Prediction of Substrates for Glutathione Transferases by Covalent Docking

Enzymes in the glutathione transferase (GST) superfamily catalyze the conjugation of glutathione (GSH) to electrophilic substrates. As a consequence they are involved in a number of key biological processes, including protection of cells against chemical damage, steroid and prostaglandin biosynthesis, tyrosine catabolism, and cell apoptosis. Although virtual screening has been used widely to discover substrates by docking potential noncovalent ligands into active site clefts of enzymes, docking has been rarely constrained by a covalent bond between the enzyme and ligand. In this study, we investigate the accuracy of docking poses and substrate discovery in the GST superfamily, by docking 6738 potential ligands from the KEGG and MetaCyc compound libraries into 14 representative GST enzymes with known structures and substrates using the PLOP program [JacobsonProteins2004, 55, 35115048827]. For X-ray structures as receptors, one of the top 3 ranked models is within 3 Å all-atom root mean square deviation (RMSD) of the native complex in 11 of the 14 cases; the enrichment LogAUC value is better than random in all cases, and better than 25 in 7 of 11 cases. For comparative models as receptors, near-native ligand–enzyme configurations are often sampled but difficult to rank highly. For models based on templates with the highest sequence identity, the enrichment LogAUC is better than 25 in 5 of 11 cases, not significantly different from the crystal structures. In conclusion, we show that covalent docking can be a useful tool for substrate discovery and point out specific challenges for future method improvement.

[1]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Statistical Potential for Modeling and Ranking of Protein-Ligand Interactions , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[2]  Benjamin A. Ellingson,et al.  Conformer Generation with OMEGA: Algorithm and Validation Using High Quality Structures from the Protein Databank and Cambridge Structural Database , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[3]  Avner Schlessinger,et al.  Structure-based discovery of prescription drugs that interact with the norepinephrine transporter, NET , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  J. D. Rowe,et al.  Rationale for Reclassification of a Distinctive Subdivision of Mammalian Class Mu Glutathione S-Transferases That Are Primarily Expressed in Testis* , 1998, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[5]  Heidi J. Imker,et al.  The Enzyme Function Initiative. , 2011, Biochemistry.

[6]  Manfred J. Sippl,et al.  Boltzmann's principle, knowledge-based mean fields and protein folding. An approach to the computational determination of protein structures , 1993, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[7]  G L Gilliland,et al.  Snapshots along the reaction coordinate of an SNAr reaction catalyzed by glutathione transferase. , 1993, Biochemistry.

[8]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Enzymatic deamination of the epigenetic base N-6-methyladenine. , 2011, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[9]  Patricia C. Babbitt,et al.  Prediction of function for the polyprenyl transferase subgroup in the isoprenoid synthase superfamily , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  David Calkins,et al.  Towards the comprehensive, rapid, and accurate prediction of the favorable tautomeric states of drug-like molecules in aqueous solution , 2010, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[11]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  Molecular Docking Screens Using Comparative Models of Proteins , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[12]  The UniProt Consortium,et al.  Update on activities at the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt) in 2013 , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[13]  Avner Schlessinger,et al.  Ligand Discovery from a Dopamine D3 Receptor Homology Model and Crystal Structure , 2011, Nature chemical biology.

[14]  X Ji,et al.  Residue R216 and catalytic efficiency of a murine class alpha glutathione S-transferase toward benzo[a]pyrene 7(R),8(S)-diol 9(S), 10(R)-epoxide. , 2000, Biochemistry.

[15]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Catalytic mechanism and three-dimensional structure of adenine deaminase. , 2011, Biochemistry.

[16]  G L Gilliland,et al.  Three-dimensional structure, catalytic properties, and evolution of a sigma class glutathione transferase from squid, a progenitor of the lens S-crystallins of cephalopods. , 1995, Biochemistry.

[17]  G. Klebe,et al.  Successful virtual screening for a submicromolar antagonist of the neurokinin-1 receptor based on a ligand-supported homology model. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[18]  Richard J. Marhöfer,et al.  Docking-based virtual screening of covalently binding ligands: an orthogonal lead discovery approach. , 2013, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  B. Honig,et al.  A hierarchical approach to all‐atom protein loop prediction , 2004, Proteins.

[20]  G Chelvanayagam,et al.  Human theta class glutathione transferase: the crystal structure reveals a sulfate-binding pocket within a buried active site. , 1998, Structure.

[21]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  Ligand-supported homology modeling of g-protein-coupled receptor sites: models sufficient for successful virtual screening. , 2004, Angewandte Chemie.

[22]  Daylight Theory Manual , 2011 .

[23]  G L Gilliland,et al.  Structure and function of the xenobiotic substrate binding site of a glutathione S-transferase as revealed by X-ray crystallographic analysis of product complexes with the diastereomers of 9-(S-glutathionyl)-10-hydroxy-9,10-dihydrophenanthrene. , 1993, Biochemistry.

[24]  Adele Di Matteo,et al.  Structural basis for the binding of the anticancer compound 6-(7-nitro-2,1,3-benzoxadiazol-4-ylthio)hexanol to human glutathione s-transferases. , 2009, Cancer research.

[25]  John J Irwin,et al.  Predicting substrates by docking high-energy intermediates to enzyme structures. , 2006, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[26]  Jeremy R. Greenwood,et al.  Epik: a software program for pKa prediction and protonation state generation for drug-like molecules , 2007, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[27]  William L. Jorgensen,et al.  Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[28]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular docking and ligand specificity in fragment-based inhibitor discovery. , 2009, Nature chemical biology.

[29]  Robert Edwards,et al.  Structure of a tau class glutathione S-transferase from wheat active in herbicide detoxification. , 2002, Biochemistry.

[30]  R. Huber,et al.  Structures of herbicides in complex with their detoxifying enzyme glutathione S-transferase - explanations for the selectivity of the enzyme in plants. , 1998, Structure.

[31]  D. Diller,et al.  Kinases, homology models, and high throughput docking. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[32]  Rick Gussio,et al.  Homology model of RSK2 N-terminal kinase domain, structure-based identification of novel RSK2 inhibitors, and preliminary common pharmacophore. , 2006, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[33]  Sarah Ciccone,et al.  The anti-cancer drug chlorambucil as a substrate for the human polymorphic enzyme glutathione transferase P1-1: kinetic properties and crystallographic characterisation of allelic variants. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Comparative Protein Structure Modeling and its Applications to Drug Discovery , 2004 .

[35]  Claudio N. Cavasotto,et al.  Ligand docking and structure-based virtual screening in drug discovery. , 2007, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[36]  Andreas Plückthun,et al.  Docking small ligands in flexible binding sites , 1998 .

[37]  Sebastian Radestock,et al.  Homology Model-Based Virtual Screening for GPCR Ligands Using Docking and Target-Biased Scoring , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[38]  Kai Zhu,et al.  Improved Methods for Side Chain and Loop Predictions via the Protein Local Optimization Program:  Variable Dielectric Model for Implicitly Improving the Treatment of Polarization Effects. , 2007, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[39]  A. Sali,et al.  Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[40]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Optimized atomic statistical potentials: assessment of protein interfaces and loops , 2013, Bioinform..

[41]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Assignment of pterin deaminase activity to an enzyme of unknown function guided by homology modeling and docking. , 2013, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[42]  Heidi J Imker,et al.  Discovery of a dipeptide epimerase enzymatic function guided by homology modeling and virtual screening. , 2008, Structure.

[43]  Susumu Goto,et al.  KEGG for integration and interpretation of large-scale molecular data sets , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[44]  T. Kanai,et al.  Three distinct-type glutathione S-transferases from Escherichia coli important for defense against oxidative stress. , 2006, Journal of biochemistry.

[45]  Keigo Gohda,et al.  Predicting subsite interactions of plasmin with substrates and inhibitors through computational docking analysis , 2012, Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry.

[46]  G L Gilliland,et al.  Location of a potential transport binding site in a sigma class glutathione transferase by x-ray crystallography. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  R. Armstrong,et al.  Structure, catalytic mechanism, and evolution of the glutathione transferases. , 1997, Chemical research in toxicology.

[48]  Kaspars Tars,et al.  Alternative mutations of a positively selected residue elicit gain or loss of functionalities in enzyme evolution. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[49]  Patricia C Babbitt,et al.  Divergence of function in the thioredoxin fold suprafamily: evidence for evolution of peroxiredoxins from a thioredoxin-like ancestor. , 2004, Biochemistry.

[50]  Amedeo Caflisch,et al.  Docking small ligands in flexible binding sites , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[51]  G L Gilliland,et al.  Structure and function of the xenobiotic substrate-binding site and location of a potential non-substrate-binding site in a class pi glutathione S-transferase. , 1997, Biochemistry.

[52]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Protein‐based virtual screening of chemical databases. II. Are homology models of g‐protein coupled receptors suitable targets? , 2002, Proteins.

[53]  B. Mannervik,et al.  Glutathione transferases--structure and catalytic activity. , 1988, CRC critical reviews in biochemistry.

[54]  T. Blundell,et al.  Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[55]  Robert Edwards,et al.  Glutathione Transferases , 2010, The arabidopsis book.

[56]  Richard N Armstrong,et al.  Analysis of the structure and function of YfcG from Escherichia coli reveals an efficient and unique disulfide bond reductase. , 2009, Biochemistry.

[57]  M W Parker,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of class pi glutathione S-transferase from human placenta in complex with S-hexylglutathione at 2.8 A resolution. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[58]  John A Tainer,et al.  Characterization of the electrophile binding site and substrate binding mode of the 26‐kDa glutathione S‐transferase from Schistosoma japonicum , 2003, Proteins.

[59]  H. Jörnvall,et al.  Identification of three classes of cytosolic glutathione transferase common to several mammalian species: correlation between structural data and enzymatic properties. , 1985, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[60]  Patricia C. Babbitt,et al.  Glutathione Transferases Are Structural and Functional Outliers in the Thioredoxin Fold† , 2009, Biochemistry.

[61]  Chris Oostenbrink,et al.  Catalytic site prediction and virtual screening of cytochrome P450 2D6 substrates by consideration of water and rescoring in automated docking. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[62]  Steven C. Almo,et al.  Transition state model and mechanism of nucleophilic aromatic substitution reactions catalyzed by human glutathione S-transferase M1a-1a. , 2006 .

[63]  L. Liu,et al.  Characterization of chicken-liver glutathione S-transferase (GST) A1-1 and A2-2 isoenzymes and their site-directed mutants heterologously expressed in Escherichia coli: identification of Lys-15 and Ser-208 on cGSTA1-1 as residues interacting with ethacrynic acid. , 1997, The Biochemical journal.

[64]  G Chelvanayagam,et al.  Mutagenesis of the active site of the human Theta-class glutathione transferase GSTT2-2: catalysis with different substrates involves different residues. , 1996, The Biochemical journal.

[65]  M. Gilson,et al.  Ligand configurational entropy and protein binding , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[66]  SödingJohannes.  Protein homology detection by HMM--HMM comparison , 2005 .

[67]  A. Canals,et al.  Site‐directed mutagenesis of mouse glutathione transferase P1‐1 unlocks masked cooperativity, introduces a novel mechanism for ‘ping pong’ kinetic behaviour, and provides further structural evidence for participation of a water molecule in proton abstraction from glutathione , 2011, The FEBS journal.

[68]  R Abagyan,et al.  High-throughput docking for lead generation. , 2001, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[69]  P. Wormer,et al.  Theory and Applications of Computational Chemistry The First Forty Years , 2005 .

[70]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Discovery of a cytokinin deaminase. , 2011, ACS chemical biology.

[71]  R. Armstrong,et al.  Mechanistic imperatives for the evolution of glutathione transferases. , 1998, Current opinion in chemical biology.