Levi L. Blazer

Small Molecule Protein–Protein Interaction Inhibitors as CNS Therapeutic Agents: Current Progress and Future Hurdles

Protein–protein interactions are a crucial element in cellular function. The wealth of information currently available on intracellular-signaling pathways has led many to appreciate the untapped pool of potential drug targets that reside downstream of the commonly targeted receptors. Over the last two decades, there has been significant interest in developing therapeutics and chemical probes that inhibit specific protein–protein interactions. Although it has been a challenge to develop small molecules that are capable of occluding the large, often relatively featureless protein–protein interaction interface, there are increasing numbers of examples of small molecules that function in this manner with reasonable potency. This article will highlight the current progress in the development of small molecule protein–protein interaction inhibitors that have applications in the treatment or study of central nervous system function and disease. In particular, we will focus upon recent work towards developing small molecule inhibitors of amyloid-β and α-synuclein aggregation, inhibitors of critical components of G-protein-signaling pathways, and PDZ domain inhibitors.

Regulators of G Protein Signaling Proteins as Targets for Drug Discovery

Signaling via G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is central for the function of biological systems. Many clinically used drugs target GPCRs directly or target molecules involved in GPCR signaling. As an alternative to targeting receptors directly, one could modulate signaling cascades downstream of receptor activation. In recent years, there has been substantial interest in a family of proteins called regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins. They modulate GPCR signaling by accelerating GTP hydrolysis on active Galpha subunits, thereby reducing the amplitude and duration of signaling. Modulating RGS activity would be a useful strategy to control GPCR signaling. An RGS inhibitor would be expected to enhance GPCR signaling and could do so in a tissue- or pathway-specific manner. Apart from the central GAP (GTPase accelerating protein) activity, many RGS proteins also have other functions like regulating protein-protein interactions, subcellular localization of signaling molecules, and protein translation. It is clear that these proteins serve important functions in a number of physiological and pathophysiological processes, and they are emerging as potential drug targets. This chapter gives an overview of what is currently known about biological functions of RGS proteins based on in vivo and in vitro data. We also summarize the current status in targeting RGS proteins in drug discovery.

Reversible, Allosteric Small-Molecule Inhibitors of Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins are potent negative modulators of G protein signaling and have been proposed as potential targets for small-molecule inhibitor development. We report a high-throughput time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer screen to identify inhibitors of RGS4 and describe the first reversible small-molecule inhibitors of an RGS protein. Two closely related compounds, typified by CCG-63802 [((2E)-2-(1,3-benzothiazol-2-yl)-3-[9-methyl-2-(3-methylphenoxy)-4-oxo-4H-pyrido[1,2-a]pyrimidin-3-yl]prop-2-enenitrile)], inhibit the interaction between RGS4 and Gαo with an IC50 value in the low micromolar range. They show selectivity among RGS proteins with a potency order of RGS 4 > 19 = 16 > 8 ≫ 7. The compounds inhibit the GTPase accelerating protein activity of RGS4, and thermal stability studies demonstrate binding to the RGS but not to Gαo. On RGS4, they depend on an interaction with one or more cysteines in a pocket that has previously been identified as an allosteric site for RGS regulation by acidic phospholipids. Unlike previous small-molecule RGS inhibitors identified to date, these compounds retain substantial activity under reducing conditions and are fully reversible on the 10-min time scale. CCG-63802 and related analogs represent a useful step toward the development of chemical tools for the study of RGS physiology.

A nanomolar-potency small molecule inhibitor of regulator of G-protein signaling proteins

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins are potent negative modulators of signal transduction through G-protein-coupled receptors. They function by binding to activated (GTP-bound) Gα subunits and accelerating the rate of GTP hydrolysis. Modulation of RGS activity by small molecules is an attractive mechanism for fine-tuning GPCR signaling for therapeutic and research purposes. Here we describe the pharmacologic properties and mechanism of action of CCG-50014, the most potent small molecule RGS inhibitor to date. It has an IC(50) for RGS4 of 30 nM and is >20-fold selective for RGS4 over other RGS proteins. CCG-50014 binds covalently to the RGS, forming an adduct on two cysteine residues located in an allosteric regulatory site. It is not a general cysteine alkylator as it does not inhibit activity of the cysteine protease papain at concentrations >3000-fold higher than those required to inhibit RGS4 function. It is also >1000-fold more potent as an RGS4 inhibitor than are the cysteine alkylators N-ethylmaleimide and iodoacetamide. Analysis of the cysteine reactivity of the compound shows that compound binding to Cys(107) in RGS8 inhibits Gα binding in a manner that can be reversed by cleavage of the compound-RGS disulfide bond. If the compound reacts with Cys(160) in RGS8, the adduct induces RGS denaturation, and activity cannot be restored by removal of the compound. The high potency and good selectivity of CCG-50014 make it a useful tool for studying the functional roles of RGS4.

Allosteric Inhibition of the Regulator of G Protein Signaling–Gα Protein–Protein Interaction by CCG-4986

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins act to temporally modulate the activity of G protein subunits after G protein-coupled receptor activation. RGS proteins exert their effect by directly binding to the activated Gα subunit of the G protein, catalyzing the accelerated hydrolysis of GTP and returning the G protein to its inactive, heterotrimeric form. In previous studies, we have sought to inhibit this GTPase-accelerating protein activity of the RGS protein by using small molecules. In this study, we investigated the mechanism of CCG-4986 [methyl-N-[(4-chlorophenyl)sulfonyl]-4-nitro-benzenesulfinimidoate], a previously reported small-molecule RGS inhibitor. Here, we find that CCG-4986 inhibits RGS4 function through the covalent modification of two spatially distinct cysteine residues on RGS4. We confirm that modification of Cys132, located near the RGS/Gα interaction surface, modestly inhibits Gα binding and GTPase acceleration. In addition, we report that modification of Cys148, a residue located on the opposite face of RGS4, can disrupt RGS/Gα interaction through an allosteric mechanism that almost completely inhibits the Gα–RGS protein–protein interaction. These findings demonstrate three important points: 1) the modification of the Cys148 allosteric site results in significant changes to the RGS interaction surface with Gα; 2) this identifies a “hot spot” on RGS4 for binding of small molecules and triggering an allosteric change that may be significantly more effective than targeting the actual protein-protein interaction surface; and 3) because of the modification of a positional equivalent of Cys148 in RGS8 by CCG-4986, lack of inhibition indicates that RGS proteins exhibit fundamental differences in their responses to small-molecule ligands.

The role of the VPS4a-exosome pathway in the intrinsic egress route of a DNA-binding anticancer drug

PurposeThis study investigates the subcellular pharmacokinetics of drug efflux in cancer cells and explores the role of the multivesicular body (MVB) in facilitating efflux of doxorubicin, a widely used DNA-targeting anticancer agent, from the nucleus.MethodsHuman erythroleukemic K562 cells were pulsed with doxorubicin and then chased in drug-free media to allow for efflux. Microscopy and biochemical techniques were used to visualize the subcellular localization of the drug and measure drug content and distribution during the efflux period. To explore the role of the MVB in doxorubicin efflux, K562 cells were transfected with dominant negative mutant forms of VPS4a–GFP chimeras.ResultsAlthough the intracellular concentration of drug exceeds the extracellular concentration, nuclear efflux of doxorubicin occurs in living cells at a faster rate than doxorubicin unbinding from isolated nuclei into drug-free buffer. In cells expressing dominant negative VPS4a, doxorubicin accumulates in VPS4a-positive vesicles and drug sequestration is inhibited, directly implicating the MVB pathway in the egress route of doxorubicin in this cell type.ConclusionsCellular membranes are a component of the doxorubicin efflux mechanism in K562 cells. Dominant-negative GFP chimeric mutants can be used to elucidate the role of specific membrane trafficking pathways in subcellular drug transport routes.

Selectivity and anti-Parkinson's potential of thiadiazolidinone RGS4 inhibitors.

Many current therapies target G protein coupled receptors (GPCR), transporters, or ion channels. In addition to directly targeting these proteins, disrupting the protein-protein interactions that localize or regulate their function could enhance selectivity and provide unique pharmacologic actions. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, especially RGS4, play significant roles in epilepsy and Parkinsons disease. Thiadiazolidinone (TDZD) inhibitors of RGS4 are nanomolar potency blockers of the biochemical actions of RGS4 in vitro. Here, we demonstrate the substantial selectivity (8- to >5000-fold) of CCG-203769 for RGS4 over other RGS proteins. It is also 300-fold selective for RGS4 over GSK-3β, another target of this class of chemical scaffolds. It does not inhibit the cysteine protease papain at 100 μM. CCG-203769 enhances Gαq-dependent cellular Ca(2+) signaling in an RGS4-dependent manner. TDZD inhibitors also enhance Gαi-dependent δ-OR inhibition of cAMP production in SH-SY-5Y cells, which express endogenous receptors and RGS4. Importantly, CCG-203769 potentiates the known RGS4 mechanism of Gαi-dependent muscarinic bradycardia in vivo. Furthermore, it reverses raclopride-induced akinesia and bradykinesia in mice, a model of some aspects of the movement disorder in Parkinsons disease. A broad assessment of compound effects revealed minimal off-target effects at concentrations necessary for cellular RGS4 inhibition. These results expand our understanding of the mechanism and specificity of TDZD RGS inhibitors and support the potential for therapeutic targeting of RGS proteins in Parkinsons disease and other neural disorders.

Novel Peptide Ligands of RGS4 from a Focused One-Bead, One-Compound Library

Regulators of G protein signaling accelerate GTP hydrolysis by Gα subunits and profoundly inhibit signaling by G protein‐coupled receptors. The distinct expression patterns and pathophysiologic regulation of regulators of G protein signaling proteins suggest that inhibitors may have therapeutic potential. We previously reported the design, mechanistic evaluation, and structure–activity relationships of a disulfide‐containing cyclic peptide inhibitor of RGS4, YJ34 (Ac‐Val‐Lys‐c[Cys‐Thr‐Gly‐Ile‐Cys]‐Glu‐NH2, S‐S) (Roof et al., Chem Biol Drug Des, 67, 2006, 266). Using a focused one‐bead, one‐compound peptide library that contains features known to be necessary for the activity of YJ34, we now identify peptides that bind to RGS4. Six peptides showed confirmed binding to RGS4 by flow cytometry. Two analogs of peptide 2 (Gly‐Thr‐c[Cys‐Phe‐Gly‐Thr‐Cys]‐Trp‐NH2, S‐S with a free or acetylated N‐terminus) inhibited RGS4‐stimulated Gαo GTPase activity at 25–50 μm. They selectively inhibit RGS4 but not RGS7, RGS16, and RGS19. Their inhibition of RGS4 does not depend on cysteine‐modification of RGS4, as they do not lose activity when all cysteines are removed from RGS4. Peptide 2 has been modeled to fit in the same binding pocket predicted for YJ34 but in the reverse orientation.

Use of Flow Cytometric Methods to Quantify Protein‐Protein Interactions

A method is described for the quantitative analysis of protein‐protein interactions using the flow cytometry protein interaction assay (FCPIA). This method is based upon immobilizing protein on a polystyrene bead, incubating these beads with a fluorescently labeled binding partner, and assessing the sample for bead‐associated fluorescence in a flow cytometer. This method can be used to calculate protein‐protein interaction affinities or to perform competition experiments with unlabeled binding partners or small molecules. Examples described in this protocol highlight the use of this assay in the quantification of the affinity of binding partners of the regulator of G‐protein signaling protein, RGS19, in either a saturation or a competition format. An adaptation of this method that is compatible for high‐throughput screening is also provided. Curr. Protoc. Cytom. 51:13.11.1‐13.11.15.

A covalent peptide inhibitor of RGS4 identified in a focused one-bead, one compound library screen

BackgroundRegulators of G protein signaling (RGSs) accelerate GTP hydrolysis by Gα subunits and profoundly inhibit signaling by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The distinct expression patterns and pathophysiologic regulation of RGS proteins suggest that inhibitors may have therapeutic potential. We recently described a focused one-bead, one-compound (OBOC) library screen to identify peptide inhibitors of RGS4. Here we extend our observations to include another peptide with a different mechanism of action.ResultsPeptide 5nd (Tyr-Trp-c [Cys-Lys-Gly-Leu-Cys]-Lys-NH2, S-S) blocks the RGS4-Gαo interaction with an IC50 of 28 μM. It forms a covalent, dithiothreitol (DTT) sensitive adduct with a mass consistent with the incorporation of one peptide per RGS. Peptide 5nd activity is abolished by either changing its disulfide bridge to a methylene dithioether bridge, which cannot form disulfide bridges to the RGS, or by removing all cysteines from the RGS protein. However, no single cysteine in RGS4 is completely necessary or sufficient for 5nd activity.ConclusionThough it has some RGS selectivity, 5nd appears to be a partially random cysteine modifier. These data suggest that it inhibits RGS4 by forming disulfide bridges with the protein.