Ronen Gabizon1, Amit Shraga1, Paul Gehrtz1, Ella Livnah1, Yamit Shorer2, Neta Gurwicz3, Liat Avram4, Tamar Unger5, Hila Aharoni5, Shira Albeck5, Alexander Brandis6, Ziv Shulman3, Ben-Zion Katz7, Yair Herishanu7, Nir London1. 1. Department of Organic Chemistry, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 7610001, Israel. 2. Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel-Aviv 6997801, Israel. 3. Department of Immunology, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 7610001, Israel. 4. Department of Chemical Research Support, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 7610001, Israel. 5. Structural Proteomics Unit, Department of Life Sciences Core Facilities, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 7610001, Israel. 6. Life Sciences Core Facilities, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 7610001, Israel. 7. Department of Hematology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel, and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel-Aviv 6997801, Israel.
Abstract
Proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs) represent an exciting inhibitory modality with many advantages, including substoichiometric degradation of targets. Their scope, though, is still limited to date by the requirement for a sufficiently potent target binder. A solution that proved useful in tackling challenging targets is the use of electrophiles to allow irreversible binding to the target. However, such binding will negate the catalytic nature of PROTACs. Reversible covalent PROTACs potentially offer the best of both worlds. They possess the potency and selectivity associated with the formation of the covalent bond, while being able to dissociate and regenerate once the protein target is degraded. Using Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) as a clinically relevant model system, we show efficient degradation by noncovalent, irreversible covalent, and reversible covalent PROTACs, with <10 nM DC50's and >85% degradation. Our data suggest that part of the degradation by our irreversible covalent PROTACs is driven by reversible binding prior to covalent bond formation, while the reversible covalent PROTACs drive degradation primarily by covalent engagement. The PROTACs showed enhanced inhibition of B cell activation compared to ibrutinib and exhibit potent degradation of BTK in patient-derived primary chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells. The most potent reversible covalent PROTAC, RC-3, exhibited enhanced selectivity toward BTK compared to noncovalent and irreversible covalent PROTACs. These compounds may pave the way for the design of covalent PROTACs for a wide variety of challenging targets.
Proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs) represent an exciting inhibitory modality with many advantages, including substoichiometric degradation of targets. Their scope, though, is still limited to date by the requirement for a sufficiently potent target binder. A solution that proved useful in tackling challenging targets is the use of electrophiles to allow irreversible binding to the target. However, such binding will negate the catalytic nature of PROTACs. Reversible covalent PROTACs potentially offer the best of both worlds. They possess the potency and selectivity associated with the formation of the covalent bond, while being able to dissociate and regenerate once the protein target is degraded. Using Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) as a clinically relevant model system, we show efficient degradation by noncovalent, irreversible covalent, and reversible covalent PROTACs, with <10 nM DC50's and >85% degradation. Our data suggest that part of the degradation by our irreversible covalent PROTACs is driven by reversible binding prior to covalent bond formation, while the reversible covalent PROTACs drive degradation primarily by covalent engagement. The PROTACs showed enhanced inhibition of B cell activation compared to ibrutinib and exhibit potent degradation of BTK in patient-derived primary chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells. The most potent reversible covalent PROTAC, RC-3, exhibited enhanced selectivity toward BTK compared to noncovalent and irreversible covalent PROTACs. These compounds may pave the way for the design of covalent PROTACs for a wide variety of challenging targets.
Proteolysis targeting
chimeras (PROTACs) are receiving increasing
attention as a new therapeutic modality, as was recently underscored
by the first PROTAC, ARV-110, to enter clinical trials.[1] PROTACs are composed of a protein target binding
moiety, a linker, and an E3 ubiquitin ligase binder.[2,3] Upon binding, the PROTAC induces the formation of a ternary complex
between the target and E3 ligase,[4−7] resulting in the ubiquitination and degradation
of the target. Compared to traditional inhibition of the target protein,
targeted degradation has several important advantages, including the
elimination of all levels of protein function, enhanced selectivity,[8−12] longer duration of action due to the need to resynthesize the target,[13] and degradation by substoichiometric amounts
of PROTAC.[14]Efficient degradation
typically requires high affinity binding
to the target as well as optimized linker geometry, to optimize the
ternary complex formation. However, many targets such as transcription
factors,[15,16] protein–protein interfaces,[17,18] or challenging enzyme classes such as GTPases[19] are recalcitrant to ligand discovery. This limits the applicability
of PROTACs against such targets. A possible solution to this problem
is to introduce an electrophile that will allow covalent binding to
the target. However, irreversible binding may reduce potency by negating
the catalytic nature of the PROTAC activity. While several covalent
PROTACs have been developed and degrade their target successfully,[20−22] there are examples in which the introduction of irreversible binding
reduces the potency of PROTACs.[23,24]Theoretically, reversible covalent PROTACs can
benefit from the enhanced potency, selectivity, and long duration
of action that accompany covalent bond formation,[25−27] without compromising
the substoichiometric activity of PROTACs. In this work we set out
to test this hypothesis by the design of cyanoacrylamide-based reversible
covalent PROTACs. To this end, we selected Bruton’s tyrosine
kinase (BTK), which is an established target for noncovalent PROTACs,[23,28−32] and systematically tested a series of reversible covalent PROTACs
along with their irreversible covalent and noncovalent PROTAC analogues.
Our work resulted in a highly potent and selective reversible covalent
PROTAC (RC-3), as well as insights into the effect of
covalent bond formation kinetics on the degradation by covalent PROTACs.
Results
We devised a modular scheme for the synthesis of cyanoacrylamide-based
PROTACs (see Methods and SI). Using this route, we synthesized a series of 12 reversible
covalent PROTACs targeting cysteine 481 in BTK (Supporting Table 1). These are based on the scaffold of the
covalent BTK binder—ibrutinib—as the protein targeting
moiety[33] and PEG-based linkers with varying
length (Figure ).
We used two approaches: in the first, we synthesized an alkyne-functionalized
BTK-binding cyanoacrylamide and an amine-functionalized E3 binder
and linked them in one-pot reactions using azide-PEG-NHS esters of
varying lengths. In the second approach, we directly functionalized
thalidomide with various PEGs and formed the cyanoacrylamide in a
final condensation step.
Figure 1
Structures of reversible covalent, irreversible
covalent, and noncovalent
BTK PROTACs described in this study. The electrophilic moieties are
highlighted in red.
Structures of reversible covalent, irreversible
covalent, and noncovalent
BTK PROTACs described in this study. The electrophilic moieties are
highlighted in red.We incubated K562 or
Mino cells with 1 μM of the compounds
for 24 h and measured the abundance of BTK by Western blot (Supporting Figure 1). Several of the tested PROTACs
displayed clear BTK degradation and could serve as potential starting
points for optimization. We selected compound RC-1, which
is based on a PEG6 linker and displayed consistent prominent levels
of degradation in both cell lines, as a starting point for this study.
On the basis of compound RC-1 we synthesized additional
compounds (Figure ), RC-2 with a CH2 group replacing the oxygen
nearest the β-carbon, their analogous acrylamidesIR-1 and IR-2, and the noncovalent analogue NC-1. We also synthesized the cyanoacrylamideRC-3 (Figure ), replacing the
Cα hydrogens with methyl groups. Similar dimethylated
cyanoacrylamides were reported to have improved cellular permeability.[34]We evaluated the ability of the compounds
to induce degradation
of BTK in human cell lines. We incubated Mino cells with the compounds
and followed BTK levels after 24 h by Western blot (Figure , Supporting
Figure 2). The noncovalent PROTAC NC-1 showed
the highest degradation potency with DC50 = 2.2 nM (maximal
degradation Dmax = 97%). The irreversible
acrylamidesIR-1 and IR-2 and the cyanoacrylamideRC-3 followed closely with DC50’s under
10 nM and Dmax near 90%. The cyanoacrylamidesRC-1 and RC-2 were less potent. Similar trends
were observed in Ramos cells (Supporting Figure
2A). We conducted metabolomics studies to estimate if cellular
penetration and stability may contribute to the relative potencies
(Supporting Table 2). NC-1 and RC-3 reached an effective concentration that was ∼2
times higher than IR-2 and ∼10 times higher than RC-2. Therefore, the lower potency of RC-2 can
at least in part be explained by lower permeability or stability.
Figure 2
Efficient
BTK degradation in cells. (A) Western blot evaluation
of BTK levels in Mino cells in response to various concentrations
of RC-2, IR-2, NC-1, and RC-3, after 24 h of incubation. (B) Quantification of BTK
levels in (A) by normalization to the β-actin house-keeping
gene in Mino cells. DC50 and Dmax were calculated by fitting the data to a second-order polynomial
using Prism software. (C) Summary of the DC50 and Dmax values for the PROTACs in Mino cells described
in (A) and Supporting Figure 2.
Efficient
BTK degradation in cells. (A) Western blot evaluation
of BTK levels in Mino cells in response to various concentrations
of RC-2, IR-2, NC-1, and RC-3, after 24 h of incubation. (B) Quantification of BTK
levels in (A) by normalization to the β-actin house-keeping
gene in Mino cells. DC50 and Dmax were calculated by fitting the data to a second-order polynomial
using Prism software. (C) Summary of the DC50 and Dmax values for the PROTACs in Mino cells described
in (A) and Supporting Figure 2.We followed the rate of BTK degradation facilitated by this
compound
series via a time course experiment in Ramos and Mino cells (Supporting Figure 3). The rates of degradation
correlated well with the DC50 values observed after 24
h, with NC-1, IR-1, IR-2, and RC-3 degrading
BTK within 2–4 h, while RC-2 and RC-1 required 6–24 h to reach maximum degradation.To validate
the mechanism of PROTAC-mediated degradation of BTK,
Mino cells were pretreated for 2 h with either ibrutinib or thalidomide-OH
and subsequently treated with the PROTACs for an additional 24 h.
Both ibrutinib pretreatment and thalidomide-OH hindered BTK degradation
(Figure A). In contrast
to the covalent PROTACs, degradation by the noncovalent NC-1 was only slightly hindered by thalidomide. In addition, RC-1m, a methylated thalidomide analogue of RC-1, no longer
able to bind CRBN, lost all activity (Supporting
Figure 4), further suggesting CRBN-mediated degradation. We
treated Mino cells with bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor,[35] for 1 h before treatment with the PROTACs and
assessed BTK levels after an additional 4 h. Bortezomib significantly
inhibited degradation, suggesting proteasome-dependent degradation
(Figure B).
Figure 3
PROTAC-mediated
BTK degradation is hindered by ibrutinib, thalidomide,
and by proteasome inhibition. (A) Mino cells were either pretreated
for 2 h with ibrutinib/thalidomide-OH or untreated, before treatment
with a BTK PROTAC for 24 h. Subsequently BTK levels were measured
via Western blot. (B) Mino cells were treated for 1 h with bortezomib
to inhibit proteasome-dependent degradation; then PROTACs were added
for 4 h, followed by measuring BTK levels via Western blot.
PROTAC-mediated
BTK degradation is hindered by ibrutinib, thalidomide,
and by proteasome inhibition. (A) Mino cells were either pretreated
for 2 h with ibrutinib/thalidomide-OH or untreated, before treatment
with a BTKPROTAC for 24 h. Subsequently BTK levels were measured
via Western blot. (B) Mino cells were treated for 1 h with bortezomib
to inhibit proteasome-dependent degradation; then PROTACs were added
for 4 h, followed by measuring BTK levels via Western blot.To assess the PROTACs’ efficiency in a clinically
relevant
model, we tested their ability to induce BTK degradation in primary
cells from chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients. The PROTACs
displayed potent degradation with DC50’s < 100
nM, with NC-1 and IR-2 reaching higher degradation
levels than RC-2 and RC-3 (Figure ).
Figure 4
Degradation of BTK in
patient-derived CLL cells. Patient-derived
primary CLL cells were treated with BTK PROTACs for 18 h, followed
by measuring BTK levels via Western blot. M-IGHV/UM-IGHV: mutated/unmutated
immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) gene.
Degradation of BTK in
patient-derived CLL cells. Patient-derived
primary CLL cells were treated with BTK PROTACs for 18 h, followed
by measuring BTK levels via Western blot. M-IGHV/UM-IGHV: mutated/unmutated
immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) gene.While we observed potent degradation by covalent PROTACs,
it was
still not clear if and how the covalent bond contributes to the degradation
process. Due to the high noncovalent binding affinity of ibrutinib
to BTK, it is possible that the degradation is induced primarily by
reversible binding that occurs prior to covalent bond formation. A
second related question was, what is the dissociation rate of the
covalent complexes formed by the cyanoacrylamides, and whether this
rate can support catalytic degradation to the same degree as noncovalent
binding. To answer these questions, we performed several experiments
to evaluate the formation of covalent complexes with BTK at the time
scale and concentration range observed for degradation, as well as
their dissociation kinetics.First, we tested the degradation
activity of the PROTACs against
overexpressed wild-type BTK and the C481S mutant, which cannot form
covalent complexes (Figure ). As expected, the degradation by noncovalent NC-1 was only mildly affected by the mutation. However, the covalent
PROTACs IR-1, IR-2, and RC-2 also showed low sensitivity to the mutation. In contrast, degradation
by RC-3 was severely impaired by the mutation, indicating
an important role for covalent engagement in the degradation process
by RC-3.
Figure 5
Degradation of overexpressed BTK and BTK C481S in U2OS
cells. (A)
Transfected U2OS cells were treated with 100 nM PROTAC for 24 h, followed
by measuring BTK levels via Western blot. (B) Quantification of normalized
BTK levels in (A).
Degradation of overexpressed BTK and BTK C481S in U2OS
cells. (A)
Transfected U2OS cells were treated with 100 nM PROTAC for 24 h, followed
by measuring BTK levels via Western blot. (B) Quantification of normalized
BTK levels in (A).Second, we tested the
ability of the compounds to covalently bind
and inhibit BTK. We performed an in vitro kinase
activity assay with both wild-type BTK and the C481S mutant (Figure A,B). The assay was
performed with a preincubation period of 2 h, equivalent to the time
scale of degradation induced by the PROTACs in cells (Supporting Figure 3). As expected, ibrutinib was both highly
potent against the WT and sensitive to the mutation, with a 74-fold
reduction in potency, indicating efficient covalent engagement. The
noncovalent NC-1 showed very mild sensitivity to the
mutation, with a <2-fold reduction in affinity. The acrylamide IR-2 did not inhibit BTK more potently than NC-1 and also showed only slight sensitivity to the mutation,
indicating inefficient covalent bond formation, possibly due to the
lowered reactivity of the β-substituted acrylamide. On the other
hand, the cyanoacrylamidesRC-2 and RC-3 were an order of magnitude more potent than NC-1 and
also highly sensitive to the mutation with 68-fold and >1000-fold
reduction in potency, respectively, indicating rapid covalent binding
to BTK on the time scale of degradation. All the PROTACs tested except RC-3 exhibited sub-100 nM binding to BTK even after mutation
of C481. This may explain why only degradation by RC-3 was significantly impaired by the mutation.
Figure 6
All PROTACs are potent
BTK inhibitors invitro, and the
cyanoacrylamides show slow dissociation kinetics
and sensitivity to the C481S mutation. (A) In vitro kinase activity assay using wild-type BTK (0.6 nM BTK, 5 μM
ATP). (B) Summary of IC50 values for the PROTACs against
wild-type BTK and C481S BTK. (C) Time course LC-MS binding assay (3
μM compound + 2 μM BTK at room temperature). (D) Ibrutinib
competition assay validates reversible binding by cyanoacrylamides;
40 μM ibrutinib was added to the preformed complex and incubated
at 37 °C, and the different species were quantified by LC-MS.
All PROTACs are potent
BTK inhibitors invitro, and the
cyanoacrylamides show slow dissociation kinetics
and sensitivity to the C481S mutation. (A) In vitro kinase activity assay using wild-type BTK (0.6 nM BTK, 5 μM
ATP). (B) Summary of IC50 values for the PROTACs against
wild-type BTK and C481S BTK. (C) Time course LC-MS binding assay (3
μM compound + 2 μM BTK at room temperature). (D) Ibrutinib
competition assay validates reversible binding by cyanoacrylamides;
40 μM ibrutinib was added to the preformed complex and incubated
at 37 °C, and the different species were quantified by LC-MS.We also used LC-MS to directly observe the formation
of covalent
complexes with recombinant BTK and measure their dissociation kinetics
(Figure C, D, Supporting Figure 5A). LC-MS measurements with
2 μM BTK and 3 μM compound indicated covalent labeling
by all compounds except NC-1, with RC-3 forming
the complex extremely fast, followed by RC-2 and IR-2, in agreement with the data from the kinase activity
assay. We should note that the preincubation of the compounds with
5 mM GSH did not significantly affect protein binding of reversible
or irreversible covalent binders (Supporting Figure
5B).To test whether the formation of the covalent adducts
is reversible
and estimate the time scale of the exchange, we added 40 μM
ibrutinib to the samples after formation of the adducts and incubated
at 37 °C. For the acrylamidesIR-1 and IR-2, no ibrutinib adduct was observed even after 28 h of incubation.
However, only 80–85% of protein appeared to be labeled by the
PROTACs (Supporting Figure 5A). This may
indicate that in fact IR-1/2 have stably labeled 100%
of the protein, thereby preventing ibrutinib binding, but dissociation
during the separation or ionization process on the LC-MS may have
generated the observed free protein peak.In contrast, for the
cyanoacrylamidesRC-2 and RC-3, the addition
of ibrutinib led to the gradual displacement
of the PROTAC by ibrutinib, confirming the reversibility of the cyanoacrylamide
covalent binding. The exchange of the cyanoacrylamide was slow, on
the order of 10–20 h. The noncovalent PROTAC NC-1 forms no covalent adduct and is rapidly exchanged by ibrutinib (100%
ibrutinib labeling by 4 μM in 1 h at room temperature; Supporting Figure 5A), indicating very rapid binding
and dissociation kinetics.To assess their proteomic selectivity,
we incubated the PROTACs
at 50 or 100 nM for 24 h with Ramos cells and followed the change
in protein abundance via quantitative label-free proteomics (Figure , Supporting Figure 6). In agreement with the Western blot analysis,
BTK was efficiently degraded by all the PROTACs we tested. NC-1, IR-1, IR-2, and RC-2 also
degraded the known ibrutinib off-targets CSK, LYN, and BLK,[33] while several other off-targets, such as LCK
and PLK1, were not significantly affected. NC-1 showed
the highest degradation potency against BTK, in agreement with Western
blot analysis. On the other hand, the only significant off-target
of RC-3 was BLK (a covalent off-target of ibrutinib)
with no activity against the noncovalent off-targets CSK and LYN,
representing enhanced selectivity and in agreement with the reduced
noncovalent affinity of RC-3 to BTK. No other significant
off-targets were detected consistently (Supporting
Data Set 1).
Figure 7
Proteomic analysis reveals high selectivity for both covalent
and
noncovalent BTK PROTACs. Ramos cells were incubated with each PROTAC
(50 nM) or DMSO in quadruplicates for 24 h and were then subjected
to label-free quantitative proteomics analysis. Each graph plots the
Log2 fold-change of proteins in the treated samples compared
to the DMSO controls (x-axis) vs the −log(p-value) of that comparison in a Student’s t test (y-axis).
Proteomic analysis reveals high selectivity for both covalent
and
noncovalent BTK PROTACs. Ramos cells were incubated with each PROTAC
(50 nM) or DMSO in quadruplicates for 24 h and were then subjected
to label-free quantitative proteomics analysis. Each graph plots the
Log2 fold-change of proteins in the treated samples compared
to the DMSO controls (x-axis) vs the −log(p-value) of that comparison in a Student’s t test (y-axis).Lastly, we assessed the ability of the PROTACs to abrogate the
activation of primary mouse B cells in response to B cell receptor
stimulation. For this purpose, primary B cells were treated with anti-IgM
for 18 h,[36,37] followed by staining for CD86, a B cell
activation surface marker (Figure ; Supporting Figure 7). The
inhibition of B cell activation correlated well with the BTK degradation
activity, with NC-1 and IR-2 showing the
strongest effect, followed by RC-3 and RC-2. NC-1 and IR-2 displayed superior inhibition
compared to ibrutinib, underscoring the benefit of targeted degradation
compared to inhibition alone. The cyanoacrylamidesRC-3 and RC-2 required higher concentrations to reach maximal
activity but also displayed superior activity to ibrutinib at 1 μM.
Figure 8
PROTACs
inhibit B cell receptor signaling more potently than ibrutinib.
Dose−response curves for B cell response after anti-IgM-induced
activation and treatment with BTK PROTACs or ibrutinib for 24 h. The y-axis shows normalized CD86 mean fluorescence intensity,
where 100% activation is cells stimulated with anti-IgM and 0% activation
is unstimulated cells.
PROTACs
inhibit B cell receptor signaling more potently than ibrutinib.
Dose−response curves for B cell response after anti-IgM-induced
activation and treatment with BTK PROTACs or ibrutinib for 24 h. The y-axis shows normalized CD86 mean fluorescence intensity,
where 100% activation is cells stimulated with anti-IgM and 0% activation
is unstimulated cells.
Discussion
The
motivation for developing reversible covalent PROTACs lies
in the combination of the advantages encompassed by covalent binding,
such as increased potency and selectivity, while maintaining the reversibility
that is considered important for the catalytic nature of PROTAC efficacy.
Several previous studies reported noncovalent PROTACs against BTK,[28−32] and some indicated that irreversible binding might be detrimental
to the activity of covalent PROTACs.[23] In
this work we tested whether cyanoacrylamide reversible covalent binders
could serve as potent PROTACs. Our results show that both acrylamides
and cyanoacrylamides can function as potent and selective PROTACs,
including in patient-derived cell lines (Figure ), with the irreversible IR-2 being among the most potent BTK PROTACs reported to date. Still,
the noncovalent PROTAC NC-1 outperformed IR-2.Since ibrutinib displays nM binding even without covalent
bond
formation[38] (Figure B), noncovalent BTK PROTACs can be very potent,[23,39,28] and adding irreversible covalent
binding would primarily be expected to reduce potency due to the loss
of catalysis. Indeed, the noncovalent NC-1 was the most
potent PROTAC we tested, similarly to Tinworth et al.[23] However, very potent degradation was also observed with
acrylamide PROTACs such as IR-2. We observed that IR-2 forms covalent bonds slowly relative to the rate of degradation,
most likely due to the lower reactivity of substituted acrylamides,
and therefore much of its activity may have been derived from reversible
binding. Tinworth et al.[23] tested irreversible
covalent PROTACs based on CRBN and IAP binders, which were inactive
and were also substituted acrylamides. These PROTACs harbored a piperazine
moiety in the linker, attached one carbon away from the acrylamide
group, which may affect reactivity and PROTAC binding. However, in vitro kinase assays using wild-type and mutant BTK had
similar results to those reported here, with their acrylamidePROTAC
exhibiting essentially the same IC50 toward BTK as the
noncovalent counterpart. Therefore, the covalent PROTACs tested by
Tinworth et al. most likely also have formed covalent bonds inefficiently,
and their inactivity may have resulted from issues such as permeability,
stability, or an unfavorable geometry. Conversely, Xue et al.[22] recently developed unsubstituted acrylamideBTK PROTACs that covalently engaged BTK and degraded it in the cell,
albeit not to 100%. Along with our study this indicates that measurement
of the relative rates of covalent bond formation and degradation is
needed to estimate how covalent binding affects PROTAC activity.In parallel to this publication, Guo et al.[34] have also reported cyanoacrylamide-based BTK degraders,
using a different linker design. For that series of PROTACs the cyanoacrylamides
were much more potent than the equivalent noncovalent and acrylamide
PROTACs, which they attribute to significantly higher cell penetration
of the cyanoacrylamides. Their study thus supports the use of reversible
covalent PROTACs but makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding
the role of the covalent bond in the degradation. Here, RC-3 and NC-1 penetrated the cells to a similar degree,
and both bind BTK reversibly, with RC-3 showing much
better IC50 (Figure A). However, NC-1 is still a more efficient BTK
degrader. We suggest two hypotheses for this discrepancy: First, the
noncovalent NC-1 has a much less rigid linker than IR-2 and RC-3, with free rotation around the
bond proximal to the amide linkage. This flexibility may aid the PROTAC
in adopting the optimal configuration for the ternary complex formation
and for ubiquitination or increase the stability of the interaction
of the BTK-PROTAC complex with the E3 ligase,[5,7] which
is likely more relevant to degradation efficiency and may also explain
the ability of NC-1 to compete with thalidomide (Figure A) compared to the
other PROTACs. Second, the noncovalent NC-1 has a rapid
binding and dissociation equilibrium: in the presence of preincubated NC-1, ibrutinib labels BTK fully within 1 h (Supporting Figure 4). Therefore, NC-1 can bind
BTK in the cell, promote the formation of the ternary complex to induce
ubiquitination, and quickly dissociate to bind more BTK molecules,
even before the ubiquitinated BTK undergoes proteasomal degradation.
The cyanoacrylamides tested here dissociate in time scales of 10–20
h, similar to the residence times observed for other cyanoacrylamide
inhibitors.[32] Therefore, they can only
be recycled after the bound BTK molecule has been degraded, resulting
in less efficient catalysis.While RC-3 was not
as potent as NC-1 in
BTK degradation, it did have a significant advantage in selectivity.
The addition of the cyanoacrylamide with the geminal dimethyl group
greatly diminished the reversible binding affinity (which was observed
for other cyanoacrylamide inhibitors of BTK[27]), while maintaining potent covalent binding. This significantly
reduced the activity against the noncovalent off-targets LYN and CSK.We conclude that reversible covalent PROTACs hold promise for selective
degradation of challenging targets for which no high-affinity reversible
ligand is available, and these are the targets where the benefits
of covalent PROTACs are likely to be most evident.
Methods
General Outline of Reversible Covalent PROTAC
Synthesis
To synthesize reversible covalent PROTACs, we prepared
PEG-monotosylates
of different lengths and coupled them to 4-OH-thalidomide to generate
thalidomide-PEG-OH constructs (Supporting Information). These were oxidized to aldehydes, followed by an aldol condensation
with the BTK inhibitor cyanoacetate to generate the cyanoacrylates.
During the condensation, the ether linkage nearest the cyanoacrylate
in RC-1 and RC0a-j was frequently cleaved and higher molecular adducts
were formed, as observed by LC/MS measurements. In the synthesis of
RC-2 and RC-3 (where the last ether linkage was replaced with a CH2 group or C(CH3)2), the condensation
was considerably slower with reduced unwanted side reactions and higher
yield (see Supporting Information for synthesis
procedures). 1H and 13C NMR spectra were recorded
on a 11.7 T Bruker AVANCE III HD spectrometer. Chemical shifts are
reported in ppm on the δ scale downfield from TMS and are calibrated
according to the deuterated solvents (see Supporting
Information).
Western Blotting
Ramos (ATCC, CRL-1596),
Mino (ATCC,
CRL-3000), or K562 (NCI-60) cell lines were counted and diluted to
106 cell/mL, using 1 mL per well in a 24-well plate, and
U2OS (ATCC HTB-96) cells overexpressing humanBTKWT or C481S mutant
were grown using 2 mL in a six-well plate (see Supporting Information). Cells were incubated with 1% DMSO
or compound in indicated concentrations for 24 h unless indicated
differently, or cells were left untreated. Lysates were prepared as
previously described,[29] and samples were
measured for total protein quantification by bicinchoninic acid (BCA)
assay (#23225 ThermoFisher Scientific) supplemented with 4× loading
buffer including 20 mM DTT, heated to 70 °C for 10 min, loaded
into 4% SDS-PAGE gel, run for 45 min at 140 mV, then transferred into
a nitrocellulose membrane (Biorad) using a Trans-Blot Turbo transfer
system (Biorad). The membrane was stained with Ponceau (Sigma) to
validate transfer for 10 min in gentle agitation then destained for
1 h with MQ water. The membrane was blocked with Licor blocking buffer
(LIC927-70001) for 1 h, washed three times for 5 min with TBS-T, incubated
with primary antibody BTK (D3H5) rabbit mAb (CST; 8547 S) overnight
(16 h) at 4 °C, washed three times for 5 min with TBS-T, and
incubated with primary antibody against β-actin (CST; 3700)
for 1 h at 25 °C. Membrane was washed three times for 5 min with
TBS-T, incubated with fluorescent secondary antibodies anti-mouse
IgG Alexa Fluor 647 (CST: 4410S) and anti-rabbit-IgG IRDye 800(LICOR:
926-32211) for 1 h, then washed three times for 5 min with TBS-T,
dried, and immediately imaged and analyzed using Licor Odyssey CLx.
Prism (GraphPad) software was used to calculate degradation levels.
We used second-order polynomial fits to estimate DC50 and Dmax values.
In Vitro Activity Assays for BTK (Carried Out
by Nanosyn, Santa Clara, CA, USA)
Test compounds were diluted
in DMSO to a final concentration that ranged from 2 μM to 11.3
pM, while the final concentration of DMSO in all assays was kept at
1%. The compounds were incubated with BTK for 2 h in a 2× buffer
containing the following: 1.2 nM BTK, 100 mM HEPES pH = 7.5, 10 mM
MgCl2, 2 mM DTT, 0.1% BSA, 0.01% Triton X-100, 20 μM
sodium orthovanadate, and 20 μM beta-glycerophosphate. Reaction
was initiated by 2-fold dilution into a solution containing 5 μM
ATP (50 μM for C481S) and substrate. The reference compound
staurosporine was tested in a similar manner.
In Vitro BTK Binding Assays
Binding
experiments were performed in Tris 20 mM pH = 8, 50 mM NaCl, and 1
mM DTT. BTK kinase domain was diluted to 2 μM in buffer, and
3 μM PROTAC was added by adding 1/100th volume from a 300 μM
solution. The PROTACs were incubated with BTK at room temperature
for various times. For testing by LCMS, 24 μL of the solution
was mixed with 6 μL of 2.4% formic acid, and 10 μL was
injected to LCMS.For the binding reversibility experiments,
the PROTACs were incubated with BTK for 2 h at room temperature, followed
by addition of 40 μM ibrutinib (by addition of 1/100th volume
of a 4 mM solution in DMSO). The samples were incubated with ibrutinib
at 37 °C for various times and tested by LCMS as described before.
For the noncovalent PROTAC NC-1, ibrutinib was added to the complex
at a concentration of 4 μM and incubated for 1 h at room temperature.For binding experiments in the presence of glutathione, freshly
dissolved reduced glutathione was incubated at 6.14 mM with 4 μM
compounds for 30 min at room temperature in Tris 20 mM pH = 8 and
50 mM NaCl. At this point BTK was added to a concentration of 2 μM
(diluting the GSH to 5 mM and the compounds to 3.25 μM), and
LC-MS was used as described previously to follow the covalent labeling
of BTK.For data analysis, the raw spectra were deconvoluted
using a 27 000:37 000
Da window and 1 Da resolution. The signal from masses 27 000:30 000
and 34 000:37 000 (which contained no peaks) was averaged
and subtracted from the whole signal. The peaks of each species were
integrated using a 100 Da window in every direction (reducing the
window down to 10 Da did not change the results significantly).
Authors: Zhengying Pan; Heleen Scheerens; Shyr-Jiann Li; Brian E Schultz; Paul A Sprengeler; L Chuck Burrill; Rohan V Mendonca; Michael D Sweeney; Keana C K Scott; Paul G Grothaus; Douglas A Jeffery; Jill M Spoerke; Lee A Honigberg; Peter R Young; Stacie A Dalrymple; James T Palmer Journal: ChemMedChem Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Dennis Dobrovolsky; Eric S Wang; Sara Morrow; Catharine Leahy; Tyler Faust; Radosław P Nowak; Katherine A Donovan; Guang Yang; Zhengnian Li; Eric S Fischer; Steven P Treon; David M Weinstock; Nathanael S Gray Journal: Blood Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Adelajda Zorba; Chuong Nguyen; Yingrong Xu; Jeremy Starr; Kris Borzilleri; James Smith; Hongyao Zhu; Kathleen A Farley; WeiDong Ding; James Schiemer; Xidong Feng; Jeanne S Chang; Daniel P Uccello; Jennifer A Young; Carmen N Garcia-Irrizary; Lara Czabaniuk; Brandon Schuff; Robert Oliver; Justin Montgomery; Matthew M Hayward; Jotham Coe; Jinshan Chen; Mark Niosi; Suman Luthra; Jaymin C Shah; Ayman El-Kattan; Xiayang Qiu; Graham M West; Mark C Noe; Veerabahu Shanmugasundaram; Adam M Gilbert; Matthew F Brown; Matthew F Calabrese Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2018-07-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Blake E Smith; Stephen L Wang; Saul Jaime-Figueroa; Alicia Harbin; Jing Wang; Brian D Hamman; Craig M Crews Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-01-10 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Peter J Cossar; Madita Wolter; Lars van Dijck; Dario Valenti; Laura M Levy; Christian Ottmann; Luc Brunsveld Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 15.419