Stefano Costanzi

Adenosine deaminase: Functional implications and different classes of inhibitors

Adenosine deaminase (ADA) is an enzyme of the purine metabolism which catalyzes the irreversible deamination of adenosine and deoxyadenosine to inosine and deoxyinosine, respectively. This ubiquitous enzyme has been found in a wide variety of microorganisms, plants, and invertebrates. In addition, it is present in all mammalian cells that play a central role in the differentiation and maturation of the lymphoid system. However, despite a number of studies performed to date, the physiological role played by ADA in the different tissues is not clear. Inherited ADA deficiency causes severe combined immunodeficiency desease (ADA‐SCID), in which both B‐cell and T‐cell development is impaired. ADA‐SCID has been the first disorder to be treated by gene therapy, using polyethene glycol‐modified bovine ADA (PEG‐ADA). Conversely, there are several diseases in which the level of ADA is above normal. A number of ADA inibitors have been designed and synthesized, classified as ground‐state and transition‐state inhibitors. They may be used to mimic the genetic deficiency of the enzyme, in lymphoproliferative disorders or immunosuppressive therapy (i.e., in graft rejection), to potentiate the effect of antileukemic or antiviral nucleosides, and, together with adenosine kinase, to reduce breakdown of adenosine in inflammation, hypertension, and ischemic injury.

On the Applicability of GPCR Homology Models to Computer-Aided Drug Discovery : A Comparison between In Silico and Crystal Structures of the β2-Adrenergic Receptor

The publication of the crystal structure of the beta2-adrenergic receptor (beta2-AR) proved that G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) share a structurally conserved rhodopsin-like 7TM core. Here, to probe to which extent realistic GPCR structures can be recreated through modeling, carazolol was docked at two rhodopsin-based homology models of the human beta 2-AR. The first featured a rhodopsin-like second extracellular loop, which interfered with ligand docking and with the orientation of several residues in the binding pocket. The second featured a second extracellular loop built completely de novo, which afforded a more accurate model of the binding pocket and a better docking of the ligand. Furthermore, incorporating available biochemical and computational data to the model by correcting the conformation of a single residue lining the binding pocket --Phe290(6.52)--, resulted in significantly improved docking poses. These results support the applicability of GPCR modeling to the design of site-directed mutagenesis experiments and to drug discovery.

Discovery of novel Agonists and antagonists of the free fatty acid receptor 1 (FFAR1) using virtual screening

The G-protein-coupled receptor free fatty acid receptor 1 (FFAR1), previously named GPR40, is a possible novel target for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. In an attempt to identify new ligands for this receptor, we performed virtual screening (VS) based on two-dimensional (2D) similarity, three-dimensional (3D) pharmacophore searches, and docking studies by using the structure of known agonists and our model of the ligand binding site, which was validated by mutagenesis. VS of a database of 2.6 million compounds followed by extraction of structural neighbors of functionally confirmed hits resulted in identification of 15 compounds active at FFAR1 either as full agonists, partial agonists, or pure antagonists. Site-directed mutagenesis and docking studies revealed different patterns of ligand-receptor interactions and provided important information on the role of specific amino acids in binding and activation of FFAR1.

Identification of residues important for agonist recognition and activation in GPR40

GPR40 was formerly an orphan G protein-coupled receptor whose endogenous ligands have recently been identified as free fatty acids (FFAs). The receptor, now named FFA receptor 1, has been implicated in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes and is a drug target because of its role in FFA-mediated enhancement of glucose-stimulated insulin release. Guided by molecular modeling, we investigated the molecular determinants contributing to binding of linoleic acid, a C18 polyunsaturated FFA, and GW9508, a synthetic small molecule agonist. Twelve residues within the putative GPR40-binding pocket including hydrophilic/positively charged, aromatic, and hydrophobic residues were identified and were subjected to site-directed mutagenesis. Our results suggest that linoleic acid and GW9508 are anchored on their carboxylate groups by Arg183, Asn244, and Arg258. Moreover, His86, Tyr91, and His137 may contribute to aromatic and/or hydrophobic interactions with GW9508 that are not present, or relatively weak, with linoleic acid. The anchor residues, as well as the residues Tyr12, Tyr91, His137, and Leu186, appear to be important for receptor activation also. Interestingly, His137 and particularly His86 may interact with GW9508 in a manner dependent on its protonation status. The greater number of putative interactions between GPR40 and GW9508 compared with linoleic acid may explain the higher potency of GW9508.

Examining the Chirality, Conformation and Selective Kinase Inhibition of 3-((3R,4R)-4-methyl-3-(methyl(7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidin-4-yl)amino)piperidin-1-yl)-3-oxopropanenitrile (CP-690,550)

Here, we examine the significance that stereochemistry plays within the clinically relevant Janus kinase 3 (Jak3) inhibitor 1 (CP-690,550). A synthesis of all four enantiopure stereoisomers of the drug was carried out and an examination of each compound revealed that only the enantiopure 3R,4R isomer was capable of blocking Stat5 phosphorylation (Jak3 dependent). Each compound was profiled across a panel of over 350 kinases, which revealed a high level of selectivity for the Jak family kinases for these related compounds. Each stereoisomer retained a degree of binding to Jak3 and Jak2 and the 3R,4S and 3S,4R stereoisomers were further revealed to have binding affinity for selected members of the STE7 and STE20 subfamily of kinases. Finally, an appraisal of the minimum energy conformation of each stereoisomer and molecular docking at Jak3 was performed in an effort to better understand each compounds selectivity and potency profiles.

A Low Molecular Weight Agonist Signals by Binding to the Transmembrane Domain of Thyroid-stimulating Hormone Receptor (TSHR) and Luteinizing Hormone/Chorionic Gonadotropin Receptor (LHCGR)

Many cognate low molecular weight (LMW) agonists bind to seven transmembrane-spanning receptors within their transmembrane helices (TMHs). The thienopyrimidine org41841 was identified previously as an agonist for the luteinizing hormone/chorionic gonadotropin receptor (LHCGR) and suggested to bind within its TMHs because it did not compete for LH binding to the LHCGR ectodomain. Because of its high homology with LHCGR, we predicted that thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor (TSHR) might be activated by org41841 also. We show that org41841 is a partial agonist for TSHR but with lower potency than for LHCGR. Analysis of three-dimensional molecular models of TSHR and LHCGR predicted a binding pocket for org41841 in common clefts between TMHs 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 and extracellular loop 2 in both receptors. Evidence for this binding pocket was obtained in signaling studies with chimeric receptors that exhibited improved responses to org41841. Furthermore, a key receptor-ligand interaction between the highly conserved negatively charged E3.37 and the amino group of org41841 predicted by docking of the ligand into the three-dimensional TSHR model was experimentally confirmed. These findings provide the first evidence that, in contrast to the ectodomain binding of cognate ligands, a LMW agonist can bind to and activate glycoprotein hormone receptors via interaction with their transmembrane domain.

New substituted 9-alkylpurines as adenosine receptor ligands

In the present study an investigation of the structure-activity relationships in 9-ethylpurine derivatives, aimed at preparing A1, A2A, A2B, and A3 selective adenosine receptor antagonists, was undertaken. Our synthetic approach was to introduce various substituents (amino, alkoxy and alkynyl groups) into the 2-, 6-, or 8-positions of the purine ring. The starting compounds for each series of derivatives were respectively: 2-iodo-9-ethyladenine (9), obtained from 2-amino-6-chloropurine (5); 9-ethyl-6-iodo-9H-purine (11), 8-bromo-9-ethyl-adenine (3) and 8-bromo-9-ethyl-6-iodo-9H-purine (13), obtained from 9-ethyl-adenine (2). The synthesized compounds were tested in in vitro radioligand binding assays at A1, A2A, and A3 human adenosine receptor subtypes. Due to the lack of a suitable radioligand the affinity of the 9-ethyladenine derivatives at A2B adenosine receptors was determined in adenylyl cyclase experiments. In general, the series of 9-ethylpurine derivatives exhibited a similar pharmacological profile at A1 and A2A receptors whereas some differences were found for the A3 and the A2B subtypes. 8-Bromo-9-ethyladenine (3) showed higher affinity for all receptors in comparison to the parent compound 2, and the highest affinity in the series for the A2A and A2B subtypes (Ki = 0.052 and 0.84 microM, respectively). Analyzing the different substituents, a phenethoxy group in 2-position (10a) gave the highest A2A versus A2B selectivity (near 400-fold), whereas a phenethylamino group in 2- and 6-position (10b and 12b, respectively) improved the affinity at A2B receptors, compared to the parent compound 2. The presence of a hexynyl substituent in 8-position led to a compound with good affinity at the A3 receptor (4d, Ki = 0.62 microM), whereas (ar)alkynyl groups are detrimental for the potency at the A2B subtype. These differences give raise to the hope that further modifications will result in the development of currently unavailable leads with good affinity and selectivity for A2B adenosine receptors.

New Insights for Drug Design from the X-Ray Crystallographic Structures of G-Protein-Coupled Receptors

Methodological advances in X-ray crystallography have made possible the recent solution of X-ray structures of pharmaceutically important G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), including receptors for biogenic amines, peptides, a nucleoside, and a sphingolipid. These high-resolution structures have greatly increased our understanding of ligand recognition and receptor activation. Conformational changes associated with activation common to several receptors entail outward movements of the intracellular side of transmembrane helix 6 (TM6) and movements of TM5 toward TM6. Movements associated with specific agonists or receptors have also been described [e.g., extracellular loop (EL) 3 in the A2A adenosine receptor]. The binding sites of different receptors partly overlap but differ significantly in ligand orientation, depth, and breadth of contact areas in TM regions and the involvement of the ELs. A current challenge is how to use this structural information for the rational design of novel potent and selective ligands. For example, new chemotypes were discovered as antagonists of various GPCRs by subjecting chemical libraries to in silico docking in the X-ray structures. The vast majority of GPCR structures and their ligand complexes are still unsolved, and no structures are known outside of family A GPCRs. Molecular modeling, informed by supporting information from site-directed mutagenesis and structure-activity relationships, has been validated as a useful tool to extend structural insights to related GPCRs and to analyze docking of other ligands in already crystallized GPCRs.

Structural basis of G protein–coupled receptor–G protein interactions

The interaction of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) with heterotrimeric G proteins represents one of the most fundamental biological processes. However, the molecular architecture of the GPCR-G protein complex remains poorly defined. In the present study, we applied a comprehensive GPCR-G protein alpha subunit (Galpha) chemical cross-linking strategy to map a receptor-Galpha interface, both before and after agonist-induced receptor activation. Using the M(3) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (M3R)-Galpha(q) system as a model system, we examined the ability of approximately 250 combinations of cysteine-substituted M3R and Galpha(q) proteins to undergo cross-link formation. We identified many specific M3R-Galpha(q) contact sites, in both the inactive and active receptor conformations, allowing us to draw conclusions regarding the basic architecture of the M3R-Galpha(q) interface and the nature of the conformational changes following receptor activation. As heterotrimeric G proteins as well as most GPCRs share a high degree of structural homology, our findings should be of broad general relevance.

A Virtual Screen for Diverse Ligands : Discovery of Selective G Protein-Coupled Receptor Antagonists

Virtual screening has become a major focus of bioactive small molecule lead identification, and reports of agonists and antagonists discovered via virtual methods are becoming more frequent. G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the one class of protein targets for which success with this approach has been limited. This is likely due to the paucity of detailed experimental information describing GPCR structure and the intrinsic function-associated structural flexibility of GPCRs which present major challenges in the application of receptor-based virtual screening. Here we describe an in silico methodology that diminishes the effects of structural uncertainty, allowing for more inclusive representation of a potential docking interaction with exogenous ligands. Using this approach, we screened one million compounds from a virtual database, and a diverse subgroup of 100 compounds was selected, leading to experimental identification of five structurally diverse antagonists of the thyrotropin-releasing hormone receptors (TRH-R1 and TRH-R2). The chirality of the most potent chemotype was demonstrated to be important in its binding affinity to TRH receptors; the most potent stereoisomer was noted to have a 13-fold selectivity for TRH-R1 over TRH-R2. A comprehensive mutational analysis of key amino acid residues that form the putative binding pocket of TRH receptors further verified the binding modality of these small molecule antagonists. The described virtual screening approach may prove applicable in the search for novel small molecule agonists and antagonists of other GPCRs.