXR (Figure A), included major human endocrine and metabolic receptors, such as the
retinoid X receptor (RXR), constitutive androstane receptor (CAR), farnesoid X receptor
(FXR), vitamin D receptor (VDR), liver X receptor (LXR) forms α and β, and the
PPAR isoforms α, δ, and γ (see Figure S1). GA (1) was compared to its analogue
δ-tocotrienol (5), the vitamers 3 and 4,
their short-chain metabolites (SCMs) α-CEHC (10) and γ-CEHC
(11), and the LCMs 2 and 8 (Chart ). The test was performed in the presence of reference
standard agonists for the different NRs. Among the vitamin E compounds, only GA showed
significant PXR agonist activity (see Figure S1A). Much lower was the response of δ-tocotrienol
(5), while all of the other vitamin E compounds were almost completely
inactive at the receptor. Most importantly, GA (1) showed high selectivity
for PXR, with only a low activity at the LXRβ receptor (see Figure S1B). None of the other vitamin E compounds showed any appreciable
agonist activity on this receptor.
Figure 1
PXR agonist activity and binding properties of GA. Binding activity of GA
(1) was assessed by the AlphaScreen test at 10 μM compound
concentration (A) and during a dose-dependent experiment (B). Comparisons were made
with a series of vitamin E compounds and the PXR agonist 0.05 μM T0901317 (see
Table S1). Calorimetric titrations of GA binding to PXR-LBD (C) were
investigated in comparison with compounds 2 and 5 dissolved
in DMSO and then further diluted to 60 μM final concentration in 25 mM Hepes
buffer, pH 7.5, containing 150 mM NaCl. The final concentration of PXR-LBD in the
reaction mixture was 3 μM, and DMSO was 8% v/v.
PXR agonist activity and binding properties of GA. Binding activity of GA
(1) was assessed by the AlphaScreen test at 10 μM compound
concentration (A) and during a dose-dependent experiment (B). Comparisons were made
with a series of vitamin E compounds and the PXR agonist 0.05 μM T0901317 (see
Table S1). Calorimetric titrations of GA binding to PXR-LBD (C) were
investigated in comparison with compounds 2 and 5 dissolved
in DMSO and then further diluted to 60 μM final concentration in 25 mM Hepes
buffer, pH 7.5, containing 150 mM NaCl. The final concentration of PXR-LBD in the
reaction mixture was 3 μM, and DMSO was 8% v/v.The activity of GA as PXR agonist was then evaluated in dose–response experiments
in comparison with T0901317[38] (Figure B); the resulting EC50 values were 1.3 and 0.015 μM,
respectively. Comparisons were also made with physiological LCM analogues 2,
6–9 (Table ).
Figure 2
PXR and CYP3A4 expression in HepG2 cells treated with garcinoic acid
(1). siRNA technique was used to transiently inhibit PXR
(A) or CYP3A4 (B) gene expression [*p < 0.05;
**p < 0.01 vs WT or Ctr test; #p
< 0.01 vs Rifampicin (RIF)]. PXR (C) and CYP3A4 (D) protein and mRNA (E) expression
were also assessed in cells treated for 24 h with 1 and 25 μM GA
(1). MDR1 mRNA expression (F) was evaluated at concentrations between 1
and 50 μM GA. The P-glycoprotein activity (G) was measured in the presence of GA
between 50 nM and 25 μM (●), and Verapamil (▲) was used as a
control. t test: control versus treatments, *p <
0.05; **p < 0.01.
Table 1
Activity of GA (1) and Metabolites 2,
6–9 on PXR as Assessed by the AlphaScreen Testa
Data represent mean values ± SDs of at least three independent
experiments.
Data represent mean values ± SDs of at least three independent
experiments.PXR and CYP3A4 expression in HepG2 cells treated with garcinoic acid
(1). siRNA technique was used to transiently inhibit PXR
(A) or CYP3A4 (B) gene expression [*p < 0.05;
**p < 0.01 vs WT or Ctr test; #p
< 0.01 vs Rifampicin (RIF)]. PXR (C) and CYP3A4 (D) protein and mRNA (E) expression
were also assessed in cells treated for 24 h with 1 and 25 μM GA
(1). MDR1 mRNA expression (F) was evaluated at concentrations between 1
and 50 μM GA. The P-glycoprotein activity (G) was measured in the presence of GA
between 50 nM and 25 μM (●), and Verapamil (▲) was used as a
control. t test: control versus treatments, *p <
0.05; **p < 0.01.All of these compounds showed EC50 values similar to that of GA
(1) (between 1.5 and 3.3 μM) with the exception of the glucuronide
9 that showed an EC50 value of 17 μM, suggesting an
interfering role of phase II derivatization for GA agonist activity.[39]
The percentage of efficacy as compared to T0901317 was 103% for GA and ≤24% for the
other LCMs (Table ); worthy of note, the
δ-configuration of the chromanol ring was associated with a higher agonist efficacy
as compared to the α-configuration.The specificity of GA agonist activity for PXR was demonstrated by the siRNA technique in
HepG2 cells. When the PXR gene was transiently inhibited, a reduction of both the PXR and
the CYP3A4 gene transcription responses to GA treatment was confirmed (Figure A and B, respectively).
Calorimetric Titration of Garcinoic Acid Binding to the PXR Ligand Binding
Domain
To obtain direct proof of interaction with the hPXR ligand binding domain (LBD), we
performed an isothermic titration calorimetry (ITC) experiment using His-tagged hPXR LBD
protein in solution (Figure C). ITC measures the
affinity, Ka, the Gibbs energy (ΔG =
−RT ln Ka), and the changes in
enthalpy, ΔH, and entropy, ΔS, associated
with the binding of the FKK compounds (ΔG =
−RT ln K = ΔH –
TΔS). Enthalpic and entropic contributions to
binding affinity define the nature of the forces that drive the binding
reaction.[40,41] GA
(1) binds to a single site in LBD (Kd = 330 nM,
ΔG = −8.8 kcal/mol, ΔH =
−6.4 kcal/mol, −TΔS = −2.4
kcal/mol, N = 0.9) (Figure C,
left panel). In contrast, the other PXR inactive analogues, δ-tocotrienol
(5) and α-tocopherol 13′-carboxylic acid (2), do
not show any detectable binding to PXR LBD in this assay (Figure C, middle and right panels, respectively).
Crystal Structure of PXR–Garcinoic Acid Complex
To determine the structural basis of the GA–PXR binding interaction, crystals of
the LBD of hPXR incubated with GA (1) were grown successfully. The resultant
crystals diffracted X-rays to 2.3 Å resolution and revealed GA bound in a single
orientation within the PXR ligand binding pocket of LBD (Figure and Table S2). The fused ring moiety of GA contacts a set of three aromatic
residues (F288, W299, and Y306) in the PXR LBD, forming an array of van der Waals contacts
including face-to-face (F288) and edge-to-face (W299) π–π interactions.
Other specific contacts include hydrogen bonds with the endocyclic oxygen and phenolic
hydroxyl of GA with Q285 and the backbone of S247, respectively (Figure
). Last, the carboxylate moiety of GA (1) forms
an ionic interaction with H407. Taken together, the hPXR LBD specifically recognizes GA
with numerous contacts that corroborate the potent binding of this ligand.
Figure 3
Crystal structure of hPXR–garcinoic acid complex. (A) Overview of hPXR
LBD–garcinoic acid complex. (B) 2.3 Å resolution X-ray diffraction data of
crystals demonstrated that GA (gray) binds in a single orientation within the ligand
binding pocket of hPXR, contacted by four amino acid side chains (cyan) and one
main-chain region (M246–S247; cyan). Distances noted are in angstroms.
Crystal structure of hPXR–garcinoic acid complex. (A) Overview of hPXR
LBD–garcinoic acid complex. (B) 2.3 Å resolution X-ray diffraction data of
crystals demonstrated that GA (gray) binds in a single orientation within the ligand
binding pocket of hPXR, contacted by four amino acid side chains (cyan) and one
main-chain region (M246–S247; cyan). Distances noted are in angstroms.
In Vitro and In Vivo Target Engagement
In Vitro Data
To confirm the activity of GA as a PXR agonist, PXR protein expression was investigated
in human hepatocarcinoma cells (HepG2) and immortalized hepatic progenitor cells
(HepaRG) that were preliminarily investigated for compound toxicity (see Figure S2).In HepG2 cells, GA increased in a dose–dose-dependent manner the PXR protein
expression (Figure C), the CYP3A4 protein and
mRNA expression (Figure D and E,
respectively), and the MDR1 gene expression and activity (Figure F and G, respectively). Even higher was the response of PXR
protein to GA treatment in HepaRG cells (see Figure S3A). This activity of GA was significantly higher as compared to
that of the α-TOH metabolites 2 and 7 (see Figure S3A). Moreover, GA reverted the PXR binding and antagonist effect
of sulforaphane (see Figure S3C).[42]The GA-induced stimulation of PXR protein expression was investigated for its
functional modulation on the CYP450-mediated ω-oxidation and subsequent catabolism
of the α-TOH side chain.[30] In HepG2 cells, GA treatment did not
modify the level of α-tocopherol (3) that was rapidly taken up,
compensating the depletion of this vitamin observed under standard cell culture
conditions (see Figure S4A).[43] On the contrary, GA stimulated both the
CYP450-mediated production and the efflux of α-tocopherol metabolites (see
Figure S4A–C). The latter finding confirms the role of GA as an
activator of the PXR-dependent membrane transporter MDR1 shown earlier in Figure F and G, and as was already described in
the literature for other LCMs, such as 2.[27] GA was found
to increase PXR and CYP3A4 protein expression also in the humancolorectal cancer cell
line HT29 and in its mucous-secreting counterpart HT29-MTX (Figure S6A–D).
In Vivo Data
GAtoxicity and PXR activation were investigated in mice after acute (single bolus)
administration. At observation (24 h after the treatment), mortality was 100% in the
group treated with 100 mg of GA and 33% in the group that received 50 mg of GA
(1). Doses of ≤25 mg were well tolerated as suggested by the gross
appearance and behavior of the treated animals and by the post-mortem examination of
liver tissue and all main organs that revealed the complete absence of signs of damage.
A dose-dependent stimulation effect of GA on PXR protein and mRNA was observed in liver
tissue (Figure A and B, respectively). PXR
mRNA also increased in intestine upon GA treatment (Figure A). Such transcriptional response, however, was not sufficient to
significantly increase PXR protein expression in this tissue (not shown), possibly due
to the lower PXR levels expressed in this tissue in comparison with liver tissue (Figure A). GA also increased CYP3A4 (which
corresponds to CYP3A11 isoform in mice) protein expression in both of the two tissues
(Figures B and 5B).
Figure 4
PXR, CYP3A4, and MDR1 expression in the liver of mice treated with garcinoic acid
(1). Mice were treated with increasing doses of GA from 5 to 25 mg
administered as a single bolus, and PXR mRNA (A) and protein expression (B, left
panel) were measured in liver samples 24 h post-treatment. CYP3A4 (CYP3A11 in mice)
and MDR1 protein expression were also investigated (B, middle and right panels);
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. Liver histology was
examined by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and IHC for PXR antigen
(C).
Figure 5
PXR, CYP3A4, and MDR1 expression in the intestine of mice treated with garcinoic
acid (1). Mice were treated with increasing doses of GA from 5 to 25 mg
administered as a single bolus, and PXR mRNA (A) and protein expression (B, left
panel) were measured in liver samples 24 h post-treatment. CYP3A4 (CYP3A11 in mice)
and MDR1 protein expression were also investigated (B, middle and right panels);
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. Liver histology was
examined by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and IHC for PXR antigen
(C).
PXR, CYP3A4, and MDR1 expression in the liver of mice treated with garcinoic acid
(1). Mice were treated with increasing doses of GA from 5 to 25 mg
administered as a single bolus, and PXR mRNA (A) and protein expression (B, left
panel) were measured in liver samples 24 h post-treatment. CYP3A4 (CYP3A11 in mice)
and MDR1 protein expression were also investigated (B, middle and right panels);
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. Liver histology was
examined by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and IHC for PXR antigen
(C).PXR, CYP3A4, and MDR1 expression in the intestine of mice treated with garcinoic
acid (1). Mice were treated with increasing doses of GA from 5 to 25 mg
administered as a single bolus, and PXR mRNA (A) and protein expression (B, left
panel) were measured in liver samples 24 h post-treatment. CYP3A4 (CYP3A11 in mice)
and MDR1 protein expression were also investigated (B, middle and right panels);
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. Liver histology was
examined by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and IHC for PXR antigen
(C).The response of PXR protein to GA treatment in liver and gut was confirmed by IHC
evaluation. In the hepatic parenchyma (Figure C), PXR was mainly localized in sinusoidal endothelial cells. In mice treated
with 25 mg of GA, PXR staining also localized in hepatocytes, particularly around
centrolobular veins (zone 3) and the lobular midzonal area (zone 2). In small bowel from
control group mice, PXR expression localized exclusively in the lamina propria,
lymphocytes, and plasma cells of intestinal villi, without any significant staining of
enterocytes (Figure C). On the contrary, in
mice treated with GA, a strong and diffuse PXR expression was observed in villous
epithelium (enterocytes) and focally also in the glandular epithelium of crypts at the
base of mucosa. Furthermore, a weak staining was present on the brush border of
enterocytes in mice treated with 10 mg of GA (Figure C).
Discussion and Conclusions
The present study conclusively demonstrates that GA (1) is an efficient
natural agonist of PXR. This finding was obtained by optimizing the isolation protocol of
1 to reach a level of purity and quantity of the compound sufficient to carry
out the synthesis of other metabolites and to get insight into compound binding and activity
at PXR. These properties of GA were investigated with different approaches, including
screening on a panel of NRs, physical and thermodynamic (calorimetric) evaluation of binding
affinity, cocrystallization experiments, and then in vitro and in vivo transcriptional and
functional assessment.In line with the in vitro binding affinity results, crystallographic data were indicative
of GA binding potency that can be explained by the presence of several and stable
interactions (Figure ). These include van der
Waals contacts between the chroman ring of GA and three aromatic residues (F288, W299, and
Y306), hydrogen bonds established by the endocyclic oxygen and phenolic hydroxyl group of GA
with residue Q285 and the backbone of S247, and the crucial ionic interaction of the
carboxylate moiety of GA with H407 (Figure ).The transcriptional function of PXR affects genes encoding drug-metabolizing enzymes and
transporters to essentially detoxify and eliminate xenobiotics and
endotoxins.[1,2,15] This gene regulation function of PXR has been explained on the basis of
its interaction with other NRs and regulatory proteins; upon activation, PXR typically
heterodimerizes with the retinoid X receptor (RXR) to recruit coactivators, instead of
corepressors, that modulate the binding of the heterodimer with specific responsive elements
in the promoter regions of target genes. For example, in the proximal promoter region of
CYP3A4, a repeat of one-half hexamers divided by six nucleotides was recognized as a
proximal PXR responsive element (2169/2152).[6] Additionally, the CYP3A4
promoter includes the xenobiotic responsive enhancer module (XREM), a distal enhancer
sequence containing two extra PXR responsive elements.[44−46]MDR1 (or P-gp) is also a PXR reporter gene in liver cells, and recent
reports showed the hepatic metabolite 2 as able to stimulate this gene,[27] consistent with a role of PXR not only as xenosensor[15]
and master regulator of vitamin E metabolism,[48] but also as a sensor of
its biotransformation products[28] and candidate receptor for this family
of natural products with marked selectivity for dimethyl and unsaturated forms.In this respect, GA shows unique properties among the entire family of vitamin E compounds
investigated in this study, being the most potent enhancer of PXR activity and consequently
of vitamin E biotransformation in human liver cells. In fact, the upregulation of key genes
in vitamin E metabolism, such as CYP3A4[30,31] and the phase III gene
MDR1,[27,29] stimulates the ω-hydroxylation of cellular α-tocopherol
(3) and the efflux of its LCMs 7 and 2 (Figure S3) that definitely are bioactive metabolites.[27,29,49] These aspects
also suggest that PXR may play a central role in the GI tract, particularly in the liver, to
discriminate between α-tocopherol, other vitamers, and metabolites of vitamin
E.[13,28,29]Important enough, after we screened the binding of GA over a panel of NRs, this compound
showed selective agonist activity at PXR (see Figure S1). No response to GA and other analogues with tocol-like structure
was observed on PPARs and FXR, RAR, and RXR. CAR, another NR originally proposed to help
explain the CYP3A-dependent metabolism of vitamin E in human
hepatocytes[30,48] and
characterized by constitutive activation, was partially inhibited during affinity binding
experiments with GA. These findings support selective action of GA for PXR and shed light on
future applications of GA in targeted chemoprevention and therapy protocols of
PXR-expressing organs, such as the liver, intestine, and to a slighter extent the kidney. In
fact, the role of PXR as transcriptional regulator of xenobiotic and drug metabolizing genes
with a broad substrate promiscuity[3] has represented the major drawback
for the pharmacological approach to the receptor.[22] In this respect, GA
represents a novel and selective PXR agonist, holding great potential in the development of
therapeutic agents for a range of human pathologies that include cholestatic liver
disease,[18] dyslipidemia,[21] and
IBD;[19,20]
furthermore, recently rifaximin has received FDA approval for IBS treatment.[25]Our in vivo data unequivocally demonstrate that both intestinal and liver PXR respond to
the agonist activity of GA, thus providing mechanistic support for the investigation of this
natural compound in PXR-related diseases of the liver and gut. In a recent study, we also
demonstrated PXR agonist activity of GA in the mouse brain as well as in isolated
astrocytes,[32] compatible with the role of this NR in the ApoE-mediated
detoxification of amyloid-β peptide, a molecule with a pathogenic role in
Alzheimer’s disease.The present findings on PXR agonist activity of GA add further and important information to
the biological activity of this natural analogue of vitamin E.[34] In this
context, GA can be exploited as a valuable chemical probe and lead compound for medicinal
chemistry explorations to disclose novel therapeutic agents for the prevention and treatment
of lipotoxicity and chronic inflammatory diseases, such as atherosclerosis,[34] IBD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and
steatohepatitis.[50,51]
Current studies are directed toward the preparation of GA (1) derivatives with
improved potency, molecular properties, and metabolic stability, the results of which will
be reported in due course.
Experimental Section
Chemistry
General Methods
Unless otherwise noted, chemicals were obtained from commercial suppliers and used
without further purification. NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker AC 400 MHz
spectrometer in the indicated solvent. Chemical shifts are reported in parts per million
(ppm) and are relative to CDCl3 (7.26 and 77.0 ppm) or to CD3OD
(3.31 and 49.2 ppm). The abbreviations used are as follows: s, singlet; brs, broad
singlet; d, doublet; dd, double doublet; t, triplet; q, quartet; m, multiplet; brm,
broad multiplet. Melting points were determined by the capillary method using a Buchi
535 instrument, and they were not corrected. TLC was performed on aluminum backed silica
plates (silica gel 60 F254). Flash chromatographic purifications were performed via
Biotage Isolera Prime using the appropriate cartridge, eluent, and gradient.
Hydrogenations were performed with H-Cube apparatus (Thalesnano Nanotechnology Inc.,
Budapest, Hungary) using a 10% Pd/C cartridge (s-cart, 30 × 4 mm i.d.). With the
exception of compound 9, all of the synthesized compounds have been
previously reported, and their spectroscopic and analytical data were consistent with
the literature.[33,35,52] The purity of the synthesized compounds (>95%) was
assessed by HPLC–HRMS.
Isolation of Garcinoic Acid (1)
Finely ground seeds (1.2 kg) of Garcinia kola were suspended in MeOH
(1.2 L) and stirred at 25 °C for 6.5 h. The resulting suspensions were filtered off
under vacuum, and the resulting solid residue was resuspended in MeOH (1.2 L) and
stirred at 25 °C for a further 17.5 h. The suspension was filtered again under
vacuum, affording a crude brownish oil (56 g). The crude was purified by silica gel
flash chromatography (eluent: CH2Cl2/MeOH, from 100:0 to 90:10,
v/v), affording 9.4 g (yield 0.78%, w/w) of ≥95% pure (determined by
HPLC–HRMS analysis) garcinoic acid (1) as a yellow-green oil.[52]1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 1.27 (3H, s), 1.53–1.61
(1H, m), 1.63 (6H, m), 1.75–1.79 (2H, m), 1.84 (3H, s), 1.99–2.01 (2H, m),
2.06–2.13 (9H, m), 2.20 (3H, s), 2.29–2.30 (2H, m), 2.70 (2H, t,
J = 6.49 Hz), 5.13–5.14 (2H, m), 6.41 (1H, d,
J = 2.51 Hz), 6.50 (1H, d, J =2.52 Hz),
6.88–6.92 (1H, m). 13C NMR (100.6 MHz, CDCl3): δ
12.0, 15.8, 15.9, 16.0, 22.1, 22.4, 24.0, 26.4, 27.5, 31.3, 38.0, 39.5, 42.0, 77.3,
112.6, 115.7, 121.2, 124.4, 125.1, 126.9, 127.3, 133.7, 134.8, 145.0, 145.9, 147.7,
173.3.
Crystallization, X-ray Diffraction Data Collection, and Structure Refinement
PXR-LBD-SRC-1p was incubated with 1 mM GA and then crystallized in 30% (v/v) MPD and
100 mM imidazole/HCl pH 7.0 by the hanging drop vapor diffusion method at 4 °C.
Diffraction data were collected at 100 K at APS Beamline 23-ID-D. Data were reduced in
XDS[54,55] and
scaled in Aimless.[55] The tethered PXR-LBD/SRC-1p-GA structure was
solved via molecular replacement in Phenix using the tethered PXR-LBD/SRC-1p apo
structure (PDB: 3CTB). The model
was refined using Phenix with manual adjustments using Coot as necessary. Coordinates
and structure factors have been deposited to the PDB with accession code 6P2B.
Biology
Cloning, Expression, and Purification of PXR-LBD/SRC-1p
Tethered PXR-LBD/SRC-1p was synthesized via GenScript. The gene product was
subsequently subcloned into the pLIC-His pMCSG7 expression vector. Site-directed
mutagenesis of the N-terminal tag was performed to replicate the construct used for a
previously determined PXR crystal structure (PDB: 3CTB).[53] The final expression vector
containing the His-tagged PXR-LBD/SRC-1p construct was transformed into E.
coli BL21(DE3) cells. A 100 mL overnight culture supplemented with 100
μg/mL ampicillin was used to inoculate a 1.5 L culture supplemented with 100
μg/mL ampicillin at 37 °C until the OD600 was approximately 0.6.
The temperature was reduced to 18 °C, and expression was induced with the addition
of 0.1 mM isopropyl β-d-thiogalactopyranoside and continued overnight.
The next day, cells were harvested and frozen at −80 °C prior to
purification. Protein was purified by Ni affinity chromatography and size exclusion
chromatography using the following buffers: Ni A – 25 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 5% v/v
glycerol, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM DTT, 10 mM imidazole; Ni B – 25 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 5%
v/v glycerol, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM DTT, 250 mM imidazole; GF – 25 mM HEPES, pH 7.9,
5% v/v glycerol, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM DTT.
AlphaScreen Assay of Nuclear Receptor Binding
The activity of nuclear receptors was determined using AlphaScreen technology, a
recruitment coactivator assay previously described.[56]
Expression and Purification of His-Tagged PXR Ligand Binding Domain (LBD)
Protein
The expression and purification of His-tagged PXR Ligand Binding Domain (LBD) protein
were performed as published with minor modifications.[57] For the
expression of the protein, Luria–Bertani (LB) media were inoculated with a
saturated culture of BL21-Gold cells transformed with HIS-LIC plasmid containing the PXR
LBD construct. The mixture was then allowed to shake at 37 °C
until the cells reached an OD600 ≈ 0.6. The temperature was then
reduced to 18 °C, at which time IPTG was added (final concentration of 0.1 mM) to
induce protein expression. For purification of PXR-LBD, the His-tag was not removed, and
the uncleaved protein was loaded onto the gel filtration column with buffer [HEPES (25
mM, pH 7.5) and NaCl (150 mM)].
Isothermal Titration Calorimetry (ITC)
ITC was performed using a VP-ITC microcalorimeter from MicroCal/Malvern Instruments
(Northampton, MA). The protein and the ligands (in DMSO, 8% vol/vol final concentration)
were prepared in 25 mM Hepes, pH 7.5 with 150 mM NaCl. In all of the experiments, the
ligand solution was injected in 10-μL aliquots into the calorimetric cell
containing PXR-LBD [3 μM] at 37 °C. The respective concentrations of GA
(1), 2, and 5 in the syringe were 60 μM
each. The heat evolved upon each injection of the ligands was obtained from the integral
of the calorimetric signal. The heat associated with binding to PXR-LBD in the cell was
obtained by subtracting the heat of dilution from the heat of reaction. The individual
heats were plotted against the molar ratio, and the enthalpy change
(ΔH), association constant (Ka =
1/Kd), and stoichiometry were obtained by nonlinear
regression of the data.
Cell Studies
HepG2 (humanhepatoma cell line; ATCC HB-8065, Manassas, VA) and HepaRG (HPRGC10,
Thermo Fisher Scientific) cells were maintained in culture as previously
described.[47] Experiments were performed between passages 2 and 10.
Cell viability, clonogenic activity, and apoptotic cell death were assessed as
previously described (see Figure S2).[58,59] HT29 humancolorectal adenocarcinoma cells (ATCC HTB-38) and its
mucous-secreting HT29-MTX subclone (Sigma-Aldrich) were used as intestinal cell models.
HT29 cells were cultured in RPMI (Invitrogen; Life Technologies) containing 10% FBS
(v/v) and 1% (v/v) l-glutamine. HT29-MTX cells (from Sigma-Aldrich) were
cultured in DMEM supplemented with 2 mM glutamine, 1% nonessential amino acids, and 10%
FBS. Cells were maintained at 37 C in a humidified 5% (v/v) CO2 atmosphere
chamber and were used between passages 10 and 20.
Immunoblot
Cells were harvested and lysed in ice-cold cell lysis buffer (Cell Signaling
Technology) and 20 μL/mL protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche). Murine tissues (10
mg each) were weighed and resuspended in 300 μL of PBS supplemented with NP40
(1:50) and a cocktail of protease inhibitors (Pierce, Thermo Fisher Scientific). After
preliminary homogenation in a 1-mL potter, sonication was performed in ice (3 cycles of
15 s each with 1 min intervals). After incubation in ice for 1 h and centrifugation
(12 000 rpm for 20 min at 4 °C), the supernatant was recovered, and total
proteins were quantified by the BCA assay kit (Pierce, Thermo Fisher Scientific). Twenty
micrograms of proteins was resolved by 10–12% SDS-PAGE, and immunoblot was
performed using anti-PXR (H-160, 1:200 dilution; sc-25381, Santa Cruz Biotechnology,
Inc.), anti-PXR (1:1000 dilution, ab192579, abcam), anti-CYP3A4 (1:1000 dilution;
TA324142, OriGene Technologies, Inc., Rockville, MD), anti-GAPDH (D16H11, 1:1000
dilution; #5174, Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA), and anti-MDR1 (dilution
1:1000, (D3H1Q) Rabbit mAb #12683 Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA, and
alpha-tubulin (dilution 1:1000, Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA) as primary
antibodies. A horseradish peroxidase–conjugated antirabbit IgG (1:2000 dilution;
#7074, Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA) was used as the secondary antibody. The
band intensity was analyzed using Gel Pro analyzer Software. The results of immunoblots
are shown as relative expression of the investigated protein by correction for
housekeeping protein and control test (value = 1) in each series of experiments.
P-Glycoprotein Activity Assay
To evaluate the effects of GA on recombinant humanPgp in a cell membrane fraction, we
used the Pgp-Glo assay system (Promega, Madison, WI), according to the
manufacturer’s instruction. The assay relies on the ATP dependence of the
light-generating reaction of firefly luciferase.
Gene Expression and siRNA PXR Transfection
RNA was extracted using the RNeasy Plus Kit (QIAGEN, Valencia, CA) and quantified with
Implen NanoPhotometer (GmbH Germany), and cDNA synthesis was carried out using
SuperScript IV (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA). For siRNA PXR transfection, HepG2 cells
were transfected with siRNAs PXR using Lipofectamine RNAiMAX Transfection Reagent
(Thermo-Fischer). Reverse transfection was also carried out, and after the silencing
procedure (24 h) HepG2 cells were treated with GA for a further 24 h.
In Vivo Studies
The 6–7-weeks old C57BL/6 wild-type male mice from Charles River were kept under
standard environmental conditions (22 °C, 35% relative humidity, 12 h dark/light
cycle) with free access to tapwater and a standard diet. After being shipped, mice were
allowed to adapt to the new environment before the experiments were initiated. All
animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of
the University of Perugia as well as all surgeries and treatments. Animals were divided
into six treatment groups (three animals each): control (vehicle = olive oil) and GA
treated groups at the dosages of 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 mg. GA was administered by oral
gavage as a single bolus, and the animals were sacrificed after 24 h according to
institutional guidelines to collect organs for histology and biochemistry evaluation as
described in the other sections.
IHC Assay
Liver and gut mouse specimens were formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded. Four
micrometer sections were mounted on polarized glass slides and stained with hematoxylin
and eosin (Sigma-Aldrich). Immunohistochemistry analysis of PXR (polyclonal antibody;
dilution 1:200; ab217375, abcam) was performed using the Bond III (Vision BioSystems,
Buffalo Grove, IL) automated slide preparation system, and Polymer Refine Detection
(Vision BioSystems) was used as the antibody detection system.
3,3′-Diaminobenzidine (DAB) was used as chromogen. The section was then
counterstained with hematoxylin (Sigma-Aldrich) and mounted with DPX (06522,
Sigma-Aldrich).
Statistical Analysis
Statistically significant differences were determined using one-way analysis of
variance followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test as the post hoc test or
t test, and differences were considered statistically significant at
p < 0.05.
Authors: Francesco Galli; Angelo Azzi; Marc Birringer; Joan M Cook-Mills; Manfred Eggersdorfer; Jan Frank; Gabriele Cruciani; Stefan Lorkowski; Nesrin Kartal Özer Journal: Free Radic Biol Med Date: 2016-11-02 Impact factor: 7.376
Authors: Benjamin A Kandel; Maria Thomas; Stefan Winter; Georg Damm; Daniel Seehofer; Oliver Burk; Matthias Schwab; Ulrich M Zanger Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2016-03-17
Authors: Zdenek Dvorak; Max Klapholz; Thomas P Burris; Benjamin P Willing; Antimo Gioiello; Roberto Pellicciari; Francesco Galli; John March; Stephen J O'Keefe; R Balfour Sartor; Chang H Kim; Maayan Levy; Sridhar Mani Journal: Mol Pharmacol Date: 2020-08-06 Impact factor: 4.436
Authors: Joshi M Ramanjulu; Shawn P Williams; Ami S Lakdawala; Michael P DeMartino; Yunfeng Lan; Robert W Marquis Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 4.632
Authors: Francesco Galli; Mario Bonomini; Desirée Bartolini; Linda Zatini; Gianpaolo Reboldi; Giada Marcantonini; Giorgio Gentile; Vittorio Sirolli; Natalia Di Pietro Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) Date: 2022-05-18