Godwin Pais

Structural Determinants for HIV-1 Integrase Inhibition by β-Diketo Acids

Among all the HIV-1 integrase inhibitors, the β-diketo acids (DKAs) represent a major lead in anti-HIV-1 integrase drug design. These derivatives inhibit the integration reactionin vitro with a strong specificity for the 3′-end joining step. They are also antiviral and inhibit integration in vivo. The aim of the present study has been to investigate the molecular interactions between DKAs and HIV-1 integrase. We have compared 5CITEP with one of the most potent DKAs reported by the Merck group (L-708,906) and found that 5CITEP inhibits 3′-processing at concentrations where L-708,906 is only active on strand transfer. We also report a novel bifunctional DKA derivative that inhibits 3′-processing even more effectively than 5CITEP. The interactions of these inhibitors with the viral DNA donor ends have been studied by performing experiments with oligonucleotides containing defined modifications. We propose that the bifunctional DKA derivative binds to both the acceptor and donor sites of HIV-1 integrase, whereas the monofunctional L-708,906 derivative binds selectively to the acceptor site.

Azido-Containing Diketo Acid Derivatives Inhibit Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Integrase In Vivo and Influence the Frequency of Deletions at Two-Long-Terminal-Repeat-Circle Junctions

ABSTRACT We previously found that azido-containing β-diketo acid derivatives (DKAs) are potent inhibitors of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) integrase (IN) (X. Zhang et al., Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett., 13:1215-1219, 2003). To characterize the intracellular mechanisms of action of DKAs, we analyzed the antiviral activities of two potent azido-containing DKAs with either a monosubstitution or a disubstitution of azido groups, using single- and multiple-replication-cycle assays. Both azido-containing DKAs significantly inhibited HIV-1 infection in 293T, CEM-SS, and H9 cells (50% inhibitory concentration = 2 to 13 μM) and exhibited low cytotoxicity (50% cytotoxic concentration = 60 to 600 μM). Inhibition of HIV-1 IN in vivo was demonstrated by the observation that previously described L-708,906 resistance mutations in HIV-1 IN (T66I and T66I/S153Y) also conferred resistance to the azido-group-containing DKAs. In vitro assays and in vivo analysis indicated that the DKAs did not significantly inhibit the 3′ processing and selectively inhibited the strand transfer reaction. In addition, quantitative PCR indicated that two-long-terminal-repeat (2-LTR) circles were elevated in the presence of the azido-containing DKAs, confirming that HIV-1 IN was the intracellular target of viral inhibition. To gain insight into the mechanism by which the DKAs increased 2-LTR-circle formation of 3′-processed viral DNAs, we performed extensive DNA sequencing analysis of 2-LTR-circle junctions. The results indicated that the frequency of deletions at the circle junctions was elevated from 19% for the untreated controls to 32 to 41% in the presence of monosubstituted (but not disubstituted) DKAs. These results indicate that the structure of the DKAs can influence the extent of degradation of viral DNA ends by host nucleases and the frequency of deletions at the 2-LTR-circle junctions. Thus, sequencing analysis of 2-LTR-circle junctions can elucidate the intracellular mechanisms of action of HIV-1 IN inhibitors.

Integration Requires a Specific Interaction of the Donor DNA Terminal 5′-Cytosine with Glutamine 148 of the HIV-1 Integrase Flexible Loop

Integration is essential for retroviral replication and gene therapy using retroviral vectors. Human immunodeficiency virus, type 1 (HIV-1), integrase specifically recognizes the terminal sequences of each long terminal repeat (LTR) and cleaves the 3′-end terminal dinucleotide 5′-GT. The exposed 3′-hydroxyl is then positioned for nucleophilic attack and subsequent strand transfer into another DNA duplex (target or chromosomal DNA). We report that both the terminal cytosine at the protruding 5′-end of the long terminal repeats (5′-C) and the integrase residue Gln-148 are critical for strand transfer. Proximity of the 5′-C and Gln-148 was demonstrated by disulfide cross-linking. Cross-linking is inhibited by the inhibitor 5CITEP 1-(5-chloroindol-3-yl)-3-hydroxy-3-(2H-tetrazol-5-yl)-propenone. We propose that strand transfer requires a conformational change of the integrase-viral (donor) DNA complex with formation of an H-bond between the N-3 of the 5′-C and the amine group of Gln-148. These findings have implications for the molecular mechanisms coupling 3′-processing and strand transfer as well as for the molecular pharmacology of integrase inhibitors.

Azido-Containing aryl β-Diketo acid HIV-1 integrase inhibitors

Aryl β-diketo acids (ADK) comprise a general class of potent HIV-1 integrase (IN) inhibitors, which can exhibit selective inhibition of strand transfer reactions in extracellular recombinant IN assays and provide potent antiviral effects in HIV-infected cells. Recent studies have shown that polycyclic aryl or aryl rings bearing aryl-containing substituents are components of potent members of this class. Reported herein is the first use of azido functionality as an aryl replacement in β-diketo acid IN inhibitors. The ability of azido-containing inhibitors to exhibit potent inhibition of IN and antiviral protection in HIV-infected cells, renders the azide group of potential value in the further development of ADK-based IN inhibitors.

Effect of HIV integrase inhibitors on the RAG1/2 recombinase

Assembly of functional Ig and T cell receptor genes by V(D)J recombination depends on site-specific cleavage of chromosomal DNA by the RAG1/2 recombinase. As RAG1/2 action has mechanistic similarities to DNA transposases and integrases such as HIV-1 integrase, we sought to determine how integrase inhibitors of the diketo acid type would affect the various activities of RAG1/2. Both of the inhibitors we tested interfered with DNA cleavage and disintegration activities of RAG1/2, apparently by disrupting interaction with the DNA motifs bound specifically by the recombinase. The inhibitors did not ablate RAG1/2s transposition activity or capture of nonspecific transpositional target DNA, suggesting this DNA occupies a site on the recombinase different from that used for specific binding. These results further underscore the similarities between RAG1/2 and integrase and suggest that certain integrase inhibitors may have the potential to interfere with aspects of B and T cell development.