Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Adenylyl cyclase (1)
- Crystal structure (1)
- Drug discovery (1)
- Drug interactions (1)
- Drug therapy (1)
- Gene expression (1)
- MRP4 (1)
- PKA (1)
- Small molecules (1)
- Structural genomics (1)
Institute
An expanded chemical space is essential for improved identification of small molecules for emerging therapeutic targets. However, the identification of targets for novel compounds is biased towards the synthesis of known scaffolds that bind familiar protein families, limiting the exploration of chemical space. To change this paradigm, we validated a new pipeline that identifies small molecule-protein interactions and works even for compounds lacking similarity to known drugs. Based on differential mRNA profiles in multiple cell types exposed to drugs and in which gene knockdowns (KD) were conducted, we showed that drugs induce gene regulatory networks that correlate with those produced after silencing protein-coding genes. Next, we applied supervised machine learning to exploit drug-KD signature correlations and enriched our predictions using an orthogonal structure-based screen. As a proof-of-principle for this regimen, top-10/top-100 target prediction accuracies of 26% and 41%, respectively, were achieved on a validation set 152 FDA-approved drugs and 3104 potential targets. We then predicted targets for 1680 compounds and validated chemical interactors with four targets that have proven difficult to chemically modulate, including non-covalent inhibitors of HRAS and KRAS. Importantly, drug-target interactions manifest as gene expression correlations between drug treatment and both target gene KD and KD of genes that act up- or down-stream of the target, even for relatively weak binders. These correlations provide new insights on the cellular response of disrupting protein interactions and highlight the complex genetic phenotypes of drug treatment. With further refinement, our pipeline may accelerate the identification and development of novel chemical classes by screening compound-target interactions.
Background/Aims: Signaling of Gs protein-coupled receptors (GsPCRs) is accomplished by stimulation of adenylyl cyclase, causing an increase of the intracellular cAMP concentration, activation of the intracellular cAMP effectors protein kinase A (PKA) and Epac, and an efflux of cAMP, the function of which is still unclear.
Methods: Activation of adenylyl cyclase by GsPCR agonists or cholera toxin was monitored by measurement of the intracellular cAMP concentration by ELISA, anti-phospho-PKA substrate motif phosphorylation by immunoblotting, and an Epac-FRET assay in the presence and absence of adenosine receptor antagonists or ecto-nucleotide phosphodiesterase/pyrophosphatase2 (eNPP2) inhibitors. The production of AMP from cAMP by recombinant eNPP2 was measured by HPLC. Extracellular adenosine was determined by LC-MS/MS, extracellular ATP by luciferase and LC-MS/MS. The expression of eNPP isoenzymes 1-3 was examined by RT-PCR. The expression of multidrug resistance protein 4 was suppressed by siRNA.
Results: Here we show that the activation of GsPCRs and the GsPCRs-independent activation of Gs proteins and adenylyl cyclase by cholera toxin induce stimulation of cell surface adenosine receptors (A2A or A2B adenosine receptors). In PC12 cells stimulation of adenylyl cyclase by GsPCR or cholera toxin caused activation of A2A adenosine receptors by an autocrine signaling pathway involving cAMP efflux through multidrug resistance protein 4 and hydrolysis of released cAMP to AMP by eNPP2. In contrast, in PC3 cells cholera toxin- and GsPCR-induced stimulation of adenylyl cyclase resulted in the activation of A2B adenosine receptors.
Conclusion: Our findings show that stimulation of adenylyl cyclase causes a remarkable activation of cell surface adenosine receptors.