Identification of a novel toxicophore in anti-cancer chemotherapeutics that targets mitochondrial respiratory complex I

  1. Zoe A Stephenson
  2. Robert F Harvey
  3. Kenneth R Pryde
  4. Sarah Mistry
  5. Rachel E Hardy
  6. Riccardo Serreli
  7. Injae Chung
  8. Timothy EH Allen
  9. Mark Stoneley
  10. Marion MacFarlane
  11. Peter M Fischer
  12. Judy Hirst  Is a corresponding author
  13. Barrie Kellam  Is a corresponding author
  14. Anne E Willis  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  2. University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
  3. Medical Research Council, United Kingdom

Abstract

Disruption of mitochondrial function selectively targets tumour cells that are dependent on oxidative phosphorylation. However, due to their high energy demands, cardiac cells are disproportionately targeted by mitochondrial toxins resulting in a loss of cardiac function. An analysis of the effects of mubritinib on cardiac cells showed that this drug did not inhibit HER2 as reported, but directly inhibits mitochondrial respiratory complex I, reducing cardiac-cell beat rate, with prolonged exposure resulting in cell death. We used a library of chemical variants of mubritinib and showed that modifying the 1H-1,2,3-triazole altered complex I inhibition, identifying the heterocyclic 1,3-nitrogen motif as the toxicophore. The same toxicophore is present in a second anti-cancer therapeutic carboxyamidotriazole (CAI) and we demonstrate that CAI also functions through complex I inhibition, mediated by the toxicophore. Complex I inhibition is directly linked to anti-cancer cell activity, with toxicophore modification ablating the desired effects of these compounds on cancer cell proliferation and apoptosis.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Zoe A Stephenson

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Robert F Harvey

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kenneth R Pryde

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Sarah Mistry

    School of Pharmacy, Biodiscovery Institute, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rachel E Hardy

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Riccardo Serreli

    MRC Mitochondrial Biology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Injae Chung

    MRC Mitochondrial Biology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2902-4677
  8. Timothy EH Allen

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Mark Stoneley

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Marion MacFarlane

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Peter M Fischer

    Division of Biomolecular Science and Medicinal Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Judy Hirst

    Mitochondrial Biology Unit, Medical Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    jh@mrc-mbu.cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Barrie Kellam

    School of Pharmacy, Biodiscovery Institute, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    barrie.kellam@nottingham.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0030-9908
  14. Anne E Willis

    MRC Toxicology Unit, University of Cambridge, Leicester, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    aew80@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1470-8531

Funding

Medical Research Council (MC_UU_000 /RG94521)

  • Zoe A Stephenson
  • Robert F Harvey
  • Kenneth Pryde
  • Anne E Willis

Medical Research Council (MC_U105663141 and MC_UU_00015/2)

  • Judy Hirst

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

Copyright

© 2020, Stephenson 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

  • 2,882
    views
  • 444
    downloads
  • 18
    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. Zoe A Stephenson
  2. Robert F Harvey
  3. Kenneth R Pryde
  4. Sarah Mistry
  5. Rachel E Hardy
  6. Riccardo Serreli
  7. Injae Chung
  8. Timothy EH Allen
  9. Mark Stoneley
  10. Marion MacFarlane
  11. Peter M Fischer
  12. Judy Hirst
  13. Barrie Kellam
  14. Anne E Willis
(2020)
Identification of a novel toxicophore in anti-cancer chemotherapeutics that targets mitochondrial respiratory complex I
eLife 9:e55845.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55845

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55845

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Shraddha KC, Kenny H Nguyen ... Thomas C Boothby
    Research Article

    The conformational ensemble and function of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are sensitive to their solution environment. The inherent malleability of disordered proteins, combined with the exposure of their residues, accounts for this sensitivity. One context in which IDPs play important roles that are concomitant with massive changes to the intracellular environment is during desiccation (extreme drying). The ability of organisms to survive desiccation has long been linked to the accumulation of high levels of cosolutes such as trehalose or sucrose as well as the enrichment of IDPs, such as late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) proteins or cytoplasmic abundant heat-soluble (CAHS) proteins. Despite knowing that IDPs play important roles and are co-enriched alongside endogenous, species-specific cosolutes during desiccation, little is known mechanistically about how IDP-cosolute interactions influence desiccation tolerance. Here, we test the notion that the protective function of desiccation-related IDPs is enhanced through conformational changes induced by endogenous cosolutes. We find that desiccation-related IDPs derived from four different organisms spanning two LEA protein families and the CAHS protein family synergize best with endogenous cosolutes during drying to promote desiccation protection. Yet the structural parameters of protective IDPs do not correlate with synergy for either CAHS or LEA proteins. We further demonstrate that for CAHS, but not LEA proteins, synergy is related to self-assembly and the formation of a gel. Our results suggest that functional synergy between IDPs and endogenous cosolutes is a convergent desiccation protection strategy seen among different IDP families and organisms, yet the mechanisms underlying this synergy differ between IDP families.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Alejandro J Brenes, Eva Griesser ... Angus I Lamond
    Research Article

    Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) have great potential to be used as alternatives to embryonic stem cells (hESCs) in regenerative medicine and disease modelling. In this study, we characterise the proteomes of multiple hiPSC and hESC lines derived from independent donors and find that while they express a near-identical set of proteins, they show consistent quantitative differences in the abundance of a subset of proteins. hiPSCs have increased total protein content, while maintaining a comparable cell cycle profile to hESCs, with increased abundance of cytoplasmic and mitochondrial proteins required to sustain high growth rates, including nutrient transporters and metabolic proteins. Prominent changes detected in proteins involved in mitochondrial metabolism correlated with enhanced mitochondrial potential, shown using high-resolution respirometry. hiPSCs also produced higher levels of secreted proteins, including growth factors and proteins involved in the inhibition of the immune system. The data indicate that reprogramming of fibroblasts to hiPSCs produces important differences in cytoplasmic and mitochondrial proteins compared to hESCs, with consequences affecting growth and metabolism. This study improves our understanding of the molecular differences between hiPSCs and hESCs, with implications for potential risks and benefits for their use in future disease modelling and therapeutic applications.