Photoinduced Covalent Irreversible Inactivation of Proline Dehydrogenase by S-Heterocycles

Electronic Structure Methods for Simulating Flavin's Spectroscopy and Photophysics: Comparison of Multi-reference, TD-DFT, and Single-Reference Wave Function Methods

The use of flavins and flavoproteins in photocatalytic, sensing, and biotechnological applications has led to a growing interest in computationally modeling the excited-state electronic structure and photophysics of flavin. However, there is limited consensus regarding which computational methods are appropriate for modeling flavin's photophysics. We compare the energies of low-lying excited states of flavin computed with time-dependent density functional theory (TD-DFT), equation-of-motion coupled cluster (EOM-EE-CCSD), scaled opposite-spin configuration interaction [SOS-CIS(D)], multiconfiguration pair-density functional theory (MC-PDFT), and several multireference perturbation theory (MR-PT2) methods. In the first part, we focus on excitation energies of the first singlet excited state (S1) of five different redox and protonation states of flavin, with the goal of finding a suitable active space for MR-PT2 calculations. In the second part, we construct two sets of one-dimensional potential energy surfaces connecting the S0 and S1 equilibrium geometries (S0-S1 path) and the S1 (π,π*) and S2 (n,π*) equilibrium geometries (S1-S2 path). The first path therefore follows a Franck-Condon active mode of flavin while the second path maps crossings points between low-lying singlet and triplet states in flavin. We discuss the similarities and differences in the TD-DFT, EOM-EE-CCSD, SOS-CIS(D), MC-PDFT and MR-PT2 energy profiles along these paths. We find that (TD-)DFT methods are suitable for applications such as simulating the spectra of flavins but are inconsistent with several other methods when used for some geometry optimizations and when describing the energetics of dark (n,π*) states. MR-PT2 methods show promise for the simulation of flavin's low-lying excited states, but the selection of orbitals for the active space and the number of roots used for state averaging must be done carefully to avoid artifacts. Some properties, such as the intersystem crossing geometry and energy between the S1 (π,π*) and T2 (n,π*) states, may require additional benchmarking before they can be determined quantitatively.

Screening a knowledge-based library of low molecular weight compounds against the proline biosynthetic enzyme 1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate 1 (PYCR1)

Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate reductase isoform 1 (PYCR1) is the last enzyme of proline biosynthesis and catalyzes the NAD(P)H-dependent reduction of Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate to L-proline. High PYCR1 gene expression is observed in many cancers and linked to poor patient outcomes and tumor aggressiveness. The knockdown of the PYCR1 gene or the inhibition of PYCR1 enzyme has been shown to inhibit tumorigenesis in cancer cells and animal models of cancer, motivating inhibitor discovery. We screened a library of 71 low molecular weight compounds (average MW of 131 Da) against PYCR1 using an enzyme activity assay. Hit compounds were validated with X-ray crystallography and kinetic assays to determine affinity parameters. The library was counter-screened against human Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate reductase isoform 3 and proline dehydrogenase (PRODH) to assess specificity/promiscuity. Twelve PYCR1 and one PRODH inhibitor crystal structures were determined. Three compounds inhibit PYCR1 with competitive inhibition parameter of 100 μM or lower. Among these, (S)-tetrahydro-2H-pyran-2-carboxylic acid (70 μM) has higher affinity than the current best tool compound N-formyl-l-proline, is 30 times more specific for PYCR1 over human Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate reductase isoform 3, and negligibly inhibits PRODH. Structure-affinity relationships suggest that hydrogen bonding of the heteroatom of this compound is important for binding to PYCR1. The structures of PYCR1 and PRODH complexed with 1-hydroxyethane-1-sulfonate demonstrate that the sulfonate group is a suitable replacement for the carboxylate anchor. This result suggests that the exploration of carboxylic acid isosteres may be a promising strategy for discovering new classes of PYCR1 and PRODH inhibitors. The structure of PYCR1 complexed with l-pipecolate and NADH supports the hypothesis that PYCR1 has an alternative function in lysine metabolism.

Structure-based engineering of minimal proline dehydrogenase domains for inhibitor discovery

Proline dehydrogenase (PRODH) catalyzes the FAD-dependent oxidation of l-proline to Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate and is a target for inhibitor discovery because of its importance in cancer cell metabolism. Because human PRODH is challenging to purify, the PRODH domains of the bacterial bifunctional enzyme proline utilization A (PutA) have been used for inhibitor development. These systems have limitations due to large polypeptide chain length, conformational flexibility and the presence of domains unrelated to PRODH activity. Herein, we report the engineering of minimal PRODH domains for inhibitor discovery. The best designs contain one-third of the 1233-residue PutA from Sinorhizobium meliloti and include a linker that replaces the PutA α-domain. The minimal PRODHs exhibit near wild-type enzymatic activity and are susceptible to known inhibitors and inactivators. Crystal structures of minimal PRODHs inhibited by S-(-)-tetrahydro-2-furoic acid and 2-(furan-2-yl)acetic acid were determined at 1.23 and 1.72 Å resolution. Minimal PRODHs should be useful in chemical probe discovery.

Structure-affinity relationships of reversible proline analog inhibitors targeting proline dehydrogenase

Proline dehydrogenase (PRODH) catalyzes the first step of proline catabolism, the FAD-dependent oxidation of L-proline to Δ¹-pyrroline-5-carboxylate. PRODH plays a central role in the metabolic rewiring of cancer cells, which has motivated the discovery of inhibitors. Here, we studied the inhibition of PRODH by 18 proline-like compounds to understand the structural and chemical features responsible for the affinity of the best-known inhibitor, S-(-)-tetrahydro-2-furoic acid (1). The compounds were screened, and then six were selected for more thorough kinetic analysis: cyclobutane-1,1-dicarboxylic acid (2), cyclobutanecarboxylic acid (3), cyclopropanecarboxylic acid (4), cyclopentanecarboxylic acid (16), 2-oxobutyric acid (17), and (2S)-oxetane-2-carboxylic acid (18). These compounds are competitive inhibitors with inhibition constants in the range of 1.4-6 mM, compared to 0.3 mM for 1. Crystal structures of PRODH complexed with 2, 3, 4, and 18 were determined. All four inhibitors bind in the proline substrate site, but the orientations of their rings differ from that of 1. The binding of 3 and 18 is accompanied by compression of the active site to enable nonpolar contacts with Leu513. Compound 2 is unique in that the additional carboxylate displaces a structurally conserved water molecule from the active site. Compound 18 also destabilizes the conserved water, but by an unexpected non-steric mechanism. The results are interpreted using a chemical double mutant thermodynamic cycle. This analysis revealed unanticipated synergism between ring size and hydrogen bonding to the conserved water. These structure-affinity relationships provide new information relevant to the development of new inhibitor design strategies targeting PRODH.