Computationally designed high specificity inhibitors delineate the roles of BCL2 family proteins in cancer

  1. Stephanie Berger  Is a corresponding author
  2. Erik Procko
  3. Daciana Margineantu
  4. Erinna F Lee
  5. Betty W Shen
  6. Alex Zelter
  7. Daniel-Adriano Silva
  8. Kusum Chawla
  9. Marco J Herold
  10. Jean-Marc Garnier
  11. Richard Johnson
  12. Michael J MacCoss
  13. Guillaume Lessene
  14. Trisha N Davis
  15. Patrick S Stayton
  16. Barry L Stoddard
  17. W Douglas Fairlie
  18. David M Hockenbery
  19. David Baker  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Washington, United States
  2. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, United States
  3. LaTrobe Institute for Molecular Science, Australia
  4. The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Australia

Abstract

Many cancers overexpress one or more of the six human pro-survival BCL2 family proteins to evade apoptosis. To determine which BCL2 protein or proteins block apoptosis in different cancers, we computationally designed three-helix bundle protein inhibitors specific for each BCL2 pro-survival protein. Following in vitro optimization, each inhibitor binds its target with high picomolar to low nanomolar affinity and at least 300-fold specificity. Expression of the designed inhibitors in human cancer cell lines revealed unique dependencies on BCL2 proteins for survival which could not be inferred from other BCL2 profiling methods. Our results show that designed inhibitors can be generated for each member of a closely-knit protein family to probe the importance of specific protein-protein interactions in complex biological processes.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Stephanie Berger

    Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    berger389@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3738-5907
  2. Erik Procko

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Daciana Margineantu

    Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Erinna F Lee

    Department of Chemistry and Physics, LaTrobe Institute for Molecular Science, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Betty W Shen

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Alex Zelter

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Daniel-Adriano Silva

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Kusum Chawla

    Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Marco J Herold

    The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Jean-Marc Garnier

    The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Richard Johnson

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Michael J MacCoss

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Guillaume Lessene

    The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1193-8147
  14. Trisha N Davis

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4797-3152
  15. Patrick S Stayton

    Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Barry L Stoddard

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. W Douglas Fairlie

    Department of Chemistry and Physics, LaTrobe Institute for Molecular Science, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. David M Hockenbery

    Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. David Baker

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    dabaker@uw.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7896-6217

Funding

National Institutes of Health (P41GM103533)

  • Stephanie Berger
  • Erik Procko
  • David Baker

Australian Research Council (FT150100212)

  • Erinna F Lee

National Institutes of Health (R01 GM115545)

  • Betty W Shen
  • Barry L Stoddard

National Institutes of Health (R01 CA158921-04)

  • Daciana Margineantu
  • David M Hockenbery

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (HDTRA1-10-0040)

  • Stephanie Berger
  • Erik Procko
  • David Baker

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI-027779)

  • Stephanie Berger
  • Erik Procko
  • David Baker

National Science Foundation (Graduate Research Fellowship Program)

  • Stephanie Berger

Worldwide Cancer Research (15-0025)

  • Erinna F Lee
  • W Douglas Fairlie

Cancer Council Victoria (1057949)

  • Erinna F Lee
  • W Douglas Fairlie

Pew Charitable Trusts

  • Daniel-Adriano Silva

Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología

  • Daniel-Adriano Silva

National Health and Medical Research Council (1024620)

  • Erinna F Lee

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Yibing Shan, DE Shaw Research, United States

Version history

  1. Received: August 4, 2016
  2. Accepted: November 1, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 2, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: November 29, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: December 20, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Berger et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,182
    views
  • 1,085
    downloads
  • 65
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Stephanie Berger
  2. Erik Procko
  3. Daciana Margineantu
  4. Erinna F Lee
  5. Betty W Shen
  6. Alex Zelter
  7. Daniel-Adriano Silva
  8. Kusum Chawla
  9. Marco J Herold
  10. Jean-Marc Garnier
  11. Richard Johnson
  12. Michael J MacCoss
  13. Guillaume Lessene
  14. Trisha N Davis
  15. Patrick S Stayton
  16. Barry L Stoddard
  17. W Douglas Fairlie
  18. David M Hockenbery
  19. David Baker
(2016)
Computationally designed high specificity inhibitors delineate the roles of BCL2 family proteins in cancer
eLife 5:e20352.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.20352

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.20352

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    Fang Huang, Zhenwei Dai ... Yang Wang
    Research Article

    Aberrant alternative splicing is well-known to be closely associated with tumorigenesis of various cancers. However, the intricate mechanisms underlying breast cancer metastasis driven by deregulated splicing events remain largely unexplored. Here, we unveiled that RBM7 is decreased in lymph node and distant organ metastases of breast cancer as compared to primary lesions and low expression of RBM7 is correlated with the reduced disease-free survival of breast cancer patients. Breast cancer cells with RBM7 depletion exhibited an increased potential for lung metastasis compared to scramble control cells. The absence of RBM7 stimulated breast cancer cell migration, invasion, and angiogenesis. Mechanistically, RBM7 controlled the splicing switch of MFGE8, favoring the production of the predominant isoform of MFGE8, MFGE8-L. This resulted in the attenuation of STAT1 phosphorylation and alterations in cell adhesion molecules. MFGE8-L exerted an inhibitory effect on the migratory and invasive capability of breast cancer cells, while the truncated isoform MFGE8-S, which lack the second F5/8 type C domain had the opposite effect. In addition, RBM7 negatively regulates the NF-κB cascade and an NF-κB inhibitor could obstruct the increase in HUVEC tube formation caused by RBM7 silencing. Clinically, we noticed a positive correlation between RBM7 expression and MFGE8 exon7 inclusion in breast cancer tissues, providing new mechanistic insights for molecular-targeted therapy in combating breast cancer.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Nicholas J Mullen, Surendra K Shukla ... Pankaj K Singh
    Research Article

    Pyrimidine nucleotide biosynthesis is a druggable metabolic dependency of cancer cells, and chemotherapy agents targeting pyrimidine metabolism are the backbone of treatment for many cancers. Dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) is an essential enzyme in the de novo pyrimidine biosynthesis pathway that can be targeted by clinically approved inhibitors. However, despite robust preclinical anticancer efficacy, DHODH inhibitors have shown limited single-agent activity in phase 1 and 2 clinical trials. Therefore, novel combination therapy strategies are necessary to realize the potential of these drugs. To search for therapeutic vulnerabilities induced by DHODH inhibition, we examined gene expression changes in cancer cells treated with the potent and selective DHODH inhibitor brequinar (BQ). This revealed that BQ treatment causes upregulation of antigen presentation pathway genes and cell surface MHC class I expression. Mechanistic studies showed that this effect is (1) strictly dependent on pyrimidine nucleotide depletion, (2) independent of canonical antigen presentation pathway transcriptional regulators, and (3) mediated by RNA polymerase II elongation control by positive transcription elongation factor B (P-TEFb). Furthermore, BQ showed impressive single-agent efficacy in the immunocompetent B16F10 melanoma model, and combination treatment with BQ and dual immune checkpoint blockade (anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1) significantly prolonged mouse survival compared to either therapy alone. Our results have important implications for the clinical development of DHODH inhibitors and provide a rationale for combination therapy with BQ and immune checkpoint blockade.