Ziyang Zhang1, Rong Gao2, Qi Hu1, Hayden Peacock2, D Matthew Peacock1, Shizhong Dai1, Kevan M Shokat1, Hiroaki Suga2. 1. Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158, United States. 2. Department of Chemistry, Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan.
Abstract
We report the identification of three cyclic peptide ligands of K-Ras(G12D) using an integrated in vitro translation-mRNA display selection platform. These cyclic peptides show preferential binding to the GTP-bound state of K-Ras(G12D) over the GDP-bound state and block Ras-Raf interaction. A co-crystal structure of peptide KD2 with K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp reveals that this peptide binds in the Switch II groove region with concomitant opening of the Switch II loop and a 40° rotation of the α2 helix, and that a threonine residue (Thr10) on KD2 has direct access to the mutant aspartate (Asp12) on K-Ras. Replacing this threonine with non-natural amino acids afforded peptides with improved potency at inhibiting the interaction between Raf1-RBD and K-Ras(G12D) but not wildtype K-Ras. The union of G12D over wildtype selectivity and GTP state/GDP state selectivity is particularly desirable, considering that oncogenic K-Ras(G12D) exists predominantly in the GTP state in cancer cells, and wildtype K-Ras signaling is important for the maintenance of healthy cells.
We report the identification of three cyclic peptide ligands of K-Ras(G12D) using an integrated in vitro translation-mRNA display selection platform. These cyclic peptides show preferential binding to the GTP-bound state of K-Ras(G12D) over the GDP-bound state and block Ras-Raf interaction. A co-crystal structure of peptideKD2 with K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp reveals that this peptide binds in the Switch II groove region with concomitant opening of the Switch II loop and a 40° rotation of the α2 helix, and that a threonine residue (Thr10) on KD2 has direct access to the mutant aspartate (Asp12) on K-Ras. Replacing this threonine with non-natural amino acids afforded peptides with improved potency at inhibiting the interaction between Raf1-RBD and K-Ras(G12D) but not wildtype K-Ras. The union of G12D over wildtype selectivity and GTP state/GDP state selectivity is particularly desirable, considering that oncogenic K-Ras(G12D) exists predominantly in the GTP state in cancer cells, and wildtype K-Ras signaling is important for the maintenance of healthy cells.
Missense
mutations of the RAS genes (KRAS, HRAS, and NRAS) occur frequently
in humancancer and drive oncogenic transformation.[1] Among these, KRAS G12D is the most prevalent
point mutation associated with poor clinical outcome. The G12D mutation
impairs both intrinsic and GTPase-accelerating protein (GAP)-mediated
GTP hydrolysis and liberates K-Ras protein from functional control
by GTPase activity.[2,3] As a result, K-Ras(G12D) is enriched
in its GTP-bound, signaling-competent state, given the near 10-fold
higher concentration of GTP than GDP inside the cell.[4]Though Ras proteins were historically considered
“undruggable” due to their picomolar affinity for guanine
nucleotides and the lack of deep accessible pockets, recent efforts
have fueled the discovery of both small-molecule and macromolecule
direct binders of Ras.[5,6,15−23,7−14] Work from our laboratory identified a class of compounds that bind
to Ras in a highly dynamic pocket near the Switch II region (SIIP)
and leverage the nucleophilicity of the acquired cysteine in K-Ras(G12C)
to covalently capture K-Ras in its inactive, GDP-bound state.[11] Further chemical optimization has yielded ligands
with potent K-Ras(G12C)-dependent antitumor effects,[24−26] and four compounds (AMG510,[27,28] MRTX849,[29] JNJ-74699157,[30] and
LY3499446[31]) have entered clinical trials
in patients with K-Ras(G12C)-mutant tumors.[32] This strategy is uniquely suited for the G12C mutant because intrinsic
GTPase activity is not affected by the G12C mutation,[3] allowing the conversion from GTP-bound state to the compound-accessible
GDP-bound state at a clinically relevant rate. Efforts to develop
K-Ras(G12C) inhibitors capable of binding to the GTP state have so
far been unsuccessful. The SIIP is occluded in the GTP state of K-Ras,
effectively blocking the drug-binding pocket in this protein state.The loss of intrinsic GTPase activity in K-Ras(G12D) presents an
additional challenge—in cells with the G12D mutation, only
a minor fraction of the K-Ras protein will be GDP-bound, and conversion
from the GTP-bound state to the GDP-bound state is extremely slow.
To target K-Ras(G12D), we envision that a GTP-state-selective K-Ras
ligand will be advantageous because (1) it will bind to the predominant
K-Ras population in G12D-mutant cells, and (2) it will be less likely
to affect healthy cells, which express wildtype K-Ras with a significant
GDP-bound population. Previous work from our lab as well as others
has demonstrated that targeting the GTP state of Ras is feasible.
Gentile et al. discovered Switch II groove (SIIG) ligands that can
recognize both GDP and GTP states of Ras, albeit with a preference
for the GDP state.[33] Sakamoto et al. reported
K-Ras(G12D)-targeting cyclic peptides generated from a T7 phage display
library that are weakly selective for the GDP state and inhibit Sos-mediated
nucleotide exchange.[16,34,35] Wu et al. identified artificial cyclic peptides that block K-Ras(G12V)/Raf1-RBD
interaction from a bead-display library but did not study the nucleotide
state preference.[36] To the best of our
knowledge, GTP-state-selective ligands have not been documented. Here
we present the discovery of GTP-state-selective and mutant-selective
cyclic peptide ligands of K-Ras(G12D) using the Random non-standard
Peptides Integrated Discovery (RaPID) platform,[37] an in vitro translation–mRNA display
technology encoding >1012 macrocyclic peptides.
Results
and Discussion
To target the GTP state of K-Ras(G12D), we
first considered a potential challenge: a ligand identified from a
binding rather than a functional screen may not antagonize K-Ras oncogenic
function. For example, an allosteric ligand that stabilizes the active
conformation K-Ras(G12D)·GTP, but still allows effector binding,
will render the protein constitutively active. To minimize this possibility,
we took advantage of the two conformational states of Ras·GTP
with distinct properties: State 1 (effector binding incompetent) and
State 2 (effector binding competent).[38] While most Ras proteins exist in an equilibrium of these two interconverting
states, a mutation of Thr35 to Ser locks the protein in State 1.[39] We therefore elected to use the double mutant
K-Ras(G12D/T35S) for our initial selection, with the GppNHp-loaded
protein as the selection target, and the GDP-loaded protein as the
counter-target (Figure a).
Figure 1
Selection of cyclic peptides that selectively bind to State 1 of
GTP-bound K-Ras(G12D) from the Random non-standard Peptide Integrated
Discovery (RaPID) mRNA display library. (a) Cyclic peptide selection
was performed for a total of five rounds using K-Ras(G12D/T35S)·GppNHp
as the positive selection target and K-Ras(G12D/T35S)·GDP as
the negative selection target. (b) Top 20 hits clustered by sequence
alignment. Peptides are ranked based on the number of unique NGS reads
in the output library (not shown, see Supporting Information for detailed methods). Colored shades group peptides
in the same cluster; gray shades represent peptides that have higher
affinity for the GDP state, which were not further studied. One peptide
from each cluster (bold typeface) was chosen for further characterization.
(c) Structures of three distinct peptides identified from the selection.
Blue color indicates the constant regions of the cyclic peptide backbone,
including sulfide bridge, the starting amino acid chloroacetyl-d-tyrosine, and the ending amino acids cysteine and glycine.
Selection of cyclic peptides that selectively bind to State 1 of
GTP-bound K-Ras(G12D) from the Random non-standard Peptide Integrated
Discovery (RaPID) mRNA display library. (a) Cyclic peptide selection
was performed for a total of five rounds using K-Ras(G12D/T35S)·GppNHp
as the positive selection target and K-Ras(G12D/T35S)·GDP as
the negative selection target. (b) Top 20 hits clustered by sequence
alignment. Peptides are ranked based on the number of unique NGS reads
in the output library (not shown, see Supporting Information for detailed methods). Colored shades group peptides
in the same cluster; gray shades represent peptides that have higher
affinity for the GDP state, which were not further studied. One peptide
from each cluster (bold typeface) was chosen for further characterization.
(c) Structures of three distinct peptides identified from the selection.
Blue color indicates the constant regions of the cyclic peptide backbone,
including sulfide bridge, the starting amino acid chloroacetyl-d-tyrosine, and the ending amino acids cysteine and glycine.Starting from a high-diversity cDNA library (>1012 encoded compounds), we performed five rounds of selection
and examined the output cDNA libraries by next generation sequencing
(NGS). Each round of selection included in vitro transcription,
puromycin ligation, N-chloroacetyl-d-tyrosine-initiated in vitro translation with in situ cyclization,
reverse transcription, negative and positive selection with target
protein, K-Ras(G12D), immobilized on streptavidin beads, and PCR amplification
of the selected cDNA libraries. At the end of the fifth round of selection,
we subjected the output library to an additional round of selection
for quantitative comparison of the binders to empty beads, immobilized
K-Ras(G12D)·GDP, or immobilized K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp using
PCR and NGS. This allowed for calculation of the GTP/GDP selectivity
index (to evaluate GTP state selectivity) and the GTP/beads selectivity
index (to assess the level of non-specific binding). The top 20 binders
(ranked by the number of NGS reads after the fifth round) contained
16 cyclic peptides with GTP/GDP selectivity index of >1 (Figure b). These 16 peptides
clustered into three distinct sequence families, and members in each
cluster displayed surprisingly high sequence homology. We chose one
representative member from each cluster (namely, KD1, KD2, and KD17)
and chemically synthesized linker-free cyclic peptides in multi-milligram
quantities for further study.Interestingly, when we performed
a separate GTP-state positive selection using empty beads in lieu
of GDP-loaded protein for negative selection, we obtained predominantly
GDP-state-selective binders (Figure S1),
despite the fact that the positive selection target was the same GppNHp-loaded
protein.With these three GTP-state-selective cyclic peptide
ligands, we assessed their impact on effector binding to K-Ras(G12D).
We used a time-resolved fluorescence energy transfer (TR-FRET) assay
that allows the quantitation of the Ras·Raf complex formation
(Figure a). All three
peptides inhibited the interaction between K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp
and Raf1-RBD at micromolar concentrations. Meanwhile, all three peptides
were less potent at inhibiting the interaction of wildtype K-Ras·GppNHp
with Raf1-RBD, with different levels of selectivity. Surprisingly,
KD2 did not exhibit an inhibitory effect against wildtype K-Ras at
the highest solubility-permitting concentration. We reasoned that
the observed selectivity could come from two sources: (1) K-Ras(G12D)
is known to have a weaker affinity for Raf RBD than wildtype K-Ras
(Kd = 270 ± 46 and 56 ± 6 nM,
respectively),[3] and (2) the cyclic peptide
may exhibit preferential recognition for the aspartate-12 residue.
Figure 2
Cyclic
peptides block the interaction of K-Ras(G12D) and effector proteins.
(a) Illustration of a biochemical assay that detects Ras-Raf interaction
by time-resolved fluorescence energy transfer (TR-FRET). (b) Cyclic
peptides block Ras-Raf interaction with selectivity for the G12D mutant
over wildtype K-Ras. (c) Illustration of a biochemical assay that
monitors Sos-mediated nucleotide exchange using a fluorescent-GDP
analog. (d) KD2 and KD17, but not KD1, inhibit Sos-mediated nucleotide
exchange of K-Ras(G12D).
Cyclic
peptides block the interaction of K-Ras(G12D) and effector proteins.
(a) Illustration of a biochemical assay that detects Ras-Raf interaction
by time-resolved fluorescence energy transfer (TR-FRET). (b) Cyclic
peptides block Ras-Raf interaction with selectivity for the G12D mutant
over wildtype K-Ras. (c) Illustration of a biochemical assay that
monitors Sos-mediated nucleotide exchange using a fluorescent-GDP
analog. (d) KD2 and KD17, but not KD1, inhibit Sos-mediated nucleotide
exchange of K-Ras(G12D).We next determined whether
these cyclic peptides affect Sos-mediated nucleotide exchange, which
takes GDP-bound Ras as the substrate. Inhibition of Sos-mediated nucleotide
exchange required high concentrations of KD2 and KD17, and even near
the solubility limit of 50 μM, KD1 only had a small effect on
the rate of nucleotide exchange. By contrast, KRpep2d (a cyclic peptide
ligand of K-Ras reported by Takeda[16]) is
a highly potent inhibitor of
nucleotide exchange, with an IC50 below the lower assay
limit of the current assay format. The weaker potency of KD1 and KD2
at inhibiting Sos-mediated nucleotide exchange than at inhibiting
Ras·Raf interaction was consistent with their preference for
the GTP state of K-Ras (Figure b).Dose-dependent binding of KD2 and KD17 to surface-immobilized
or solution-phase K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp could be readily detected
using biolayer interferometry (BLI), surface plasmon resonance (SPR),
and isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) (Figure S2). None of these three peptides stabilized K-Ras(G12D) against
thermal denaturation either in their GDP-bound or GppNHp-bound state
(ΔTm < 1.0 °C, Figure S3). By contrast, KRpep2d increased the
melting temperature of K-Ras(G12D)·GDP by 6.0 °C, but had
little stabilization effect on K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp.To probe
the structural perturbation of K-Ras(G12D) by these three cyclic peptides,
we performed 1H–15N heteronuclear single
quantum coherence (HSQC) experiments with 100 μM 15N-labeled K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp in the presence of 400 μM
cyclic peptide. The low solubility of KD1 in aqueous buffer (∼50
μM) precluded the acquisition of the HSQC spectrum for this
peptide. Both KD2 and KD17 caused large perturbations of nearly all
peaks in the HSQC spectrum of K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp, with additional
new peaks that are not present in the spectrum of unliganded K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp
(Figure S4). Unfortunately, titration of
the ligand did not allow us to trace the chemical shift change of
each peak (instead, we observed two distinct populations). This result
is consistent with a tightly binding ligand with a slow dissociation
rate. Among the easily identifiable peaks, G77 showed a +0.10 ppm 1H chemical shift change upon the binding of either KD2 or
KD17.Owing to its pronounced GTP/GDP state selectivity (as
revealed by NGS reads in the selection) and G12D/wildtype selectivity
(as revealed by the Ras·Raf interaction assay), we focused our
additional efforts on KD2. We successful obtained co-crystals of KD2
and K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp in a construct where all cysteines have
been mutated to serine or leucine and which we previously found to
have improved crystallization properties. The crystal structure was
determined by molecular replacement and refined to 1.6 Å (Table S1). The overall complex structure is shown
in Figure a, with
the mutant aspartate residue (Asp12) highlighted in cyan, and KD2
and GppNHp shown in stick models. KD2 binds in the Switch II groove
region, below the α2 helix and the Switch II loop, the same
pocket as previously reported for covalent ligands targeting the engineered
cysteine in H-Ras(M72C)·GppNHp.[33] Strikingly,
this pocket is not observable in any published structures of the non-liganded
K-Ras in the GTP state. For example, examination of the structure
of K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp (PDB: 5USJ) reveals a closed surface between Switch
II and the α3 helix. However, KD2 appears to have expanded the
pocket by inducing a large shift of the α2 helix and the Switch
II loop (Figure d, Figure S5, Movie S1). The conformation adopted by these regions differs from that observed
in either GDP-state or GTP-state K-Ras(G12D) (Figure d). We also observed concomitant changes
of the Switch I conformation upon KD2 binding. However, the lack of
strong electron density for several residues and possible crystal
packing biases precluded further conclusions from being made (Figure S5c).
Figure 3
Crystal structure of KD2 bound to K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp.
(a) KD2 binds in the Switch II groove of K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp.
(b) 2Fo – Fc map showing the electron density of KD2, Asp12, Gln61, and
relevant water molecules, contoured at 1.0σ. (c) KD2 forms an
intricate hydrogen bond network intramolecularly and intermolecularly
with K-Ras. (d) Comparison of K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp·KD2 structure
with unliganded K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp (PDB: 5USJ) and K-Ras(G12D)·GDP
(PDB: 4EPR).
Root-mean-square deviations (RMSDs) were calculated on a residue-by-residue
basis for each pairwise comparison. SI, Switch I; SII, Switch II.
Crystal structure of KD2 bound to K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp.
(a) KD2 binds in the Switch II groove of K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp.
(b) 2Fo – Fc map showing the electron density of KD2, Asp12, Gln61, and
relevant water molecules, contoured at 1.0σ. (c) KD2 forms an
intricate hydrogen bond network intramolecularly and intermolecularly
with K-Ras. (d) Comparison of K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp·KD2 structure
with unliganded K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp (PDB: 5USJ) and K-Ras(G12D)·GDP
(PDB: 4EPR).
Root-mean-square deviations (RMSDs) were calculated on a residue-by-residue
basis for each pairwise comparison. SI, Switch I; SII, Switch II.KD2 forms an intricate hydrogen bond network both
within the macrocycle and with residues on K-Ras(G12D). One intriguing
observation was an ordered water molecule in the center of the macrocycle,
forming hydrogen bonds with both side-chain and backbone elements
of cyclic KD2. We surmise that this water molecule may be critical
to maintaining the conformation of the macrocycle. KD2 interacts with
K-Ras(G12D) through residues on various domains (Figure c), including G60 (Switch II),
D69 (α2 helix), D92 (α3 helix), Y96 (α3 helix),
and Q99 (α3 helix). Particularly remarkable is that the mutant
aspartate residue (Asp12) is directly accessible from Thr10 on the
cyclic peptide. We observed a low-occupancy water molecule bridging
Thr10 (KD2), Gln61 (K-Ras), and Asp12 (K-Ras) in the crystal structure
(Figure b). To the
best of our knowledge, this is the first ligand-bound crystal structure
of K-Ras(G12D) in its GTP state where the ligand makes direct contact
with the mutant residue at position 12.We next sought to improve
the affinity and mutant/wildtype selectivity of KD2 to K-Ras(G12D)
through structure-guided chemical modification. Asking whether we
could enhance side-chain interactions between the cyclic peptide and
Asp12 of K-Ras, we synthesized a set of KD2 analogs varying at the
Thr10 position (Figure a,b). These included the His, Lys, and Arg mutants, as well as a
few non-proteogenic amino acids such as l-1,2-diaminopropanoic
acid (Dap), l-citrulline (Cit), and l-β-azidoalanine
(Aza). During cyclic peptide synthesis, an unexpected side reaction
led the conversion of the azidoalanine residue into 4-methylpiperidinylalanine
(labeled Aza-X). We do not have a full mechanistic understanding of
this transformation, but it likely occurred during a Fmoc deprotection
step where 40% 4-methylpiperidine was used. (We hypothesize
that this happened via base-mediated β-elimination of azide
followed by Michael addition of 4-methylpiperidine onto the
resulting dehydroalanine; as a result, the stereochemistry of
Aza-X is uncertain.)
Figure 4
Substitution of Thr10 in KD2 improves the potency for
blocking Ras-Raf interaction. (a) Thr10 in KD2 is in proximity with
Asp12 of K-Ras(G12D). (b) Structure of KD2 with Thr10 highlighted
in red. (c) Thr10 mutants of KD2 are more potent inhibitors of Ras-Raf
interaction. (d) Thr10 mutants of KD2 do not inhibit wildtype K-Ras-Raf
interaction.
Substitution of Thr10 in KD2 improves the potency for
blocking Ras-Raf interaction. (a) Thr10 in KD2 is in proximity with
Asp12 of K-Ras(G12D). (b) Structure of KD2 with Thr10 highlighted
in red. (c) Thr10 mutants of KD2 are more potent inhibitors of Ras-Raf
interaction. (d) Thr10 mutants of KD2 do not inhibit wildtype K-Ras-Raf
interaction.We tested these KD2 analogs in
the TR-FRET-based Ras·Raf interaction assay (Figure c,d). The IC50 values
for the Lys and Arg mutants were found to be about 3-fold lower than
for KD2 (however, the solubility of these two mutants was significantly
lower than that of the parent peptideKD2, preventing their testing
at concentrations greater than 11.1 μM). Most strikingly, the
byproduct (Aza-X) from the failed attempt to incorporate azidoalanine
was the most potent among all compounds tested, with an IC50 of 0.80 μM, a >10-fold improvement compared to KD2. Meanwhile,
these analogs appeared to have maintained the G12D-mutant selectivity:
none of these KD2 mutants inhibited the interaction between Raf1-RBD
and wildtype K-Ras·GppNHp by more than >50% at the highest
concentrations tested (11.1 μM for the Lys, Arg, His, and Dap
mutants due to limited solubility, 100 μM for all others).We also considered rigidification of the cyclic peptide scaffold
through the formation of a transannular bridge, a structural
feature that has been found in both natural and synthetic peptides
to improve their activity.[40−42] To achieve this, we first identified
two amino acids in KD2, Val3 and Arg9, that do not participate in
intramolecular interactions or binding interaction with K-Ras
(Figure a). By replacing
these two amino acids with two cysteines or a combination of azidohomoalanine
and propargylglycine, we synthesized two bicyclic variants of
KD2 (Figure b). These
peptides were more potent inhibitors of the interaction between K-Ras(G12D)
and Raf1-RBD (Figure c). Although these two bicyclic peptides also inhibited the interaction
between wildtype K-Ras and Raf1-RBD, the IC50 values were
more than 20-fold higher than those for K-Ras(G12D).
Figure 5
Bicyclic variants of
KD2 exhibit improved potency for block Ras-Raf interaction. (a) Val3
and Arg9 on KD2 are solvent exposed and participate in neither interaction
with K-Ras nor intramolecular interactions. (b) Structures of
bicyclic variants of KD2. (c) Bicyclic variants of KD2 are more potent
inhibitors of K-Ras(G12D)-Raf interaction. (d) Bicyclic variants of
KD2 show improved inhibition of K-Ras(wildtype)-Raf interaction at
high concentrations.
Bicyclic variants of
KD2 exhibit improved potency for block Ras-Raf interaction. (a) Val3
and Arg9 on KD2 are solvent exposed and participate in neither interaction
with K-Ras nor intramolecular interactions. (b) Structures of
bicyclic variants of KD2. (c) Bicyclic variants of KD2 are more potent
inhibitors of K-Ras(G12D)-Raf interaction. (d) Bicyclic variants of
KD2 show improved inhibition of K-Ras(wildtype)-Raf interaction at
high concentrations.While we cannot extract
a comprehensive structure–activity relationship from this relatively
small compound set, it is conceivable that both the potency and the
mutant selectivity of these peptides can benefit from further structural
optimization with two distinct approaches—Thr10 modification
and scaffold rigidification. Importantly, the data here indicates
that substitution of Thr10 is well tolerated and may be tailored to
target the GTP state of other G12 mutants of K-Ras.
Conclusion
Employing a high-throughput selection platform (the RaPID system),
we have identified three distinct cyclic peptide scaffolds that preferentially
bind to K-Ras(G12D) in its GTP state from an initial library of 1012 members. These cyclic peptides inhibit the interaction between
K-Ras(G12D) and Raf1-RBD but are less effective for wildtype K-Ras
protein. X-ray crystallography showed that one of these peptides binds
to K-Ras in the Switch II groove region previously discovered in a
fragment screen.[33] Structure-guided chemical
diversification allowed rapid optimization of one initial hit into
a compound with sub-micromolar potency at inhibiting Ras-Raf interaction.One remaining challenge is that these cyclic peptides do not readily
enter cells, impeding their utility in a cellular setting (Figures S6–S8). We tested the cellular
activity of these peptides in phospho-signaling (Figure S6a,c) and cell viability (Figure S6b,c) but observed no evidence of on-pathway effects. We next
assessed cell permeability in multiple formats—passive artificial
membrane permeability assay (PAMPA) (Figure S7a), Caco-2 permeability assay (Figure S7a), chloroalkane penetration assay[43] (Figure S7b–d), and by using a fluorescein-conjugated
derivative of KD2 (Figure S7e–g).
These results suggested low cell permeability as a potential reason
for the lack of detectable cellular activity, although other factors
might have also contributed, and further studies are merited to understand
the activity of these cyclic peptides (see Supporting Information for an additional discussion on cellular activity).
Cellular permeability of cyclic peptides is a complex problem under
active research.[44−49] With guidance from abundant empirical rules and contemporary computational
modeling, we are optimistic that this will be a surmountable problem.
While these cyclic peptides in their current forms are unsuitable
as cellular leads, they have demonstrated that selective targeting
of the GTP state of mutant K-Ras is achievable and may serve as useful
starting points or molecular probes for future inhibitor development.Our study has overturned the current understanding of the Switch
II pocket (SIIP) first revealed by the discovery of covalent ligands
for K-Ras (G12C) and now extended by many more analogs which have
advanced to the clinic. The K-Ras (G12C) ligands do not bind to the
GTP state of K-Ras(G12C) and only bind in its GDP state, when Switch
II of K-Ras is open, exposing the SIIP. This understanding has dominated
clinical trials for K-Ras (G12C) ligands because of the inability
to identify ligands for the GTP state of K-Ras (G12C). Previous studies
have also revealed the Switch II groove (SIIG), a shallow surface
adjacent to SIIP but accessible in both GDP and GTP states. Ligands
that bind to SIIG have so far shown preference for the GDP state.
This study set out to identify what we initially hypothesized would
have to be a distinct pocket on K-Ras (G12D) in the GTP state since
previous studies appeared to suggest the SIIP was inaccessible. The
co-crystal structure of KD2 bound to K-Ras(G12D)·GppNHp was surprising
because KD2 occupies both SIIP and SIIG. This unified drug pocket
allowed ligands to simultaneously achieve selectivity for the GTP
state over the GDP state and for the G12D mutant over wildtype K-Ras.
This result suggests a previously unappreciated dynamic aspect of
the Switch II loop of K-Ras (G12D) in the GTP state exposing the SIIP
for drug access. This is a promising therapeutic approach for many
oncogenic K-Ras mutants that are devoid of GTPase activity and enriched
in their GTP-bound state.
Authors: Till Maurer; Lindsay S Garrenton; Angela Oh; Keith Pitts; Daniel J Anderson; Nicholas J Skelton; Benjamin P Fauber; Borlan Pan; Shiva Malek; David Stokoe; Mary J C Ludlam; Krista K Bowman; Jiansheng Wu; Anthony M Giannetti; Melissa A Starovasnik; Ira Mellman; Peter K Jackson; Joachim Rudolph; Weiru Wang; Guowei Fang Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-03-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Huizhong Feng; Yan Zhang; Pieter H Bos; Jennifer M Chambers; Marcel M Dupont; Brent R Stockwell Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2019-05-14 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Adrian Whitty; Mengqi Zhong; Lauren Viarengo; Dmitri Beglov; David R Hall; Sandor Vajda Journal: Drug Discov Today Date: 2016-02-15 Impact factor: 7.851
Authors: Matthew E Welsch; Anna Kaplan; Jennifer M Chambers; Michael E Stokes; Pieter H Bos; Arie Zask; Yan Zhang; Marta Sanchez-Martin; Michael A Badgley; Christine S Huang; Timothy H Tran; Hemanth Akkiraju; Lewis M Brown; Renu Nandakumar; Serge Cremers; Wan Seok Yang; Liang Tong; Kenneth P Olive; Adolfo Ferrando; Brent R Stockwell Journal: Cell Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Matthew R Janes; Jingchuan Zhang; Lian-Sheng Li; Rasmus Hansen; Ulf Peters; Xin Guo; Yuching Chen; Anjali Babbar; Sarah J Firdaus; Levan Darjania; Jun Feng; Jeffrey H Chen; Shuangwei Li; Shisheng Li; Yun O Long; Carol Thach; Yuan Liu; Ata Zarieh; Tess Ely; Jeff M Kucharski; Linda V Kessler; Tao Wu; Ke Yu; Yi Wang; Yvonne Yao; Xiaohu Deng; Patrick P Zarrinkar; Dirk Brehmer; Dashyant Dhanak; Matthew V Lorenzi; Dana Hu-Lowe; Matthew P Patricelli; Pingda Ren; Yi Liu Journal: Cell Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: John C Hunter; Deepak Gurbani; Scott B Ficarro; Martin A Carrasco; Sang Min Lim; Hwan Geun Choi; Ting Xie; Jarrod A Marto; Zhe Chen; Nathanael S Gray; Kenneth D Westover Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Dirk Kessler; Michael Gmachl; Andreas Mantoulidis; Laetitia J Martin; Andreas Zoephel; Moriz Mayer; Andreas Gollner; David Covini; Silke Fischer; Thomas Gerstberger; Teresa Gmaschitz; Craig Goodwin; Peter Greb; Daniela Häring; Wolfgang Hela; Johann Hoffmann; Jale Karolyi-Oezguer; Petr Knesl; Stefan Kornigg; Manfred Koegl; Roland Kousek; Lyne Lamarre; Franziska Moser; Silvia Munico-Martinez; Christoph Peinsipp; Jason Phan; Jörg Rinnenthal; Jiqing Sai; Christian Salamon; Yvonne Scherbantin; Katharina Schipany; Renate Schnitzer; Andreas Schrenk; Bernadette Sharps; Gabriella Siszler; Qi Sun; Alex Waterson; Bernhard Wolkerstorfer; Markus Zeeb; Mark Pearson; Stephen W Fesik; Darryl B McConnell Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Michael Garrigou; Bérengère Sauvagnat; Ruchia Duggal; Nicole Boo; Pooja Gopal; Jennifer M Johnston; Anthony Partridge; Tomi Sawyer; Kaustav Biswas; Nicolas Boyer Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 8.039
Authors: Seong Ho Hong; Daniel Y Yoo; Louis Conway; Khyle C Richards-Corke; Christopher G Parker; Paramjit S Arora Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Golnaz Kamalinia; Brian J Grindel; Terry T Takahashi; Steven W Millward; Richard W Roberts Journal: Chem Soc Rev Date: 2021-06-24 Impact factor: 60.615
Authors: Alok K Sharma; Marcin Dyba; Marco Tonelli; Brian Smith; William K Gillette; Dominic Esposito; Dwight V Nissley; Frank McCormick; Anna E Maciag Journal: Biomol NMR Assign Date: 2021-10-22 Impact factor: 0.731