SARS-CoV-2 is the viral pathogen causing the COVID19 global pandemic. Consequently, much research has gone into the development of preclinical assays for the discovery of new or repurposing of FDA-approved therapies. Preventing viral entry into a host cell would be an effective antiviral strategy. One mechanism for SARS-CoV-2 entry occurs when the spike protein on the surface of SARS-CoV-2 binds to an ACE2 receptor followed by cleavage at two cut sites ("priming") that causes a conformational change allowing for viral and host membrane fusion. TMPRSS2 has an extracellular protease domain capable of cleaving the spike protein to initiate membrane fusion. A validated inhibitor of TMPRSS2 protease activity would be a valuable tool for studying the impact TMPRSS2 has in viral entry and potentially be an effective antiviral therapeutic. To enable inhibitor discovery and profiling of FDA-approved therapeutics, we describe an assay for the biochemical screening of recombinant TMPRSS2 suitable for high throughput application. We demonstrate effectiveness to quantify inhibition down to subnanomolar concentrations by assessing the inhibition of camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate, clinically approved agents in Japan. Also, we profiled a camostat metabolite, FOY-251, and bromhexine hydrochloride, an FDA-approved mucolytic cough suppressant. The rank order potency for the compounds tested are nafamostat (IC50 = 0.27 nM), camostat (IC50 = 6.2 nM), FOY-251 (IC50 = 33.3 nM), and gabexate (IC50 = 130 nM). Bromhexine hydrochloride showed no inhibition of TMPRSS2. Further profiling of camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate against a panel of recombinant proteases provides insight into selectivity and potency.
SARS-CoV-2 is the viral pathogen causing the COVID19 global pandemic. Consequently, much research has gone into the development of preclinical assays for the discovery of new or repurposing of FDA-approved therapies. Preventing viral entry into a host cell would be an effective antiviral strategy. One mechanism for SARS-CoV-2 entry occurs when the spike protein on the surface of SARS-CoV-2 binds to an ACE2 receptor followed by cleavage at two cut sites ("priming") that causes a conformational change allowing for viral and host membrane fusion. TMPRSS2 has an extracellular protease domain capable of cleaving the spike protein to initiate membrane fusion. A validated inhibitor of TMPRSS2 protease activity would be a valuable tool for studying the impact TMPRSS2 has in viral entry and potentially be an effective antiviral therapeutic. To enable inhibitor discovery and profiling of FDA-approved therapeutics, we describe an assay for the biochemical screening of recombinant TMPRSS2 suitable for high throughput application. We demonstrate effectiveness to quantify inhibition down to subnanomolar concentrations by assessing the inhibition of camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate, clinically approved agents in Japan. Also, we profiled a camostat metabolite, FOY-251, and bromhexine hydrochloride, an FDA-approved mucolytic cough suppressant. The rank order potency for the compounds tested are nafamostat (IC50 = 0.27 nM), camostat (IC50 = 6.2 nM), FOY-251 (IC50 = 33.3 nM), and gabexate (IC50 = 130 nM). Bromhexine hydrochloride showed no inhibition of TMPRSS2. Further profiling of camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate against a panel of recombinant proteases provides insight into selectivity and potency.
The severe
acute respiratory
syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has driven the
urgent need to rapidly identify therapeutics for both preventing and
treating infectedpatients. Given that no approved therapeutics for
treating any coronaviruses existed at the time SARS-CoV-2 emerged
(late 2019), early attention has focused on drug repurposing opportunities.[1,2] Drug repurposing is an attractive approach to treating SARS-CoV-2,
as active drugs approved for use in humans in the United States or
by other regulatory agencies, or unapproved drug candidates shown
to be safe in human clinical trials, can be nominated for fast-track
to the clinic. For example, remdesivir (GS-5734, Gilead Sciences Inc.),
is an inhibitor of viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase that had previously
been in clinical trials for treating Ebola virus. Remdesivir was rapidly
shown to be active against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and
in clinical trials, which resulted in the FDA granting emergency use
authorization and full approval in Japan.[3] The delineation of targets and cellular processes that mediate SARS-CoV-2infection and replication forms the basis for the development of assays
for drug repurposing screening and subsequent full-fledged therapeutic
development programs.One therapeutic target receiving significant
attention is the human
host cell transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2, Uniprot-O15393[4]) that is expressed in epithelial cells of the
human respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts.[5] TMPRSS2 is anchored to the extracellular surface of the cell, where
it exerts its enzymatic activity. While its precise physiologic substrate
is not clear, TMPRSS2 gene fusions are common in prostate cancer,
resulting in its overexpression.[6,7] The SARS-CoV-2 virus
enters cells via its spike protein first binding to the cell-surface
angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), and evidence suggests that
TMPRSS2 then proteolytically cleaves a sequence on the spike protein,
facilitating a conformation change that “primes” it
for cell entry (Figure A) through both virus-cell fusion and through cell–cell fusion
that results in syncytia formation. TMPRSS2 was first shown to facilitate
viral entry of the coronavirusesSARS-CoV and HCoV-NL63 in cells engineered
to overexpress TMPRSS2, and by inhibition with the trypsin-like serine
protease inhibitor, camostat.[8] When the
Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV) outbreak
occurred, TMPRSS2-overexpressing cells were again shown to facilitate
cell infection, TMPRSS2 was shown to degrade the MERS-CoVspike protein,
and camostat was shown to limit cell entry.[9] The structurally related trypsin-like serine protease inhibitor
nafamostat was shown to similarly inhibit spike protein-mediated cell
fusion of MERS-CoV.[10] Additionally, in vivo mouse models for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV with a TMPRSS2
gene knockout caused a reduction in lung pathology after viral infection
while not seeing any effect on development or survival. However, it
was noted that a decreased inflammatory chemokine and cytokine response
mediated by a Toll-like receptor 3 agonist may suggest an unidentified
physiological role.[11] The protein sequence
between mouse and human is conserved, with 77% sequence identity suggesting
structure and functional similarity.[12] Similarly,
inhibition of trypsin-like serine proteases with camostat (30 mg/kg)
mitigated SARS-CoV pathogenesis in a lethal SARS-CoV BALB/c mouse
model.[13] Given the strong evidence that
TMPRSS2 mediates coronavirus entry, when SARS-CoV-2 emerged it was
soon demonstrated through loss- and gain-of-function experiments that
TMPRSS2 is retained as a mediator of cell infection, and that this
can be inhibited by camostat.[14−18]
Figure 1
(A)
Scheme demonstrating the role TMPRSS2 plays in priming SARS-CoV-2
for cellular entry. Spike protein first binds to ACE2 (“Binding”),
followed by proteolytic action of TMPRSS2 (“Priming”)
prior to viral fusion. (B) Scheme displaying the enzymatic assay principle.
The fluorogenic peptide substrate Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC has low fluorescence
compared to the fluorescent 7-amino-4-methylcoumarin (AMC), which
is released upon proteolytic cleavage. The scissile bond is indicated
in red. (C) Schematic of the truncated yeast-expressed recombinant
TMPRSS2, containing the low-density lipoprotein receptor A (LDLRA)
domain, scavenger receptor cysteine-rich (SRCR) domain, and protease
domain used in the biochemical assay.
(A)
Scheme demonstrating the role TMPRSS2 plays in priming SARS-CoV-2
for cellular entry. Spike protein first binds to ACE2 (“Binding”),
followed by proteolytic action of TMPRSS2 (“Priming”)
prior to viral fusion. (B) Scheme displaying the enzymatic assay principle.
The fluorogenic peptide substrate Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC has low fluorescence
compared to the fluorescent 7-amino-4-methylcoumarin (AMC), which
is released upon proteolytic cleavage. The scissile bond is indicated
in red. (C) Schematic of the truncated yeast-expressed recombinant
TMPRSS2, containing the low-density lipoprotein receptor A (LDLRA)
domain, scavenger receptor cysteine-rich (SRCR) domain, and protease
domain used in the biochemical assay.Camostat (also called FOY-305) is a trypsin-like serine protease
inhibitor approved in Japan (as the mesylate salt) for the treatment
of pancreatitis and reflux esophagitis.[19] Given its status as an approved agent that is orally administered,
safe, well tolerated in humans, and can inhibit cellular entry, camostat
mesylate received attention as a drug repurposing candidate. At least
eight clinical trials for treating patients are currently underway.[20] It was developed by Ono Pharmaceuticals (Japan,
patented in 1977[19,21]). While a specific report of
its development does not appear to be published, it is a highly potent
inhibitor of trypsin (IC50 ≈ 50 nM),[22] and it cross-inhibits other proteases. When
given as a treatment, it is hydrolyzed in plasma (t1/2 < 1 min) to 4-(4-guanidinobenzoyloxy)phenylacetic
acid (FOY-251), which has shown a similar profile for inhibition of
trypsin, thrombin, plasma kallikrein, and plasmin.[22] Two other structurally related inhibitors, nafamostat (Torii
Pharmaceutical, Japan) and gabexate (also from Ono, FOY-307), are
also approved in Japan for treating pancreatitis and show potential
for activity against SARS-CoV-2, and trials with nafamostat have also
been reported.[23] While TMPRSS2 biochemical
assays have been reported for understanding its role in prostate cancer
and influenza,[24,25] these three inhibitors have not
yet been directly demonstrated to inhibit TMPRSS2, and the mechanism
has been inferred by inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cell models
such as the lung-derived human cell line Calu-3.[26] Conversely, bromhexine (BHH), an FDA-approved mucolytic
cough suppressant, has been identified within a TMPRSS2 biochemical
screen as the most potent hit (IC50 = 750 nM) and further
shown to demonstrate efficacy in mouse models to reduce metastasis
of prostate cancer.[25] With this reported
activity as a TMPRSS2 inhibitor, it is being investigated within a
COVID19 clinical trial.[27]In response
to the COVID19 public health emergency, we are developing
both protein/biochemical and cell-based assays to interrogate several
biological targets to enable identification of potential therapeutic
leads. Our initial focus is on performing drug repurposing screening
for each assay and rapidly sharing the data through the NCATS OpenData
portal for COVID19.[28] As part of this effort,
we sought to develop a biochemical assay for measuring the activity
of TMPRSS2 to enable the evaluation of existing drug repurposing candidates,
virtual screening,[29−31] and new inhibitors.Herein we report the development
of a TMPRSS2 fluorogenic biochemical
assay and testing of a number of clinical repurposing candidates for
COVID19. Activity of TMPRSS2 constructs and the assessment of several
substrates were first performed. The best substrate was then used
to assess enzyme kinetics and establish a Km value for the substrate, to define assay conditions, and demonstrate
suitability of the assay in 384- and 1536-well plates. The inhibitors
camostat, FOY-251, nafamostat, gabexate, and BHH were assessed. To
understand their relative activities, we chose camostat, nafamostat,
and gabexate to be profiled against a panel of human recombinant proteases.
Results
and Discussion
To identify inhibitors of TMPRSS2 that may
be used to validate
its role in SARS-CoV-2 entry and potentially expedite to clinical
trials, we developed a biochemical assay using active TMPRSS2 protease
and a fluorogenic peptide substrate (Figure B). Initially, we screened six candidate
fluorogenic peptide substrates, Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC,[25] Cbz-d-Arg-Gly-Arg-AMC,[24] Cbz-d-Arg-Pro-Arg-AMC,[24] Boc-Leu-Gly-Arg-AMC,[24,32] Cbz-Gly-Gly-Arg-AMC,[24,33] and Ac-Val-Arg-Pro-Arg-AMC, most
of which had been demonstrated within the literature to be cleaved
by TMPRSS2 and related proteases. Each peptide contains a 7-amino-4-methylcoumarin
(AMC) fluorophore that is released following enzymatic cleavage. Candidate
substrates were tested to both confirm that the TMPRSS2 construct
was biochemically active (thus far commercial protein expressed in
HEK293, E. coli, and in vitro wheat
germ constructs have not shown activity, data not shown), and to identify
the most avid substrate, indicated by the greatest production of fluorescence
from the released fluorogenic product AMC (Figure A). The peptide Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC had 27%
released AMC at 60 min, which was the highest observed, and was used
for further assay optimization and inhibitor screening with yeast-expressed
recombinant TMPRSS2 from Creative BioMart (Figure C).
Figure 2
Assessment of enzymatic activity and optimization
of TMPRSS2 biochemical
assay. (A) Various AMC-labeled peptides. Peptide [10 μM], TMPRSS2
[1 μM] in Tris-HCl pH8. (B) TMPRSS2 titration using Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC
peptide [25 μM] in Tris-HCl pH8. (C) Varying Tris-HCl buffer
pH. TMPRSS2 [4 μM], Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC [25 μM]. (D) Km of Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC while TMPRSS2 [1 μM],
Tris-HCl pH8. (E) 384-well plate S:B and Z′.
TMPRSS2 [1 μM], Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC [10 μM], Tris-HCl
pH8. (F) 1536-well plate S:B and Z′. TMPRSS2
[1 μM], Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC [10 μM], Tris-HCl pH8.
Assessment of enzymatic activity and optimization
of TMPRSS2 biochemical
assay. (A) Various AMC-labeled peptides. Peptide [10 μM], TMPRSS2
[1 μM] in Tris-HCl pH8. (B) TMPRSS2 titration using Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC
peptide [25 μM] in Tris-HCl pH8. (C) Varying Tris-HCl buffer
pH. TMPRSS2 [4 μM], Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC [25 μM]. (D) Km of Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC while TMPRSS2 [1 μM],
Tris-HCl pH8. (E) 384-well plate S:B and Z′.
TMPRSS2 [1 μM], Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC [10 μM], Tris-HCl
pH8. (F) 1536-well plate S:B and Z′. TMPRSS2
[1 μM], Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC [10 μM], Tris-HCl pH8.Next, a TMPRSS2 titration was performed at constant
substrate concentration
(25 μM) to identify an appropriate enzyme concentration that
achieves ∼20% substrate cleavage in 60 min, and this was found
to be 1 μM (Figure B). We then varied assay buffer conditions, such as Tris-HCl
buffer pH, DMSO, and Tween20 concentrations to further optimize enzymatic
activity and determine tolerance to DMSO and Tween20 that is required
for inhibitor screening. Noticing that trypsin activity is optimal
at pH 7.5–8.5,[34] we tested a few
different pH values greater than 7 and demonstrated that a pH of 9
had the highest percentage of released AMC (Figure C). However, a pH of 8, which had a nearly
identical percent released AMC, was chosen to proceed for further
assay optimization and inhibitor screening. Next, enzymatic activity
was shown to be tolerant of Tween20 at 0.01% (data not shown), and
DMSO up to 4% (data not shown), well above the DMSO concentrations
of less than 1% v/v typically applied during the testing of inhibitors.Finally, using our optimized assay buffer conditions, we determined
the Km of our peptide substrate to be
33 μM (Figure D). The concentration of substrate selected for the biochemical assay
was set below Km at 10 μM to ensure
susceptibility to competitive inhibitors (detailed protocol provided
in Table ). Positive
and negative control conditions were assessed in 384- and 1536-well
plate formats to determine a signal/background (S:B) and a Z′ appropriate for HTS. The S:B and Z′ in a 384-well plate were 3.6 and 0.86, respectively (Figure E), and in a 1536-well
plate the S:B and Z′ were 3.2 and 0.86, respectively
(Figure F). These
data demonstrate appropriate performance for this assay within both
plate formats to be useful for HTS.
Table 1
Detailed TMPRSS2
Biochemical Protocol
step no.
process
notes
1
20 nL of peptide substrate
dispensed into 1536-well plates.
Peptide (dissolved in DMSO)
dispensing performed using an ECHO 655 acoustic dispenser (LabCyte).
Corning 1536-well Black Polystyrene, square well, high base, nonsterile,
nontreated; cat.# 3724
2
20 nL of inhibitor or vehicle
control (DMSO) dispensed into 1536-well plates.
Inhibitor or vehicle control
(DMSO) dispensing performed using an ECHO 655 acoustic dispenser (LabCyte).
3
TMPRSS2 diluted in assay
buffer dispensed into 1536-well plates.
TMPRSS2 (33.5 μM,
150 nL) in assay buffer (50 mM Tris pH 8, 150 mM NaCl, 0.01% Tween20)
dispensing performed using a BioRAPTR (Beckman Coulter). Total reaction
volume of 5 μL.
4
incubate at RT for 1 h
Final assay conditions are
10 μM peptide and 1 μM TMPRSS2 in assay buffer (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 8, 150 mM NaCl, 0.01% Tween20)
Using the established assay, we tested the inhibition of TMPRSS2
using COVID19-relevant and putative TMPRSS2 inhibitors: camostat,
FOY-251, nafamostat, gabexate, and BHH (Figure ). We found that nafamostat (currently in
clinical trials) (IC50 = 0.27 nM) is the most potent among
the inhibitors, while camostat (currently in clinical trials) shows
low nM potency (IC50 = 6.2 nM) and its primary metabolite,
FOY-251, has a ∼5-fold potency loss (IC50 = 33.3
nM). Gabexate was significantly less potent (IC50 = 130
nM). Notably, we did not detect inhibition by BHH (currently in clinical
trials). Because our reported IC50 values were ∼10–100-fold
lower than our enzyme concentration (1 μM), based on the manufacturer’s
supplied concentration, we used the TMPRSS2 activity (%) from our
dose–response curves for camostat and nafamostat to calculate
an active TMPRSS2 concentration and apparent dissociation constants
for the enzyme–inhibitor complex (Kiapp) using the tight-binding equation, also known as the
Morrison equation (eq ).[35,36]
Figure 3
Activity of clinically-approved
inhibitors against TMPRSS2 (blue),
and fluorescent counter-assay (black). The molecular structures and
dose–response inhibition of TMPRSS2 by (A) camostat, (B) FOY251,
(C) nafamostat, (D) gabexate, and (E) bromhexine are shown. The calculated
concentrations required for 50% inhibition (IC50) are displayed
in nM. (F) Calculated active TMPRSS2 concentration and apparent dissociation
constants for the enzyme–inhibitor complex (Kiapp) by fitting dose–response data
from camostat and nafamostat to the Morrison equation.
Activity of clinically-approved
inhibitors against TMPRSS2 (blue),
and fluorescent counter-assay (black). The molecular structures and
dose–response inhibition of TMPRSS2 by (A) camostat, (B) FOY251,
(C) nafamostat, (D) gabexate, and (E) bromhexine are shown. The calculated
concentrations required for 50% inhibition (IC50) are displayed
in nM. (F) Calculated active TMPRSS2 concentration and apparent dissociation
constants for the enzyme–inhibitor complex (Kiapp) by fitting dose–response data
from camostat and nafamostat to the Morrison equation.Fitting the TMPRSS2 activity (%) data to this equation while
setting
S to 1 and Km to 1000 within GraphPad
Prism determined an active TMPRSS2 concentration of approximately
0.14 nM and Kiapp values for
camostat and nafamostat matching the reported IC50 values
(Figure F). Graphs
to determine Kiapp for FOY-251
and gabexate are shown in Supplementary Figure 1. To ensure these inhibitors are not false-positive artifacts
of the assay by quenching the fluorescence of the cleaved AMC, a counter-assay
to detect quenching of AMC was performed. The counter-assay involved
the addition of inhibitors in various concentrations to AMC held at
1 μM, which approximates 10% enzymatic cleavage resulting in
1 μM of released AMC. The counter-assay demonstrated that these
inhibitors had no dose–response effects on the fluorescence
from AMC, indicating there was no quenching of AMC fluorescence from
the inhibitors tested (overlaid data, Figure a–e). These data support the conclusions
drawn in cell-based studies that the ability of camostat, nafamostat,
and gabexate to inhibit cell entry of a virus is caused by direct
inhibition of TMPRSS2 (though inhibition of other proteases may contribute
to cellular activity observed, vide infra).To assess potential activity against other physiologically relevant
proteases, camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate were profiled by Reaction
Biology Corp. against a panel of human recombinant protease assays,
spanning multiple enzyme families and classes in 10-point concentration
response (Figure ).
Consistent with their similar chemical structures and defined activity
as trypsin-like serine protease inhibitors,[37] inhibition patterns were similar among the three inhibitors tested,
demonstrating concentration–response inhibition of several
trypsin-like serine proteases, including members of the trypsin family
(trypsin, kallikreins). All three inhibitors also demonstrated potent
activity toward the plasma trypsin-like proteases, plasmin, and FXIa,
as well as Matriptase 2 (a.k.a. TMPRSS6), a member of the type II
transmembrane protease family which includes TMPRSS2.[38] Nafamostat again demonstrated the most potent inhibitory
activity, followed by camostat, with gabexate demonstrating the lowest
potency. Of the proteases tested, only Kallikrein 12 demonstrated
greater sensitivity to gabexete relative to nafamostat and camostat.
Dose–response data revealed no inhibitory activity against
several matrix metalloproteases (MMP) and caspases, and only modest
activity against the cysteine protease, Cathepsin S.
Figure 4
Activity of camostat,
nafamostat, and gabexate against a panel
of proteases. (A) Compounds were tested against all proteases in dose–response,
and activity data were conditionally formatted, dark green = inhibition
(IC50 ≤ 10 μM), light green = (IC50 > 10 μM), and red = inactive. (B) Dose–response
curves
for all three compounds against the eight most sensitive proteases
in the panel (full report in Supplemental Reaction Biology Report).
Activity of camostat,
nafamostat, and gabexate against a panel
of proteases. (A) Compounds were tested against all proteases in dose–response,
and activity data were conditionally formatted, dark green = inhibition
(IC50 ≤ 10 μM), light green = (IC50 > 10 μM), and red = inactive. (B) Dose–response
curves
for all three compounds against the eight most sensitive proteases
in the panel (full report in Supplemental Reaction Biology Report).Additional profiling
of 40+ human proteases by BPS Bioscience Inc.
at single concentration using 10 μM (Supplementary Figure 2) confirmed sensitivity observed by Matriptase 2 and
several kallikreins, with the highest inhibitory activity against
another plasma trypsin-like serine protease, APC, which plays a critical
role in coagulation.[39] This diverse panel
also included several caspases and ubiquitin specific proteases (USP),
all of which demonstrated little to no sensitivity to either inhibitor.
The conserved rank order demonstrated here against numerous proteases
tested suggests that neither compound conveys improved target selectivity
but rather improved potency, which highlights the need for novel,
more specific inhibitors of TMPRSS2.We developed a fluorogenic
biochemical assay for measuring recombinant
humanTMPRSS2 activity for high-throughput screening that can be readily
replicated and used to demonstrate inhibition as we show with nafamostat
(most potent), camostat, FOY-251, and gabexate. The fluorogenic assay
approach taken here has advantages and disadvantages. The assay was
readily scaled to a 1536-well format for potential high-throughput
robotic screening and can be monitored in real-time. Also, activity
is easily detected by the liberation of a fluorophore. The substrate
was selected based on the maximal activity of TMPRSS2 against it compared
with other substrate candidates, and can be considered a tool substrate,
rather than one that is physiologically relevant in the context of
the action of TMPRSS2 against its SARS-CoV-2spike protein cleavage
site. A disadvantage that is common to all fluorescence-based assay
readouts is the potential for inhibitory compounds from screening
to be false-positive artifacts, by quenching the fluorescence of the
AMC product, but a simple counter-assay for AMC quenchers can be used
to identify false-positives. This counter assay was done on those
inhibitors profiled here to demonstrate there was no dose–response
quenching of AMC fluorescence (overlaid data, Figure a–e).Two other reports of biochemical
assays for TMPRSS2 exist, though
their studies were unrelated to the role of TMPRSS2 in SARS-CoV-2
entry. Lucas et al. examined TMPRSS2 in the context of prostate cancer.
They reported a HTS at a single concentration that produced several
hits including their most potent hit, BHH (IC50 of 750
nM reported), which is an FDA-approved mucolytic cough suppressant.[25] It has also been included as a potential drug
repurposing TMPRSS2 inhibitor and been shown to reduce the ICU admissions,
intubation, and mortality rate in patients with COVID19 in a 78 patient
open-label, randomized clinical trial.[27,40,41] Unfortunately, few details of the assay utilized,
scale of assay, or its development were described, but the substrate
identified in our study as the most amenable for HTS (Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC)
was also used in the Lucas et al. study. Notably, we did not detect
inhibition of TMPRSS2 from BHH, and confirmed 99.9% purity of our
BHH sample (Supplementary Figure 3). One
significant distinction between the reports is the recombinant TMPRSS2
construct used. Both were expressed in yeast, yet the Lucas et al.
TMPRSS2 (aa 148–492) is without the LDLRA domain, whereas our
TMPRSS2 (aa 106–492) composes the full extracellular domain.
It is not known how this difference could lead to a discrepancy in
inhibition data. In potential agreement with our results, a recent
report demonstrated a lack of inhibiting SARS-CoV-2-S-mediated pseudotyped
particle entry from bromhexine, suggesting no direct inhibition of
TMPRSS2.[42] Additionally, a metabolite of
bromhexine, ambroxol, that is also used as a mucolytic agent did not
show any TMPRSS2 inhibition at 40 μM (data not shown). These
data suggest the mechanism of action from these mucolytic agents may
be an indirect effect on TMPRSS2 or other proteases involved in proteolytic
priming of the spike protein, such as trafficking and secretion.[43,44] Meyer et al. examined several peptide AMC substrates for TMPRSS2
and used a biochemical assay to assess modified peptide substrates
as TMPRSS2 inhibitors, some with observed inhibition constants of
approximately 20 nM.[24] They found a high
correlation between inhibition constants of inhibitors between TMPRSS2
and matriptase, similar to the cross-inhibition seen from the inhibitors
profiled within our assay. Additionally, they report a low active
TMPRSS2 concentration in the enzyme stock solution. In our study,
the enzyme concentration used was 1 μM based on the manufacturer’s
supplied concentration. However, using our dose–response data
from camostat and nafamostat for fitting to the Morrison equation
allowed us to calculate the active TMPRSS2 concentration to be approximately
0.14 nM.We report here for the first time the direct biochemical
inhibition
of TMPRSS2 by camostat and nafamostat, clinical agents of interest
in COVID19. Given the clinical trial attention on camostat and nafamostat
for treating COVID19, our finding that nafamostat demonstrates greater
potency against TMPRSS2 supports its evaluation in clinical trials.
A recent molecular dynamics and Markov modeling study explains the
increased potency from nafamostat and the molecular mechanism of TMPRSS2
inhibition.[45] Protease profiling revealed
activity against a range of trypsin-like serine proteases (and greater
potency than against TMPRSS2), but activity was restricted to this
protease class and compounds did not generally inhibit other protease
classes such as matrix metalloproteases (MMPs), caspases, and ubiquitin-specific
proteases (USPs). Camostat and nafamostat development was reported
to focus on trypsin, plasmin, and kallikrein,[22,46] because of the role these targets played in pancreatitis, reflux
esophagitis, and hyperproteolytic conditions, and activity against
these enzymes was certainly observed in the protease panel.Beyond the evaluation of current inhibitors, we demonstrated acceptable
reproducibility and S:B indicating its suitability in a drug repurposing
screen and to support the development of new TMPRSS2 inhibitors through
virtual screening efforts.[29−31] There are several reasons why
a new clinical candidate may be valuable. A number of coronaviruses
have been shown to rely on TMPRSS2 for cellular entry (described in
the introduction), so a potent, orally available TMPRSS2 inhibitor
could be invaluable as a repurposing candidate for treating future
emergent coronaviruses. COVID19 is associated with acute respiratory
distress syndrome (ARDS). The lung pathology of the ARDS shows microvascular
thrombosis and hemorrhage, and has been characterized as disseminated
intravascular coagulation (DIC) with enhanced fibrinolysis, or as
diffuse pulmonary intravascular coagulopathy.[47,48] This coagulopathy can lead to pulmonary hypertension and cardiac
injury. Trypsin-like serine proteases are involved in SARS-CoV-2 cell
entry (TMPRSS2), in the coagulation cascade (APC), and in the enhanced
fibrinolysis (plasmin). As shown from profiling the protease panels,
camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate directly inhibit enzymes involved
in all these processes. Clinical development of this class of compounds
could thus be directed toward treatment of the infection through inhibition
of viral entry, toward treatment of the coagulopathy, or conceivably,
both. However, the strategies used to treat viral infection and coagulopathies
are very different. The former aims to achieve maximum viral suppression,
with dose limited by safety and tolerability. The latter seeks to
strike the delicate balance between suppression of thrombosis while
managing the inevitable increased risk of bleeding. For this reason,
the known clinical trials planned or underway for nafamostat and camostat
can be divided into three categories: those for which the primary
end point is focused on limiting or preventing infection, those for
which the primary end point is focused on management of ARDS and advanced
disease, and those which may capture the treatment benefit through
either mechanism.Nafamostat is approved and marketed in Japan
and South Korea and
is typically prescribed to treat acute symptoms of pancreatitis and
to treat DIC.[49] It is administered by IV
infusion and has a plasma half-life (t1/2) of about 23 min.[50] The main metabolites
of nafamostat are 6-amidino-2-naphthol and 4-guanidinobenzoic acid
which, unlike nafamostat itself, do not inhibit the trypsin-like serine
protease, prostasin.[51] It is unknown whether
these metabolites would inhibit TMPRSS2. Clinical trials to test the
hypothesis that nafamostat can lower lung function deterioration and
need for intensive care admission in COVID-19patients, and that nafamostat
can improve the clinical status of COVID-19patients with pneumonia
have been registered.[23] Indeed, in a small
case report, three high-risk elderly patients in South Korea who required
oxygen, improved and could be discharged following IV administration
of 200 mg daily for 4 to 13 days.[52] Camostat
is approved in Japan for the treatment of acute symptoms of chronic
pancreatitis and postoperative reflux esophagitis.[53] The treatment regimen is typically 200 mg PO, every 8 h.
Camostat is a pro-drug as the parent drug is not detected in plasma.
The terminal ester is rapidly hydrolyzed in plasma (t1/2 < 1 min) to 4-(4-guanidinobenzoyloxy)phenylacetic
acid (FOY-251) which has a mean terminal half-life of 1 h.[54] FOY-251 and camostat are reported to have similar
activities against trypsin, thrombin, plasma kallikrein, and plasmin,[22] and here we show a ∼5-fold decreased
potency by FOY-251 (IC50 = 33.3 nM) compared to camostat
(IC50 = 6.2 nM) for TMPRSS2 inhibition. There are eight
registered clinical trials studying camostat, of which only one is
focused on coagulopathy.[20] The other trials
are focused on early, mild, or moderate disease. Given the short half-lives
for camostat and nafamostat, the limitation of a biochemical assay
on purified TMPRSS2 alone is that the in vivo effects
may also result from metabolites of the parent. Accordingly, we tested
TMPRSS2 inhibition by FOY-251, the primary camostat metabolite. Literature
suggests it is unlikely the metabolites from nafamostat would inhibit
TMPRSS2. Another critical piece, not considered within this report,
that may contribute to in vivo effects are inhibitor
kinetics, demonstration of reversibility, and off-rates for the parent
inhibitor. Gabexate is an IV drug approved for marketing in Italy
and Japan and was shown to be effective in treating patients with
sepsis-associated DIC and treating acute pancreatitis.[55] It is clearly much less potent than nafamostat,
and there are no registered COVID-19 clinical studies with it. In
summary, of the three drugs in the class, nafamostat is being studied
as the preferred drug in an ICU setting as it can be titrated against
coagulation markers as a treatment for coagulopathy, while considering
its antiviral effect as a bonus. In outpatient, early diagnosis, or
prophylactic settings, camostat is being studied predominantly with
the primary purpose as an antiviral. In these latter settings there
is room for new, selective TMPRSS2 inhibitors which could achieve
higher levels of inhibition without incurring a bleeding risk. However,
it is unclear whether a selective TMPRSS2 probe molecule would in
turn be an effective antiviral therapeutic as other extracellular
trypsin-like serine proteases, such as TMPRSS4, have been shown to
affect viral entry.[16,56] Consequently, a TMPRSS2 probe
molecule may avert the increased risk of bleeding from off-target
trypsin-like serine protease inhibition, while sacrificing antiviral
efficacy due to the need to inhibit redundant proteolytic activity
from other trypsin-like serine proteases on the cell surface. Here,
protein expression differences between the various trypsin-like serine
proteases may affect the amount of antiviral efficacy from TMPRSS2
inhibition alone.The biochemical TMPRSS2 assay we disseminate
here is a simple and
HTS-amenable approach to support TMPRSS2 inhibitor therapeutic development
and investigate TMPRSS2 inhibition from compounds in COVID19 trials.
Clinical trials of nafamostat for COVID19 have been reported, and
we believe it warrants evaluation given its superior activity over
camostat, as demonstrated herein.
Methods
Reagents
Recombinant HumanTMPRSS2 protein expressed
from yeast (humanTMPRSS2 residues 106–492, N-terminal 6x His-tag)
(cat.# TMPRSS2-1856H) was acquired from Creative BioMart (Shirley,
NY). Peptides obtained from Bachem include Boc-Leu-Gly-Arg-AMC. Acetate
(cat.# I-1105), Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC. HCl (cat.# I-1550), Ac-Val-Arg-Pro-Arg-AMC.
TFA (cat.# I-1965), Cbz-Gly-Gly-Arg-AMC. HCl (cat.# I-1140). Peptides
custom ordered from LifeTein (Somerset, NJ) include Cbz-d-Arg-Gly-Arg-AMC, Cbz-d-Arg-Pro-Arg-AMC.
To a 384-well
black plate (Greiner 781900) was added Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC
(62.5 nL) and inhibitor (62.5 nL) using an ECHO 655 acoustic dispenser
(LabCyte). To that was added TMPRSS2 (750 nL) in assay buffer (50
mM Tris pH 8, 150 mM NaCl, 0.01% Tween20) to give total reaction volume
of 25 μL. Following 1 h incubation at RT, detection was done
using the PHERAstar with 340 nm excitation and 440 nm emission.
Fluorescence Counter Assay—384-Well Plate
To
a 384-well black plate (Greiner 781900) was added 7-amino-methylcoumarin
(62.5 nL) and inhibitor or DMSO (62.5 nL) using an ECHO 655 acoustic
dispenser (LabCyte). To that was added assay buffer (50 mM Tris pH
8, 150 mM NaCl, 0.01% Tween20) to give a total reaction volume of
25 μL. Detection was done using the PHERAstar with 340 nm excitation
and 440 nm emission. Fluorescence was normalized relative to a negative
control containing DMSO-only wells (0% activity, low fluorescence)
and a positive control containing AMC only (100% activity, high fluorescence).
An inhibitor causing fluorescence quenching would be identified as
having a concentration-dependent decrease on AMC fluorescence.
To a 1536-well
black plate was added Boc-Gln-Ala-Arg-AMC substrate
(20 nL) and inhibitor (20 nL) using an ECHO 655 acoustic dispenser
(LabCyte). To that was dispensed TMPRSS2 (150 nL) in assay buffer
(50 mM Tris pH 8, 150 mM NaCl, 0.01% Tween20) using a BioRAPTR (Beckman
Coulter) to give a total reaction volume of 5 μL. Following
1 h of incubation at RT, detection was done using the PHERAstar with
340 nm excitation and 440 nm emission.
TMPRSS2 Assay Protocol
The TMPRSS2 biochemical assay
was performed according to the assay protocol shown in Table .
Data Process and Analysis
To determine compound activity
in the assay, the concentration–response data for each sample
was plotted and modeled by a four-parameter logistic fit yielding
IC50 and efficacy (maximal response) values. Raw plate
reads for each titration point were first normalized relative to a
positive control containing no enzyme (0% activity, full inhibition)
and a negative control containing DMSO-only wells (100% activity,
basal activity). Data normalization, visualization, and curve fitting
were performed using Prism (GraphPad, San Diego, CA).
Protease Profiling
Camostat, nafamostat, and gabexate
were assessed for inhibition against panels of recombinant human proteases
by commercial services from Reaction Biology Corp and BPS Biosciences.
The Reaction Biology Corp profile tested in a 10-dose IC50 with a 3-fold serial dilution starting at 10 μM against 65
proteases. The BPS Biosciences profile was against 48 proteases at
a single concentration of 10 μM.
Authors: Jared M Lucas; Cynthia Heinlein; Tom Kim; Susana A Hernandez; Muzdah S Malik; Lawrence D True; Colm Morrissey; Eva Corey; Bruce Montgomery; Elahe Mostaghel; Nigel Clegg; Ilsa Coleman; Christopher M Brown; Eric L Schneider; Charles Craik; Julian A Simon; Antonio Bedalov; Peter S Nelson Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2014-08-13 Impact factor: 39.397
Authors: K Senokuchi; H Nakai; Y Nakayama; Y Odagaki; K Sakaki; M Kato; T Maruyama; T Miyazaki; H Ito; K Kamiyasu Journal: J Med Chem Date: 1995-07-07 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Giorgio Fois; Nina Hobi; Edward Felder; Andreas Ziegler; Pika Miklavc; Paul Walther; Peter Radermacher; Thomas Haller; Paul Dietl Journal: Cell Calcium Date: 2015-10-27 Impact factor: 6.817
Authors: Stephanie Bertram; Adeline Heurich; Hayley Lavender; Stefanie Gierer; Simon Danisch; Paula Perin; Jared M Lucas; Peter S Nelson; Stefan Pöhlmann; Elizabeth J Soilleux Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Yanchen Zhou; Punitha Vedantham; Kai Lu; Juliet Agudelo; Ricardo Carrion; Jerritt W Nunneley; Dale Barnard; Stefan Pöhlmann; James H McKerrow; Adam R Renslo; Graham Simmons Journal: Antiviral Res Date: 2015-02-07 Impact factor: 5.970
Authors: Mohamed Haddad; Roger Gaudreault; Gabriel Sasseville; Phuong Trang Nguyen; Hannah Wiebe; Theo Van De Ven; Steve Bourgault; Normand Mousseau; Charles Ramassamy Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-02-27 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Young Joo Sun; Gabriel Velez; Dylan E Parsons; Kun Li; Miguel E Ortiz; Shaunik Sharma; Paul B McCray; Alexander G Bassuk; Vinit B Mahajan Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2021-05-17 Impact factor: 19.456
Authors: Matthew D Hall; James M Anderson; Annaliesa Anderson; David Baker; Jay Bradner; Kyle R Brimacombe; Elizabeth A Campbell; Kizzmekia S Corbett; Kara Carter; Sara Cherry; Lillian Chiang; Tomas Cihlar; Emmie de Wit; Mark Denison; Matthew Disney; Courtney V Fletcher; Stephanie L Ford-Scheimer; Matthias Götte; Abigail C Grossman; Frederick G Hayden; Daria J Hazuda; Charlotte A Lanteri; Hilary Marston; Andrew D Mesecar; Stephanie Moore; Jennifer O Nwankwo; Jules O'Rear; George Painter; Kumar Singh Saikatendu; Celia A Schiffer; Timothy P Sheahan; Pei-Yong Shi; Hugh D Smyth; Michael J Sofia; Marla Weetall; Sandra K Weller; Richard Whitley; Anthony S Fauci; Christopher P Austin; Francis S Collins; Anthony J Conley; Mindy I Davis Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 7.759