Zhangping Xiao1, Deng Chen1, Shanshan Song1,2, Ramon van der Vlag3, Petra E van der Wouden1, Ronald van Merkerk1, Robbert H Cool1, Anna K H Hirsch3,4,5, Barbro N Melgert2,6, Wim J Quax1, Gerrit J Poelarends1, Frank J Dekker1. 1. Chemical and Pharmaceutical Biology, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy (GRIP), University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. Molecular Pharmacology, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy (GRIP), University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands. 3. Stratingh Institute for Chemistry, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 7, 9747 AG Groningen, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Drug Design and Optimization, Helmholtz Institute for Pharmaceutical Research Saarland (HIPS) - Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI) Campus Building E8.1, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany. 5. Department of Pharmacy, Saarland University, Campus Building E8.1, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany. 6. Groningen Research Institute of Asthma and COPD, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
Macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) is a cytokine with key roles in inflammation and cancer, which qualifies it as a potential drug target. Apart from its cytokine activity, MIF also harbors enzyme activity for keto-enol tautomerization. MIF enzymatic activity has been used for identification of MIF binding molecules that also interfere with its biological activity. However, MIF tautomerase activity assays are troubled by irregularities, thus creating a need for alternative methods. In this study, we identified a 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorophore with high affinity for the MIF tautomerase active site (Ki = 18 ± 1 nM) that binds with concomitant quenching of its fluorescence. This property enabled development of a novel competition-based assay format to quantify MIF binding. We also demonstrated that the 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorophore interfered with the MIF-CD74 interaction and inhibited proliferation of A549 cells. Thus, we provide a high-affinity MIF binder as a novel tool to advance MIF-oriented research.
Macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) is a cytokine with key roles in inflammation and cancer, which qualifies it as a potential drug target. Apart from its cytokine activity, MIF also harbors enzyme activity for keto-enol tautomerization. MIF enzymatic activity has been used for identification of MIF binding molecules that also interfere with its biological activity. However, MIF tautomerase activity assays are troubled by irregularities, thus creating a need for alternative methods. In this study, we identified a 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorophore with high affinity for the MIF tautomerase active site (Ki = 18 ± 1 nM) that binds with concomitant quenching of its fluorescence. This property enabled development of a novel competition-based assay format to quantify MIF binding. We also demonstrated that the 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorophore interfered with the MIF-CD74 interaction and inhibited proliferation of A549 cells. Thus, we provide a high-affinity MIF binder as a novel tool to advance MIF-oriented research.
The impact of cancer
as a major public health problem is demonstrated
by the estimated 9.6 million cancer-related deaths worldwide in 2018.[1] Although substantial progress has been achieved
over the last decades, cancer treatment remains a challenge.[2] This challenge can be addressed by exploring
novel molecular mechanisms involved in cell proliferation to identify
novel therapeutics. Apart from inflammation,[3,4] the
cytokine macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) has also been
connected to several processes in the pathogenesis and progression
of cancer.[5,6] Overexpression of MIF was found in several
cancers, including genitourinary cancer,[7] melanoma,[8] neuroblastoma,[9] and lung carcinoma.[10] Both clinical
and animal studies demonstrated that MIF enhanced tumor growth, invasion,
and angiogenesis.[11,12] Additionally, MIF gene knockout
or knockdown decreased proliferation and increased apoptosis of cancer
cells.[13,14] The role of MIF in tumor development indicates
that MIF represents a potential drug target for cancer therapy.On a molecular level, MIF operates via protein–protein interactions
(PPIs) with membrane-bound receptors such as the cluster of differentiation
74 (CD74), CXCR4, and CXCR7 receptors, as well as with intracellular
targets such as p53 and Jab.[15−18] Binding of MIF to CD74 triggers activation of the
mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway and inhibition of
p53, which both suppress apoptosis and enhance cell proliferation.[7] Development of molecules that interfere with
MIF–receptor interactions is an attractive strategy to inhibit
MIF-induced cellular signaling. The utility of this approach has been
demonstrated by the development of the MIF-neutralizing antibody imalumab,
which is currently in a phase II clinical trial for treatment of patients
with metastatic colorectal cancer.[19] Also,
the development of small-molecule MIF binders to interfere with MIF
signaling has gained attention over the past years.[20,21]There is structural information available to facilitate development
of MIF-targeted therapeutics. MIF exists in a homotrimeric form, in
which each monomer contains a peptide with 114 amino acids folding
into two β-strands and four α-helixes.[22] MIF also harbors three tautomerase active sites, each located
at the interface between two adjacent monomers, centering around Pro1
residues,[23] that catalyze keto–enol
conversion of substrates such as d-dopachrome and 4-hydroxylphenylpyruvate
(4-HPP). Importantly, the enzyme active sites are located in the vicinity
of amino acid residues that are involved in binding to the CD74 receptor.
For instance, amino acid residues Y36, K66, N109, I64, and W108 on
the MIF surface (Figure A) were mapped as residues responsible for activation of CD74 by
alanine-scanning mutagenesis.[24] Residues
79–86 on the second α2-helix were also identified
to be responsible for MIF–CD74 binding.[25] Interestingly, Y99 of MIF was reported to regulate both
catalytic activity and CD74 activation allosterically.[26] Therefore, inhibitors of MIF tautomerase activity
can be expected to interfere with MIF/CD74 binding and MIF-induced
signaling.[27] The initially discovered MIF
tautomerase inhibitor ISO-1 (Figure B) also suppresses MIF cytokine activity.[28] For instance, ISO-1 significantly inhibited
prostate cancer growth through neutralizing MIF-triggered MAPK pathway
activation both on the cellular level and in animal models.[29] Other inhibitors like 4-IPP and SCD-19 (Figure B) were also effective
in inhibition of MIF-mediated tumor cell growth or migration.[30,31] However, the currently available inhibitors are not in clinical
development for various reasons, such as the lack of potency, poor
physicochemical properties, chemical reactivity, etc. Therefore, novel inhibitors with improved properties are needed
to facilitate both basic research and drug development.
Figure 1
Structure of
MIF, MIF tautomerase inhibitors, and molecules used
for MIF binding studies. (A) The MIF surface alanine-scanning mutagenesis
study results and ISO-1 binding site (PDB code: 1LJT(38)). The regions highlighted in red or pink show mutants that
cannot or can only partially activate CD74, respectively.[24] ISO-1 is shown in green.[38] The ISO-1 binding site is located in the vicinity of amino
acid residues involved in CD74 receptor activation, such as Y36, K66,
and N109. (B) Structures of ISO-1,[28] 4-IPP,[31] and SCD-19.[30] (C)
4-HPP tautomerization catalyzed by MIF.[33] (D) Structure of ligand B for the fluorescence polarization probe
assay.[37]
Structure of
MIF, MIF tautomerase inhibitors, and molecules used
for MIF binding studies. (A) The MIF surface alanine-scanning mutagenesis
study results and ISO-1 binding site (PDB code: 1LJT(38)). The regions highlighted in red or pink show mutants that
cannot or can only partially activate CD74, respectively.[24] ISO-1 is shown in green.[38] The ISO-1 binding site is located in the vicinity of amino
acid residues involved in CD74 receptor activation, such as Y36, K66,
and N109. (B) Structures of ISO-1,[28] 4-IPP,[31] and SCD-19.[30] (C)
4-HPP tautomerization catalyzed by MIF.[33] (D) Structure of ligand B for the fluorescence polarization probe
assay.[37]Several assays have been developed to study binding to the MIF
tautomerase active site. The most commonly used assay format depends
on MIF-catalyzed keto–enol tautomerization of d-dopachrome
methyl ester or 4-HPP that can be monitored by a corresponding change
in the UV absorption spectrum (Figure C). Despite its utility, this tautomerization-based
assay format has several drawbacks. The use of d-dopachrome
methyl ester has the disadvantage that it can undergo spontaneous
decarboxylation to form 5,6-dihydroxyindole (DHI) and CO2,[32] which makes this substrate less convenient.
The substrate 4-HPP proved to be a more stable substrate for MIF-catalyzed
tautomerization,[33] which stimulated broad
application in MIF tautomerase activity assays. Nevertheless, the
4-HPP enol reaction product proved to be relatively unstable in an
aqueous environment for both enthalpic and entropic reasons.[34] This creates the need to perform the MIF-catalyzed
tautomerization of 4-HPP in buffers with relatively low pH (∼6.0)
and high concentrations of boric acid and ammonium acetate to stabilize
the enol reaction product. We also note that the UV absorbance at
306 nm for detection of the 4-HPP enol reaction product is relatively
unspecific, which increases the chance for interference by UV-active
compounds. These and other factors can result in irregularities in
MIF tautomerase enzyme activity assays as described previously.[35,36] This demonstrates the need for complementary assays to study MIF
binding such as the fluorescence polarization competition assay with
fluorescently labeled MIF ligand B as shown in Figure D.[37] Here, we
provide a fluorescent indicator displacement (FID) assay as a convenient
and sensitive assay for MIF binding studies.The FID assay provides
a convenient format for competitive binding
studies.[39,40] In this assay format, a fluorescent indicator
is allowed to bind reversibly to a receptor upon which binding of
a competing ligand can be quantified by displacement of the fluorescent
indicator.[41] Development of a fluorescent
indicator that binds tightly to the target and changes fluorescence
upon binding is key to successful development of an FID assay. We
envisioned that 7-hydroxycoumarin derivatives are promising fluorophores
for the development of a fluorescent MIF-binding sensor because of
their intensive fluorescence.[42] Importantly,
these fluorophores were reported to bind to the MIF tautomerase active
site.[43] However, their utility in an FID
assay for MIF has not yet been explored.In this study, we describe
the development of a 7-hydroxycoumarin
inhibitor as a fluorescent indicator for an FID assay to study binding
to the MIF tautomerase active site. Toward this aim, a series of 7-hydroxycoumarins
were synthesized and the structure–activity relationships (SARs)
for MIF binding and concomitant fluorescence quenching were explored.
A 7-hydroxycoumarin derivative with nanomolar potency was identified
and used for the development of a convenient and sensitive FID assay
for MIF binder assessment. Furthermore, we also explored the 7-hydroxycoumarin
inhibitor for its potency to interfere with the MIF–CD74 interaction
and with MIF-induced ERK phosphorylation and proliferation of A549
cells. Altogether, we identified a novel MIF-binding fluorophore that
can be used in competitive binding studies as well as in cell-based
assays.
Results
Design and Synthesis
In order to
identify a suitable
fluorophore for fluorescence quenching binding studies, we set out
to investigate a focused compound collection around the 7-hydroxycoumarin
scaffold with carbonyl or phenyl substitution in the 3-position. 2,4-Dihydroxybenzaldehyde 1 was employed as the starting material to provide the desired
product using the Knoevenagel condensation as a key step as outlined
in Scheme . Condensation
of 1 with diethylmalonate, using piperidine as base,
provided 2 in 76% yield. Condensation of 1 with malonic acid afforded intermediate 3 that was
converted to compounds 4a and 4b by an amidation
reaction in yields of 54 and 54%, respectively. tert-Butyldimethylsilyl (TBDMS) protection of 1 provided 5 as a starting material for condensation with the corresponding
2-phenylacetic acids to obtain compounds 6a–l. Condensation proceeded with cyanuric chloride and N-methylmorpholine (NMM) followed by TBDMS deprotection
using TBAF. The yields for these subsequent two reaction steps were
20–90%. All final compounds were purified with chromatography
and characterized by 1H and 13C NMR spectroscopy,
and LC-HRMS (Supporting Information).
Scheme 1
Synthesis of 7-Hydroxycoumarins as MIF Inhibitors from 2,4-Dihydroxybenzaldehyde 1 as a Key Precursor
The focused
compound collection described above
was tested for inhibition of MIF tautomerase activity employing 4-HPP
as a substrate as described previously.[35] In brief, the compound stock solution in DMSO was subsequently mixed
with aqueous EDTA solution and MIF solution in assay buffer. After
10 min of preincubation, the assay was started by mixing the inhibitor–enzyme
mixture with 4-HPP solution. The final reaction mixture contained
225 nM MIF, 0.5 mM 4-HPP, 2.5% (v/v) DMSO, and a variable concentrations
of inhibitor. Enzyme activity was monitored by the change in UV absorbance
at 306 nm over time. The residual enzyme activity was determined with
reference to the positive control for which a corresponding amount
of DMSO was used, which was set to 100%. A control reaction in the
absence of the enzyme was used as negative control to correct for
the spontaneous conversion of the substrate, which was set to 0%.
The linear regression parameters were determined to calculate IC50 using GraphPad Prism. The IC50 values were transformed
to Ki values using the Cheng–Prusoff
equation: Ki = IC50/(1 + [S]/Km),[44] in which [S]
is the substrate concentration (0.5 mM) and Km is the Michaelis–Menten constant (1.0 mM).[35]The SARs for inhibition of the MIF tautomerase
activity by the 7-hydroxycoumarins are shown in Table . For compound 2, a Ki of 12.4 ± 1.3 μM was observed,
which is in line with a previous report (7.4 ± 2.0 μM).[43] Changing the ester to a substituted amide in
compounds 4a and 4b decreased the inhibitory
potency. In contrast, phenyl substitution at the 7-hydroxycoumarin
3-position in compound 6a provided 10-fold enhanced potency
(Ki of 1.17 ± 0.10 μM) compared
to inhibitor 2. Subsequently, compound 6a was used as a starting point to evaluate changes in potency upon
substitution on the phenyl ring (6b–l). Substitution of the phenyl para-position with
a chloro- (6b), methyl- (6c), methoxyl-
(6d), fluoro- (6j), bromo- (6k), or iodo- (6l) functionality provided 2- to 3-fold
improvement in inhibitory potency. In contrast, replacement of the
phenyl with a naphthalene (6e) or substitution at the meta- or ortho-position (6f–i) did not improve the potency compared to 6a. Among the para-halogen-substituted analogues,
bromo-substitution in 6k provided, with a Ki value of 0.31 ± 0.02 μM, the highest inhibitory
potency.
Table 1
Inhibition of the MIF Tautomerase
Enzyme Activity by 3-Substituted 7-Hydroxycoumarin Derivatives as
Determined by the Conversion of 4-HPP as a Substrate (n = 3, Standard Deviations of the Nonlinear Curve Fitting Are Reported)
Ki =
IC50/(1 + 0.5/Km).
% inhibition at 25 μM.
7.4 ± 2.0 μM (Orita-1)
in the literature.[43]
Ki =
IC50/(1 + 0.5/Km).% inhibition at 25 μM.7.4 ± 2.0 μM (Orita-1)
in the literature.[43]
Fluorescence Quenching and Indicator-Displacement
Assay
From the focused compound collection, inhibitor 6d was
chosen for the initial exploration of an FID assay for MIF binding.
Inhibitor 6d has a UV absorption maximum at 340 nm in
PBS (pH 7.4) and a fluorescence emission maximum at 460 nm, resulting
in a Stokes shift of 120 nm (Figure A). The fluorescence quantum yield was determined to
be 0.25 (Figure S1), which is sufficiently
high for the development of a fluorescent sensor for binding studies.[42] Importantly, the fluorescence intensity of 6d is linearly correlated to its concentration at concentrations
below 200 nM (Figure B). Fluorescence quenching of 6d (200 nM) was observed
upon addition of MIF (1 μM) (Figure C), and the fluorescence quenching is concentration-dependent
(Figure D). Quantification
of the change in fluorescence enabled determination of a dissociation
constant of 0.39 ± 0.04 μM for 6d to MIF (Figure E), which is in line
with the Ki value calculated from the
MIF tautomerase enzyme activity assay. Taken together, this demonstrates
that 7-hydroxycoumarin 6d shows affinity-dependent fluorescence
quenching upon binding to the MIF tautomerase active site, which enables
quantification of binding.
Figure 2
The fluorescence of compound 6d is quenched upon binding
to MIF. (A) UV absorbance (50 μM) and fluorescence emission
spectra (200 nM) of 6d. (B) Concentration–fluorescence
intensity correlation of 6d, n = 3.
(C) Fluorescence and fluorescence quenching of 6d (200
nM) in the absence or presence of MIF (1 μM). (D) Decrease in
fluorescence intensity for 6d (100 nM) with increasing
concentration of MIF (10 nM to 4 μM). (E) Concentration-dependent
decrease of the fluorescence of 6d (100 nM) in response
to increased concentration of MIF, n = 3. All experiments
were conducted in pH 7.4 PBS buffer.
The fluorescence of compound 6d is quenched upon binding
to MIF. (A) UV absorbance (50 μM) and fluorescence emission
spectra (200 nM) of 6d. (B) Concentration–fluorescence
intensity correlation of 6d, n = 3.
(C) Fluorescence and fluorescence quenching of 6d (200
nM) in the absence or presence of MIF (1 μM). (D) Decrease in
fluorescence intensity for 6d (100 nM) with increasing
concentration of MIF (10 nM to 4 μM). (E) Concentration-dependent
decrease of the fluorescence of 6d (100 nM) in response
to increased concentration of MIF, n = 3. All experiments
were conducted in pH 7.4 PBS buffer.The affinity-dependent fluorescence quenching of 6d upon
binding to MIF creates chances for development of an FID assay
to quantify binding to the MIF tautomerase active site. The quenched
fluorescence of 6d (100 nM) by MIF (1.0 μM) can
be recovered by using the nonfluorescent MIF inhibitor 8 in a concentration-dependent manner (Figure A). Plotting the fluorescence intensity against
the concentration of 8 provided a sigmoidal curve with
an effective concentration for a half-recovery of the fluorescence
(EC50) of 0.386 ± 0.044 μM as derived by nonlinear
curve fitting.
Figure 3
Fluorescence recovery of 6d in the presence
of MIF
by 8. (A) Fluorescence spectra of 6d (100
nM) together with MIF (1.0 μM) increased with the addition of 8. (B) Nonlinear regression for log concentration of 8vs response, n = 3.
Fluorescence recovery of 6d in the presence
of MIF
by 8. (A) Fluorescence spectra of 6d (100
nM) together with MIF (1.0 μM) increased with the addition of 8. (B) Nonlinear regression for log concentration of 8vs response, n = 3.EC50 for fluorescence recovery was used
to calculate
the corresponding Kd value for binding
of 8 to MIF by application of eq according to literature procedures.[39,45] In this equation, Kd is the dissociation
constant between MIF and the nonfluorescent inhibitor; Ht is the total host (MIF) concentration; It is the total concentration of the fluorescent indicator 6d; EC50 is the concentration of the competitor
that provides half-maximal fluorescence recovery; KS is the dissociation binding constant of the interaction
between MIF and fluorescent indicator 6b; Fb is the fraction of the bound indicator 6b. Using this equation, a Kd value of
0.156 ± 0.018 μM was calculated for the binding of 8 to MIF. We note that this value corresponds well with a Ki value of 0.100 ± 0.010 μM as determined
by the MIF tautomerase activity assay using 4-HPP as a substrate.
Binding properties of 8 are also in line with the SARs
of a group of structurally similar MIF inhibitors.[37] At this point, we conclude that the FID assay provides
a viable alternative for the MIF tautomerase enzyme activity assay
used for analysis of MIF binding molecules.
Assay Optimization
In the next step, we set out to
improve the FID assay by development of a 7-hydroxycoumarin with a
higher affinity for MIF to gain sensitivity and enable reduction of
the concentrations of both the fluorophore and MIF. Improved affinity
was achieved by expansion of the substituent on the para-position of the 3-phenyl-7-hydroxycoumarin scaffold with a 4′-carboxyphenyl
functionality. This functionality was installed using a Suzuki cross-coupling
reaction on the para-iodophenyl derivative 6l to provide 7-hydroxycoumarin 7 (Scheme ). Interestingly, 7 exhibited a 10-fold increased potency compared to its precursor 6l in the MIF tautomerase activity assay to provide an IC50 value of 71 ± 3 nM, which indicates tight-binding properties.
Because of the tight-binding properties, the Morrison equation was
used to calculate the binding constant of 7, which proved
to be 16 ± 1 nM (see Figure S2).[46]
Scheme 2
Synthesis of 7
Reagents and conditions: (vi)
4-boronobenzoic acid, Pd(AcO)2, Na2CO3, EtOH, rt.
Synthesis of 7
Reagents and conditions: (vi)
4-boronobenzoic acid, Pd(AcO)2, Na2CO3, EtOH, rt.To rationalize binding of 7 to MIF, a docking study
was performed for compound 7 using the crystal structure
of MIF bound to inhibitor 2 (Orita-1) (PDB code: 1GCZ).[43] Inhibitor 2 (Orita-1) was removed from the
binding site and redocked to validate the docking protocol. The 7-hydroxylcoumarin
part of 2 (Orita-1) occupies the active site that harbors
the MIF tautomerase activity. There is a second hydrophobic region
at the rim of the tautomerase active site to which 2 (Orita-1)
does not bind. The highest-scoring docking poses for compound 7 can occupy the same position as observed for 2 (Orita-1) to provide similar interactions of the coumarin core (Figure A and Figure S8). The major difference between 2 (Orita-1) and 7 resides in the substitution
at the coumarin 3-position. 2 (Orita-1) formed a hydrophobic
interaction between the ethyl group of the ester and Lys32. In contrast,
for compound 7, both phenyl rings at the coumarin 3-position
formed π–π stacking interactions with Tyr36 and
hydrophobic interactions with Pro1 and Lys32 (Figure B) at the rim of the tautomerase active site.
Thus, compound 7 provides additional interactions with
the hydrophobic rim of the MIF tautomerase active site, which explains
the higher MIF binding potency observed for inhibitor 7.
Figure 4
Molecular modeling of compound 7 in the MIF tautomerase
active site (PDB code: 1GCZ).[43] (A) Overlay for binding
of 2 (Orita-1) (green) and 7 (yellow) to
the MIF tautomerase active site. The protein is shown in ribbon diagram.
Inhibitors are displayed as sticks. (B) Binding of 7 to
the MIF tautomerase active site shown in surface representation. The
interactions between phenyl rings of 7 and rim residues
Tyr36 and Lys32 are highlighted.
Molecular modeling of compound 7 in the MIF tautomerase
active site (PDB code: 1GCZ).[43] (A) Overlay for binding
of 2 (Orita-1) (green) and 7 (yellow) to
the MIF tautomerase active site. The protein is shown in ribbon diagram.
Inhibitors are displayed as sticks. (B) Binding of 7 to
the MIF tautomerase active site shown in surface representation. The
interactions between phenyl rings of 7 and rim residues
Tyr36 and Lys32 are highlighted.Meanwhile, 7 also demonstrated favorable fluorescence
properties with a quantum yield of 0.32, a Stokes shift of 100 nm
(Figure A), and concentration-dependent
fluorescence quenching upon binding to MIF in (Figure B). Using this fluorescence quenching experiment,
the binding constant KS of 7 was determined to be 16 ± 3 nM (Figure C), which is again in line with the inhibition
of the MIF tautomerase activity (Ki =
18 ± 1 nM). The high affinity of 7 for MIF enabled
the reduction of both the fluorophore (50 nM) and MIF (100 nM) concentrations
in the FID assay. This provides an assay format that is sufficiently
sensitive to quantify the binding affinity of MIF ligands with nanomolar
potencies.
Figure 5
Fluorescence properties of 7 and its fluorescence
quenching upon MIF binding. (A) UV absorbance and fluorescence emission
spectra of 7. (B) Fluorescence quenching of 50 nM 7 by MIF (12.5–200 nM). (C) Quantification of fluorescence
quenching of 50 nM 7 by MIF or BSA. (D) Lineweaver–Burk
plot of inhibition of 7 against MIF tautomerase. (E)
Fluorescence lifetime study in 1 mL of pH 7.4 PBS; half-life of 100
nM fluorophore is 4.2 ns and together with 500 nM MIF is 4.0 ns. (F)
Fluorescence intensity of 200 nM 7 in different solvents,
Ex/Em = 355/455 nm.
Fluorescence properties of 7 and its fluorescence
quenching upon MIF binding. (A) UV absorbance and fluorescence emission
spectra of 7. (B) Fluorescence quenching of 50 nM 7 by MIF (12.5–200 nM). (C) Quantification of fluorescence
quenching of 50 nM 7 by MIF or BSA. (D) Lineweaver–Burk
plot of inhibition of 7 against MIF tautomerase. (E)
Fluorescence lifetime study in 1 mL of pH 7.4 PBS; half-life of 100
nM fluorophore is 4.2 ns and together with 500 nM MIF is 4.0 ns. (F)
Fluorescence intensity of 200 nM 7 in different solvents,
Ex/Em = 355/455 nm.The FID assay was established
with fluorophore 7.
First, a control experiment for non-MIF-dependent fluorescence quenching
was performed with a corresponding amount of bovine serum albumin
(BSA). In clear contrast to MIF, no fluorescence quenching was observed
upon the addition of 800 nM BSA to a 50 nM solution of fluorophore 7 (Figure C). Enzyme kinetics experiments demonstrated that 7 binds
in competition with 4-HPP (Figure D). As a next step, we aimed to distinguish static versus dynamic fluorescence quenching by determination of
the fluorescence lifetime of 7 (100 nM) in the absence
(τ0) or in the presence (τ) of MIF (500 nM),
which proved to be 4.2 and 4.0 ns, respectively (Figure E). The constant value for
the fluorescence lifetime demonstrates that fluorescence quenching
is static, which implies that quenching occurs by specific binding
of the fluorophore to a cavity in the protein rather than by random
collision-induced energy transfer. In addition, the influence of the
solvent on the fluorescence intensity of 7 (200 nM) was
investigated. The fluorescence proved to be the strongest in PBS buffer
(Figure F), which
indicates that an aqueous environment is most suitable for this fluorophore.
The steep decrease in fluorescence in hydrophobic solvents, such as
THF and toluene, indicates that hydrophobicity of the binding site
of MIF could play a role in fluorescence quenching upon binding.We previously observed that the MIF tautomerase activity assay
using 4-HPP as a substrate was sensitive to the presence of heavy
metal ions such as Cu2+.[35] Therefore,
the influence of Cu2+ ions on this FID assay for MIF binding
using 7 as a fluorophore was investigated. Importantly,
no influence of Cu2+ ions was observed up to a concentration
of 200 μM (Figure S5), which indicates
that this assay format is not sensitive to interference by this heavy
metal ion.Thus, the FID assay using fluorescent indicator 7 was
established as a method for competition-based binding studies to the
MIF tautomerase active site. This assay was used to determine the
affinities of a series of structurally diverse MIF tautomerase inhibitors
(Figure )[35,47] for validation. This assay was performed in a 96-well format in
which each well contained 100 μL of MIF (200 nM, in pH 7.4 PBS
buffer) and 50 μL of inhibitor in various concentrations in
PBS (pH 7.4 with 10% (v/v) DMSO). The mixture was incubated for 10
min at room temperature, and subsequently, 50 μL of indicator 7 (200 nM) in PBS buffer (pH 7.4) was added and incubated
for 10 min before the fluorescence intensity was recorded at Ex/Em
= 355/455 nm. The window coefficient (Z’-factor)
of this assay was evaluated for an inhibition curve of 8 and proved to be 0.75 in this setup (SI 6), which indicates that the quality of this assay is sufficient for
medium- to high-throughput applications (0.5–1).[48] Using the FID assay, the EC50 values
for the structurally diverse series of MIF tautomerase inhibitors
were determined and used to calculate the Kd values using eq .
Comparison of the Kd values as determined
by the FID assay to the Ki values as calculated
from the MIF tautomerase enzyme activity assay indicated that both
methods provide comparable affinity values (Table ), thus indicating that the FID assay is
a reliable and accurate alternative for the MIF tautomerase enzyme
activity assay.
Figure 6
Structurally diverse MIF inhibitors that were used to
compare the
MIF tautomerase enzyme activity assay to the FID assay. Compound 8 is an analogue of NVS-2;[37]9 and 10 are two typical biaryltrizoles synthesized
by the Jorgensen lab;[47]11 is a phenolic hydrazone
analogue;[50]12 and 13 were reported by our lab.[35]14 (benzyl isothiocyanate, BITC) is a covalent inhibitor of MIF.[51,52]
Table 2
Results for MIF Tautomerase
Activity
Inhibition (Ki) from the 4-HPP Conversion
Assay and for MIF Binding (Kd) from the
Fluorescent Indicator Displacement Assay Using Compound 7 as a Probea
compound
Ki (μM)
Kd (μM)
ISO-1
44 ± 4.9
47 ± 6.3
8
0.10 ± 0.01
0.11 ± 0.01
9
5.0 ± 0.6
4.0 ± 0.5
10
0.44 ± 0.03
0.47 ± 0.08
11
8.0 ± 0.6
5.6 ± 0.5
12
3.3 ± 0.6
4.4 ± 0.3b
13
0.96 ± 0.2
1.4 ± 0.1
14c
4.3 ± 0.3
2.9 ± 0.4
Data are shown as mean ± SD
of three independent experiments.
The Kd value measured by microscale
thermophoresis (MST) was 3.6 μM.[35]
Measured after 10 min
of incubation.
Structurally diverse MIF inhibitors that were used to
compare the
MIF tautomerase enzyme activity assay to the FID assay. Compound 8 is an analogue of NVS-2;[37]9 and 10 are two typical biaryltrizoles synthesized
by the Jorgensen lab;[47]11 is a phenolic hydrazone
analogue;[50]12 and 13 were reported by our lab.[35]14 (benzyl isothiocyanate, BITC) is a covalent inhibitor of MIF.[51,52]Data are shown as mean ± SD
of three independent experiments.The Kd value measured by microscale
thermophoresis (MST) was 3.6 μM.[35]Measured after 10 min
of incubation.
Inhibition
of the MIF–CD74 PPI
The high affinity
of 7 for the MIF tautomerase active site raised the question
if this compound also interferes with the MIF–CD74 PPI. To
address this question, a previously published ELISA assay to monitor
the interaction between MIF and sCD74 was used.[53] In this assay, human recombinant MIF was coated on a 96-well
ELISA plate by incubation at 4 °C overnight. After removal of
the unbound MIF and blocking with 2% (w/v) BSA, the plate was incubated
with a mixture of MBP–sCD74 (500 nM) and inhibitor for half
an hour. Subsequently, bound MBP–sCD74 was detected using an
anti-CD74 primary antibody and a signal amplifying secondary antibody.
The signal for MBP–sCD74 in the absence of the inhibitor was
set to 100%, and the signal in which MBP–sCD74 was replaced
by blank PBS buffer was used as a negative control and set to 0%.
Compound 7 provided a dose-dependent inhibition of the
sCD74 binding to MIF with an IC50 of 36 ± 3 μM
(Figure ). The MIF
tautomerase inhibitors ISO-1 and compound 8 were subjected
to the same assay but did not demonstrate inhibition at concentrations
up to 50 μM (Figure S8). Thus, compound 7 interferes with the MIF–sCD74 interaction in this
assay format.
Figure 7
Compound 7 inhibits the MIF–sCD74
binding as
determined by an ELISA assay. Binding of MBP–sCD74 to MIF-coated
ELISA plates was detected using a rabbit anti-CD74 antibody as the
primary and a goat anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase conjugate as
the secondary antibody. Data are displayed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
Compound 7 inhibits the MIF–sCD74
binding as
determined by an ELISA assay. Binding of MBP–sCD74 to MIF-coated
ELISA plates was detected using a rabbit anti-CD74 antibody as the
primary and a goat anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase conjugate as
the secondary antibody. Data are displayed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
Cell-Based Study
MIF-induced signaling proceeds through
binding to the CD74 receptor, activation of the MAPK signaling pathway,
and can result in cell proliferation.[6] The
ability of inhibitor 7 to interfere with MIF-induced
signaling was investigated in A549 cells.[54] As a first step, an MTS assay was performed, which demonstrated
that
compound 7 did not inhibit cell viability at concentrations
below 20 μM upon 24 h of treatment (Figure S9). Next, the growth inhibitory potency of compound 7 in A549 was studied by a colony-forming assay. Compounds
ISO-1 and 13 were used as references to a prior literature,[35] and they inhibited colony formation at 100 and
10 μM, respectively (Figure ). Treatment with inhibitor 7 in doses
of 2.5 or 10 μM resulted in significantly lower numbers of colonies.
These data demonstrate that 7 is a more potent inhibitor
of A549 cell proliferation than ISO-1 and 13.
Figure 8
Inhibition
of cell proliferation by MIF inhibitors. (A) Representative
pictures of clonogenic assays. A549 cells (100 cells per well) were
treated with appropriate inhibitors and stained with crystal violet.
(B) Colony quantification provided a bar graph showing inhibition
of colony formation upon treatment with MIF inhibitors ISO-1, 13, or 7. Colonies were counted by ImageJ and
confirmed by manual counting. One colony was estimated as an aggregate
of >50 cells. Data are shown as mean ± SD of three independent
experiments. *p < 0.05, **p <
0.01, and ***p < 0.001 vs control
group.
Inhibition
of cell proliferation by MIF inhibitors. (A) Representative
pictures of clonogenic assays. A549 cells (100 cells per well) were
treated with appropriate inhibitors and stained with crystal violet.
(B) Colony quantification provided a bar graph showing inhibition
of colony formation upon treatment with MIF inhibitors ISO-1, 13, or 7. Colonies were counted by ImageJ and
confirmed by manual counting. One colony was estimated as an aggregate
of >50 cells. Data are shown as mean ± SD of three independent
experiments. *p < 0.05, **p <
0.01, and ***p < 0.001 vs control
group.As a next step, the influence
of 7 on MIF-induced
ERK phosphorylation was investigated in A549 cells. Toward this aim,
A549 cells were stimulated with MIF or compound 7 preincubated
MIF, and subsequently, ERK phosphorylation was detected by Western
blot. We found that compound 7 attenuated MIF-induced
ERK phosphorylation in A549 cells (Figure ) at a concentration of 10 μM.
Figure 9
Effect of MIF
inhibitor 7 on MIF-induced ERK phosphorylation
in A549 cells. (A) A representative result of the Western blot experiment.
150 ng/mL MIF was incubated with or without appropriate concentrations
of MIF inhibitors for 10 min followed by stimulation at 37 °C
for 10 min. (B) Quantification of the pERK level using the pERK/GAPDH
ratio. In the control group, vehicle was applied without MIF. In the
vehicle group, MIF was incubated with an appropriate amount of DMSO.
Data are shown as mean ± SD of four independent experiments.
*p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 vs vehicle group.
Effect of MIF
inhibitor 7 on MIF-induced ERK phosphorylation
in A549 cells. (A) A representative result of the Western blot experiment.
150 ng/mL MIF was incubated with or without appropriate concentrations
of MIF inhibitors for 10 min followed by stimulation at 37 °C
for 10 min. (B) Quantification of the pERK level using the pERK/GAPDH
ratio. In the control group, vehicle was applied without MIF. In the
vehicle group, MIF was incubated with an appropriate amount of DMSO.
Data are shown as mean ± SD of four independent experiments.
*p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 vs vehicle group.
Discussion and Conclusions
In this study, we set out to
develop an FID assay for competitive
binding studies on the MIF tautomerase active site. Toward this aim,
we employed 7-hydroxycoumarins as fluorophores that quench fluorescence
upon binding to the tautomerase active site.[42,43] In order to identify 7-hydroxycoumarins with high potency, a focused
collection of 3-substituted 7-hydroxycoumarins were synthesized and
inhibition of MIF tautomerase enzyme activity was investigated. We
observed that compounds with a phenyl substituent in the 7-hydroxycoumarin
3-position were more potent than derivatives with an ester or amide
functionality in this position. This result is in line with the literature
in which the hydrophobic surface at the rim of active site of MIF
was described to be involved in the enhanced potency of 3-phenyl-substituted
7-hydroxycoumarins.[43] Further analysis
of the SARs indicated that para-phenyl substitutions
in the 3-position of 7-hydroxycoumarins that add bulk and are weakly
electron-withdrawing are favorable for the potency of inhibitors.
This inspired the design of an inhibitor with a para-benzoic acid functionality. Inhibitor 7 proved to be
the most potent inhibitor of this series with a Ki of 18 ± 1 nM. This confirms that MIF tautomerase
inhibitors that bind both in the active site to residues such as Asn97
and Tyr95 and on the hydrophobic edge of the active site to residue
Tyr36 provide low-nanomolar potency.[43] Taken
together, we obtained one of the most potent MIF tautomerase inhibitors
by exploiting the interactions with both the MIF tautomerase active
site and the rim of the active site.7-Hydroxy- and 7-aminocoumarins
are widely used fluorescent sensors
in biological applications.[42] Therefore,
the fluorescence properties of the 7-hydroxycoumarinMIF inhibitors
were exploited for the development of an FID assay for binding to
the MIF tautomerase active site. The fluorogenic properties of MIF
inhibitors 6d and 7 are favorable with a
Stokes shift exceeding 100 nm and quantum yields of 0.25 and 0.32,
respectively. Importantly, the fluorescence of both 6d and 7 quenched upon MIF addition in a concentration-dependent
manner. Binding of the 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorophores to the MIF tautomerase
active site proved to be reversible, which enabled development of
a competitive binding assay to recover the 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorescence.
Using fluorescence lifetime analysis, we found fluorescence quenching
of 7 upon binding to MIF to be static rather than dynamic.
This excludes fluorescence quenching by random collision, which also
qualifies 7 as an appropriate fluorophore for FID assay
development. Therefore, 7 was used as the most potent
MIF binder with suitable fluorogenic properties for the development
of an FID assay to quantify binding to the MIF tautomerase active
site. This assay employs the same format as applied for other targets
such as carbonic anhydrase and retinoid X receptor.[40,55] Most fluorescent indicators contain three parts: a specific high-affinity
target binding moiety, a linker, and a fluorophore. In contrast, 7-hydroxycoumarin 7 is a fluorophore and a high-affinity binder at the same
time. Furthermore, 7 is a small molecule that can be
synthesized in only four steps including TBDMS protection and deprotection,
which makes this molecule and assay format easily accessible.The FID assay using 7 as a fluorophore was validated
through measuring binding affinities of a group of structurally diverse
MIF tautomerase inhibitors. The consistency between Kd values assessed by the FID assay and the Ki values measured by the enzymatic tautomerase assay (Table ) demonstrates that
the FID assay is a reliable substitution for the MIF tautomerase assay.
Notably, the FID assay has several advantages. For example, in contrast
to the 4-HPP tautomerase assay, the FID assay can be performed in
PBS buffer and does not require reduced pH and borate buffer (Figure S10). The presence of metal ions such
as Cu2+ did not interfere with the FID assay in contrast
to the tautomerase activity assay, which reduces the chance for irregularities
in the assay.[35] In addition, the FID assay
employs 100 nM MIF, which is more sensitive than the MIF tautomerase
assay that typically requires 200–400 nM MIF.[47] We note that the FID assay could provide false positive
results by fluorescence quenching through the competing ligand, for
which proper controls need to be included. We also note that Ki values of reference compounds measured by
the 4-HPP tautomerase assay are consistent among different labs[43,47] and also in line with Kd values measured
by other assays,[35,37] which demonstrates that the MIF
tautomerase assay itself is also a reliable assay if handled properly.
Irregularities as reported previously in the literature[36] can be excluded by proper operation of the respective
assay. We envision that the FID assay will gain a role as a complementary
assay to the 4-HPP tautomerase assay.Besides its use as a fluorescent
indicator for MIF binding, compound 7 was also analyzed
for its ability to interfere with MIF-induced
signaling. The CD74 receptor is important for MIF-induced signaling
and can mediate the MIF-induced cell growth and proliferation.[6,9] Interestingly, compound 7 interfered with the MIF–sCD74
interactions in an ELISA assay. This implies that molecules that
bind to the MIF tautomerase active site also interfere with the MIF–CD74
PPI, in line with the literature.[24] We
anticipate that interference with the MIF–CD74 PPI is enabled
by interactions between compound 7 with Tyr36 of MIF,
which is a key residue for the PPI.[24] However,
we also note that a significant “drop-off” in potency
is observed for inhibition of the MIF–CD74 interaction in comparison
to MIF binding. Similar inconsistencies were reported in an earlier
literature.[56] We have the impression that
the MIF–CD74
interaction has some unresolved issues with respect to binding stoichiometry
in connection to binding avidity. The ELISA assay format, as applied
here, might influence the binding avidity of the MIF–CD74 interaction,
which influences inhibitor binding potency. Nevertheless, inhibitor 7 also inhibited MIF-induced ERK phosphorylation and colony
formation of A549 cells in the clonogenic assay. Taken together, our
results provide further evidence that MIF-induced signaling can be
inhibited by small-molecule inhibitors that target the MIF tautomerase
active site.[28]The currently available
inhibitors of MIF tautomerase activity
suffer often from poor physicochemical properties such as poor water
solubility and high C log P values,
which can, among others, result in irregularities in the assay readout.[36] Notably, the solubility of compound 7 in pH 7.4 PBS buffer was 18.8 ± 1.4 μg/mL (53 ±
3.9 μM), which overcomes the solubility issue of the triazole
inhibitors.[47] Furthermore, ligand efficiency
and lipophilic ligand efficiency of 7 are calculated
to be 0.37 and 5.80, respectively, which are favorable for biological
activity (>0.3 for LE, and >5.0 for LLE).[57] This demonstrates that inhibitor 7 has favorable
physicochemical
properties and good efficiency and potency against MIF tautomerase
activity (Table )
as well as in cell-based assays on MIF-induced signaling.
Table 3
Potency, C log P, Solubility, and Ligand Efficiency Values of MIF Tautomerase
Inhibitors
compound
Ki (μM)
MW
C log Pa
solubility (μg/mL)
LEb
LLEc
ISO-1
44 ± 4.9
235.08
1.69
0.34
2.48
7
0.018 ± 0.001
357.08
1.35
18.8 ±
1.4
0.37
5.80
8
0.10 ± 0.01
302.10
1.97
0.43
4.85
10
0.44 ± 0.03
385.07
3.64
2.2[47]
0.39
2.55
13
0.96 ± 0.2
288.10
3.80
10.8 ± 0.10[35]
0.30
2.05
Calculated
by ChemDraw Professional
18.1.
LE (ligand efficiency)
=1.4(−log
IC50)/N, where N is the
number of non-hydrogen atoms.
LLE (lipophilic ligand efficiency)
= pIC50 – C log P, pIC50 = −log IC50.
Calculated
by ChemDraw Professional
18.1.LE (ligand efficiency)
=1.4(−log
IC50)/N, where N is the
number of non-hydrogen atoms.LLE (lipophilic ligand efficiency)
= pIC50 – C log P, pIC50 = −log IC50.In conclusion, we have developed
a convenient and effective FID
assay to evaluate the affinity of MIF tautomerase active site binders.
The fluorescent indicator 7 was designed based on the
SARs of a group of 7-hydroxylcoumarin derivatives. 7 displays
clear fluorescence quenching upon binding to the MIF tautomerase active
site that is reversible in the presence of competing ligands. Using
fluorophore 7, an FID assay was developed that enabled
quantification of MIF binding in a competition assay. This assay system
proved to be more sensitive than the 4-HPP tautomerase assay and can
be performed in neutral pH in PBS buffer. These results demonstrate
that 7 is a convenient fluorescent probe for MIF binding
studies in an FID assay format. The most potent MIF enzyme inhibitor 7 provides inhibition of the MIF–CD74 PPI and interferes
with MIF-induced ERK phosphorylation as well as cell growth in a clonogenic
assay with A549cancer cells at micromolar concentrations. Taken together,
compound 7 provides a valuable novel tool to advance
MIF-oriented research.
Experimental Section
General
All the reagents and solvents were purchased
from Sigma-Aldrich, TCI, Fluorochem, or Acros and were used without
further purification. Reactions were monitored by thin layer chromatography
(TLC), in which Merck silica gel 60 F254 plates were used
and spots were detected with UV light. MP Ecochrom silica 32–63,
60 Å was used for column chromatography. Nuclear magnetic resonance
spectra, 1H NMR (500 MHz) and 13C NMR (126 MHz),
were recorded on a Bruker Avance 500 spectrometer. Chemical shifts
were reported in ppm. Chemical shifts were referenced to the residual
proton and carbon signals of the deuterated solvent, CDCl3: δ = 7.26 (1H) and 77.05 ppm (13C) or
DMSO-d6: δ = 2.50 (1H)
and 39.52 ppm (13C). The following abbreviations were used
for spin multiplicity: s (singlet), d (doublet), t (triplet), q (quartet),
dd (double of doublets), and m (multiplet). Coupling constants were
reported in hertz (Hz). High-resolution mass spectra were recorded
using Fourier transform mass spectrometry (FTMS) and electrospray
ionization (ESI) on an Applied Biosystems/SCIEX API3000-triple quadrupole
mass spectrometer. Purity of the compounds was determined by reversed-phase
high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis to be >95%.
Malonic acid
(1.35 g, 13 mmol) was dissolved in pyridine (4 mL) followed by addition
of 2,4-dihydroxybenzaldehyde (1.0 g, 7.3 mmol) and aniline (0.1 mL).
After stirring at room temperature overnight, the mixture was acidified
with 1 N HCl to pH 4.0. The precipitate was isolated by filtration
and recrystallization in methanol to provide 1.3 g of product as a
yellow solid, yield 89%, Rf value 0.60
(CH2Cl2/MeOH, 10:1). 1H NMR (500
MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 12.89 (s, 1H), 11.07
(s, 1H), 8.68 (s, 1H), 7.75 (d, J = 8.6 Hz, 1H),
6.84 (dd, J = 8.6, 2.2 Hz, 1H), 6.74 (d, J = 2.2 Hz, 1H). 13C NMR (126 MHz, DMSO) δ
164.7, 164.4, 158.00, 157.5, 149.9, 132.5, 114.5, 113.0, 111.1, 102.3.
3 (70 mg, 0.3 mmol) was mixed with benzylamine (100 μL,
1.0
mmol) in dry DMF (1 mL) followed by addition of EDCI (120 mg, 0.8
mmol) and HOBt (70 mg, 0.5 mmol). The yellow solution formed was stirred
at room temperature with argon for overnight. Afterward, the reaction
mixture was diluted with CH2Cl2 (10 mL) and
washed with water (10 mL × 2). The aqueous layer was washed with
CH2Cl2 (10 mL × 3). The organic layer was
collected and dried with MgSO4, filtered, and concentrated
by reduced pressure evaporation. The product was purified by chromatography
with petroleum ether and ethyl acetate 1:1. 80 mg of white solid was
obtained with a yield of 54%, Rf value
0.40 (CH2Cl2/MeOH, 20:1). 1H NMR
(500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 11.06 (s, 1H),
9.05 (t, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H), 8.81 (s, 1H), 7.82 (d, J = 8.7 Hz, 1H), 7.33 (m, 4H), 7.25 (m, 1H), 6.88 (dd, J = 8.6, 2.2 Hz, 1H), 6.80 (d, J = 2.0
Hz, 1H), 4.53 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 2H). 13C
NMR (126 MHz, DMSO) δ 164.1, 162.2, 161.5, 156.8, 148.7, 139.6,
132.5, 128.9, 127.8, 127.4, 114.8, 114.2, 111.6, 102.3, 43.1. HRMS,
calculated for C16H12O4N [M + H]+: 296.0917, found 296.0917.
2,4-Dihydroxybenzaldehyde (0.40 g, 2.9 mmol)
and imidazole (0.22 g, 3.2 mmol) were dissolved in CH2Cl2 (6 mL) followed by portionwise addition of tert-butyldimethylsilyl chloride (TBDMS-Cl) (0.44 g, 2.9 mmol). The mixture
was stirred at room temperature for 1.5 h, and progress of the reaction
was monitored by TLC analysis. Upon disappearance of the starting
material, CH2Cl2 (10 mL) was added to dilute
the mixture. The organic layer was subsequently washed with water
(20 mL × 3) and brine (20 mL) and dried over MgSO4. After filtering MgSO4, organic solvent was removed under
reduced pressure by a rotary evaporator. The product was obtained
as a clear oily liquid, which was used without further purification
in the next step. 1H NMR (500 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 11.36 (s, 1H), 9.75 (s, 1H), 7.43 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 1H), 6.50 (dd, J = 8.5, 2.2 Hz, 1H),
6.41 (d, J = 2.2 Hz, 1H), 1.01 (s, 9H), 0.28 (s,
6H).
General Procedure for the Synthesis of Compounds 6a–l (Using 6a as an Example)[60]
2-Phenylacetic acid (136 mg,
1.0 mmol) and cyanuric chloride (190 mg, 1.0 mmol) were dissolved
in anhydrous DMF (2 mL). N-Methyl morpholine (160
μL, 1.5 mmol) was added into the flask, and the mixture was
stirred at room temperature for 10 min. 4-((tert-Butyldimethylsilyl)oxy)-2-hydroxybenzaldehyde
(250 mg, 1.0 mmol) was dissolved in DMF (1 mL) and added dropwise
to the reaction mixture. The resulting suspension was refluxed under
argon overnight. The reaction was monitored using TLC, and the coumarin
product showed strong fluorescence under UV light (365 nm). The reaction
was stopped by addition of demineralized water (15 mL). The mixture
was extracted with ethyl acetate (15 mL × 3). The organic phase
was collected, washed with brine, dried over MgSO4, and
filtered, and the solution was concentrated under reduced pressure
by a rotary evaporator. The residue was dissolved in THF (4 mL), and
tetra-n-butylammonium fluoride (TBAF) (260 mg, 1.0
mmol) was added. The suspension was stirred at room temperature for
1 h. The reaction mixture was diluted with CH2Cl2 (20 mL), and the organic phase was washed with brine (20 mL ×
3), dried over MgSO4, filtered, and concentrated under
reduced pressure. The product was purified by column chromatography
using CH2Cl2/MeOH (100:1) as the eluent followed
by recrystallization from MeOH to provide the pure product as a pale
yellow powder in an overall yield of 55%.
To a suspension of 6l (190
mg, 0.5 mmol) in EtOH (5 mL), 4-boronobenzoic acid (160 mg, 1.0 mmol)
was added. It was followed by addition of Pd(AcO)2 (11
mg, 0.05 mmol) and Na2CO3 (210 mg, 2.0 mmol).
The mixture was stirred at room temperature for 48 h. The resulting
dark brown suspension was filtered through celite and washed with
methanol (20 mL). The filtrate was condensed and purified by chromatography
with 5% (v/v) MeOH in CH2Cl2 to provide the
product as a brown solid (110 mg), yield 59%, Rf value 0.45 (CH2Cl2/MeOH, 10:1). 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
12.98 (s, 1H), 10.66 (s, 1H), 8.26 (s, 1H), 8.04 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 2H), 7.87–7.81 (m, 6H), 7.63 (d, J = 8.6 Hz, 1H), 6.84 (dd, J = 8.5, 2.1 Hz, 1H),
6.77 (d, J = 1.9 Hz, 1H). 13C NMR (126
MHz, DMSO) δ 167.6, 161.8, 160.5, 155.4, 144.1, 141.6, 138.9,
135.5, 130.6, 130.5, 130.2, 129.3, 127.2, 121.9, 113.9, 112.5, 102.2,
102.2. HRMS, calculated for C22H15O5 [M + H]+: 359.0914, found 359.0912.
Compound 8 was synthesized using a reported
method.[37] Compound 5 (200
mg, 0.8 mmol) and
3,4-dimethoxyaniline (120 mg, 0.8 mmol) were dissolved in 5 mL of
ethanol and stirred at room temperature for 1 h. The suspension turned
into deep yellow. With an ice-bath, NaBH4 (50 mg, 1.5 mmol)
was added portionwise to the reaction mixture and the resulting mixture
was stirred at room temperature for 1 h until the suspension turned
into transparent. Subsequently, H2O (15 mL) was poured
into the mixture and extracted with DCM (20 mL × 3). The organic
layer was dried over MgSO4. After filtration, the solution
was concentrated to 5 mL. Then, carbonyldiimidazole (160 mg, 1 mmol)
was added, and the mixture stirred for 16 h at room temperature. DCM
(20 mL) was added to dilute the mixture. Then, the mixture was washed
with HCl solution (1 N, 20 mL), a saturated NaHCO3 solution
(20 mL), and brine (20 mL), dried over MgSO4, and concentrated
under vacuum. The residue was dissolved in 5 mL of THF, and tetra-n-butylammonium fluoride (260 mg, 1 mmol) was added and
stirred at room temperature for 2 h. The resulting mixture was purified
with column chromatography using petroleum ether/ethyl acetate 4:1
(v/v) as the eluent. Rf of 8 is 0.2 with petroleum ether/ethyl acetate 2:1 (v/v). 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 9.79
(s, 1H), 7.11–7.05 (m, 2H), 7.01–6.94 (m, 2H), 6.60
(dd, J = 8.3, 2.3 Hz, 1H), 6.48 (d, J = 2.2 Hz, 1H), 4.73 (s, 2H), 3.78 (s, 3H), 3.75 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (126 MHz, DMSO) δ 158.3, 150.6, 150.1, 149.3, 148.1,
135.6, 127.0, 118.4, 112.1, 110.8, 109.3, 102.6, 102.5, 56.2, 56.1,
50.5.
To synthesize 11, 4-methoxybenzohydrazide
(254 mg, 1.53 mmol) and 3-fluoro-4-hydroxybenzaldehyde (236 mg, 1.68
mmol) were dissolved in methanol (10 mL). After overnight refluxing,
the solvent was evaporated to dryness under reduced pressure and the
product was purified using column chromatography (DCM/MeOH 9.5:0.5
to 9:1). The product was isolated as a yellow, crystalline solid (419
mg, 1.45 mmol, 95% yield). qHNMR purity: 96 wt %. M.p.: 229–232
°C. 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 11.63 (s, 1H), 10.37 (br. s, 1H), 8.34 (s, 1H), 7.91 (d, J = 8.9 Hz, 2H), 7.49 (d, J = 12.0 Hz,
1H), 7.36 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H), 7.06 (d, J = 8.9 Hz, 2H), 7.03 (t, J = 8.6 Hz, 1H), 3.84 (s,
3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 162.4, 161.9, 151.2 (d, J = 241.8 Hz),
146.8 (d, J = 11.9 Hz), 146.3, 129.4, 126.3 (d, J = 6.1 Hz), 125.5, 124.2, 117.9 (d, J =
3.2 Hz), 113.9 (d, J = 18.9 Hz,), 113.7, 55.4. 19F NMR (565 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
−137.37 (t, J = 10.5 Hz). HRMS calculated
for C15H14FN2O3 [M + H]+: 289.098, found 289.098.
Preparation of Human MIF
and MBP–sCD74
C-terminal
His-tagged recombinant humanMIF was expressed through transforming
a pET-20b(+) plasmid containing the target gene into Escherichia coli BL21 (DE3) according to literature
procedures.[61] Overexpression was performed
by following
a protocol as described in a previous study.[53] Cells were collected and resuspended into buffer A containing 20
mM Tris-HCl
(pH 7.5), 20 mM NaCl, 2 mM MgCl2, and 10% (v/v) glycerol
0.2× complete EDTA-free protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche).
After sonication, the insoluble material was removed by centrifugation
at 17,000g for 20 min. The obtained supernatant was
applied to a medium-pressure chromatography system (Biologic Duoflow)
equipped with a His trap HP (5 mL) column with detection at 280 nm
for the eluent. The column was washed with a binding buffer containing
50 mM Tris and 10% glycerol at pH 7.4 and eluted with an elution buffer
containing 500 mM imidazole, 50 mM Tris, and 10% glycerol at pH 7.4.
The pure fractions (as judged by SDS-PAGE) were pooled and subjected
to a PD-10 column (GE Healthcare) that was equilibrated with PBS buffer
at pH 7.4 to remove the high concentration of imidazole. The collected
MIF solution was divided into 50 μL aliquots and stored at −80
°C.To express humanCD74 fusion protein, the pET20b–MBP–sCD74
plasmid was transformed into Rossetta-gami 2 (DE3) using previously
described procedures.[53] After having obtained
the cell-free extract, MBP–sCD74 was first
purified with a His trap HP (5 mL, GE Healthcare) column on a medium-pressure
chromatography system (Biologic Duoflow) with detection at 280 nm
for the eluent. The column was washed with a binding buffer containing
50 mM Tris and 10% glycerol at pH 7.4 and eluted with an elution buffer
containing 500 mM imidazole, 50 mM Tris, and 10% glycerol at pH 7.4.
The pure fractions (as judged by SDS-PAGE) were pre-equilibrated with
buffer A (50 mM Tris-HCl, 10% glycerol, pH 7.4) and incubated with
5 mL of MBPTrap resin (GE Healthcare) in a gravity column at 4 °C
with rotation overnight. This was followed by removing the nonbound
proteins with 50 mL of buffer A by gravity flow. Bound protein was
eluted with 15 mL of buffer B (50 mM Tris-HCl, 10 mM maltose, 10%
glycerol, pH 7.4). The collected fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE,
and the pure fractions were pooled and then divided into 50 μL
aliquots and stored at −80 °C.
Enzyme Assays
The protocol for measuring inhibition
of MIF tautomerase enzyme activity and enzyme kinetics was adapted
from our previous protocol.[35] In brief,
180 μL of a 500 nM MIF solution in boric acid buffer (435 mM,
pH 6.2) was mixed with 10 μL of a 20 mM EDTA solution in demineralized
water and 10 μL of a solution of the desired compound dissolved
in DMSO or blank DMSO. This mixture was preincubated at room temperature
for 10 min. Next, 50 μL of this mixture was mixed with 50 μL
of a 1 mM 4-HPP solution in ammonium acetate buffer (50 mM, pH 6.0).
Subsequently, MIF tautomerase activity was monitored by measuring
the increase of UV absorbance at 306 nm over time. MIF tautomerase
activity in the presence a blank DMSO dilution was set to 100% enzyme
activity. Noncatalyzed conversion of the substrate in the absence
of MIF was set to 0%. Data from the first 3 min were used to calculate
the initial velocities. All experiments were repeated three times,
and calculations were performed with the program GraphPad Prism.
UV–vis and Fluorescence Spectra Measurements
UV–vis
absorbance and fluorescence spectra were recorded on
a Synergy H1 Hybrid Reader (BioTek) instrument. UV absorption spectra
of the coumarin derivatives were measured at 100 μM of the respective
compound in PBS buffer (pH 7.4) containing 5% (v/v) DMSO in transparent
96-well plates (#655801, Greiner). Fluorescence emission spectra were
measured in 200 μL of a 200 nM solution of the respective compound
in PBS (pH 7.4) containing 5% (v/v) DMSO (pH 7.4 PBS) in 96-well plates
(#655900, Greiner). The excitation wavelength was set to 340 nm for 6d and to 355 nm for 7 to measure the emission
spectra from 380 to 600 nm. The excitation and emission slit widths
were both 5 nm.
KS Determination
of 6d and 7
To determine the binding
affinity KS of 6d, a solution
of 6d (200 nM) was prepared by diluting a 10 mM solution
of 6d in DMSO with PBS buffer (pH 7.4). A dilution series
(16–8000
nM) of MIF in PBS buffer (pH 7.4) was freshly prepared. Subsequently,
100 μL of the 6d solution (200 nM) was mixed with
100 μL of the MIF dilutions followed by 10 min of incubation
at room temperature. The fluorescence intensity was monitored at Ex/Em
= 340/460 nm in a 96-well plate (#655900, Greiner). The specific equilibrium
binding constant (KS) was derived from
the specific binding curve by fitting the data to a hyperbolic curve
using GraphPad Prism. KS of 7 was obtained using the same protocol except that fluorescence intensity
was measured at Ex/Em = 355/455 nm.
FID Assays of Representative
Nonfluorescent Inhibitors
This assay was performed according
to the workflow shown in Figure S10. A
solution of each test compound
(various concentrations in 50 μL of pH 7.4 PBS buffer containing
5 μL of DMSO) was incubated with MIF (200 nM in 100 μL
of pH 7.4 PBS buffer) at room temperature for 10 min. Next, 7 (200 nM in 50 μL of pH 7.4 PBS buffer) was added into
the mixture and incubated at room temperature for another 10 min.
The final concentrations in each well were 100 nM for MIF, 50 nM for
indicator 7, 2.5% (v/v) for DMSO, and various concentrations
for the tested inhibitors. Fluorescence intensity was measured at
Ex/Em = 355/455 nm in a 96-well plate (#655900, Greiner). Calculation
of EC50 was carried out with GraphPad Prism.
Docking Study
Docking studies were performed to gain
insight into SARs. All molecular modeling studies were done with the
program Discovery Studio (Dassault Systèmes) version 2018,
and the crystal structures of human recombinant MIF (PDB code: 1GCZ)[43] was used. The CDOCKER protocol was used for docking, which
is a CHARMM-based algorithm. Docking was verified by use of the ligand
ethyl 7-hydroxy-2-oxo-2H-chromene-3-carboxylate (Orita-1)
from the crystal structure 1GCZ. All 10 highest ranked poses show a comparable position
to the original pose of 2 (Orita-1) from the crystal
structure in the 7-hydroxycoumarin functionality (Figure S7). Poses with the lowest CDOCKER energies were chosen
for representation.
ELISA
Freshly thawed MIF (stored
at −80 °C)
aliquots were diluted in PBS buffer (pH 7.4) to a concentration of
250 nM. 100 μL of this solution was used for coating of the
wells of a high-binding 96-well plate overnight at 4 °C. The
wells were washed three times with 220 μL of washing buffer
(PBS with 0.05% Tween20) and subsequently blocked with 210 μL
of freshly prepared 2% (w/v) bovine serum albumin solution in PBS
buffer at room temperature for 1 h. During all incubation steps, the
plate was shaken slowly on a microplate shaker. The blocking solution
was removed, and the plate was washed three times with washing buffer.
Subsequently, a solution of the inhibitor (2 μL in DMSO) was
mixed with an sCD74 solution (510 nM, 98 μL in PBS buffer (pH
7.4) to obtain a 100 μL mixture with 500 nM sCD74 and an inhibitor
concentration ranging from 1 to 100 μM. After 10 min of incubation
at room temperature, the inhibitor–sCD74 mixtures were added
to each well and incubated for 30 min at room temperature. At this
step, a blank DMSO dilution was used as vehicle control. PBS buffer
(100 μL) without sCD74 was used as control to exclude the nonspecific
binding of anti-CD74 pAb. After washing, the wells were incubated
with 100 μL of a rabbit anti-CD74 pAb solution (1:1000 dilution
in PBS, 0.2% BSA) (Sinobiological, The Netherlands) at room temperature
for 30 min. After removing the anti-CD74 solution and washing, a solution
of 100 μL of goat anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase conjugate
(1:1000 dilution in PBS, 0.2% BSA) (Life Technologies, The Netherlands)
was added and incubated at room temperature for 30 min. After washing,
binding was visualized by conversion of 100 μL of aqueous tetramethylbenzydine
(TMB) solution (Sigma Aldrich, The Netherlands), which was quenched
with an aqueous 1 N H2SO4 solution (100 μL).
The UV absorbance was detected at 450 nm. Data were analyzed with
the program GraphPad Prism.
Colony Formation Assay
A549 cells
were seeded in 6-well
plates (100 cells per well in 2 mL of RPMI medium (#61970-010, Gibco)
containing 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 100 U/mL penicillin/streptomycin
(#10378016, Gibco)) and incubated overnight. Stock solutions (10 mM)
of inhibitors were prepared using DMSO as solvent. The cells were
treated with corresponding inhibitors for 10 days. Subsequently, the
medium was carefully removed, and cells were fixed with 4% (v/v) paraformaldehyde
for 20 min and stained with 0.5% (w/v) crystal violet for 20 min.
After washing, the image of each well was photographed and analyzed
with ImageJ. We defined one colony as an aggregate of >50 cells.
The
final concentration of DMSO was 0.2% for this assay. The 0.2% DMSO-treated
group was used as vehicle control.
ERK Signaling Pathway Study
A549 cells (2 × 105 cells per well) were seeded
into each well of a 6-well plate
with 2 mL of RPMI-1640 medium containing 10% FBS (Costar Europe, Badhoevedorp,
The Netherlands) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin solution (Corning).
After overnight culturing, the medium was removed. In the experimental
groups, a fresh medium with 150 ng/mL MIF (endotoxin-free) and different
concentrations of 7 was added to cells. A fresh medium
containing 150 ng/mL MIF was applied as the positive control. The
medium was used as negative control. DMSO concentration was 0.2% for
all groups. After that, cells were lysed with a RIPA buffer containing
1× PhosSTOP and protease inhibitor (PI) cocktail (Roche, Mannheim,
Germany). The BCA Protein Assay Kit (Pierce, Rockford, IL, USA) was
used to determine the protein concentration. 30 μg of protein
was separated by a precast 10% NuPAGE Bis-Tris gel (Invitrogen, USA)
and then transferred to a polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) membrane.
Five percent of skimmed milk was used to block the membrane for 1
h at room temperature. The blocked membrane was incubated with an
appropriate primary antibody (pERK, #9101, Cell Signaling, 1:1000;
GAPDH, #97166, Cell Signaling, 1:10000) overnight at 4 °C followed
by the treatment of an HRP-conjugated secondary goat anti-rabbit antibody
(#P0448, Dako, 1:2000) or rabbit anti-mouse antibody (#P0260, Dako,
1:2000) at room temperature for 1 h. The protein bands were visualized
with enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) solution (GE Healthcare). The
figures were quantified with ImageJ software based on grayscale.
Authors: Emma S Spencer; Edward J Dale; Aimée L Gommans; Malcolm T Rutledge; Christine T Vo; Yoshio Nakatani; Allan B Gamble; Robin A J Smith; Sigurd M Wilbanks; Mark B Hampton; Joel D A Tyndall Journal: Eur J Med Chem Date: 2015-02-24 Impact factor: 6.514
Authors: Jodi B Lubetsky; Angeles Dios; Jialian Han; Bayan Aljabari; Bela Ruzsicska; Robert Mitchell; Elias Lolis; Yousef Al-Abed Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Arlixer M Coleman; Beatriz E Rendon; Ming Zhao; Ming-Wei Qian; Richard Bucala; Dan Xin; Robert A Mitchell Journal: J Immunol Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Tjie Kok; Anna A Wasiel; Frank J Dekker; Gerrit J Poelarends; Robbert H Cool Journal: Protein Expr Purif Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 1.650
Authors: Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Zhangping Xiao; Angelina Osipyan; Shanshan Song; Deng Chen; Reinder A Schut; Ronald van Merkerk; Petra E van der Wouden; Robbert H Cool; Wim J Quax; Barbro N Melgert; Gerrit J Poelarends; Frank J Dekker Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Zhangping Xiao; Deng Chen; Fabian Mulder; Shanshan Song; Petra E van der Wouden; Robbert H Cool; Barbro N Melgert; Gerrit J Poelarends; Frank J Dekker Journal: Chemistry Date: 2021-11-22 Impact factor: 5.020