An Unusual Protein–Protein Interaction through Coupled Unfolding and Binding

Aptides, a novel class of high‐affinity peptides, recognize diverse molecular targets with high affinity and specificity. The solution structure of the aptide APT specifically bound to fibronectin extradomain B (EDB), which represents an unusual protein–protein interaction that involves coupled unfolding and binding, is reported. APT binding is accompanied by unfolding of the C‐terminal β strand of EDB, thereby permitting APT to interact with the freshly exposed hydrophobic interior surfaces of EDB. The β‐hairpin scaffold of APT drives the interaction by a β‐strand displacement mechanism, such that an intramolecular β sheet is replaced by an intermolecular β sheet. The unfolding of EDB perturbs the tight domain association between EDB and FN8 of fibronectin, thus highlighting its potential use as a scaffold that switches between stretched and bent conformations.     

Combinatorial Synthesis and Multidimensional NMR Spectroscopy: An Approach to Understanding Protein–Ligand Interactions

Combinatorial chemistry is a laboratory emulation of natural recombination and selection processes. Strategies in this developing discipline involve the generation of diverse, molecular libraries through combinatorial synthesis and the selection of compounds that possess a desired property. Such approaches can facilitate the identification of ligands that bind to biological receptors, promoting our chemical understanding of cellular processes. This article illustrates that the coupling of combinatorial synthesis, multidimensional NMR spectroscopy, and biochemical methods has enhanced our understanding of a protein receptor used commonly in signal transduction, the Src Homology 3 (SH3) domain. This novel approach to studying molecular recognition has revealed a set of rules that govern SH3–ligand interactions, allowing models of receptor–ligand complexes to be constructed with only a knowledge of the polypeptide sequences. Combining combinatorial synthesis with structural methods provides a powerful new approach to understanding how proteins bind their ligands in general.     

Reversibly Triggered Protein–Ligand Assemblies in Giant Vesicles

External small‐molecule triggers were used to reversibly control dynamic protein–ligand interactions in giant vesicles. An alcohol dehydrogenase was employed to increase or decrease the interior pH upon conversion of two different small‐molecule substrates, thereby modulating the pH‐sensitive interaction between a Ni‐NTA ligand on the vesicle membrane and an oligohistidine‐tagged protein in the lumen. By alternating the small‐molecule substrates the interaction could be reversed.     

Visualizing an Ultra‐Weak Protein–Protein Interaction in Phosphorylation Signaling

Proteins interact with each other to fulfill their functions. The importance of weak protein–protein interactions has been increasingly recognized. However, owing to technical difficulties, ultra‐weak interactions remain to be characterized. Phosphorylation can take place via a K_D≈25 mM interaction between two bacterial enzymes. Using paramagnetic NMR spectroscopy and with the introduction of a novel Gd^III‐based probe, we determined the structure of the resulting complex to atomic resolution. The structure accounts for the mechanism of phosphoryl transfer between the two enzymes and demonstrates the physical basis for their ultra‐weak interaction. Further, molecular dynamics (MD) simulations suggest that the complex has a lifetime in the micro‐ to millisecond regimen. Hence such interaction is termed a fleeting interaction. From mathematical modeling, we propose that an ultra‐weak fleeting interaction enables rapid flux of phosphoryl signal, providing a high effective protein concentration.     

Structure‐Based Design of Inhibitors of Protein–Protein Interactions: Mimicking Peptide Binding Epitopes

Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) are involved at all levels of cellular organization, thus making the development of PPI inhibitors extremely valuable. The identification of selective inhibitors is challenging because of the shallow and extended nature of PPI interfaces. Inhibitors can be obtained by mimicking peptide binding epitopes in their bioactive conformation. For this purpose, several strategies have been evolved to enable a projection of side chain functionalities in analogy to peptide secondary structures, thereby yielding molecules that are generally referred to as peptidomimetics. Herein, we introduce a new classification of peptidomimetics (classes A–D) that enables a clear assignment of available approaches. Based on this classification, the Review summarizes strategies that have been applied for the structure‐based design of PPI inhibitors through stabilizing or mimicking turns, β‐sheets, and helices.     

Accelerating the Association of the Most Stable Protein–Ligand Complex by More than Two Orders of Magnitude

The complex between the bacterial type 1 pilus subunit FimG and the peptide corresponding to the N‐terminal extension (termed donor strand, Ds) of the partner subunit FimF (DsF) shows the strongest reported noncovalent molecular interaction, with a dissociation constant (K_D) of 1.5×10^?20 m . However, the complex only exhibits a slow association rate of 330 m ^?1 s^?1 that limits technical applications, such as its use in affinity purification. Herein, a structure‐based approach was used to design pairs of FimGt (a FimG variant lacking its own N‐terminal extension) and DsF variants with enhanced electrostatic surface complementarity. Association of the best mutant FimGt/DsF pairs was accelerated by more than two orders of magnitude, while the dissociation rates and 3D structures of the improved complexes remained essentially unperturbed. A K_D value of 8.8×10^?22 m was obtained for the best mutant complex, which is the lowest value reported to date for a protein/ligand complex.     

Stabilizer‐Guided Inhibition of Protein–Protein Interactions

The discovery of novel protein–protein interaction (PPI) modulators represents one of the great molecular challenges of the modern era. PPIs can be modulated by either inhibitor or stabilizer compounds, which target different though proximal regions of the protein interface. In principle, protein–stabilizer complexes can guide the design of PPI inhibitors (and vice versa). In the present work, we combine X‐ray crystallographic data from both stabilizer and inhibitor co‐crystal complexes of the adapter protein 14‐3‐3 to characterize, down to the atomic scale, inhibitors of the 14‐3‐3/Tau PPI, a potential drug target to treat Alzheimer’s disease. The most potent compound notably inhibited the binding of phosphorylated full‐length Tau to 14‐3‐3 according to NMR spectroscopy studies. Our work sets a precedent for the rational design of PPI inhibitors guided by PPI stabilizer–protein complexes while potentially enabling access to new synthetically tractable stabilizers of 14‐3‐3 and other PPIs.     

Direct Identification of Protein–Protein Interactions by Single‐Molecule Force Spectroscopy

Single‐molecule force spectroscopy based on atomic force microscopy (AFM‐SMFS) has allowed the measurement of the intermolecular forces involved in protein‐protein interactions at the molecular level. While intramolecular interactions are routinely identified directly by the use of polyprotein fingerprinting, there is a lack of a general method to directly identify single‐molecule intermolecular unbinding events. Here, we have developed an internally controlled strategy to measure protein–protein interactions by AFM‐SMFS that allows the direct identification of dissociation force peaks while ensuring single‐molecule conditions. Single‐molecule identification is assured by polyprotein fingerprinting while the intermolecular interaction is reported by a characteristic increase in contour length released after bond rupture. The latter is due to the exposure to force of a third protein that covalently connects the interacting pair. We demonstrate this strategy with a cohesin–dockerin interaction.     

Selective and Potent Proteomimetic Inhibitors of Intracellular Protein–Protein Interactions

Inhibition of protein–protein interactions (PPIs) represents a major challenge in chemical biology and drug discovery. α‐Helix mediated PPIs may be amenable to modulation using generic chemotypes, termed “proteomimetics”, which can be assembled in a modular manner to reproduce the vectoral presentation of key side chains found on a helical motif from one partner within the PPI. In this work, it is demonstrated that by using a library of N‐alkylated aromatic oligoamide helix mimetics, potent helix mimetics which reproduce their biophysical binding selectivity in a cellular context can be identified.     

Single‐Walled Carbon Nanotubes as Scaffolds to Concentrate DNA for the Study of DNA–Protein Interactions

Genomic DNA in bacteria exists in a condensed state, which exhibits different biochemical and biophysical properties from a dilute solution. DNA was concentrated on streptavidin‐covered single‐walled carbon nanotubes (Strep ? SWNTs) through biotin–streptavidin interactions. We reasoned that confining DNA within a defined space through mechanical constraints, rather than by manipulating buffer conditions, would more closely resemble physiological conditions. By ensuring a high streptavidin loading on SWNTs of about 1 streptavidin tetramer per 4 nm of SWNT, we were able to achieve dense DNA binding. DNA is bound to Strep ? SWNTs at a tunable density and up to as high as 0.5 mg mL^?1 in solution and 29 mg mL^?1 on a 2D surface. This platform allows us to observe the aggregation behavior of DNA at high concentrations and the counteracting effects of HU protein (a histone‐like protein from Escherichia coli strain U93) on the DNA aggregates. This provides an in vitro model for studying DNA–DNA and DNA–protein interactions at a high DNA concentration.     

Probing Functional Heteromeric Chemokine Protein–Protein Interactions through Conformation‐Assisted Oxime Ligation

Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) govern most processes in living cells. Current drug development strategies are aimed at disrupting or stabilizing PPIs, which require a thorough understanding of PPI mechanisms. Examples of such PPIs are heteromeric chemokine interactions that are potentially involved in pathological disorders such as cancer, atherosclerosis, and HIV. It remains unclear whether this functional modulation is mediated by heterodimer formation or by the additive effects of mixed chemokines on their respective receptors. To address this issue, we report the synthesis of a covalent RANTES‐PF4 heterodimer (termed OPRAH) by total chemical synthesis and oxime ligation, with an acceleration of the final ligation step driven by PPIs between RANTES and PF4. Compared to mixed separate chemokines, OPRAH exhibited increased biological activity, thus providing evidence that physical formation of the heterodimer indeed mediates enhanced function.     

A Small‐Molecule Protein–Protein Interaction Inhibitor of PARP1 That Targets Its BRCT Domain

Poly(ADP‐ribose)polymerase‐1 (PARP1) is a BRCT‐containing enzyme (BRCT=BRCA1 C‐terminus) mainly involved in DNA repair and damage response and a validated target for cancer treatment. Small‐molecule inhibitors that target the PARP1 catalytic domain have been actively pursued as anticancer drugs, but are potentially problematic owing to a lack of selectivity. Compounds that are capable of disrupting protein–protein interactions of PARP1 provide an alternative by inhibiting its activities with improved selectivity profiles. Herein, by establishing a high‐throughput microplate‐based assay suitable for screening potential PPI inhibitors of the PARP1 BRCT domain, we have discovered that (±)‐gossypol, a natural product with a number of known biological activities, possesses novel PARP1 inhibitory activity both in vitro and in cancer cells and presumably acts through disruption of protein–protein interactions. As the first known cell‐permeable small‐molecule PPI inhibitor of PAPR1, we further established that (?)‐gossypol was likely the causative agent of PARP1 inhibition by promoting the formation of a 1:2 compound/PARP1 complex by reversible formation of a covalent imine linkage.