Novel small molecule guanidine Sigma1 inhibitors for advanced prostate cancer

pH Regulates Ligand Binding to an Enzyme Active Site by Modulating Intermediate Populations

Understanding the mechanism of ligands binding to their protein targets and the influence of various factors governing the binding thermodynamics is essential for rational drug design. The solution pH is one of the critical factors that can influence ligand binding to a protein cavity, especially in enzymes whose function is sensitive to the pH. Using computer simulations, we studied the pH effect on the binding of a guanidinium ion (Gdm⁺) to the active site of hen egg-white lysozyme (HEWL). HEWL serves as a model system for enzymes with two acidic residues in the active site and ligands with Gdm⁺ moieties, which can bind to the active sites of such enzymes and are present in several approved drugs treating various disorders. The computed free energy surface (FES) shows that Gdm⁺ binds to the HEWL active site using two dominant binding pathways populating multiple intermediates. We show that the residues close to the active site that can anchor the ligand could play a critical role in ligand binding. Using a Markov state model, we quantified the lifetimes and kinetic pathways connecting the different states in the FES. The protonation and deprotonation of the acidic residues in the active site in response to the pH change strongly influence the Gdm⁺ binding. There is a sharp jump in the ligand-binding rate constant when the pH approaches the largest pK_a of the acidic residue present in the active site. The simulations reveal that, at most, three Gdm⁺ can bind at the active site, with the Gdm⁺ bound in the cavity of the active site acting as a scaffold for the other two Gdm⁺ ions binding. These results can aid in providing greater insights into designing novel molecules containing Gdm⁺ moieties that can have high binding affinities to inhibit the function of enzymes with acidic residues in their active site.

The chemistry and biology of guanidine secondary metabolites

Covering: 2017-2019Guanidine natural products isolated from microorganisms, marine invertebrates and terrestrial plants, amphibians and spiders, represented by non-ribosomal peptides, guanidine-bearing polyketides, alkaloids, terpenoids and shikimic acid derived, are the subject of this review. The topics include the discovery of new metabolites, total synthesis of natural guanidine compounds, biological activity and mechanism-of-action, biosynthesis and ecological functions.

Haloperidol and Prostate Cancer Prevention: More Epidemiologic Research Needed

CONTEXT

The antipsychotic drug haloperidol has antiproliferative and growth-inhibiting properties on prostate cancer cell lines in vitro by binding the sigma 1 protein. Evidence is needed regarding a possible preventive association in men.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether our epidemiologic data support an inverse association of haloperidol use with risk of prostate cancer.

DESIGN

These case-control analyses used conditional logistic regression to estimate relative risk by odds ratios (ORs) adjusting for race/ethnicity and aspects of medical care related to detection of prostate cancer. We tested 3 other commonly used antipsychotic drugs, risperidone, quetiapine, and olanzapine, for sigma 1 protein binding and inhibition of clonogenic growth of prostate cancer cells. Use of any of these by men was considered use of a comparator drug.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

1) association of haloperidol with prostate cancer; 2) sigma 1 binding and clonogenic growth.

RESULTS

Probably owing to small numbers of haloperidol recipients, evidence of a preventive association was inconsistent, depending on the definition of long-term use. If duration of use was greater than 1 year, the odds ratio (OR) was 0.38 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.14-1.01) for haloperidol and 0.80 (95% CI = 0.66-0.98) for the comparator drug; if the duration of use was greater than 2 years, the OR was 0.66 (95% CI = 0.24-1.76) for haloperidol and 0.84 (95% CI = 0.66-1.08) for the comparator drug. Unlike haloperidol, risperidone, quetiapine, and olanzapine did not bind sigma 1 or inhibit clonogenic growth.

CONCLUSION

Given the laboratory evidence, our ambiguous epidemiologic findings should encourage more epidemiologic evaluation of haloperidol use and risk of prostate cancer. Finding a negative association could be a scientific advance in prostate cancer prevention but would not be sufficient basis for recommending the prescription of haloperidol for that purpose.