Discovery of Novel Tubulin Inhibitors via Structure-Based Hierarchical Virtual Screening

To discover novel tubulin inhibitors, we performed structure-based virtual screening against the colchicine binding pocket. In combination with a hierarchical docking and scoring procedure, the structural information of an additional subpocket in colchicine site was applied to filter out the undesired docking hits. This strategy automatically resulted in 63 candidates meeting the structural and energetic criteria from a screening library containing approximately 100,000 diverse druglike compounds. Among them, nine molecules were chosen for experimental validation, which all share the similar binding pose and contain an enriched scaffold bearing thiophene core. Encouragingly, five compounds are active in tubulin polymerization assay. The most potent inhibitor, 2-(2-fluorobenzamido)-3-carboxamide-4,5-dimethylthiophene, is structurally distinct to any known colchicine site binders and has higher ligand efficiency than colchicine. On the basis of its predicted binding pose, we systematically probed its binding characteristics by testing series of structural modifications. The obtained structure-activity relationship results are consistent with our binding model, and the inhibition activities of two analogues are improved by 2-fold. We expect that the novel structure discovered in the present study may serve as a starting point for developing tubulin inhibitors with improved efficacy and fewer side effects. We also expect that our hierarchical strategy may be generally applicable in structure-based virtual screening campaigns.

[1]  W. Waud,et al.  Comparison of 1,2-dihydropyrido[3,4-b]pyrazines (1-deaza-7,8-dihydropteridines) with several other inhibitors of mitosis. , 1987, Cancer research.

[2]  Jan Balzarini,et al.  Synthesis and cellular pharmacology studies of a series of 2-amino-3-aroyl-4-substituted thiophene derivatives. , 2010, Medicinal chemistry (Shariqah (United Arab Emirates)).

[3]  B. Shoichet,et al.  A specific mechanism of nonspecific inhibition. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Hierarchical docking of databases of multiple ligand conformations. , 2005, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[5]  H. Hsieh,et al.  Pharmaceutical design of antimitotic agents based on combretastatins. , 2005, Current pharmaceutical design.

[6]  Carlos Alfonso,et al.  Stathmin and Interfacial Microtubule Inhibitors Recognize a Naturally Curved Conformation of Tubulin Dimers* , 2010, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[7]  I. Barasoain,et al.  Inhibition of microtubules and cell cycle arrest by a new 1-deaza-7,8-dihydropteridine antitumor drug, CI 980, and by its chiral isomer, NSC 613863. , 1994, Cancer research.

[8]  Ray Luo,et al.  Accelerated Poisson–Boltzmann calculations for static and dynamic systems , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[9]  Chryso Kanthou,et al.  Microtubule depolymerizing vascular disrupting agents: novel therapeutic agents for oncology and other pathologies , 2009, International journal of experimental pathology.

[10]  Anurag Chaudhary,et al.  Combretastatin a-4 analogs as anticancer agents. , 2007, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[11]  Ki Young Lee,et al.  Design and biological evaluation of novel tubulin inhibitors as antimitotic agents using a pharmacophore binding model with tubulin. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[12]  I. Kuntz,et al.  The maximal affinity of ligands. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  P A Kollman,et al.  Continuum solvent studies of the stability of RNA hairpin loops and helices. , 1998, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[14]  P. Kollman,et al.  How well does a restrained electrostatic potential (RESP) model perform in calculating conformational energies of organic and biological molecules? , 2000 .

[15]  A. Hopkins,et al.  Ligand efficiency: a useful metric for lead selection. , 2004, Drug discovery today.

[16]  Andrea Brancale,et al.  The Tubulin Colchicine Domain: a Molecular Modeling Perspective , 2012, ChemMedChem.

[17]  M. Jacobson,et al.  Molecular mechanics methods for predicting protein-ligand binding. , 2006, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[18]  A. Yamaguchi,et al.  Mechanism of action of E7010, an orally active sulfonamide antitumor agent: inhibition of mitosis by binding to the colchicine site of tubulin. , 1997, Cancer research.

[19]  E Hamel,et al.  The synthesis and tubulin binding activity of thiophene-based analogues of combretastatin A-4. , 2001, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[20]  Li Qian,et al.  Binding Orientations, QSAR, and Molecular Design of Thiophene Derivative Inhibitors , 2009, Chemical biology & drug design.

[21]  D. Zaharevitz,et al.  A common pharmacophore for a diverse set of colchicine site inhibitors using a structure-based approach. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  V. Peyrot,et al.  Tubulin binding of two 1-deaza-7,8-dihydropteridines with different biological properties: enantiomers NSC 613862 (S)-(-) and NSC 613863 (R)-(+). , 1993, Biochemistry.

[23]  Gisbert Schneider,et al.  Virtual screening: an endless staircase? , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[24]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Automated docking with grid‐based energy evaluation , 1992 .

[25]  M. L. Connolly Solvent-accessible surfaces of proteins and nucleic acids. , 1983, Science.

[26]  B. Honig,et al.  A rapid finite difference algorithm, utilizing successive over‐relaxation to solve the Poisson–Boltzmann equation , 1991 .

[27]  Nikolay V. Dokholyan,et al.  Cheminformatics Meets Molecular Mechanics: A Combined Application of Knowledge-Based Pose Scoring and Physical Force Field-Based Hit Scoring Functions Improves the Accuracy of Structure-Based Virtual Screening , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[28]  Conrad C. Huang,et al.  The MIDAS display system , 1988 .

[29]  Ping-Chiang Lyu,et al.  Generation of ligand-based pharmacophore model and virtual screening for identification of novel tubulin inhibitors with potent anticancer activity. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[30]  R. Friesner,et al.  Evaluation and Reparametrization of the OPLS-AA Force Field for Proteins via Comparison with Accurate Quantum Chemical Calculations on Peptides† , 2001 .

[31]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  ZINC - A Free Database of Commercially Available Compounds for Virtual Screening , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[32]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Rapid Context-Dependent Ligand Desolvation in Molecular Docking , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[33]  Chryso Kanthou,et al.  Disrupting tumour blood vessels , 2005, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[34]  B. Matthews,et al.  A model binding site for testing scoring functions in molecular docking. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[35]  Raimond B G Ravelli,et al.  Variations in the colchicine-binding domain provide insight into the structural switch of tubulin , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  R. D'Amato,et al.  2-Methoxyestradiol, an endogenous mammalian metabolite, inhibits tubulin polymerization by interacting at the colchicine site. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[37]  M. Jacobson,et al.  Binding-Site Assessment by Virtual Fragment Screening , 2010, PloS one.

[38]  Niu Huang,et al.  Physics-Based Scoring of Protein-Ligand Complexes: Enrichment of Known Inhibitors in Large-Scale Virtual Screening , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[39]  S Seeber,et al.  D-24851, a novel synthetic microtubule inhibitor, exerts curative antitumoral activity in vivo, shows efficacy toward multidrug-resistant tumor cells, and lacks neurotoxicity. , 2001, Cancer research.

[40]  Jing Chen,et al.  Recent development and SAR analysis of colchicine binding site inhibitors. , 2009, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[41]  J M Blaney,et al.  A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[43]  R. Friesner,et al.  High‐resolution prediction of protein helix positions and orientations , 2004, Proteins.

[44]  Jan Balzarini,et al.  Synthesis of novel antimitotic agents based on 2-amino-3-aroyl-5-(hetero)arylethynyl thiophene derivatives. , 2011, Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters.

[45]  Nikolay V. Dokholyan,et al.  Combined Application of Cheminformatics- and Physical Force Field-Based Scoring Functions Improves Binding Affinity Prediction for CSAR Data Sets , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[46]  Dulal Panda,et al.  Microtubule assembly dynamics: An attractive target for anticancer drugs , 2008, IUBMB life.

[47]  Junmei Wang,et al.  Development and testing of a general amber force field , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[48]  J. Jaén,et al.  Selective, covalent modification of beta-tubulin residue Cys-239 by T138067, an antitumor agent with in vivo efficacy against multidrug-resistant tumors. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[49]  M. Castoldi,et al.  Purification of brain tubulin through two cycles of polymerization-depolymerization in a high-molarity buffer. , 2003, Protein expression and purification.

[50]  Alberto Massarotti,et al.  Identification of Novel Antitubulin Agents by Using a Virtual Screening Approach Based on a 7‐Point Pharmacophore Model of the Tubulin Colchi‐Site , 2011, Chemical biology & drug design.

[51]  Anke Wienecke,et al.  Indibulin, a novel microtubule inhibitor, discriminates between mature neuronal and nonneuronal tubulin. , 2009, Cancer research.

[52]  K. Sharp,et al.  Accurate Calculation of Hydration Free Energies Using Macroscopic Solvent Models , 1994 .

[53]  Patrick A. Curmi,et al.  Insight into tubulin regulation from a complex with colchicine and a stathmin-like domain , 2004, Nature.

[54]  Young Hoon Kim,et al.  Structure-based virtual screening of novel tubulin inhibitors and their characterization as anti-mitotic agents. , 2010, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[55]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Virtual screening of chemical libraries , 2004, Nature.

[56]  F. Giles,et al.  Microtubule dynamics as a target in oncology. , 2009, Cancer treatment reviews.

[57]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Development and Testing of the OPLS All-Atom Force Field on Conformational Energetics and Properties of Organic Liquids , 1996 .

[58]  M. Kavallaris Microtubules and resistance to tubulin-binding agents , 2010, Nature Reviews. Cancer.

[59]  Giovanni Sorba,et al.  Medicinal chemistry of combretastatin A4: present and future directions. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[60]  M. Jordan,et al.  Microtubules as a target for anticancer drugs , 2004, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[61]  George A. Kaminski,et al.  Force Field Validation Using Protein Side Chain Prediction , 2002 .

[62]  Mathias Schmidt,et al.  Mitotic drug targets and the development of novel anti-mitotic anticancer drugs. , 2007, Drug resistance updates : reviews and commentaries in antimicrobial and anticancer chemotherapy.

[63]  Giuseppe Basso,et al.  Synthesis and biological evaluation of 2-(3',4',5'-trimethoxybenzoyl)-3-aryl/arylaminobenzo[b]thiophene derivatives as a novel class of antiproliferative agents. , 2010, European journal of medicinal chemistry.

[64]  C. Dumontet,et al.  Microtubule-binding agents: a dynamic field of cancer therapeutics , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.