| Literature DB >> 34867843 |
Shravani S Bobde1, Fahad M Alsaab1,2, Guangshuan Wang3, Monique L Van Hoek1.
Abstract
Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are ubiquitous amongst living organisms and are part of the innate immune system with the ability to kill pathogens directly or indirectly by modulating the immune system. AMPs have potential as a novel therapeutic against bacteria due to their quick-acting mechanism of action that prevents bacteria from developing resistance. Additionally, there is a dire need for therapeutics with activity specifically against Gram-negative bacterial infections that are intrinsically difficult to treat, with or without acquired drug resistance. Development of new antibiotics has slowed in recent years and novel therapeutics (like AMPs) with a focus against Gram-negative bacteria are needed. We designed eight novel AMPs, termed PHNX peptides, using ab initio computational design (database filtering technology combined with the novel positional analysis on APD3 dataset of AMPs with activity against Gram-negative bacteria) and assessed their theoretical function using published machine learning algorithms, and finally, validated their activity in our laboratory. These AMPs were tested to establish their minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and half-maximal effective concentration (EC50) under CLSI methodology against antibiotic resistant and antibiotic susceptible Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Laboratory-based experimental results were compared to computationally predicted activities for each of the peptides to ascertain the accuracy of the computational tools used. PHNX-1 demonstrated antibacterial activity (under high and low-salt conditions) against antibiotic resistant and susceptible strains of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and PHNX-4 to -8 demonstrated low-salt antibacterial activity only. The AMPs were then evaluated for cytotoxicity using hemolysis against human red blood cells and demonstrated some hemolysis which needs to be further evaluated. In this study, we successfully developed a design methodology to create synthetic AMPs with a narrow spectrum of activity where the PHNX AMPs demonstrated higher antibacterial activity against Gram-negative bacteria compared to Gram-positive bacteria. Thus, these peptides present novel synthetic peptides with a potential for therapeutic use. Based on our findings, we propose upfront selection of the peptide dataset for analysis, an additional step of positional analysis to add to the ab initio database filtering technology (DFT) method, and we present laboratory data on the novel, synthetically designed AMPs to validate the results of the computational approach. We aim to conduct future in vivo studies which could establish these AMPs for clinical use.Entities:
Keywords: Gram-negative bacteria; ab initio; antimicrobial peptide; computational prediction models; design
Year: 2021 PMID: 34867843 PMCID: PMC8636942 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.715246
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1A flowchart describing the ab initio rational AMP design process for Dataset 1 including an additional filter: positional analysis [Adapted from Mishra and Wang (2012)].
FIGURE 2Statistics of AMP properties obtained from APD3. (A) Lengths of AMPs in Dataset 1. (B) Frequency of total amino acid residues in Dataset 1. (C) Charge of the AMPs in Dataset 1. (D) Hydrophobicity percentage of AMPs in Dataset 1 [hydrophobicity was calculated as a percentage of hydrophobic amino acids, based on the Kyte and Doolittle scale (Kyte and Doolittle, 1982) divided by the total number of amino acids per AMP].
Positional analysis results where the amino acid with the highest frequency per position was assessed and resulted in the design of PHNX-1.
|
|
|
|
| 1 | Phenylalanine (F) | 18 |
| 2 | Leucine (L) | 15 |
| 3 | Leucine (L) | 19 |
| 4 | Lysine (K) | 18 |
| 5 | Isoleucine (I) | 23 |
| 6 | Valine (V) | 14 |
| 7 | Alanine (A) | 10 |
| 8 | Leucine (L) | 11 |
| 9 | Leucine (L) | 21 |
| 10 | Lysine (K) | 14 |
| 11 | Lysine (K) | 21 |
| 12 | Lysine (K) | 20 |
| 13 | Leucine (L) | 16 |
| 14 | Leucine (L) | 10 |
Synthetically designed sequences of the PHNX AMPs and their similarity to peptides within the APD3 database (Wang et al., 2016).
|
|
|
|
| PHNX-1 | FLLKIVALLKKKLL | 60% AP02977 (Temporin-PE) |
| PHNX-2 | FGKLLKLGKGLGG | 50% AP00739 (Caeridin-a1) |
| PHNX-3 | FGKLLKLGKGLKG | 50% AP03169 [Peptide LDKA (synthetic)] |
| PHNX-4 | FLLKLGLGKKKLL | 57.14% AP03112 [DFT503 (synthetic)] |
| PHNX-5 | FLIKILKGGKGGK | 50% AP02842 (Temporin-MS4) |
| PHNX-6 | FIGAIASYLKKFR | 69.23% AP00405 (Ranatuerin 6) |
| PHNX-7 | GVVDIIKGAGKKFAKGLAGKI | 62.96% AP02598 (Ocellatin-PT4) |
| PHNX-8 | GLMDTVKNAAKNLAGQLLD | 96.42% AP01507 (Ranatuerin-2CPc) |
Calculated physicochemical properties of the synthetically designed peptides (PHNX-1 to -8).
| Name | Length (n) ( | Molecular Weight (Da) ( | Charge ( | Wimley–White whole-residue hydrophobicity (kcal/mol) ( | Boman index (kcal/mol) ( | GRAVY ( | APD3 defined hydro-phobic ratio (%) ( | Hydro-phobicity (H) ( | Hydro-phobic moment (μH) ( |
|
| 14 | 1640.20 | 4 | −0.6 | −1.5 | 1.46 | 71 | 0.81 | 0.41 |
|
| 13 | 1287.60 | 3 | −0.35 | −0.82 | 0.33 | 38 | 0.43 | 0.53 |
|
| 13 | 1358.72 | 4 | 0.63 | −0.32 | 0.06 | 38 | 0.36 | 0.50 |
|
| 13 | 1470.94 | 4 | −0.51 | −0.93 | 0.71 | 53 | 0.62 | 0.30 |
|
| 13 | 1358.72 | 4 | 1.13 | −0.32 | 0.17 | 38 | 0.37 | 0.34 |
|
| 13 | 1513.84 | 3 | −1.11 | 0.32 | 0.55 | 53 | 0.57 | 0.66 |
|
| 25 | 2512.06 | 6 | 6.83 | 0.46 | −0.02 | 44 | 0.17 | 0.35 |
|
| 28 | 2947.57 | 3 | 6.15 | 0.8 | 0.04 | 46 | 0.34 | 0.37 |
Bioinformatics prediction of antimicrobial activity potential of peptides PHNX 1-8.
| Name | Predicted antimicrobial activity | ||||||||
| AxPEP ( | CAMP | CLASSAMP ( | DBAASP ( | ||||||
| Deep-AmPEP | RF-AmPEP | SVM | RF | ANN | DA | SVM | RF | ||
|
| 0.92 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.98 | AMP | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.99 | AMP |
|
| 0.73 | 0.93 | 0.94 | 0.54 | AMP | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | AMP |
|
| 0.77 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.73 | AMP | 1.00 | 0.99 | 0.97 | AMP |
|
| 0.93 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | AMP | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.99 | Non-AMP |
|
| 0.85 | 0.94 | 0.88 | 0.89 | AMP | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.98 | Non-AMP |
|
| 0.86 | 0.70 | 0.86 | 0.97 | AMP | 0.85 | 0.99 | 0.96 | AMP |
|
| 0.92 | 0.84 | 1.00 | 1.00 | AMP | 1.00 | Not | 0.99 | AMP |
|
| 0.89 | 0.88 | 0.93 | 1.00 | AMP | 0.98 | Not | 0.94 | AMP |
Not, not antibacterial.
FIGURE 3Antibacterial screening of PHNX-peptides and controls (IDR-1018 and BF-CATH) at 100 μg/ml against. (A) Antibiotic susceptible Escherichia coli 4157. (B) Staphylococcus aureus BAA-1718. (C) Antibiotic resistant E. coli O157:H7 51659. (D) S. aureus MRSA 33592 where PHNX-1 led to almost 0% bacterial survival against all strains and PHNX-7 and -8 against the Gram-negative bacteria.
FIGURE 4Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of PHNX-1 against four strains of bacteria. (A) Antibiotic susceptible E. coli 4157 (MIC = 16 μg/ml). (B) E. coli O157:H7 51659 (MIC = 32 μg/ml). (C) S. aureus BAA-1718 (MIC = 32 μg/ml). (D) S. aureus 33592 (MIC = 64 μg/ml).
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of PHNX peptides (μg/ml) against multi-drug resistant and antibiotic susceptible strains of E. coli and S. aureus.
| Bacteria peptides | Consensus from predictors ( | ||||
|
| 32 | 64 | 16 | 32 | Active (probability ≥ 0.92) |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 | Mixed predictions (see text, 0.54 by CAMP |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 | Mixed predictions (see text, 0.73 by CAMP |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 | Active (except by DBAASP) |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 | Active (except by DBAASP) |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 | Mixed predictions (0.70 RF-AmPEP) |
|
| >64 | >100 | >100 | >100 | Active (except by CLASSAMP-SVM) |
|
| 64 | >100 | 32 | >100 | Active (except by CLASSAMP-SVM) |
|
| 32 | >64 | NT | NT | |
|
| 8 | 64 | 4 | NT | |
|
| 16 | 16 | NT | 16 |
NT refers to not tested. LL-37, BF-CATH, and IDR-1018 were control peptides tested against the bacterial strains. The consensus from the antimicrobial peptide predictors in
FIGURE 5Half maximal effective concentration (EC50) of (A) PHNX-1, (B) PHNX-6, (C) PHNX-7, and (D) PHNX-8 against antibiotic resistant E. coli O157:H7 51659 and S. aureus MRSA 33592.
Half maximal effective concentration (EC50) of PHNX peptides against multi-drug resistant strains of E. coli and S. aureus.
| Peptides | Bacteria | EC50 (μg/ml) | 95% CI (μg/ml) | EC50 (μM) | Consensus from predictors ( |
|
| 0.12 | 0.06–0.3 | 0.08 | Active (probability ≥ 0.92) | |
| 0.22 | 0.10–0.52 | 0.14 | |||
|
| >10 | N/A | >7.78 | Mixed predictions (see text, 0.54 by CAMP | |
| >10 | N/A | >7.78 | |||
|
| >10 | N/A | >7.34 | Mixed predictions (see text, 0.73 by CAMP | |
| >10 | N/A | >7.34 | |||
|
| 2.91 | 1.30–6.53 | 1.98 | Active (except by DBAASP) | |
| 4.85 | 1.90–12.36 | 3.29 | |||
|
| 4.95 | 1.90–12.91 | 3.64 | Active (except by DBAASP) | |
| >10 | N/A | >7.36 | |||
|
| 2.60 | 0.90–7.57 | 1.72 | Mixed predictions (0.70 RF-AmPEP) | |
| 7.94 | 2.85–22.13 | 5.24 | |||
|
| 0.04 | 0.02–0.12 | 0.02 | Active (except by CLASSAMP-SVM) | |
| 2.09 | 0.61–7.10 | 0.83 | |||
|
| 0.06 | 0.02–0.14 | 0.02 | Active (except by CLASSAMP-SVM) | |
| 3.31 | 0.89–12.29 | 1.12 |
N/A refers to not applicable where the 95% Confidence Interval could not be calculated. IDR-1018 was used as a control against
FIGURE 6Hemolysis of the PHNX peptides against human red blood cells collected in EDTA with LL-37, deionized (DI) water and IDR-1018 were used as the controls. All PHX AMPs demonstrated hemolytic activity not significantly different from or lower than the controls.