Challenges Predicting Ligand-Receptor Interactions of Promiscuous Proteins: The Nuclear Receptor PXR

Transcriptional regulation of some genes involved in xenobiotic detoxification and apoptosis is performed via the human pregnane X receptor (PXR) which in turn is activated by structurally diverse agonists including steroid hormones. Activation of PXR has the potential to initiate adverse effects, altering drug pharmacokinetics or perturbing physiological processes. Reliable computational prediction of PXR agonists would be valuable for pharmaceutical and toxicological research. There has been limited success with structure-based modeling approaches to predict human PXR activators. Slightly better success has been achieved with ligand-based modeling methods including quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) analysis, pharmacophore modeling and machine learning. In this study, we present a comprehensive analysis focused on prediction of 115 steroids for ligand binding activity towards human PXR. Six crystal structures were used as templates for docking and ligand-based modeling approaches (two-, three-, four- and five-dimensional analyses). The best success at external prediction was achieved with 5D-QSAR. Bayesian models with FCFP_6 descriptors were validated after leaving a large percentage of the dataset out and using an external test set. Docking of ligands to the PXR structure co-crystallized with hyperforin had the best statistics for this method. Sulfated steroids (which are activators) were consistently predicted as non-activators while, poorly predicted steroids were docked in a reverse mode compared to 5α-androstan-3β-ol. Modeling of human PXR represents a complex challenge by virtue of the large, flexible ligand-binding cavity. This study emphasizes this aspect, illustrating modest success using the largest quantitative data set to date and multiple modeling approaches.

[1]  T. Nikolskaya,et al.  A COMBINED APPROACH TO DRUG METABOLISM AND TOXICITY ASSESSMENT , 2006, Drug Metabolism and Disposition.

[2]  L. Moore,et al.  Structural disorder in the complex of human pregnane X receptor and the macrolide antibiotic rifampicin. , 2005, Molecular endocrinology.

[3]  Jun Feng,et al.  PharmID: Pharmacophore Identification Using Gibbs Sampling , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Feng Ding,et al.  Active Nuclear Receptors Exhibit Highly Correlated AF-2 Domain Motions , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[5]  Wissem Mnif,et al.  Estrogens and antiestrogens activate hPXR. , 2007, Toxicology letters.

[6]  Sean Ekins,et al.  The importance of discerning shape in molecular pharmacology. , 2009, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[7]  Timothy M Willson,et al.  Crystal structure of the PXR-T1317 complex provides a scaffold to examine the potential for receptor antagonism. , 2007, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[8]  J. Jenkins,et al.  Prediction of Biological Targets for Compounds Using Multiple‐Category Bayesian Models Trained on Chemogenomics Databases. , 2006 .

[9]  W. Sabbagh,et al.  SXR, a novel steroid and xenobiotic-sensing nuclear receptor. , 1998, Genes & development.

[10]  M. Jacobs,et al.  In silico tools to aid risk assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals. , 2004, Toxicology.

[11]  Bruce Blumberg,et al.  Activation of the steroid and xenobiotic receptor, SXR, induces apoptosis in breast cancer cells , 2009, BMC Cancer.

[12]  L. Moore,et al.  2.1 A crystal structure of human PXR in complex with the St. John's wort compound hyperforin. , 2003, Biochemistry.

[13]  L. Iakoucheva,et al.  Intrinsic Disorder and Protein Function , 2002 .

[14]  M. Lambert,et al.  Coactivator binding promotes the specific interaction between ligand and the pregnane X receptor. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  Matthew D Krasowski,et al.  Evolution of the pregnane x receptor: adaptation to cross-species differences in biliary bile salts. , 2005, Molecular endocrinology.

[16]  R. Cramer,et al.  Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. , 1988, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[17]  Sean Ekins,et al.  A pharmacophore for human pregnane X receptor ligands. , 2002, Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals.

[18]  Y. Z. Chen,et al.  In Silico Prediction of Pregnane X Receptor Activators by Machine Learning Approache , 2007, Molecular Pharmacology.

[19]  Denise G. Teotico,et al.  Structural Basis of Human Pregnane X Receptor Activation by the Hops Constituent Colupulone , 2008, Molecular Pharmacology.

[20]  A. Ghose,et al.  Prediction of Hydrophobic (Lipophilic) Properties of Small Organic Molecules Using Fragmental Methods: An Analysis of ALOGP and CLOGP Methods , 1998 .

[21]  R Ohlsson,et al.  Identification of a human nuclear receptor defines a new signaling pathway for CYP3A induction. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  S. Ekins,et al.  Evolution of pharmacologic specificity in the pregnane X receptor , 2008, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[23]  Markus A Lill,et al.  Raptor: combining dual-shell representation, induced-fit simulation, and hydrophobicity scoring in receptor modeling: application toward the simulation of structurally diverse ligand sets. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[24]  S. Mani,et al.  Expanding the Roles for Pregnane X Receptor in Cancer: Proliferation and Drug Resistance in Ovarian Cancer , 2008, Clinical Cancer Research.

[25]  Peter W. Swaan,et al.  Structural Determinants of P-Glycoprotein-Mediated Transport of Glucocorticoids , 2003, Pharmaceutical Research.

[26]  Sean Ekins,et al.  PXR and the regulation of apoA1 and HDL-cholesterol in rodents. , 2004, Pharmacological research.

[27]  W. Delano.  The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System , 2002 .

[28]  F. Berardi,et al.  1‐Cyclohexyl‐4‐(4‐arylcyclohexyl)piperazines: Mixed σ and Human Δ8–Δ7 Sterol Isomerase Ligands with Antiproliferative and P‐Glycoprotein Inhibitory Activity , 2011, ChemMedChem.

[29]  R. Cramer,et al.  Validation of the general purpose tripos 5.2 force field , 1989 .

[30]  D. Rogers,et al.  Using Extended-Connectivity Fingerprints with Laplacian-Modified Bayesian Analysis in High-Throughput Screening Follow-Up , 2005, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[31]  P. Willett,et al.  PHARMACOPHORE PERCEPTION , DEVELOPMENT , AND USE IN DRUG DESIGN , 2011 .

[32]  Sean Ekins,et al.  Computational prediction of human drug metabolism , 2005, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[33]  Sean Ekins,et al.  Intrinsic disorder in nuclear hormone receptors. , 2008, Journal of proteome research.

[34]  L. Moore,et al.  Crystal structure of the pregnane X receptor-estradiol complex provides insights into endobiotic recognition. , 2007, Molecular endocrinology.

[35]  Markus A Lill,et al.  Prediction of Small‐Molecule Binding to Cytochrome P450 3A4: Flexible Docking Combined with Multidimensional QSAR , 2006, ChemMedChem.

[36]  S. Ekins.  Predicting undesirable drug interactions with promiscuous proteins in silico. , 2004, Drug discovery today.

[37]  A. Hopfinger,et al.  Construction of 3D-QSAR Models Using the 4D-QSAR Analysis Formalism , 1997 .

[38]  Markus A. Lill,et al.  Combining 4D Pharmacophore Generation and Multidimensional QSAR: Modeling Ligand Binding to the Bradykinin B2 Receptor , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[39]  Bradley L Urquhart,et al.  Nuclear Receptors and the Regulation of Drug‐Metabolizing Enzymes and Drug Transporters: Implications for Interindividual Variability in Response to Drugs , 2007, Journal of clinical pharmacology.

[40]  Jie Zhou,et al.  The Antiapoptotic Role of Pregnane X Receptor in Human Colon Cancer Cells , 2007 .

[41]  H. Mewes,et al.  Can we estimate the accuracy of ADME-Tox predictions? , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[42]  L. Moore,et al.  The Human Nuclear Xenobiotic Receptor PXR: Structural Determinants of Directed Promiscuity , 2001, Science.

[43]  Thierry Langer,et al.  The Identification of Ligand Features Essential for PXR Activation by Pharmacophore Modeling. , 2005 .

[44]  Igor V. Tetko,et al.  Critical Assessment of QSAR Models of Environmental Toxicity against Tetrahymena pyriformis: Focusing on Applicability Domain and Overfitting by Variable Selection , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[45]  Sean Ekins,et al.  Elucidating the ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ Nature of PXR: The Case for Discovering Antagonists or Allosteric Antagonists , 2009, Pharmaceutical Research.

[46]  Anthony E. Klon,et al.  Improved Naïve Bayesian Modeling of Numerical Data for Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism and Excretion (ADME) Property Prediction , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[47]  Sean Ekins,et al.  Human Pregnane X Receptor Antagonists and Agonists Define Molecular Requirements for Different Binding Sites , 2007, Molecular Pharmacology.

[48]  María Suárez,et al.  Pareto optimization in computational protein design with multiple objectives , 2008, J. Comput. Chem..

[49]  P Willett,et al.  Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[50]  A. Bender,et al.  Modeling Promiscuity Based on in vitro Safety Pharmacology Profiling Data , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[51]  Sean Ekins,et al.  A Comprehensive in Vitro and in Silico Analysis of Antibiotics That Activate Pregnane X Receptor and Induce CYP3A4 in Liver and Intestine , 2008, Drug Metabolism and Disposition.

[52]  A. Bender,et al.  Analysis of Pharmacology Data and the Prediction of Adverse Drug Reactions and Off‐Target Effects from Chemical Structure , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[53]  Jeffrey R. Huth,et al.  Enhancement of chemical rules for predicting compound reactivity towards protein thiol groups , 2007, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[54]  Philip Prathipati,et al.  Global Bayesian Models for the Prioritization of Antitubercular Agents , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[55]  R. Cramer,et al.  Recent advances in comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). , 1989, Progress in clinical and biological research.

[56]  David Rogers,et al.  Cheminformatics analysis and learning in a data pipelining environment , 2006, Molecular Diversity.

[57]  Sean Ekins,et al.  Machine learning methods and docking for predicting human pregnane X receptor activation. , 2008, Chemical research in toxicology.

[58]  J. Lehmann,et al.  An Orphan Nuclear Receptor Activated by Pregnanes Defines a Novel Steroid Signaling Pathway , 1998, Cell.

[59]  William J. Welsh,et al.  Hybrid Scoring and Classification Approaches to Predict Human Pregnane X Receptor Activators , 2009, Pharmaceutical Research.

[60]  Sean Ekins,et al.  A Ligand-Based Approach to Understanding Selectivity of Nuclear Hormone Receptors PXR, CAR, FXR, LXRα, and LXRβ , 2002, Pharmaceutical Research.

[61]  R. Evers,et al.  Attenuating pregnane X receptor (PXR) activation: A molecular modelling approach , 2007, Xenobiotica; the fate of foreign compounds in biological systems.