1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology

Structure-guided microbial targeting of antistaphylococcal prodrugs

  1. Justin J Miller
  2. Ishaan T Shah
  3. Jayda Hatten
  4. Yasaman Barekatain
  5. Elizabeth A Mueller
  6. Ahmed M Moustafa
  7. Rachel L Edwards
  8. Cynthia S Dowd
  9. Paul Planet
  10. Florian L Muller
  11. Joseph Jez
  12. Audrey R Odom John  Is a corresponding author
  1. Washington University School of Medicine, United States
  2. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
  3. Washington University in St Louis, United States
  4. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, United States
  5. The George Washington University, United States
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66657
Share this article
Cite this article
  1. Justin J Miller
  2. Ishaan T Shah
  3. Jayda Hatten
  4. Yasaman Barekatain
  5. Elizabeth A Mueller
  6. Ahmed M Moustafa
  7. Rachel L Edwards
  8. Cynthia S Dowd
  9. Paul Planet
  10. Florian L Muller
  11. Joseph Jez
  12. Audrey R Odom John
(2021)
Structure-guided microbial targeting of antistaphylococcal prodrugs
eLife 10:e66657.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66657
  2. Download BibTeX
  3. Download .RIS

Abstract

Carboxy ester prodrugs are widely employed to increase oral absorption and potency of phosphonate antibiotics. Prodrugging can mask problematic chemical features that prevent cellular uptake and may enable tissue specific compound delivery. However, many carboxy ester promoieties are rapidly hydrolyzed by serum esterases, limiting their therapeutic potential. While carboxy ester-based prodrug targeting is feasible, it has seen limited use in microbes as microbial esterase specific promoieties have not been described. Here we identify the bacterial esterases, GloB and FrmB, that activate carboxy ester prodrugs in Staphylococcus aureus. Additionally, we determine the substrate specificities for FrmB and GloB and demonstrate the structural basis of these preferences. Finally, we establish the carboxy ester substrate specificities of human and mouse sera, ultimately identifying several promoieties likely to be serum esterase-resistant and microbially labile. These studies will enable structure-guided design of anti-staphylococcal promoieties and expand the range of molecules to target staphylococcal pathogens.

Data availability

Sequencing data and structure data is provided in the manuscript and deposited on the NCBI BioProject database (PRJNA648156) or in the protein data bank (FrmB accession code 7L0A, GloB accession code 7L0B).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Justin J Miller

    Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9400-8916

  2. Ishaan T Shah

    Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  3. Jayda Hatten

    Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Yasaman Barekatain

    Cancer Systems Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Elizabeth A Mueller

    Biology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5482-6551

  6. Ahmed M Moustafa

    Pediatrics Infectious Diseases, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9949-6936

  7. Rachel L Edwards

    Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  8. Cynthia S Dowd

    Chemistry, The George Washington University, Washington DC, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  9. Paul Planet

    Pediatrics Infectious Diseases, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  10. Florian L Muller

    Cancer Systems Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  11. Joseph Jez

    Biology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  12. Audrey R Odom John

    Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, United States
    For correspondence
    johna3@email.chop.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8395-8537

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01 AI103280; R21 AI123808; R21 AI130584)

  • Audrey R Odom John

National Center for Research Resources (UL1 RR024992)

  • Joseph Jez

Burroughs Wellcome Fund (PATH)

  • Audrey R Odom John

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

Copyright

© 2021, Miller 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

  • 2,238
    views
  • 324
    downloads
  • 7
    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. Justin J Miller
  2. Ishaan T Shah
  3. Jayda Hatten
  4. Yasaman Barekatain
  5. Elizabeth A Mueller
  6. Ahmed M Moustafa
  7. Rachel L Edwards
  8. Cynthia S Dowd
  9. Paul Planet
  10. Florian L Muller
  11. Joseph Jez
  12. Audrey R Odom John
(2021)
Structure-guided microbial targeting of antistaphylococcal prodrugs
eLife 10:e66657.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66657

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66657

Categories and tags

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology

    Disordered proteins interact with the chemical environment to tune their protective function during drying

    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. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics

    Isobaric crosslinking mass spectrometry technology for studying conformational and structural changes in proteins and complexes

    Jie Luo, Jeff Ranish
    Tools and Resources

    Dynamic conformational and structural changes in proteins and protein complexes play a central and ubiquitous role in the regulation of protein function, yet it is very challenging to study these changes, especially for large protein complexes, under physiological conditions. Here, we introduce a novel isobaric crosslinker, Qlinker, for studying conformational and structural changes in proteins and protein complexes using quantitative crosslinking mass spectrometry. Qlinkers are small and simple, amine-reactive molecules with an optimal extended distance of ~10 Å, which use MS2 reporter ions for relative quantification of Qlinker-modified peptides derived from different samples. We synthesized the 2-plex Q2linker and showed that the Q2linker can provide quantitative crosslinking data that pinpoints key conformational and structural changes in biosensors, binary and ternary complexes composed of the general transcription factors TBP, TFIIA, and TFIIB, and RNA polymerase II complexes.