← 专区目录
目录 · 跳到任一小节
结构生物学 · 庞露苹专区 · 论文精读 03/06 · 全文精译(抗结核靶点 · 双底物连接酶)

半胱氨酰磺酰胺卡住了 MshC:第一个全长结构,和一道没跨过去的门

Pang L#、Lenders S#、Osipov EM、Weeks SD、Rozenski J、Piller T、Cappoen D、Strelkov SV、Van Aerschot A(# 同等贡献,Pang L 为共同第一作者)· International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2022;23(23):15095 | 英文原题 Structural Basis of Cysteine Ligase MshC Inhibition by Cysteinyl-Sulfonamides
下划线 = 中文容易“变味”或丢信息的词句:红线带编号 = 15 条注释卡(悬停看、点击跳转)。核心问题:化合物在试管里确实抱住了靶点,为什么进了细菌什么也没发生?这一页值得读的地方,不是结构有多漂亮,而是作者怎么把这个“没发生”拆成两个可以继续做的实验问题。英文原文附于文末

作者:Luping Pang#、Stijn Lenders#、Evgenii M Osipov、Stephen D Weeks、Jef Rozenski、Tatiana Piller、Davie Cappoen、Sergei V Strelkov、Arthur Van Aerschot(# 表示同等贡献)
出处:International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2022;23(23):15095(MDPI,开放获取)
DOI:10.3390/ijms232315095 PMID:36499418 PDB:8HFM(apo)、8HFN(7b 复合物)、8HFO(7d 复合物)
基金:比利时 FWO(G0A4616N、G066619N)、KU Leuven 研究基金(3M14022)、郑州大学研究基金 32213231(L. P.)

译自英文原题:Structural Basis of Cysteine Ligase MshC Inhibition by Cysteinyl-Sulfonamides。全文按节精译,表格数据照录;图注按原文译出,不引图片。

摘要(全译)

分枝杆菌硫醇(mycothiol,MSH)是结核分枝杆菌(Mycobacterium tuberculosis,Mtb)细胞内主要的硫醇,在 Mtb 对多种抗生素与氧化应激的抗性中起核心作用。MshC 催化 ATP 依赖的反应:把 1-O-(2-氨基-2-脱氧-α-D-吡喃葡萄糖基)-D-肌醇(GlcN-Ins)与 L-半胱氨酸(L-Cys)连接起来,生成 L-Cys-GlcN-Ins,这是 MSH 生物合成的倒数第二步。抑制 MshC 对 Mtb 是致死的。本研究合成了五个新的半胱氨酰磺酰胺,并用热迁移实验评估它们与 MshC 的结合亲和力。其中两个以 219 与 231 µM 的 EC50 结合靶点。这两个化合物与全长 MshC 的共晶结构显示,它们结合在 MshC 的催化位点,并相对于 apo 形式诱导了催化位点的剧烈构象变化。特别是,我们观察到了 KMSKS 环的闭合;而已发表的半胱氨酰-氨磺酰腺苷结合结构中没有检测到这一闭合,后者很可能源于胰蛋白酶处理。尽管确证了与 MshC 的结合,这些化合物并未抑制 Mtb 培养物的生长,原因可能是缺乏足够的细胞摄取。总体而言,这些新的半胱氨酰磺酰胺类 MshC 抑制剂,以及新报道的全长 apo 与配体结合 MshC 结构,为进一步开发靶向 MshC 的新型抗结核药物提供了有希望的起点。

关键词:MshC;双底物竞争性抑制剂;蛋白-配体共晶结构;构效关系;酶抑制;结核分枝杆菌

引言:结核病与分枝杆菌的“谷胱甘肽替代品” MSH

结核病(TB)由革兰阳性病原体结核分枝杆菌(Mtb)引起,已经存在了几个世纪,至今仍是全球公共卫生的重大威胁。2018 年,世界卫生组织(WHO)统计到 150 万例 TB 死亡与 700 万例新发病例。随着耐多药(MDR)与广泛耐药(XDR)Mtb 菌株的出现和传播,现有抗结核化疗的效率被持续侵蚀,对新药的需求既迫切又持续。因此,抑制 Mtb 重要细胞过程(尤其是蛋白质合成与抗生素解毒过程)中的酶,被认为是阻止 TB 并发症进一步恶化的关键。

与许多放线菌一样,Mtb 会合成 mycothiol(MSH)。它是真核生物和大多数真细菌中谷胱甘肽(GSH)的功能等价物,也是 Mtb 体内占主导地位的低分子量硫醇,负责抵御氧化应激、亲电性毒素与抗生素。这句话里藏着一个药物化学的推论:如果 MSH 是 Mtb 的“抗氧化总闸”,那么 MSH 合成与代谢通路上的酶,就有资格被当作研发选择性抗分枝杆菌药物的靶点。

MSH 通过一系列复杂的酶催化反应合成(原文图 1)。顺序是这样的:MSH 糖基转移酶(MshA)把 1L-肌醇-1-磷酸(Ins-P)接到 N-乙酰葡糖胺(GlcNAc)上;MSH 磷酸酶(MshA2)产出 GlcNAc-Ins;MSH 脱乙酰酶(MshB)生成 GlcN-Ins;然后 MshC 把 L-Cys 连到 GlcN-Ins 上;最后由 MSH 合成酶(MshD)把 L-Cys-GlcN-Ins 乙酰化,得到终产物 MSH。MSH 自氧化会形成 MSSM(二硫化物),再由 MSH 二硫化物还原酶(Mtr)还原回 MSH。

图 1 MSH 的生物合成与再生通路。MshA 把 Ins-P 与 GlcNAc 连接;MshA2 生成 GlcNAc-Ins;MshB 脱乙酰生成 GlcN-Ins;MshC 把 L-Cys 连到 GlcN-Ins 上;MshD 乙酰化 L-Cys-GlcN-Ins 得到 MSH。MSH 自氧化形成 MSSM,由 Mtr 还原。

这条通路里,MshC 是倒数第二个酶,催化半胱氨酸与 GlcN-Ins 中间体的 ATP 依赖缩合。它被证明对 Mtb 维持氧化还原平衡与代谢稳态是必需的;mshC 基因的破坏或高密度转座子突变,会让 Mtb 在体外无法生长。翻译成人话:这个酶不是“可选项”,细菌没有它就活不了。这正是靶点该有的样子。

理论上,靶向 MshC 的化合物只会打到 Mtb 特有的过程,在宿主或宿主菌群里命中脱靶的机会有限,因此不太容易产生不想要的毒性。但作者随即指出一个例外,而且这个例外反过来成了本文的机会:宿主的半胱氨酰-tRNA 合成酶(Hs-CysRS)——以及更有利的是 Mtb-CysRS——整体折叠与 MshC 催化结构域高度相似。原因是两个酶在做同一件事的第一步:都先形成半胱氨酰-腺苷酸(Cys-AMP)中间体,然后才把活化的半胱氨酸交给不同的受体(MshC 交给 GlcN-Ins,CysRS 交给 tRNACys)。

换句话说,MshC 的催化核心长得像一个“丢了 tRNA 的 CysRS”。这句话既是风险(抑制剂可能同时打中宿主的 CysRS),也是设计依据(CysRS 的抑制剂骨架可以拿来改)。到本文发表时,还没有针对 MshC 的特异性药物。化合物库筛选曾得到 NTF1836 与地喹氯铵(dequalinium chloride),两者都表现出中等的体外 MshC 抑制活性与 Mtb 生长抑制,但都被证明对哺乳动物细胞有细胞毒性,因此没有继续推进。想沿用这些骨架、或者找新的化学实体,还卡在同一个地方:MshC 的全长分子结构一直缺着。

结构上,MshC 与 class I 氨酰-tRNA 合成酶(aaRS)相似,尤其像 CysRS。aaRS 以 ATP 依赖的方式把氨基酸连接到对应的 tRNA 上,按催化核心的两种折叠分成两类:class I 共享 Rossmann 折叠(属 HUP 超家族),带两个保守的签名序列 motif——HIGH 与 KMSKS;class II 的催化域则是六股 β 折叠。aaRS 家族被当作抗生素靶点追了几十年。其中,氨酰-氨磺酰腺苷(aaSAs)是 aaRS 众所周知的高亲和力配体,它们有效模拟了天然的氨酰-腺苷酸(aa-AMP)中间体:不可水解的氨磺酰基模拟 aa-AMP 上磷酸基团的结合与功能。但这类化合物缺乏物种选择性,又因为极性太强而没有抗菌活性。

近年的转折来自另外两个酶。Trius 公司发现了靶向 ThrRS 的间位取代芳香磺酰胺;牛津药物设计(Oxford Drug Design)靶向 LeuRS 也取得类似成功。这两类化合物都表现出很强的酶抑制活性、抗菌活性,以及物种选择性。作者注意到:这些芳香磺酰胺其实是在模拟氨磺酰腺苷(SA)的一部分——保留了与酶结合的关键药效团,同时丢掉了让它极性过高、进不了细菌的那部分。

于是本文的设计逻辑就出来了:既然 MshC 的催化口袋与 class I CysRS 相似,那就照这两个成功案例的骨架,做一系列半胱氨酰磺酰胺——名字里的 “cysteinyl” 对应 CysRS/MshC 的底物半胱氨酸,“sulfonamide” 对应芳香磺酰胺那片模拟磷酸/腺苷区域的芳香环。设计时甚至留了一个“双靶点”的可能:同一批分子也许能同时打 CysRS 与 MshC。接下来用热迁移实验确认有两个化合物能结合 MshC,再解出它们与全长 MshC 的共晶结构。作者对本文的定位说得很清楚:这项工作阐明这类磺酰胺骨架如何与一个“类 class I aaRS”的酶作用,并为后续设计优化靶向这类酶的 anti-TB 药物提供起点。

你读到这里可以先停一下,注意作者行文的次序:先给靶点的必要性(基因致死),再给靶点的可成药性(同类酶已有成功骨架),最后给本文要补的缺口(没有全长结构)。这是结构导向药物设计论文最标准的三段式开场,值得直接抄进你自己的开题报告。

方法:合成 + 热迁移 + 共晶

这篇的实验部分不长,但五脏俱全,正好可以当作“从化学到结构”的模板来看。它由四条互相咬合的线组成:化学合成、结合力测定、晶体学、全菌活性。下面按这四条线拆开。

① 化学合成:三步,一个骨架,五个取代基。从 3-溴苯磺酰胺(化合物 3)出发,先做 Suzuki 反应,与五种芳基硼酸(4a–e)偶联,得到磺酰胺 5a–e,产率中等。然后把 5a–e 与带保护的 L-半胱氨酸酰化,再去保护,得到五个目标半胱氨酰磺酰胺 7a–e。合成路线本身不复杂,真正的设计信息藏在“5a–e 用了哪五种芳基硼酸”里——这五种取代基就是本文的构效关系变量。

② 结合力测定:热迁移实验(TSA)。作者没有用 Mtb 的 MshC,而是用了耻垢分枝杆菌(M. smegmatis)的 Ms-MshC——它是 Mtb-MshC 的同源物,整体序列一致性 79%、相似性 88%;只看负责第一步(形成半胱氨酰-腺苷酸)的活性位点,一致性 93%、相似性 97%。因此,在 Ms-MshC 上测到的结合亲和力,被认为可以反映这些化合物与 Mtb-MshC 的结合潜力;而且 Ms-MshC 更容易拿到,对后续的结构研究有利。

原理一句话:化合物结合通常会让蛋白更稳定,变性过程中的熔解温度(Tm)随之升高;在同一个骨架系列里,ΔTm 越大的化合物,通常结合越强。实验体系是 20 µL:0.2 mg/mL 蛋白、1× 热迁移染料、50 mM HEPES pH 7.0、150 mM KCl、10%(v/v)乙二醇,加上不同浓度的化合物,在 96 孔 PCR 板里从 4 °C 以 0.05 °C/s 升到 95 °C,用 Boltzmann 模型拟合熔解曲线算 Tm。

③ 晶体学。apo 晶体用悬滴气相扩散法在 20 °C 长出来:10 mg/mL 蛋白(10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7、100 mM NaCl、2.5 mM β-巯基乙醇)与含 25 mM CaCl2、25 mM MgCl2、5–8%(w/v)PEG8000、Morpheus buffer system 2 pH 7.1、20%(v/v)乙二醇的池液 1:1 混合。复合物则把蛋白与 1 mM 化合物、1 mM TCEP 在冰上孵育 1 小时,离心后做坐滴筛选,晶体出现在 Morpheus 筛选的 PEG550MME 20%(v/v)、PEG20000 10%(w/v)、60 mM 二价离子、buffer system 3 pH 8.5 条件下。衍射数据在 100 K 下于 ESRF 的 ID23-1 与 Soleil 的 Proxima I 收集,用 autoPROC 处理,以去掉配体的 Ms-MshC 模型(PDB 3C8Z)做分子置换(Phaser),再用 COOT 手动建模与 Phenix.refine 精修交替进行。

④ 全菌活性。测试菌株包括 Mtb H37Ra 实验室株、它的 Δmtr::Hyg 衍生株(在 Rv2855 基因——编码 MSH 二硫化物还原酶 Mtr——上带缺失),以及含 PSMT-1 质粒的脓肿分枝杆菌(M. abscessus,Mab)。为什么专门要一个 Δmtr 株?因为 Mtr 是把氧化型 mycothione 还原回 MSH 的关键酶,删掉它,细菌的还原性胞内环境就更脆弱——这是作者给化合物准备的一个“更敏感的对照组”:如果连这个更脆弱的菌都打不动,那问题就不在靶点,而在化合物本身。化合物从 100 µM 起做三分之一倍比稀释,最高 1%(v/v)DMSO,37 °C 培养 7 天(Mtb)或 3 天(Mab),以发光法(BacTiter-Glo,读数对应 ATP 量)判断存活,莫西沙星(moxifloxacin)作阳性对照。

这四条线的顺序值得记一下:先化学(能不能做出来)→ 再结合(能不能抱上)→ 再结构(抱在哪儿、怎么抱)→ 最后全菌(抱上了有没有用)。很多论文只做到第二步就宣称“发现了抑制剂”,这篇做到了第四步,并且如实报告第四步是失败的。

结果:五个半胱氨酰磺酰胺的结合与结构

合成与初步设计:变量只有“C3 上挂什么”

五个化合物共用同一个骨架:苯磺酰胺的间位(C3)挂一个芳环,磺酰胺的氮上接一个 L-半胱氨酸。变的就是 C3 那个芳环——7a 是苯基(联苯),7b 是 6-甲氧基吡啶-3-基,7c 是吡啶-3-基,7d 是噻吩-2-基,7e 是带三氟甲基的联苯。这个设计其实很“老实”:先把已知能结合 class I aaRS 的骨架搬过来,再用五个取代基探一探口袋的偏好。五个化合物,五组数据,没有一个是“优化出来的”,全是第一轮探路——你读的时候不要把这一节当成“先导化合物优化”,它只是“能不能结合”的可行性测试。

热迁移:先解决两个干扰项,再谈结合

TSA 的第一个坑是溶剂。化合物要先溶在有机溶剂里,而溶剂本身会让蛋白不稳定。作者的做法是分别测 10%(v/v)DMSO 与 10%(v/v)乙二醇(EDO)对 Ms-MshC 的影响:DMSO 让 Tm 掉了 3.38 °C,EDO 只掉 0.48 °C。所以后面全部改用 EDO,并且 ΔTm 一律以“含 10% EDO 的蛋白”为基准来算,而不是以纯缓冲液为基准。这一步看起来只是方法学细节,实际上是整篇文章数据可信度的地基:如果不做溶剂对照,后面 ±0.2 °C 的差异根本没法解释。

第二个坑是化合物自己。这批分子带一个半胱氨酰基,巯基很容易氧化成二硫键,二聚体大概塞不进 MshC 的活性中心——这解释了为什么第一次测的时候,除了 7d 有 +0.99 °C 的微弱升高,其余四个几乎一动不动。于是作者在体系里加了 1 mM 的还原剂 TCEP,先把二硫键还原掉再测。对照组显示 TCEP 本身不影响蛋白的热稳定性。重测之后,7b 与 7d 的表现变了:100 µM 时 ΔTm 分别为 +1.24 与 +1.10 °C,1 mM 时为 +3.08 与 +3.75 °C。

顺带把天然底物的数据也读了,因为它是全篇的“标尺”。单独的 L-Cys 在 10 mM 时才让 Tm 升 3.09 °C,单独的 ATP 在 10 mM 时升 1.35 °C,两者在 1 mM 时几乎没影响。但把 L-Cys 与 ATP 同时加进去(各 100 µM 或 1 mM,另加 5 mM MgCl2),ΔTm 分别是 +3.76 与 +8.08 °C。作者的解释是:酶在体系里现场催化生成了 Cys-AMP 中间体,而中间体与酶的结合比两个底物各自结合要强得多。这个实验设计很值得学——它没有直接买 Cys-AMP,而是让酶自己造出来,用“结合变强”反证“反应发生了”。

化合物C3 上的取代基ΔTm(1 mM,含 1 mM TCEP)表观 Ki(µM)
7a苯基(联苯)−0.45 °C未测
7b6-甲氧基吡啶-3-基+3.08 °C219.29 ± 1.27
7c吡啶-3-基+0.59 °C未测
7d噻吩-2-基+3.75 °C230.60 ± 2.16
7e4′-三氟甲基联苯+0.76 °C未测
L-Cys + ATP(原位生成 Cys-AMP)—+8.08 °C(各 1 mM,5 mM MgCl2)106.64 ± 1.34

表 1 五个半胱氨酰磺酰胺与 Ms-MshC 的热稳定性数据(据原文表 1 整理)。ΔTm 以含 10% EDO 的 Ms-MshC 为基准;表观 Ki 由稀释系列拟合得到。

构效关系读起来一句话:把苯基换成杂环,结合变好;杂环上再加一个邻位甲氧基,结合更好。7b 与 7c 都是吡啶,但 7b 的吡啶多一个邻位甲氧基,结合从“几乎不动”变成“能测出 Ki”。作者据此推测吡啶环的邻位修饰对这个口袋更合适。不过说句实话:五个化合物、两个有信号、Ki 都在 200 µM 量级,这只能叫“找到两个弱的起始点”,离“构效关系”这个词的完整含义还差得远。构效关系(SAR)严格来说需要一组同系物上的系统性趋势与定量模型,本文给出的是一张五点探路表。

结构:全长 apo,两个复合物,一个环终于闭上了

先把历史包袱说清楚。此前唯一的结构,是 Ms-MshC 与半胱氨酰腺苷酸类似物 CSA(5′-O-[N-(L-半胱氨酰)-氨磺酰]腺苷)的复合物。那份工作在结晶前用胰蛋白酶处理过蛋白,而结果是:结构里缺了 KMSKS 环——这个环正常就位于底物结合位点附近。在 CysRS 里,KMSKS motif 负责结合并定位 L 形的 tRNA 分子,也参与氨基酸活化;作者推测 MshC 里这个同源环参与前半程腺苷酸中间体的形成,可能对后半程 GlcN-Ins 的结合也重要。所以,要理解这个酶怎么工作、抑制剂怎么结合,就必须拿到全长结构。这就是本文结构工作的动机:不是“再解一个结构”,而是“补上被蛋白酶切掉的那一段”。

本文解出三个结构:全长 apo 形式 2.4 Å(PDB 8HFM,空间群 P41212);与 7b 的复合物 1.98 Å(8HFN,P61);与 7d 的复合物 2.77 Å(8HFO,P61)。已发表的 CSA 复合物(3C8Z)不对称单元里有两个分子,而本文三个结构每个不对称单元只有一个分子——尽管它们来自两种不同的空间群。

结构PDB分辨率(Å)空间群Rwork / Rfree不对称单元分子数
Ms-MshC apo8HFM2.41P412120.207 / 0.2381
Ms-MshC–7b8HFN1.98P610.199 / 0.2231
Ms-MshC–7d8HFO2.77P610.213 / 0.2581
Ms-MshC–CSA(已发表,经胰蛋白酶处理)3C8Z———2

表 2 本文三个晶体结构与已发表 CSA 复合物的关键参数(据原文表 2 整理;3C8Z 部分原文未在表内重复给出)。

apo 结构与 CSA 复合物放在一起看,最刺眼的两处差异是互补的:本文的 apo 结构里,含 P88–R95 的 α 螺旋是无序的,而在 CSA 结合的结构里它是完整有序的;反过来,本文第一次看到了完整的 KMSKS 环。两相比较,CSA 结合会把 T46–H52 环向活性位点方向推,同时 Y48 的侧链向内翻进结合口袋。这个协同变化的意义是:在 apo 结构里,Y48 的侧链和 P88–R95 螺旋的有序定位会打架,所以 CSA 一结合,Y48 必须先让位,螺旋才能坐稳。结构生物学里这种“你动我才动”的耦合,比单个残基的接触更能说明构象选择。

图 5 全长与经蛋白酶切的 MshC 结构比较。(A)全长 MshC 的无配体结构;(B)apo 形式 MshC 催化域的放大图;(C)与 CSA 复合的 MshC 催化域放大图(3C8Z);(D)apo 形式(绿)与 CSA 结合形式(青)的结构叠合。红色与橙色区域分别代表 apo 结构中的 KMSKS 环与已发表 CSA 结合结构中的 P88–R95 螺旋。

两个复合物本身几乎一模一样:叠合后主链 RMSD 只有 0.33 Å(用 370 个 Cα 原子算),omit 电子密度图都明确显示化合物结合在活性位点,方式非常相似。所以作者只对分辨率更高、结合也略好的 7b 复合物做详细分析——这是个务实的选择,也是结构论文里常见的做法:先证明两个配体结合模式一致,再把叙述集中在一套高分辨率数据上。

7b 怎么抱上去的?拆成四块看:

① 半胱氨酰部分。7b 的半胱氨酰基与 CSA 的同一个化学基团完全叠合。配体的巯基与 C43、C231、H256 的侧链共同配位辅因子 Zn2+。Zn2+ 被认为是酶从氨基酸池里识别底物 L-Cys 的主要机制——这一点在 MshC 的同源物 CysRS 里也有报道。半胱氨酰基的 α-氨基与 T46、T83 侧链的羟基氧以及 G44 的主链氧形成三个氢键,作者认为这对正确选择该氨基酸的手性很重要。

② 后口袋。结合 CSA 或含半胱氨酰基的类似物,都会诱导 44GITPY48 环向内运动,导致 Y48 侧链向内翻转。作者的解释是:这一步可能防止半胱氨酰-腺苷酸中间体被水解——先把产物护住,再等第二个底物进来。这是一个很漂亮的机制猜想,虽然本文没有直接的功能实验证明它。

③ 磺酰胺基。7b 的磺酰胺基与 CSA 的氨磺酰基位置重叠,它诱导 289KMSKS293 环向内运动,最大 Cα 位移达 4 Å。这一闭合带来两个新相互作用:磺酰胺氧与 K289 的氨基形成盐桥;磺酰胺氧与 HIGH motif 中 H55 的 Nε 形成氢键。也就是说,这个环是被“拉”下来的,而拉它的正是那片模拟磷酸/腺苷区域的化学基团。

这里出现了全文最有趣的一步推理:既然两个结构里磺酰胺与氨磺酰基完全叠合,那么 CSA 的氨磺酰基很可能也会诱导类似的 KMSKS 环构象变化;但由于结晶前对蛋白做了有限的胰蛋白酶处理,这个环很可能被切掉了——这大概就是为什么在已发表的 CSA 复合物里看不到 KMSKS 环。换句话说,旧结构缺的那一段,不是因为它本来无序,而是因为样品制备时被剪掉了。

④ 芳环部分。7b 的苯基占据 MshC 的核糖结合口袋,只形成疏水相互作用,没有氢键。取代的吡啶部分叠合在 CSA 的腺嘌呤位置,落在 ATP 结合腔里。但吡啶平面与 CSA 结构中 M282 的位置有立体冲突(M282 在 CSA 结构里与腺嘌呤侧链形成疏水作用)。7b 结合时,G281–M282 与 M282–I283 的主链肽平面因此翻转:一方面避开了冲突、容纳吡啶,另一方面在吡啶环氮原子与 M282 主链 NH 之间生出一个氢键,提高了这个配体的结合亲和力。而 7d 的噻吩环没有形成这样的氢键,所以预期结合更弱——这与 TSA 的结果一致(7d 的 Ki 231 µM,略弱于 7b 的 219 µM)。

图 6 磺酰胺类化合物与 Ms-MshC 的结合模式。(A)Phenix.Polder 计算的 7b 与 7d 在催化位点的 omit 电子密度图(3.5 σ);(B)基于蛋白主链叠合的 7b 与 7d 叠合;(C)CSA 结合(青)与 7b 结合(灰)的 MshC 结构叠合;(D)apo(绿)与 7b 复合物(灰)的结构叠合;氢键以黑色虚线表示,KMSKS 环(约 4 Å)的位移以两结构中 K289 的 Cα 位置差来度量。

作者最后把这一步的结论收在一句话上:这类磺酰胺化合物有可能替代选择性差的含氨磺酰基类似物 CSA,成为一个新的 Ms-MshC 抑制剂类别。注意措辞——是“有可能替代骨架”,不是“找到了药”。

全菌:什么都没发生

化合物随后进了全菌筛选。测试面板是 Mtb H37Ra、它的 Δmtr::Hyg 衍生株(Mtr 缺失,还原环境更脆弱),以及含 PSMT-1 的脓肿分枝杆菌。结果是:发光法读数显示,直到 100 µM 都没有任何活性。换成 pIC50 表示,五个化合物在三个菌株上全部 < 3.9;阳性对照莫西沙星分别是 8.1(Mtb 野生型)、6.3(Δmtr 株)、5.5(Mab)。

化合物Mtb 野生型(pIC50)Mtb Δmtr::Hyg(pIC50)M. abscessus 野生型(pIC50)
7a< 3.9< 3.9< 3.9
7b< 3.9< 3.9< 3.9
7c< 3.9< 3.9< 3.9
7d< 3.9< 3.9< 3.9
7e< 3.9< 3.9< 3.9
莫西沙星(阳性对照)8.16.35.5

表 3 受试化合物对 Mtb 与 M. abscessus 的活性(据原文表 3 整理)。数值为 pIC50,测试上限 100 µM;< 3.9 即在该浓度下无可测活性。

作者给了两个解释。第一个是化合物的细胞药代/药效性质不佳——说白了就是:这些分子不够容易进细菌,或者进去了又被泵出来,总之没能在胞内达到有效浓度。第二个是亲和力不够:7b 与 7d 是 Cys-AMP 竞争性抑制剂,而它们的 EC50 比天然反应中间体弱约两倍,想在细胞内有效阻断 MshC 的催化活性会很吃力。基于这两点,作者把后续方向定为:以 7b 结合的结构为基础找更高亲和力的结合物,用对接与分子动力学评估各种替换吡啶的杂环,理性优化这个骨架。

讨论:为什么体外结合却不抑菌

这是全文最值得你带走的一节,因为它把一句容易被糊弄过去的话——“体外有效、体内无效”——拆成了两个可以分别检验的假设。先把这句话说清楚:

“化合物能结合靶点”和“化合物能杀死细菌”是两件不同的事。前者只需要一个结合口袋,后者需要分子穿过细胞壁与细胞膜、不被外排泵清走、在靶点附近达到足够浓度、并且待在靶点上的时间足够长。本文把这四件事里的前三件,全部留在了“未知”状态。

作者的两条解释,其实是两种完全不同的失败模式,而且它们可以同时成立:

失败模式一:分子没进去(摄取问题)。这是作者明写的解释(“lack of adequate cellular uptake”)。如果分子进不去,那么你把亲和力优化到纳摩尔也没用——因为胞内浓度可能是零。注意作者没有测胞内浓度,这句话是推测,但它是可以被实验检验的推测:做 LC-MS/MS 测菌体内药物蓄积,或者用外排泵缺陷株复测。这也是为什么他们特意带了一个 Δmtr 株——那是想用“更脆弱的菌”来放大任何微弱的靶点抑制效应。结果连这个更敏感的菌都没反应,说明问题确实不在“菌太顽强”,而在“药根本没到”。

失败模式二:分子进去了,但抢不过底物(竞争问题)。这是更本质的一层。MshC 是双底物酶:先用 ATP 与 L-Cys 造出 Cys-AMP,再把半胱氨酸交给 GlcN-Ins。7b/7d 是 Cys-AMP 竞争性的,等于在“第一步的产物位”上和酶自己刚造出来的中间体抢位置。而细胞内 ATP 与 L-Cys 是常量代谢物,酶持续在造中间体;一个 Ki 在 200 µM 量级、只比天然中间体弱两倍的分子,在这个动态竞争里很难赢。

把三个数字放到一起,你会看得更清楚。抗菌实验的最高测试浓度是 100 µM;结合的 EC50 是 219 与 231 µM;按最简单的结合曲线估算(假设 Hill 系数为 1),在 100 µM 时被占住的酶还不到一半。也就是说,即便化合物能自由进出细菌、没有外排、没有代谢,这个浓度也不足以把靶点压住。而 pIC50 < 3.9 换算过来是 IC50 > 126 µM——刚好落在“结合都勉强”的区间里。数字自己在讲同一件事:这次失败是效力不足 + 摄取不明共同造成的,而不是“靶点不重要”。

这里有一个读英文的小陷阱,值得单独拎出来。原文写 “their EC50 values are two-fold lower than the reaction intermediate”,字面是“EC50 比中间体低两倍”。但表里的数值是 219/231 对 107——数值上更高。英文这里的 “lower” 说的是效力(potency)更低,不是数值更低。中文若直译成“EC50 低两倍”,读者会以为化合物比天然中间体还强。这类“数值方向”与“效力方向”相反的句子,是论文精读里最容易读反的地方之一。

那这篇到底做成了什么?三件事:

① 补上了缺失的结构片段。第一次拿到全长 MshC 的 apo 与两个配体结合结构,看到完整的 KMSKS 环,并且解释了旧结构为什么缺这段(胰蛋白酶处理)。这是可以直接下载、用 PyMOL 打开看的一手数据(8HFM/8HFN/8HFO)。

② 证明了磺酰胺骨架能在这个“类 class I aaRS”的口袋里找到位置。半胱氨酰基叠合 CSA、磺酰胺基拉起 KMSKS 环、吡啶挤开 M282 的主链——这套结合模式,与 LeuRS 的 N-亮氨酰磺酰胺抑制剂的结合方式可以互相印证。对做抑制剂设计的人来说,这是可迁移的知识。

③ 把一个阴性结果写成了下一步的实验计划。“不抑菌”没有被藏起来,而是被拆成“摄取”与“亲和力”两个可检验的问题,并给出了具体路线(基于 7b 结构做杂环替换、对接与 MD)。这三件事里,第三件最难,也最值得学。

如果要给这个工作一个诚实的评价:它是一个高质量的“起点论文”,不是一个“候选化合物论文”。五个化合物、两个弱结合(200 µM 量级)、零抗菌活性——按药物化学的标准,这批分子连先导化合物都算不上。但它给出的结构信息与失败分析,足以支撑后面几轮优化。科研里大量有价值的工作就长这样:不漂亮,但把路标立住了。

这篇在轨迹里的位置

把六篇按时间排开,你会看到一条很清楚的重心迁移:

2021 IJMS(01)人源 ProRS 抑制剂——靶点在人身上。这一步练的是“结构导向的抑制剂设计”这套手艺:看口袋、选骨架、测活性,对象是人的酶。

2022 Commun Biology(02)LeuRS 催化机制——靶点换到细菌,问题换成“这个酶到底怎么催化”。这一步练的是机制:氨酰化、编辑、构象变化,都是“酶怎么工作”的问题。

2022 IJMS(本页 03)MshC 结构与抑制剂——把前两步合起来:先看清酶(全长结构、KMSKS 环、Zn 配位),再拿它当靶点设计分子(磺酰胺骨架、五个类似物、共晶)。这是这条线上第一次同时交出“结构”和“分子”,也是第一次撞上“体外结合 ≠ 体内有效”这堵墙。

2023 STTT(04)CLK 综述——从“一个酶”跨到“一个激酶家族与一堆疾病”。问题从“这个口袋长什么样”变成“这个家族在哪些病里出错、哪些分子进了临床”。(下一页详细讲。)

2026 JBC(05)脓肿分枝杆菌 MshC——回到同一个靶点,换一个物种。如果它要接着往前推,本页留下的两个问题正好是起点:亲和力怎么提上去、摄取怎么测出来。

2026 ACS Omega(06)PZA 衍生物——从“靶点”走到“候选化合物”。吡嗪酰胺(PZA)是抗结核一线药的前药,做它的衍生物,意味着开始碰成药性:溶解度、稳定性、代谢。

这条线的一句话是:先把酶怎么工作看清楚,再把它当靶点设计分子,最后推到病原体与候选化合物上。本页正好是这条线的腰——往前它是“机制 + 结构”,往后它是“病原体 + 化合物”。它同时装了两头,也因此同时暴露了两头的困难。

还有一条不那么显眼、但对写作者有用的线索:本文的基金里同时有 FWO、KU Leuven 和郑州大学研究基金(32213231,给 L. P.)。这说明这篇工作是她 2021 年 10 月入职郑大前后、把鲁汶的课题带回来继续做完的产物。你以后看论文的基金栏,可以读出很多作者简介里不会写的迁移轨迹。

给刚进组的你

一、把这篇当“实验逻辑链”的模板,而不是当“结论”来背。设计 → 合成 → 结合 → 结构 → 全菌,五环扣着走。你在组会上讲自己的课题时,也可以用这条链自查:我的证据走到了第几环?如果我只做到第二环就说“发现了抑制剂”,审稿人一定会问第三、第四环。能说清自己停在哪一环,比多做一个实验更能体现你懂这套逻辑。

二、TSA 的两个细节,直接抄进你的实验记录本。第一,溶剂对照必须先做:DMSO 能把这套体系的 Tm 拉低 3.38 °C,比大多数真实结合信号还大。第二,带巯基/易氧化基团的化合物要加还原剂(这里是 1 mM TCEP):不加的时候五个化合物几乎全是阴性,加了之后才浮出两个真结合。“先排除假阴性,再谈阳性”——这是所有结合实验的通用顺序。

三、学会读“配对结构”。本文的说服力不在单个结构,而在 apo 与复合物的对照:apo 里 P88–R95 无序、KMSKS 在;CSA 复合物里反过来。差异本身就是信息。你以后看任何结构论文,先找“有没有对照结构”,没有对照的单结构,故事通常讲不深。

四、拿到 PDB 号就去下载。8HFM、8HFN、8HFO 三套坐标是公开的。装个 PyMOL(学生免费),把 8HFN 打开,输入 select loop, resi 289-293,再和 8HFM 叠合,你能亲眼看到那 4 Å 的位移。看一次真的结构,胜过读十遍文字描述。

五、阴性结果是资产。这篇如果只报告“两个化合物结合 MshC、解出结构”,是一篇普通的结构论文;加上“但不管用,原因可能是摄取与亲和力”,它才变成一篇有用的论文。你以后写不出阳性结果的时候,先问自己:我这个阴性结果排除了什么?能排除东西的阴性结果,本身就有发表价值。

六、一个可以拿去问导师的问题。“如果我们有一个只在体外结合、细胞里没活性的化合物,应该先测胞内蓄积,还是先做亲和力优化?”——这个问题没有标准答案,但它能立刻让你从“做实验的人”变成“设计实验的人”。本文的答案是“两条一起走”:结构在手,先优化亲和力;同时把摄取当成独立的未知量去测。

最后说一个判断,供你参考:这篇论文最容易被误读成“失败了”。但它其实做了一个很硬的示范——把一个漂亮的结合数据和一次彻底的全菌失败,放在同一篇文章里,并且用结构去解释为什么。科学不是每次都要赢;把“为什么没赢”讲清楚,也是一种赢。

至于那个半开玩笑的总结:结构生物学能拍到分子抱住酶的那一瞬间,但拍不到它怎么进门。门在细菌那边,得靠别的实验去敲。

▲ 本部分翻译难点(对照学习用)

〔注1〕
原文
mycothiol (MSH)
直译
分枝杆菌硫醇(MSH)
失味点
中文文献里常写成“ mycothiol(MSH,分枝硫醇)”或干脆译成“谷胱甘肽类似物”。它不是 GSH 的结构类似物,而是功能等价物——化学结构完全不同(一个是肌醇-葡糖胺骨架,一个是 γ-谷氨酰-半胱氨酰-甘氨酸),干的是同一份活:做细胞里最主要的低分子量硫醇。译成“类似物”会让你以为两者可以互换,实际上靶向 MSH 通路的药对人没有交叉毒性,这正是它的卖点。
学习提示
遇到 “functional equivalent / orthologue / analogue”,先分清是结构相似还是功能相似。药物设计里这两者能差出一整个安全性窗口。
〔注2〕
原文
MshC (cysteine ligase)
直译
MshC(半胱氨酸连接酶)
失味点
“cysteine ligase” 很容易被读成“把两个半胱氨酸连起来”,其实它是把半胱氨酸连到 GlcN-Ins 上。而且它虽然与 CysRS 同源、共用 Cys-AMP 中间体,却不是 aaRS:它不碰 tRNA。中文若译成“半胱氨酰-tRNA 合成酶类酶”,后面所有“为什么能选择性打 MshC 而不伤宿主”的论证都会跟着错位。
学习提示
MshC 属于 Msh 通路(MshA→MshA2→MshB→MshC→MshD)。看这类论文,先画一张通路图,把每个酶的底物与产物写上,比记缩写有用得多。
〔注3〕
原文
1-O-(2-amino-2-deoxy-α-D-glucopyranosyl)-D-myo-inositol (GlcN-Ins)
直译
1-O-(2-氨基-2-脱氧-α-D-吡喃葡萄糖基)-D-肌醇
失味点
这个长名字被缩写掉之后,读者容易忘记它是糖-肌醇双环结构,也就看不出 MshC 为什么是“双底物”酶:一个底物是氨基酸(L-Cys),另一个是糖醇(GlcN-Ins)。中文文献里还常把它写成“GlcN-Ins(葡糖胺-肌醇)”,但“葡糖胺”三个字省掉了 2-氨基-2-脱氧这个关键修饰——而这正是 MshB 脱乙酰之后才出现、MshC 要识别的位置。
学习提示
看到长化学名被缩写,回到首次出现处把全名与结构式对一遍。缩写的代价就是丢结构。
〔注4〕
原文
thermal shift assay (TSA); ΔTm
直译
热迁移实验;熔解温度变化
失味点
中文常译成“热稳定性实验”或“热漂移实验”。“稳定性”听起来像是在测蛋白会不会坏,其实测的是配体结合引起的 Tm 位移;而“位移”这个词丢了更要紧的一层:ΔTm 只是表观指标,同一个系列里可以排序,跨系列、跨蛋白不能直接比。本文正是靠“同系列内排序”来挑出 7b/7d 的。
学习提示
TSA 的三条铁律:溶剂对照、还原剂(若有易氧化基团)、同系列比较。任何一条缺了,ΔTm 的绝对值都没有意义。
〔注5〕
原文
EC50; pIC50; MIC
直译
半数有效浓度;半数抑制浓度的负对数;最低抑菌浓度
失味点
本文里这三个词混着用,最容易读晕:摘要说化合物以 219/231 µM 的 EC50 结合 MshC,结果部分却叫 Kiapp(表观抑制常数),抗菌部分用的是 pIC50(<3.9 即 >126 µM)。三个数说的是三件不同的事:结合、酶抑制、杀菌。中文若一律译成“半数有效浓度”,读者会以为“结合 219 µM”和“杀菌 126 µM”是一回事。
学习提示
见到 EC50 先问:在什么体系里测的?纯酶、细胞、还是全菌?同一个词换一个体系就是另一个量。这也是为什么药物化学论文里 MIC 与 Ki 必须分开报。
〔注6〕
原文
cysteinyl-sulfonamide
直译
半胱氨酰磺酰胺
失味点
这个名字里叠了两层化学信息: “cysteinyl” 指分子一端是半胱氨酰基(对应底物 L-Cys),“sulfonamide” 指另一端是磺酰胺(对应氨磺酰腺苷的磷酸/腺苷模拟区)。中文常把它和“氨磺酰腺苷(sulfamoyl adenosine)”混为一谈——后者带一个完整的腺苷,极性大、进不了细菌;前者正是为了甩掉腺苷才设计的。译错这一层,就看不懂“为什么这类分子有希望而 aaSA 没有”。
学习提示
拆药名:一端模拟底物、一端模拟辅底物/磷酸。能拆开,就能猜出它结合在哪个口袋。
〔注7〕
原文
bi-substrate competitive inhibitor
直译
双底物竞争性抑制剂
失味点
“竞争性”在这里不是“跟另一个药竞争”,而是跟酶的天然底物抢同一个位点。MshC 的反应分两半:先 ATP + L-Cys → Cys-AMP,再 Cys-AMP + GlcN-Ins → 产物。7b/7d 模拟的是第一半的产物 Cys-AMP,所以它们同时与 ATP、L-Cys 竞争。中文若只写“竞争性抑制”,读者会以为做一次底物浓度梯度就能判定,其实要分别对两个底物做。
学习提示
判定竞争类型:固定一个底物、变另一个,看 Lineweaver-Burk 图的交点落在哪儿。双底物酶要用两套图。
〔注8〕
原文
KMSKS loop / KMSKS motif
直译
KMSKS 环 / KMSKS 基序
失味点
K-M-S-K-S 是五个氨基酸的单字母缩写,是 class I aaRS 的签名序列,不是随便一个“环”。它在 CysRS 里负责结合并定位 L 形 tRNA、参与氨基酸活化;在 MshC 里没有 tRNA 可抱,于是它的角色变成了围住活性位点、帮着稳住反应中间体。翻译时若只写“KMSKS 环”而不解释它是什么,读者就看不到“这个环闭合 4 Å”为什么是大新闻。
学习提示
记签名序列的方法:把它和功能绑在一起记(KMSKS = class I aaRS 的催化环;HIGH = 同样是 class I 的 ATP 结合 motif)。本文的 H55 就在 HIGH 里。
〔注9〕
原文
treated with trypsin prior to crystallization / limited trypsinolysis
直译
结晶前用胰蛋白酶处理 / 有限的胰蛋白酶解
失味点
这是全篇最容易读漏、却最影响结论的一句。中文若译成“用胰蛋白酶消化”,读者会以为是去杂质;实际上这是为了长出晶体而主动切掉柔性片段——切掉的那段里正好包括 KMSKS 环。于是旧结构里“看不到这个环”变成了“这个环本来就无序”的错误印象。本文的对照才把它纠正过来:环在,只是被剪了。
学习提示
读结构论文,先看“蛋白是怎么制备的”:有没有蛋白酶切、有没有去标签、有没有突变。样品制备的每一步都可能出现在结构里,也可能消失在结构外。
〔注10〕
原文
apo form / ligand-free structure
直译
apo 形式 / 无配体结构
失味点
“apo” 在中文里常被译成“脱辅基”,在酶学里指不含辅因子/配体的状态。它容易被误解成“未激活”或“不完整”——其实 apo 结构是完全正常的蛋白,只是口袋里没东西。本文最关键的一组对照就是 apo 与配体结合态,两者都是“完整的酶”。
学习提示
结构的三种常见状态:apo(空)、holo(带辅因子/配体)、复合物(带抑制剂/底物类似物)。写论文时状态必须标清楚,否则读者不知道你在比什么。
〔注11〕
原文
co-crystal structure; omit map (Phenix.Polder)
直译
共晶结构;omit 电子密度图(Polder 图)
失味点
“共晶”在药物化学里专指蛋白与小分子一起结晶,不是“两个晶体长在一起”。而 omit map 是“把配体从模型里拿掉再算密度”,如果不拿掉,模型自身就会把密度“解释”出来——那样画出的图等于自证。中文常把这一步略过,读者就不知道这张图为什么能证明配体真的在那儿。
学习提示
判断一个配体结构可不可信,看三样:omit/Polder 图、配体 B 因子、以及配体与周围残基的相互作用是否有化学合理性。本文三样都给了。
〔注12〕
原文
lack of adequate cellular uptake
直译
缺乏足够的细胞摄取
失味点
中文常说“渗透性差”或“进不去细胞”,但“uptake”在抗菌领域是一个复合概念:穿过分枝杆菌特有的、富含分枝菌酸的外膜,躲过外排泵,不被胞内代谢掉。任何一环断了,都表现为“没活性”,但修的方向完全不同。译成“渗透性差”会把三个问题压成一个,也就把后续实验设计压没了。
学习提示
抗菌化合物“没活性”的四步排查:进没进(蓄积测定)→ 泵不泵(外排泵缺陷株)→ 靶点占没占(靶点结合/耐药突变)→ 通不通路(代谢物回补)。本文只做到第二步的“更敏感菌株”版本。
〔注13〕
原文
structure-activity relationship (SAR)
直译
构效关系
失味点
“构效关系”在中文里被用得很松,仿佛只要有结构、有活性就算。严格定义是:在一组同系物上,结构变化与活性变化之间的可量化、可预测的关系。本文只有五个化合物、两个可测 Ki,得到的是一张“探路表”,不是完整的 SAR。把这两者混为一谈,读者会高估这批分子的成熟度。
学习提示
看 SAR,先数化合物数目与活性跨度(最好 ≥3 个数量级)。数目不够、跨度不够,就只能叫“初步探索”。
〔注14〕
原文
M. smegmatis MshC (Ms-MshC), a homologue to MshC from M. tuberculosis
直译
耻垢分枝杆菌 MshC,结核分枝杆菌 MshC 的同源物
失味点
用同源酶替代真实靶点,是结构生物学的常规操作,但中文写作里常被一句“同源物”带过,丢掉了推理链:整体一致性 79%、相似性 88%,活性位点 93% 与 97%——数字越高,替代越站得住。反过来说,如果活性位点一致性只有 60%,同样一句“同源物”就撑不起“结合力可以外推”这个结论。
学习提示
遇到“用 A 代替 B”,去要三个数:全序列一致性、结构域一致性、活性位点一致性。并且记住:结合力可以外推,抗菌活性不可以——后者还牵扯到两种菌的膜结构与外排系统。
〔注15〕
原文
tris-(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP)
直译
三(2-羧乙基)膦(TCEP)
失味点
TCEP 是还原剂,作用是把二硫键还原成游离巯基;它不是“保护剂”,也不会“稳定蛋白”。本文加它是为了把化合物自身氧化成的二聚体还原回单体——这一步不加,五个化合物里四个是假阴性。中文若译成“抗氧化剂”,读者会以为是防止蛋白氧化,方向就错了。
学习提示
带游离半胱氨酸的化合物做结合实验,先想三件事:会不会氧化成二聚体、会不会和染料反应、会不会与缓冲液里的金属离子配位。这三件事都能把阳性变成阴性。

附录 · 英文原文

以下为未经改动的英文原文(来源:Europe PMC 开放获取全文,MDPI 开放获取)。

Structural Basis of Cysteine Ligase MshC Inhibition by Cysteinyl-Sulfonamides

Journal: 2022;23(23):15095  |  DOI: 10.3390/ijms232315095  |  PMID: 36499418  |  PMCID:

Authors: Luping Pang; Stijn Lenders; Evgenii M Osipov; Stephen D Weeks; Jef Rozenski; Tatiana Piller; Davie Cappoen; Sergei V Strelkov; Arthur Van Aerschot

Abstract

Mycothiol (MSH), the major cellular thiol in Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), plays an essential role in the resistance of Mtb to various antibiotics and oxidative stresses. MshC catalyzes the ATP-dependent ligation of 1-O-(2-amino-2-deoxy-α-d-glucopyranosyl)-d-myo-inositol (GlcN-Ins) with l-cysteine (l-Cys) to form l-Cys-GlcN-Ins, the penultimate step in MSH biosynthesis. The inhibition of MshC is lethal to Mtb. In the present study, five new cysteinyl-sulfonamides were synthesized, and their binding affinity with MshC was evaluated using a thermal shift assay. Two of them bind the target with EC50 values of 219 and 231 µM. Crystal structures of full-length MshC in complex with these two compounds showed that they were bound in the catalytic site of MshC, inducing dramatic conformational changes of the catalytic site compared to the apo form. In particular, the observed closure of the KMSKS loop was not detected in the published cysteinyl-sulfamoyl adenosine-bound structure, the latter likely due to trypsin treatment. Despite the confirmed binding to MshC, the compounds did not suppress Mtb culture growth, which might be explained by the lack of adequate cellular uptake. Taken together, these novel cysteinyl-sulfonamide MshC inhibitors and newly reported full-length apo and ligand-bound MshC structures provide a promising starting point for the further development of novel anti-tubercular drugs targeting MshC.

Keywords: MshC, bi-substrate competitive inhibitors, protein-ligand co-crystal structures, structure-activity relationship, enzyme inhibition, Mycobacterium tuberculosis

1. Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB), caused by the Gram-positive pathogen Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), has existed for centuries and remains a major global public health threat. In 2018, 1.5 million TB deaths and 7 million new TB cases were identified by the World Health Organization (WHO) [[1]]. With the emergence and spread of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Mtb strains, the efficiency of current anti-TB chemotherapeutics is consistently undermined, and there is an urgent and continuous demand for discovering new drugs [[2],[3]]. Therefore, inhibiting enzymes involved in the important cellular processes of Mtb, in particular protein synthesis and antibiotic detoxification processes, is crucial to avert further complications from TB.

Like many actinomycetes, Mtb produces mycothiol (MSH), the functional equivalent of glutathione (GSH) in eukaryotes and most eubacteria, as the predominant low-molecular-weight thiol to protect against oxidative stress, electrophilic toxins and antibiotics [[4],[5],[6]]. This suggests that enzymes involved in the MSH biosynthesis and metabolism pathway may be potential targets for the development of selective antimycobacterial agents. MSH is synthesized through a series of complex enzyme-catalyzed reactions (), in which the cysteine ligase MshC is the penultimate enzyme catalyzing the ATP-dependent condensation of cysteine and the GlcN-Ins intermediate. MshC has been proven to be essential for the maintenance of redox balance and metabolic homeostasis of Mtb [[7],[8]]. Disruption or high-density mutagenesis in the mshC gene has been shown to be lethal for the in vitro growth of Mtb [[9],[10]]. MshC, therefore, is considered as a potential and promising target for developing drugs to treat TB.

[Figure 1] Biosynthetic and recycling pathway of MSH. MSH glycosyltransferase (MshA) links 1L-myo-inositol-1-phosphate (Ins-P) to N-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc). MSH phosphatase (MshA2) produces GlcNAc-Ins. MSH deacetylase (MshB) generates 1-O-(2-amino-2-deoxy-α-d-glucopyranosyl)-d-myo-inositol (GlcN-Ins). MshC then links l-Cys with GlcN-Ins, and MSH synthase (MshD) acetylates l-Cys-GlcN-Ins to produce the final product, MSH. MSH autoxidation forms MSSM, which is reduced by MSH disulfide reductase (Mtr).

Being essential and specific to the lifecycle of Mtb, compounds targeting MshC, in theory, would have a limited chance of hitting off-targets within the host or host microbiome, reducing the possibility of undesired toxicity. One exception could be the host cysteinyl-tRNA synthetase (Hs-CysRS)—and, to our advantage, Mtb-CysRS—as the overall fold of the MshC catalytic domain strongly resembles the one for CysRSs [[11],[12]]. This is the result of both enzymes catalyzing the same cysteinyl-adenosine (Cys-AMP) intermediate formation before transferring the activated cysteine to different substrates (GlcN-Ins and tRNACys for MshC and CysRS, respectively). Thus far, there is no specific drug available for the inhibition of MshC. Screening of chemical libraries afforded NTF1836 [[13]] and dequalinium [[14]] chloride, both exhibiting moderate in vitro MshC inhibitory activity and Mtb growth inhibition. However, both of them were proved to be cytotoxic to mammalian cells and hence were not pursued further. Attempts to exploit these small molecule scaffolds or identify new chemical entities have also been hampered by the lack of the full-length molecular structure of MshC.

Structurally, MshC is similar to class I aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs), especially to CysRS, as mentioned above. AaRSs catalyze the ligation of amino acids with their cognate tRNA in an ATP-dependent manner. These enzymes are divided into two classes based on two different folds of the catalytic core [[15],[16]]. Class I aaRSs share a similar Rossmann fold (belonging to the HUP superfamily) and have two conserved HIGH and KMSKS signature sequence motifs, while the catalytic domain of class II aaRSs adopts a six-stranded β sheet [[15],[16]]. The aaRSs families have been pursued as viable targets for the discovery and design of new antibiotics for a number of decades [[17],[18],[19],[20],[21],[22],[23]]. Herein, aminoacyl-sulfamoyl adenosines (aaSAs) are well-known, high-affinity ligands of aaRS, effectively mimicking the natural aminoacyl-adenosine (aa-AMP) intermediate in which the non-hydrolysable sulfamoyl-moiety mimics the binding and function of the phosphoryl group of aa-AMP. However, these compounds lack species selectivity and are devoid of antibacterial properties due to their highly polar nature. Recently, “Trius pharmaceuticals” discovered ThrRS-targeting m-substituted aromatic sulfonamides () [[24]]. These substituted aryl sulfonamides mirror the sulfamoyl adenosine part of the threonyl-SA [[24]]. Analogous success was achieved by Oxford Drug Design targeting LeuRS [[25]]. Both series of compounds showed very potent enzymatic inhibitory and antibacterial activity as well as species selectivity.

[Figure 2] Respective lead compounds described for inhibition of bacterial ThrRS (developed by Trius Pharmaceuticals) and LeuRS (developed by Oxford Drug Design), respectively.

Given these advances, we designed and synthesized a small series of cysteinyl-sulfonamide compounds which were based on the same scaffold and, therefore, potentially capable of simultaneously targeting CysRS and MshC. Using the thermal shift assay, two compounds were confirmed to bind to MshC. Subsequently, the co-crystal structures of these compounds bound to full-length MshC were determined. This work elucidates how this sulfonamide scaffold works with the class I aaRS-like enzyme and provides a starting point for the further design and optimization of anti-tubercular drugs targeting these enzymes.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Design and Synthesis of Cysteinyl-Sulfonamides

Based on the previously published heterocyclic sulfonamide congeners targeting ThrRS or LeuRS (), we designed and synthesized a small series of cysteinyl-sulfonamide compounds for the potential simultaneous targeting of CysRS and MshC (). Starting from 3-bromophenylsulfonamide (3), a Suzuki reaction with arylboronic acids 4a–e afforded the sulfonamides 5a–e in moderate yields. The latter were acylated with protected l-cysteine, followed by deprotection to afford the target cysteinyl sulfonamides 7a–e.

[Figure 3] Synthetic scheme for the cysteinyl sulfonamide congeners 7a–e.

2.2. Binding Affinity of Compounds against M. smegmatis MshC

The binding affinity of these compounds with M. smegmatis MshC (Ms-MshC), a homologue to MshC from M. tuberculosis (Mtb-MshC), was determined by a thermal shift assay (TSA). We here opted for Ms-MshC to carry out affinity determination as the enzyme highly resembles Mtb-MshC with an overall sequence identity and similarity of 79% and 88%, respectively. Further examination of the active site of these two proteins, which are, in their first step, responsible for the cysteinyl-adenosine formation, showed 93% identity and 97% similarity. Therefore, the binding affinity of the synthesized compounds evaluated against Ms-MshC appears to likewise reflect their potential binding with Mtb-MshC. In addition, the availability of Ms-MshC is beneficial for the following structural studies.

In principle, compound binding usually improves the thermal stability of the protein, which then leads to an increase in the melting temperature (Tm) during the denaturation process. Furthermore, when a specific compound induces a bigger increase in Tm, this compound usually possesses a higher binding affinity compared to other ligands sharing a similar scaffold [[26]]. To eliminate the effect of the solvent in this experiment, ∆Tm was calculated as the difference between Tm of Ms-MshC with and without 10% (v/v) either dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) or ethylene glycol (EDO). DMSO clearly lowers the thermal stability of the protein by decreasing the Tm of Ms-MshC by 3.38 °C, while EDO decreases the Tm by only 0.48 °C (). Therefore, EDO was selected as the solvent to assist in dissolving the respective compounds in the subsequent experiments.

[Table 1] Thermal stabilization capability of the synthesized compounds against Ms-MshC.

CompoundsConc. (µM)Tm (°C) 1∆Tm (°C)Tm (°C; + 1mM TCEP) 5∆Tm (°C) 6EC50
Control/58.47 ± 0.07////
DMSO 10% (v/v)55.09 ± 0.98−3.38 2///
EDO 10% (v/v)57.99 ± 0.04−0.48 357.91 ± 0.05//
7a100057.56 ± 0.16−0.43 457.46 ± 0.26−0.45/
10058.05 ± 0.12+0.06 458.00 ± 0.09+0.09
7b100058.08 ± 0.23+0.09 460.99 ± 0.23+3.08219.29 ± 1.27
10057.98 ± 0.08−0.01 459.15 ± 0.05+1.24
7c100058.20 ± 0.14+0.21 458.50 ± 0.15+0.59/
10058.01 ± 0.07+0.02 457.90 ± 0.01−0.01
7d100058.98 ± 0.22+0.99 461.66 ± 0.29+3.75230.60 ± 2.16
10057.94 ± 0.09−0.05 459.01 ± 0.22+1.10
7e100058.13 ± 0.14+0.14 458.67 ± 0.17+0.76/
10057.76 ± 0.08−0.23 457.76 ± 0.03−0.15
L-Cys10,00061.56 ± 0.06+3.09 4///
100059.20 ± 0.07+0.73 4//
ATP10,00059.82 ± 0.18+1.35 4///
100058.20 ± 0.03−0.27 4//
Cys-AMP100066.55 ± 0.13+8.08 4//106.64 ± 1.34
10062.23 ± 0.13+3.76 4//

The natural substrate l-Cys and ATP solely increased the Tm of Ms-MshC by 3.09 and 1.35 °C at 10 mM concentration, respectively, but almost did not change Tm at 1 mM (). In contrast, when l-Cys and ATP were simultaneously added both at 100 μM or 1 mM concentration in the presence of 5 mM MgCl2, significant increases of ∆Tm of 3.76 and 8.08 °C, respectively, were observed. This suggests that the formation of the Cys-AMP reaction intermediate is catalyzed by the enzyme in this case, in line with its higher binding affinity compared to single substrates. Subsequently, 100 μM and 1 mM concentrations of each synthesized compound were applied to measure their effects on the Tm of Ms-MshC in the presence of EDO. However, only compound 7d showed a 0.99 °C increase in Tm, while the others had no effect ().

The synthesized compounds contain a cysteinyl moiety which can be easily oxidized to yield the disulfide form, and these dimerized compounds may not fit into the active center of MshC. This may explain their surprisingly weak stabilization effects on protein. Therefore, to eliminate the effect of oxidation, a 1 mM reducing agent, tris-(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP), was added to the evaluation system, and then the effects of the various compounds on the Tm of the protein were reassessed. In the absence of Ms-MshC ligands, TCEP had no effect on the thermal stability of the protein. In the following experiments, ∆Tm was calculated as the difference between Tm of Ms-MshC in the presence and absence of 100 µM and 1 mM, respectively, of each compound. The results demonstrated that compounds 7b and 7d cause an increase in the ∆Tm (1.24 and 1.10 °C at 100 μM; 3.08 and 3.75 °C at 1 mM), suggesting that the TCEP-reduced compounds are potential binders of Ms-MshC. Measurements of dilution series for these two compounds showed Kiapp of 219 and 231 µM respectively, which is only 2-fold weaker binding compared with the natural intermediate Cys-AMP (Kiapp of 107 µM) in this evaluation system (and).

[Figure 4] Titration curves of compounds measured by thermal shift assay. The experiments were performed in triplicate with error bars shown.

A comparison of these five synthesized compounds showed that the heterocycle instead of a phenyl ring at C3 of the phenyl sulfonamide (compounds 7b, 7c and 7d) is beneficial for binding. Despite both compounds 7b and 7c containing a pyridine moiety, the ortho-methoxy substituent on the pyridine further improved the binding affinity compared with the non-modified compound 7c, suggesting the modification on the ortho-position of the pyridine ring seems more suitable for binding. Combined, these cysteinyl-sulfonamide-based compounds are potential new binders for Ms-MshC.

2.3. Structural Study on the Inhibitory Mechanism of Compounds 7b and 7d

In the past, the first partial crystal structure of MshC from M. smegmatis complexed with cysteinyl adenylate analogue, 5′-O-[N-(l-cysteinyl)-sulfamonyl] adenosine (CSA), was determined. Here, the formed MshC-CSA was treated with trypsin prior to crystallization [[27]]. It has been reported that the overall tertiary structure of MshC is similar to that of CysRS, which catalyzed the formation of cysteine-charged tRNA. However, as a result of trypsin proteolysis, this structure lacks the KMSKS loop, which is normally situated near the substrate binding site. In CysRS, the KMSKS motif is responsible for the binding and positioning of the L-shaped tRNA molecule as well as amino acid activation. It was proposed that the homologous loop in MshC is involved in the formation of the adenylate intermediate in the first-half reaction and possibly also important for the binding of the GlcN-Ins substrate in the second-half reaction [[27]]. Therefore, a crystal structure of full-length MshC is required for a better understanding of the function of this enzyme and elucidation of the binding mechanism of MshC inhibitors.

Here, we determined the crystal structure of the full-length Ms-MshC at 2.4 Å resolution (A and). While the published MshC structure in complex with CSA contains two macromolecules in the asymmetric unit (ASU), all structures solved in this work only possess one macromolecule per ASU despite crystalizing in two different space groups ().

[Figure 5] Comparison of the crystal structures of full-length and proteolyzed MshC from M. smegmatis. (A) Ligand-free structure of full-length MshC. (B) Zoom in of the catalytic domain of apo form MshC; (C) Zoom in of the catalytic domain of MshC in complex with CSA [[27]] (PDB ID: 3C8Z); (D) Structural superposition of apo form (green) and CSA-bound MshC (cyan). Protein backbones of both structures are shown as cartoon representations, while ligand and crucial protein residues are shown as sticks, and the co-factor Zn2+ ion is shown as a grey ball. The red- and orange-colored regions represent the KMSKS loop in the apo structure and the P88–R95 helix in the published CSA-bound structure, respectively.

[Table 2] X-ray diffraction data collection and refinement statistics of Ms-MshC and Ms-MshC-ligand complexes.

MshC (apo)MshC-Compound 7bMshC-Compound 7d
PDB Code8HFM8HFN8HFO
Data collection
Resolution range (Å)48.32–2.41 (2.50–2.41)43.68–1.98 (2.05–1.98)55.03–2.773 (2.87–2.77)
Space groupP 41 2 2P 61P 61
Unit cell
a, b, c (Å)69.81 69.81 236.01166.02 166.02 51.36168.11 168.11 52.30
α, β, γ (°)90 90 9090 90 12090 90 120
Unique reflections23,525 (2275)56,710 (5394)21,800 (2176)
Multiplicity26.2 (26.6)10.2 (10.6)20.1 (20.7)
Completeness (%)99.9 (100.0)99.9 (99.9)99.9 (99.9)
Mean I/σ (I)15.3 (1.6)14.1 (2.6)19.0 (2.3)
Wilson B-factor (Å2)56.441.292.4
R merge0.167 (1.995)0.086 (1.160)0.098 (1.438)
R meas0.171 (2.034)0.090 (1.219)0.100 (1.474)
R pim0.033 (0.393)0.029 (0.373)0.023 (0.323)
CC1/20.998 (0.760)0.998 (0.886)0.993 (0.889)
Refinement
Reflections used for refinement23,514 (2276)53,801 (5391)21,784 (2174)
R work0.207 (0.298)0.199 (0.490)0.213 (0.409)
R free0.238 (0.359)0.223 (0.460)0.258 (0.356)
Number of non-H atoms319734733214
Macromolecules313032003181
Inhibitor/2723
Solvent6524610
RMS bonds (Å)0.0040.0040.005
RMS angles (°)0.660.770.89
Ramachandran favoured (%)98.2599.2795.38
Ramachandran allowed (%)1.750.734.38
Average B-factor (Å2)65.953.64109.07
Protein66.0653.55109.27
Inhibitor/46.8582.91
Solvent57.9855.63105.87

In contrast to the published MshC-CSA complex (PDB ID: 3C8Z) that had been truncated through trypsin proteolysis, the newly obtained structure reveals the intact KMSKS loop. At the same time, the α-helix containing residues P88–R95 is disordered in our apo structure, while it is fully structured in the CSA-bound structure (B,C). Detailed analysis of these two structures showed that CSA binding induces a shift of the T46-H52 loop region towards the active site, whereby the side chain of Y48 is flipped inwards into the binding pocket. This concerted conformational change avoids the steric clash between the side chain of Y48 in the apo structure and the ordered positioning of the P88–R95 containing α-helix upon CSA binding (C,D).

To clarify the binding mechanism of the newly synthesized sulfonamide-based compounds, we also have co-crystallized Ms-MshC with compounds 7b and 7d and determined the structures of these complexes at 2 and 2.8 Å resolution, respectively (). The electron density map unambiguously showed both compounds binding in the active site in a very similar manner (A,B). The superposition of both complexes reveals little change in the protein backbone (RMSD of 0.33 Å using coordinates of 370 Cα atoms). Therefore, detailed structural analysis was carried out only for the higher resolution complex involving the better binder 7b.

[Figure 6] The binding mode of the sulfonamide-based compound with Ms-MshC. (A) The calculated electron density map (omit map) of compounds 7b and 7d in the catalytic site of Ms-MshC. Maps were determined in Phenix.Polder map [[28]] and countered at 3.5 σ. (B) Superposition of compounds 7b and 7d based on the alignment of protein backbones. (C) Structural superposition of CSA-bound (cyan) and compound 7b-bound (grey) Ms-MshC. (D) Structural superposition of the apo form of MshC (green) and MshC in complex with compound 7b (grey). Protein backbones were shown as cartoon representations, while ligands and essential protein residues were shown as sticks, with the co-factor Zn2+ ion shown as a grey sphere. H-bonds were shown as black dashed lines. The movement of 289KMSKS293 loop (~4 Å) induced by compound binding in D was measured based on the different positioning of K289 Cα atom between these two structures.

In comparison with the structure of Ms-MshC in complex with CSA, the cysteinyl moiety of compound 7b is fully superposed with the same chemical group of CSA (C). The thiol group of the ligand and the side chains of C43, C231 and H256 coordinate the co-factor Zn2+ ion. The presence of Zn2+ is considered the major recognition mechanism of substrate l-Cys from the amino acids pool, as reported for MshC-homolog CysRS [[12]]. The α-amino group of the cysteinyl moiety forms three hydrogen bonds with the hydroxyl oxygen of side chains of T46 and T83 and the main-chain oxygen of G44, which is likely important for the correct chirality selection of this amino acid (D). In addition, the binding of CSA or the cysteinyl-containing analog induces the same inward movement of the 44GITPY48 loop surrounding the back pocket of MshC. This results in the inward flipping of the side chain of Y48, which may prevent the hydrolysis of the cysteinyl-adenylate reaction intermediate. The presence of the sulfonamide group in compound 7b, similar to the sulfamoyl group in CSA, induces the inward movement of the 289KMSKS293 loop with the largest Cα shift of 4 Å. This leads to the formation of one salt bridge between the sulfonamide oxygen and the amine group of the K289 residue of the 289KMSKS293 motif, and one H-bond between the sulfonamide oxygen and Nε of H55 from the HIGH motif, respectively. Since the sulfonamide and sulfamoyl groups in both structures (D) are fully overlaid, it seems rational to hypothesize that the sulfamoyl group in CSA likely induces a similar conformational change of the KMSKS loop. However, due to the limited trypsinolysis treatment of the protein before crystallization with the CSA ligand, the KMSKS loop was likely cleaved. This may explain why the KMSKS loop could not be observed in the previously published CSA-bound structure of MshC.

The phenyl group of compound 7b occupies the ribose binding pocket of MshC but only forms hydrophobic interactions with surrounding protein residues (C,D). The substituted pyridine moiety is superposed with the adenine base of CSA located in the ATP binding cavity. Positioning of the pyridine plane is sterically clashing with the position of M282 in the CSA-bound structure, which forms hydrophobic interactions with the side chain of the adenine base. Therefore, in compound 7b’s bound structure, the backbone peptide planes of G281-M282 and M282-I283 are flipped. On the one hand, this avoids the steric clash and accommodates the binding of pyridine, and on the other hand, it generates one H-bond between the nitrogen atom of the pyridine ring and the backbone NH of M282, thus increasing the binding affinity for this ligand (D). The lack of an H-bond between the thiophene ring of 7d and active site residues would suggest that a lower binding potency should be expected relative to compound 7b. This is in good agreement with the TSA results (). Taken together, the sulfonamide-based compounds can probably replace the non-selective sulfamoyl-containing analog CSA, acting as a new class of Ms-MshC inhibitors.

2.4. Anti-Mycobacterium Activity of the Compounds

The synthesized compounds were subsequently profiled for antimycobacterial activity in a whole-cell screening assay. The panel of test organisms included the Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37Ra lab strain, the Δmtr::Hyg derivative strain and Mycobacterium abscessus containing PSMT-1. The Mtb H37Ra Δmtr::Hyg strain carries a deletion in the Rv2855 gene encoding mycothiol reductase (Mtr) (). Mtr itself is the key enzyme to reduce oxidized mycothione to mycothiol, thereby maintaining the reductive intracellular environment within the bacillus. In addition, the compounds have been evaluated against M. abscessus, the causative agent of opportunistic nontuberculous infections in immune-compromised persons. However, based on luminescence, no activity could be observed for the test compounds for concentrations up to 100 µM (). One possible explanation for the failure of target engagement of the compounds in the whole-cell evaluation is to attribute the lack of potency to poor cellular pharmacodynamics or pharmacokinetics of the compounds. Moreover, since compounds 7b and 7d are Cys-AMP competitive inhibitors, but as their EC50 values are two-fold lower than the reaction intermediate, it would be challenging for the synthesized compounds to efficiently block the catalytic activity of MshC inside the cell. This could be another explanation for their weak antimycobacterial activities. Therefore, further work should look for higher affinity binders based on the 7b-bound MshC structure. Using docking and molecular dynamics simulations, various heterocycles substituting for the pyridine ring hereto could be evaluated in an effort to rationally optimize these scaffold compounds. This should pave the way for the development of new MshC antimycobacterial drug candidates.

[Table 3] Activity of the test compounds (7a–e) against Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium abscessus.

CompoundpIC50 a
Mtb bMab c
WT dΔmtr::Hyg eWT
7a<3.9<3.9<3.9
7b<3.9<3.9<3.9
7c<3.9<3.9<3.9
7d<3.9<3.9<3.9
7e<3.9<3.9<3.9
f MXF8.16.35.5

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Reagents and Analytical Procedures

Reagents and solvents were purchased from commercial suppliers and used as provided and previously described [[29]]. 1H and 13C NMR spectra of the compounds were recorded on a Bruker UltraShield Avance 300 MHz (Brüker, Fällanden, Switzerland) or, when needed, on a 500 MHz and 600 MHz spectrometer. High-resolution mass spectra were recorded on a quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer (SYNAPT G2 HDMS, Waters, Milford, MA, USA) equipped with a standard ESI interface; all these analytical techniques were used as described previously [[29]]. All the 1H NMR, 13C NMR and MS spectra data were summarized in.

3.2. Chemical Synthesis and Analysis

3.2.1. Synthesis of Compounds 5a–e: General Procedure A

3-Bromobenzenesulfonamide (3) (300 mg, 1.26 mmoL, 1 eq) and the respective boronic acids 4a–e (1.4 mmoL, 1.1 eq) and K2CO3 (538 mg, 3.9 mmoL, 3.1 eq) were dissolved in 15 mL of a 4:1 mixture of 1,4-dioxane:water. Pd(dppf)(Cl)2 (175 mg, 0.25 mmoL, 0.2 eq) was added, and the reaction mixture was stirred overnight at 110 °C. After consumption of the starting material, the reaction was cooled down to room temperature and diluted with 30 mL of MeOH. The mixture was filtered over a celite plug and dried using anhydrous Na2SO4. The mixture was filtered again, and the solvents were evaporated to dryness. The resulting crude was purified using silica gel chromatography to obtain 5a–e.

3.2.2. Synthesis of Compounds 6a–e: General Procedure B

The respective sulfonamide 5a–e (1 eq), N-(tert-butoxycarbonyl)-S-trityl-l-cysteine (1.2 eq), O-Benzotriazole-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium-hexafluoro-phosphate (HBTU, 1.5 eq) and triethylamine (3 eq) were dissolved in 4 mL of N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF) and stirred overnight. After thin layer chromatography (TLC) showed full consumption of the starting material, the reaction mixture was diluted with 25 mL of ethyl acetate (EtOAc) and washed with 3 × 25 mL of brine. The organic phase was dried using anhydrous Na2SO4, filtered and evaporated to dryness. The resulting crude was purified using silica gel chromatography affording 6a–e.

3.2.3. Synthesis of Compounds 7a–e: General Procedure C

An aliquot of 1 mL of trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) was added to a solution of the respective starting material (6a–e) in 4 mL of dichloromethane (DCM). Triethylsilane (2.5 eq) was added, and the solution was stirred for 1 h. The reaction was quenched with saturated NaHCO3 and extracted using DCM. The organic phases were collected, dried using anhydrous Na2SO4 and filtered. The organic phase was evaporated to dryness, and the resulting crude was purified using silica gel chromatography, affording the final sulfonamides 7a–e.

N-([1,1′-biphenyl]-3-ylsulfonyl)-2(R)-amino-3-mercaptopropanamide (7a). 1H NMR (300 MHz, (MeOD): δ (ppm) = 8.12 (s, 1H), 7.99 (bs, 2H, NH), 7.85 (d, J = 7.53 Hz, 2H), 7.68 (s, 1H), 7.66 (s, 1H), 7.60 (t, J = 7.06 Hz, 1H), 7.51 (t, J = 7.29 Hz, 2H), 7.43 (d, J = 7.53 Hz, 1H), 3.83 (s, 1H), 2.91 (s, 2H); 13C NMR (75 MHz, (MeOD): δ (ppm) = 129.23, 129.16, 129.10, 128.42, 128.13, 126.85, 126.32, 126.19, 125.53, 55.64, 25.21; HRMS (ESI): calcd. for C15H17N2O3S2 [M+H]+: 337.0675, found: 337.0678.

2(R)-Amino-3-mercapto-N-((3-(6-methoxypyridin-3-yl)phenyl)sulfonyl)propenamide (7b). 1H NMR (300 MHz, (MeOD): δ (ppm) = 8.50 (d, J = 2.22 Hz, 1H), 8.11–7.98 (m, 4H), 7.92–7.83 (m, 2H), 7.63 (t, J = 8.32 Hz, 1H), 6.95 (d, J = 7.21, 1H), 3.91 (s, 3H), 3.79 (s, 1H), 2.93–2.84 (m, 2H); 13C NMR (75 MHz, (MeOD): δ (ppm) = 163,.53, 145.02, 137.73, 137.40, 129.37, 126.14, 124.96, 110.91, 53.47, 40.13, 30.40; HRMS (ESI): calcd. for C15H18N3O4S2 [M+H]+: 368.0733, found: 368.0730.

2(R)-Amino-3-mercapto-N-((3-(pyridin-3-yl)phenyl)sulfonyl)propanamide (7c). 1H NMR (300 MHz, (DMSO): δ (ppm) = 8.97 (s, 1H), 8.70 (d, J = 4.54 Hz, 1H), 8.25 (d, J = 8.17 Hz, 1H, 8.18 (s, 1H), 8.05 (bs, 2H, NH), 7.97 (t, J = 8.17 Hz, 2H), 7.74–7.62 (m, 2H), 2.93 (s, 2H); 13C NMR (75 MHz, (DMSO): δ (ppm) = 168.62, 140.56, 135.82, 130.43, 129.60, 129.00, 128.23, 126.69, 126.19, 125.04, 122.54, 55.90, 25.30.

2(R)-Amino-3-mercapto-N-((3-(thiophen-2-yl)phenyl)sulfonyl)propanamide (7d). 1H NMR (300 MHz, (DMSO): δ (ppm) = 8.13 (s, 1H), 8.05 (bs, 2H, NH), 7.98–7.89 (m, 2H), 7.80 (d, J = 8.26 Hz), 7.72–7.68 (m, 1H), 7.61–7.52 (m, 2H), 3.89 (s, 1H), 2.92 (d, J = 3.88 Hz, 2H); 13C NMR (75 MHz, (DMSO): δ (ppm) = 130.19, 129.65, 128.17, 126.47, 126.26, 125.09, 122.68, 55.84, 25.42; MS (ESI): calcd. for C13H14N2O3S3 [M+H]+: 343.0, found: 342.8.

2(R)-Amino-3-mercapto-N-((4′-(trifluoromethyl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-3-yl)sulfonyl)propanamide (7e). 1H NMR (300 MHz, (DMSO): δ (ppm) = 8.17 (s, 1H), 8.00–7.83 (m, 8H), 7.64 (t, J = 7.30 Hz, 1H), 3.80 (s, 1H) 2.91 (s, 2H); 13C NMR (150 MHz, (DMSO): δ (ppm) = 143.86, 19.11, 128.43, 127.70, 126.32, 126.07, 126.04, 125.80, 55.83, 29.05; MS (ESI): calcd. for C16H16F3N2O3S2 [M+H]+: 405.1, found: 404.9.

3.3. Cloning, Expression and Protein Purification

The DNA sequence encoding full-length M. smegmatis MshC (Ms-MshC, UniProt accession ID: A0QZY0) was amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) from genomic DNA isolated from Mycobacterium smegmatis. The amplified gene was separated by agarose gel electrophoresis and purified by a gel extraction kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). The purified gene was subsequently cloned into the pETRUK vector, an in-house derivative of pETHSUL [[30]] that yields a fusion protein with a SUMO tag at the N-terminus for expression in E. coli Rosetta 2 (DE3) pLysS cells. Initial trials showed that the SUMO tag of SUMO-fused Ms-MshC was not able to be cleaved efficiently by SUMO hydrolase. Therefore, a glycine spacer was added between the C-terminal SUMO tag residue and the first methionine residue of Ms-MshC. Isolation of the protein was similar to that previously reported for LeuRS [[29],[31],[32]]. Briefly, following culture of transformed Rosetta 2 (DE3) pLysS ZYP-5052 auto-induction medium [[33]], cells were harvested by centrifuge and lysed by sonication in cation exchange buffer A (25 mM HEPES-NaOH pH 7, 150 mM NaCl and 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol) supplemented with 1 mM MgCl2 and 100 U cold-active Cryonase (Takara, Shiga, Japan). The lysis was clarified by centrifugation at 18,000× g for 45 min, and the resulting supernatant was applied onto a 5 mL Hitrap HP SP column (Cytiva, Marlborough, MA, USA). The protein was eluted by a linear gradient with Cation exchange buffer B (25 mM HEPES-NaOH pH 7, 1 M NaCl and 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol). Fractions corresponding to the SUMO-fused Ms-MshC were combined, followed by SUMO hydrolase treatment to remove the SUMO tag. This combined mixture was dialyzed in buffer containing 20 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, glycerol 10% (w/v) overnight at 4 °C to remove the salt and was then filtered by a 0.45 μm syringe filter (Millipore, Burlington, MA, USA) and loaded onto a Hitrap HP SP column (Cytiva, Marlborough, MA, USA) to remove the SUMO tag and SUMO hydrolase. The flow through containing Ms-MshC was further purified by anion exchange chromatography and size exclusion chromatography. Purified Ms-MshC was concentrated to 20 mg/mL in the final buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, 100 mM NaCl and 2.5 mM β-mercaptoethanol) and stored at −80 °C.

3.4. Crystallization

The crystals of the apo form of Ms-MshC were obtained by the hanging drop vapor diffusion method at 20 °C. Briefly, 10 mg/mL protein in 10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, 100 mM NaCl and 2.5 mM β-mercaptoethanol was mixed with the reservoir solution containing 25 mM CaCl2, 25 mM MgCl2, PEG8000 5–8% (w/v), Morpheus buffer system 2 pH 7.1, and ethylene glycol 20% (v/v) in a 1:1 ratio, which was then equilibrated over 1 mL of the same solution. Suitable crystals were harvested using a nylon cryo-loop. The crystals were briefly immersed in the reservoir solution supplemented with 22% (v/v) ethylene glycol as a cryoprotectant and then flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen for subsequent data collection.

For the MshC-ligand complex, the protein at a concentration of 10 mg/mL in 10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7, 100 mM NaCl and 2.5 mM β-mercaptoethanol was mixed with a final concentration of 1 mM compound and 1 mM tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP), which was then incubated on ice for 1 h. Before crystallization experiments, the protein mixture was centrifuged at 12,000× g for 10 min at 4 °C. This cleared mixture was subjected to extensive crystallization screening against a broad series of commercially available screens utilizing the sitting drop vapor diffusion method at 20 °C. Crystals of MshC in complex with either compound 7b or 7d were found in conditions from the Morpheus screen in dispensed droplets comprised of 300 nL protein mixture and 150 nL reservoir solution containing PEG550MME 20% (v/v), PEG20000 10% (w/v), Morpheus divalent 60 mM and Morpheus buffer system 3 pH 8.5. The crystals were cryoprotected by passage through paraffin oil and flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen prior to data collection.

3.5. Data Collection and Structure Determination

X-ray diffraction data were collected at 100 K on a Beamline ID23-1 (ESRF, Grenoble, France) and Proxima I (Soleil, Paris, France) using a standard data collection setup. Data were processed using the autoPROC package [[34]]. The initial structure solution was determined by molecular replacement using Phaser [[35]] employing a modified model of Ms-MshC (PDB code: 3C8Z), whereby the bound ligand was removed as a starting search model. The structures were refined by alternating the steps of the manual building method in COOT [[36]] and refinement with Phenix.refine [[28]]. The final structures were qualified using the validation tools available on the Protein Data Bank server [[37]]. The corresponding data collection and refinement statistics are summarized in. Structural figures were prepared with Pymol (version 2.0.4).

3.6. Thermal Shift Assay

The binding affinity of the synthesized compounds to M. smegmatis MshC (Ms-MshC) was evaluated by applying a fluorescence-based thermal shift assay (TSA). A 20 μL reaction system containing 0.2 mg/mL protein, 1× thermal shift dye (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), 50 mM HEPES pH 7.0, 150 mM KCl, 10% (v/v) ethylene glycol and various concentrations of each compound was prepared in 96-well PCR plates (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) on ice. The plates were centrifuged to remove air bubbles and then measured by using the Applied Biosystems real-time PCR system (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) with an excitation filter of 580 ± 10 nm and an emission filter of 623 ± 14 nm. The plates were gradually heated from 4 °C to 95 °C at a rate of 0.05 °C/s. The melting curves were fitted with a Boltzmann model using the Protein Thermal Shift software to calculate the protein melting temperature (Tm). Due to the compounds containing a cysteine group, which is easily oxidized, forming a disulfide, the reducing agent TCEP (1 mM) was added to eliminate the effects of oxidation. The compared results are shown in. Triplicate assays were applied to controls, and all compounds and the averaged Tm were used.

3.7. Antibacterial Activity Measurements

Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37Ra ATCC 25177 (Mtb), a Mtb Δmtr::Hyg derivative strain and Mycobacterium abscessus ATCC 19977 (Mab) containing an episomal plasmid with PSMT-1 were routinely cultured in 7H9 supplemented with 10% (v/v) albumin-dextrose-saline (ADS), 0.2% (v/v) glycerol and 0.5% (v/v) tyloxapol at 37 °C. First, the test compounds were dissolved in 100% DMSO to reach a final concentration of 20 mM DMSO. After confirmation of the compounds’ solubility, the test compounds were spotted in a 96-well plate in one-over-three dilution series by complementing with 7H9 supplemented with 10% (v/v) ADS, 0.2% (v/v) glycerol and 0.5% (v/v) tyloxapol to reach the final concentration starting from 100 µM with a maximum of 1% (v/v) DMSO. As a positive control, moxifloxacin was added. Solubility in aqueous conditions was confirmed visually. Next, the plates containing the Mtb strains were inoculated at an OD600 of 0.05, and the Mab strain was inoculated at an RLU of 1 × 104; they were subsequently incubated for 7 days (Mtb) or 3 days (Mab) at 37 °C. The viability of both Mtb and Mab was measured as a reduction in luminescence compared to the untreated reference culture by using a Promega discover multi-well plate reader (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). For the Mtb strains, the BacTiter-GloTM Microbial Cell Viability Assay (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) was used to provide a luminescent signal corresponding to the amount of ATP present.

4. Conclusions

Aminoacyl-sulfonamide-based compounds have been reported for class I LeuRS and class II ThrRS possessing potent antibacterial activity and species selectivity. Since MshC shares a similar catalytic pocket to class I CysRS, it stimulated us to generate similar compounds targeting the former protein, being essential in the regulation of oxidative stress in Mycobacterium. Based on this rational design, we reported a new series of cysteinyl-sulfonamide-based compounds that can effectively target Mycobacterium MshC. Two positive hits (compound 7b and 7d) were identified and suggested that heterocyclic substitutions at the meta position of the phenyl moiety are favorable for binding with MshC compared with a phenyl moiety. Additionally, the full-length crystal structures of ligand-free and compound-bound MshC provide the first glimpse of how this sulfonamide scaffold induces a number of conformational changes in the protein upon binding in the catalytic site. This result likely also reflects the binding mode of N-leucyl sulfonamide inhibitors targeting class I LeuRS [[25]]. Although the anti-mycobacterium activities of these compounds still need to be improved, the general synthetic route described can provide the basis for the production of a broad range of meta-substituted MshC inhibitors based on this cysteinyl phenylsulfonamide scaffold. In parallel, the current ligand-bound MshC structure provides good visual insights for further optimization.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the beamline scientists in Proxima 1 of synchrotron Soleil and ID23-1 in ESRF for helping with X-ray data collection.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms232315095/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.P. and A.V.A.; methodology, L.P., S.L., S.D.W., T.P. and D.C.; validation, L.P., D.C. and A.V.A.; Structural data analysis, L.P. and E.M.O.; NMR and MS data analysis, S.L., J.R. and A.V.A.; writing—original draft preparation, L.P.; writing—review and editing, L.P., D.C., E.M.O., S.V.S. and A.V.A.; supervision, S.D.W., D.C. and A.V.A.; project administration, S.D.W., D.C. and A.V.A.; funding acquisition, D.C. and A.V.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All structural datasets generated in this work are available in the PDB repository (https://www.rcsb.org/ (accessed on 10 November 2022)) under accession codes 8HFM, 8HFN and 8HFO.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the Research Fund Flanders (Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, G0A4616N to A.V.A. and G066619N to D.C. and A.V.A. and by a scholarship (1S68722N) to T.P.); the KU Leuven Research Fund (3M14022 to A.V.A.); and Zhengzhou University Research Fund (32213231 to L.P.). Mass spectrometry was made possible by the support of the Hercules Foundation of the Flemish Government (20100225-7).

Footnotes

References

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

Data Availability Statement

All structural datasets generated in this work are available in the PDB repository (https://www.rcsb.org/ (accessed on 10 November 2022)) under accession codes 8HFM, 8HFN and 8HFO.