Direct comparison of binding equilibrium, thermodynamic, and rate constants determined by surface‐ and solution‐based biophysical methods

The binding interactions of small molecules with carbonic anhydrase II were used as model systems to compare the reaction constants determined from surface‐ and solution‐based biophysical methods. Interaction data were collected for two arylsulfonamide compounds, 4‐carboxybenzenesulfonamide (CBS) and 5‐dimethyl‐amino‐1‐naphthalene‐sulfonamide (DNSA), binding to the enzyme using surface plasmon resonance, isothermal titration calorimetry, and stopped‐flow fluorescence. We demonstrate that when the surface plasmon resonance biosensor experiments are performed with care, the equilibrium, thermodynamic, and kinetic constants determined from this surface‐based technique match those acquired in solution. These results validate the use of biosensor technology to collect reliable data on small molecules binding to immobilized macromolecular targets. Binding kinetics were shown to provide more detailed information about complex formation than equilibrium constants alone. For example, although carbonic anhydrase II bound DNSA with twofold higher affinity than CBS, kinetic analysis revealed that CBS had a fourfold slower dissociation rate. Analysis of the binding and transition state thermodynamics also revealed significant differences in the enthalpy and entropy of complex formation. The lack of labeling requirements, high information content, and high throughput of surface plasmon resonance biosensors will make this technology an important tool for characterizing the interactions of small molecules with enzymes and receptors.

[1]  L. Vrang,et al.  Characterization of a Set of HIV-1 Protease Inhibitors Using Binding Kinetics Data from a Biosensor-Based Screen , 2000, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[2]  M. Hämäläinen,et al.  Screening of compounds interacting with HIV-1 proteinase using optical biosensor technology. , 1998, Analytical biochemistry.

[3]  D. Myszka,et al.  Kinetic analysis of macromolecular interactions using surface plasmon resonance biosensors. , 1997, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[4]  D. Myszka,et al.  Improving biosensor analysis , 1999, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[5]  S. Loefas,et al.  Immobilization of proteins to a carboxymethyldextran-modified gold surface for biospecific interaction analysis in surface plasmon resonance sensors. , 1991, Analytical biochemistry.

[6]  H Roos,et al.  Thermodynamic analysis of protein interactions with biosensor technology , 1998, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[7]  D. Myszka Kinetic, equilibrium, and thermodynamic analysis of macromolecular interactions with BIACORE. , 2000, Methods in enzymology.

[8]  R. Karlsson,et al.  Kinetic and Concentration Analysis Using BIA Technology , 1994 .

[9]  D G Myszka,et al.  Survey of the 1998 optical biosensor literature , 1999, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[10]  N. Carter,et al.  Introduction to the carbonic anhydrases. , 2000, EXS.

[11]  M. Hämäläinen,et al.  Biosensor analysis of drug-target interactions: direct and competitive binding assays for investigation of interactions between thrombin and thrombin inhibitors. , 2000, Analytical biochemistry.

[12]  D G Myszka,et al.  Extending the range of rate constants available from BIACORE: interpreting mass transport-influenced binding data. , 1998, Biophysical journal.

[13]  G. Orphanides,et al.  Probing the binding of coumarins and cyclothialidines to DNA gyrase. , 1999, Biochemistry.

[14]  R. Rich,et al.  Survey of the 1999 surface plasmon resonance biosensor literature , 2000, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[15]  I. Chaiken,et al.  Interpreting complex binding kinetics from optical biosensors: a comparison of analysis by linearization, the integrated rate equation, and numerical integration. , 1995, Analytical biochemistry.