Browsing by Author "Knabe, William Eric"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A new class of orthosteric uPAR·uPA small-molecule antagonists are allosteric inhibitors of the uPAR·vitronectin interaction
    (American Chemical Society, 2015-06-19) Liu, Degang; Zhou, Donghui; Wang, Bo; Knabe, William Eric; Meroueh, Samy O.; Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, IU School of Medicine
    The urokinase receptor (uPAR) is a GPI-anchored cell surface receptor that is at the center of an intricate network of protein-protein interactions. Its immediate binding partners are the serine proteinase urokinase (uPA), and vitronectin (VTN), a component of the extracellular matrix. uPA and VTN bind at distinct sites on uPAR to promote extracellular matrix degradation and integrin signaling, respectively. Here, we report the discovery of a new class of pyrrolone small-molecule inhibitors of the tight ∼1 nM uPAR·uPA protein-protein interaction. These compounds were designed to bind to the uPA pocket on uPAR. The highest affinity compound, namely 7, displaced a fluorescently labeled α-helical peptide (AE147-FAM) with an inhibition constant Ki of 0.7 μM and inhibited the tight uPAR·uPAATF interaction with an IC50 of 18 μM. Biophysical studies with surface plasmon resonance showed that VTN binding is highly dependent on uPA. This cooperative binding was confirmed as 7, which binds at the uPAR·uPA interface, also inhibited the distal VTN·uPAR interaction. In cell culture, 7 blocked the uPAR·uPA interaction in uPAR-expressing human embryonic kidney (HEK-293) cells and impaired cell adhesion to VTN, a process that is mediated by integrins. As a result, 7 inhibited integrin signaling in MDA-MB-231 cancer cells as evidenced by a decrease in focal adhesion kinase (FAK) phosphorylation and Rac1 GTPase activation. Consistent with these results, 7 blocked breast MDA-MB-231 cancer cell invasion with IC50 values similar to those observed in ELISA and surface plasmon resonance competition studies. Explicit-solvent molecular dynamics simulations show that the cooperativity between uPA and VTN is attributed to stabilization of uPAR motion by uPA. In addition, free energy calculations revealed that uPA stabilizes the VTNSMB·uPAR interaction through more favorable electrostatics and entropy. Disruption of the uPAR·VTNSMB interaction by 7 is consistent with the cooperative binding to uPAR by uPA and VTN. Interestingly, the VTNSMB·uPAR interaction was less favorable in the VTNSMB·uPAR·7 complex suggesting potential cooperativity between 7 and VTN. Compound 7 provides an excellent starting point for the development of more potent derivatives to explore uPAR biology.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Probing binding and cellular activity of pyrrolidinone and piperidinone small molecules targeting the urokinase receptor
    (Wiley, 2013-12) Mani, Timmy; Liu, Degang; Zhou, Donghui; Li, Liwei; Knabe, William Eric; Wang, Fang; Oh, Kyungsoo; Meroueh, Samy O.; Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, School of Medicine
    The urokinase receptor (uPAR) is a cell-surface protein that is part of an intricate web of transient and tight protein interactions that promote cancer cell invasion and metastasis. Here, we evaluate the binding and biological activity of a new class of pyrrolidinone and piperidinone compounds, along with derivatives of previously-identified pyrazole and propylamine compounds. Competition assays revealed that the compounds displace a fluorescently labeled peptide (AE147-FAM) with inhibition constant (Ki ) values ranging from 6 to 63 μM. Structure-based computational pharmacophore analysis followed by extensive explicit-solvent molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and free energy calculations suggested the pyrazole-based and piperidinone-based compounds adopt different binding modes, despite their similar two-dimensional structures. In cells, pyrazole-based compounds showed significant inhibition of breast adenocarcinoma (MDA-MB-231) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) cell proliferation, but piperidinone-containing compounds exhibited no cytotoxicity even at concentrations of 100 μM. One pyrazole-based compound impaired MDA-MB-231 invasion, adhesion, and migration in a concentration-dependent manner, while the piperidinone inhibited only invasion. The pyrazole derivative inhibited matrix metalloprotease-9 (gelatinase) activity in a concentration-dependent manner, while the piperidinone showed no effect suggesting different mechanisms for inhibition of cell invasion. Signaling studies further highlighted these differences, showing that pyrazole compounds completely inhibited ERK phosphorylation and impaired HIF1α and NF-κB signaling, while pyrrolidinones and piperidinones had no effect. Annexin V staining suggested that the effect of the pyrazole-based compound on proliferation was due to cell killing through an apoptotic mechanism. The compounds identified represent valuable leads in the design of further derivatives with higher affinities and potential probes to unravel the protein-protein interactions of uPAR.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Small Molecules Engage Hot Spots through Cooperative Binding To Inhibit a Tight Protein–Protein Interaction
    (ACS, 2017-03) Liu, Degang; Xu, David; Liu, Min; Knabe, William Eric; Yuan, Cai; Zhou, Donghui; Huang, Mingdong; Meroueh, Samy O.; Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, School of Medicine
    Protein–protein interactions drive every aspect of cell signaling, yet only a few small-molecule inhibitors of these interactions exist. Despite our ability to identify critical residues known as hot spots, little is known about how to effectively engage them to disrupt protein–protein interactions. Here, we take advantage of the ease of preparation and stability of pyrrolinone 1, a small-molecule inhibitor of the tight interaction between the urokinase receptor (uPAR) and its binding partner, the urokinase-type plasminogen activator uPA, to synthesize more than 40 derivatives and explore their effect on the protein–protein interaction. We report the crystal structure of uPAR bound to previously discovered pyrazole 3 and to pyrrolinone 12. While both 3 and 12 bind to uPAR and compete with a fluorescently labeled peptide probe, only 12 and its derivatives inhibit the full uPAR·uPA interaction. Compounds 3 and 12 mimic and engage different hot-spot residues on uPA and uPAR, respectively. Interestingly, 12 is involved in a π–cation interaction with Arg-53, which is not considered a hot spot. Explicit-solvent molecular dynamics simulations reveal that 3 and 12 exhibit dramatically different correlations of motion with residues on uPAR. Free energy calculations for the wild-type and mutant uPAR bound to uPA or 12 show that Arg-53 interacts with uPA or with 12 in a highly cooperative manner, thereby altering the contributions of hot spots to uPAR binding. The direct engagement of peripheral residues not considered hot spots through π–cation or salt-bridge interactions could provide new opportunities for enhanced small-molecule engagement of hot spots to disrupt challenging protein–protein interactions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Virtual Screening Targeting the Urokinase Receptor, Biochemical and Cell-Based Studies, Synthesis, Pharmacokinetic Characterization, and Effect on Breast Tumor Metastasis
    (American Chemical Society, 2011-10-27) Wang, Fang; Li, Jing; Sinn, Anthony L.; Knabe, William Eric; Khanna, May; Jo, Inha; Silver, Jayne M.; Oh, Kyungsoo; Li, Liwei; Sandusky, George E.; Sledge, George W.; Nakshatri, Harikrishna; Jones, David R.; Pollok, Karen E.; Meroueh, Samy O.
    Virtual screening targeting the urokinase receptor (uPAR) led to (3R)-4-cyclohexyl-3-(hexahydrobenzo[d][1,3]dioxol-5-yl)-N-((hexahydrobenzo[d][1,3]dioxol-5-yl)methyl)butan-1-aminium 1 (IPR-1) and 4-(4-((3,5-dimethylcyclohexyl)carbamoyl)-2-(4-isopropylcyclohexyl)pyrazolidin-3-yl)piperidin-1-ium 3 (IPR-69). Synthesis of an analog of 1, namely 2 (IPR-9), and 3 led to breast MDA-MB-231 invasion, migration and adhesion assays with IC50 near 30 μM. Both compounds blocked angiogenesis with IC50 of 3 μM. Compounds 2 and 3 inhibited cell growth with IC50 of 6 and 18 μM and induced apoptosis. Biochemical assays revealed lead-like properties for 3, but not 2. Compound 3 administered orally reached peak concentration of nearly 40 μM with a half-life of about 2 hours. In NOD-SCID mice inoculated with breast TMD-231 cells in their mammary fat pads, compound 3 showed a 20% reduction in tumor volumes and less extensive metastasis was observed for the treated mice. The suitable pharmacokinetic properties of 3 and the encouraging preliminary results in metastasis make it an ideal starting point for next generation compounds.