Advertisement

Drug repurposing approach for the identification and designing of potential E6 inhibitors against cervical cancer: an in silico investigation

  • Avinash Kumar
  • Ekta Rathi
  • Suvarna G. KiniEmail author
Original Research
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

Repurposing of ‘old’ drugs to treat both common and rare diseases has garnered huge attention of the researchers because of the high attrition rates and extortionate cost involved in new drug discovery. Almost in 100% of cases, high-risk HPV DNA has been found to be associated with cervical cancer. The viral E6 and E7 genes are regularly maintained and expressed in cervical cancer. So, the functional inhibition of E6 can be a promising therapeutic target for HPV-associated cervical cancer. In the present study, a five feature (AADRR) e-pharmacophore model was built based on amino acid residues reported by Zanier et al. and predicted by the Sitemap module of Maestro (Schrödinger). FDA-approved drugs library was screened employing the developed model and identified hits (based on phase screen score) were further put for docking and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations studies. The top two identified hits were ZINC000001543916 (valganciclovir; anti-viral drug) and ZINC000003795098 (cytarabine; anti-cancer drug). Incidentally, our target protein E6 can be classified under the field of tumour virology. Identified five hits are either purine or pyrimidine derivatives. We have also reported compound ASK4, a valganciclovir derivative as a potential E6 inhibitor. Molecular docking studies suggest that H-bond interaction with TYR32 and CYS51 amino acid residues is important for E6 inhibition. MD simulations studies indicated that the ligands might form stable complex with the E6 protein. All the designed compounds showed acceptable ADME profile. Further purine and pyrimidine scaffold can be used to design novel E6 inhibitors.

Keywords

Drug repurposing Cancer HPV e-Pharmacophore Virtual screening Molecular dynamics simulations 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to Manipal - Schrödinger Centre for Molecular Simulations, Manipal Academy of Higher Education and Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences for providing necessary supports and facilities to carry out the present research work.

Funding information

The authors are thankful to BioCARe, Department of Biotechnology, Government of India, New Delhi (Grant No. BT/PR18194/BIC/101/631/2016) for financial support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    GLOBOCAN (2018) Cancer Today-IARC France http://www.gco.iarc.fr. Accessed 04 April 2019
  2. 2.
    zur Hausen H, De Villier EM (1994) Human papilloma viruses. Annu Rev Microbiol 48(1):427–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grabowska AK, Riemer AB (2012) The invisible enemy - how human papillomaviruses avoid recognition and clearance by the host immune system. Open Virol J 6:249–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Teissier S, Pang CL, Thierry F (2010) The E2F5 repressor is an activator of E6/E7 transcription and of the S-phase entry in HPV18-associated cells. Oncogene 29(36):5061–5070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doorbar J, Quint W, Banks L, Bravo IG, Stoler M, Broker TR, Stanley MA (2012) The biology and life-cycle of human papillomaviruses. Vaccine 30:F55–F70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Scheffner M, Huibregtse JM, Howley PM (1994) Identification of a human ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme that mediates the E6-AP-dependent ubiquitination of P53. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 91(19):8797–8801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Scheffner M, Huibregtse JM, Vierstra RD, Howley PM (1993) The HPV-16 E6 and E6-AP complex functions as a ubiquitin-protein ligase in the ubiquitination of P53. Cell 75(3):495–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Butz K, Ristriani T, Hengstermann A, Denk C, Scheffner M, Hoppe-Seyler F (2003) SiRNA targeting of the viral E6 oncogene efficiently kills human papillomavirus-positive cancer cells. Oncogene 22(38):5938–5945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Doorbar J, Griffin H (2007) Intrabody strategies for the treatment of human papillomavirus-associated disease. Expert Opin Biol Ther.  https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.7.5.677
  10. 10.
    Cherry JJ, Rietz A, Malinkevich A, Liu Y, Xie M, Bartolowits M, Davisson VJ, Baleja JD, Androphy EJ (2013) Structure based identification and characterization of flavonoids that disrupt human papillomavirus-16 E6 function. PLoS One 8(12):1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weinstein IB, Joe A (2008) Oncogene addiction. Cancer Res 68(9):3077–3080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fehrmann F, Laimins LA (2003) Human papillomaviruses: targeting differentiating epithelial cells for malignant transformation. Oncogene.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1206554
  13. 13.
    Scheffner M, Whitaker NJ (2003) Human papillomavirus-induced carcinogenesis and the ubiquitin-proteasome system. Semin Cancer Biol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1044-579X(02)00100-1
  14. 14.
    Zanier K, Stutz C, Kintscher S, Reinz E, Sehr P, Bulkescher J, Hoppe-Seyler K, Travé G, Hoppe-Seyler F (2014) The E6AP binding pocket of the HPV16 E6 oncoprotein provides a docking site for a small inhibitory peptide unrelated to E6AP, indicating druggability of E6. PLoS One.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112514
  15. 15.
    Butz K, Denk C, Ullmann A, Scheffner M, Hoppe-Seyler F (2000) Induction of apoptosis in human papillomaviruspositive cancer cells by peptide aptamers targeting the viral E6 oncoprotein. Proc Natl Acad Sci 97(12):6693–6697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ham S, Kim KH, Kwon TH, Bak Y, Lee DH, Song YS, Park SH, Park YS, Kim MS, Kang JW (2014) Luteolin induces intrinsic apoptosis via inhibition of E6/E7 oncogenes and activation of extrinsic and intrinsic signaling pathways in HPV-18-associated cells. Oncol Rep 31(6):2683–2691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Griffin H, Elston R, Jackson D, Ansell K, Coleman M, Winter G, Doorbar J (2006) Inhibition of papillomavirus protein function in cervical cancer cells by intrabody targeting. J Mol Biol 355(3):360–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boolell M, Allen MJ, Ballard SA, Gepi-Attee S, Muirhead GJ, Naylor AM, Osterloh IH, Gingell C (1996) Sildenafil: an orally active type 5 cyclic GMP-specific phosphodiesterase inhibitor for the treatment of penile erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 8(2):47–52Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Galiè N, Ghofrani HA, Torbicki A, Barst RJ, Rubin LJ, Badesch D, Fleming T, Parpia T, Burgess G, Branzi A (2005) Sildenafil citrate therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension. N Engl J Med 353(20):2148–2157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Polamreddy P, Gattu N (2019) The drug repurposing landscape from 2012 to 2017: evolution, challenges, and possible solutions. Drug Discov Today 24(3):789–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heinrich MC, Joensuu H, Demetri GD, Corless CL, Apperley J, Fletcher JA, Soulieres D, Dirnhofer S, Harlow A, Town A (2008) Phase II, open-label study evaluating the activity of imatinib in treating life-threatening malignancies known to be associated with imatinib-sensitive tyrosine kinases. Clin Cancer Res 14(9):2717–2725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murahari M, Krishnamurthy M (2019) An update on drug repurposing: re-written saga of the drug’s fate. Biomed Pharmacother 110:700–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Salam NK, Nuti R, Sherman W (2009) Novel method for generating structure-based pharmacophores using energetic analysis. J Chem Inf Model 49(10):2356–2368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sterling T, Irwin JJ (2015) ZINC 15 - ligand discovery for everyone. J Chem Inf Model.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.5b00559
  25. 25.
    Schrödinger Release 2019-1: Maestro, Schrödinger, LLC, New York, NY, 2019Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zanier K, Charbonnier S, Sidi AOMO, McEwen AG, Ferrario MG, Poussin-Courmontagne P, Cura V, Brimer N, Babah KO, Ansari T (2013) Structural basis for hijacking of cellular LxxLL motifs by papillomavirus E6 oncoproteins. Science 339(6120):694–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Madhavi SG, Adzhigirey M, Day T, Annabhimoju R, Sherman W (2013) Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments. J Comput Aided Mol Des 27(3):221–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Halgren TA (2009) Identifying and characterizing binding sites and assessing druggability. J Chem Inf Model 49(2):377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dixon SL, Smondyrev AM, Rao SN (2006) PHASE: a novel approach to pharmacophore modeling and 3D database searching. Chem Biol Drug Des 67(5):370–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Friesner RA, Murphy RB, Repasky MP, Frye LL, Greenwood JR, Halgren TA, Sanschagrin PC, Mainz DT (2006) Extra precision glide: docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein−ligand complexes. J Med Chem 49(21):6177–6196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bowers KJ, Chow DE, Xu H, Dror RO, Eastwood MP, Gregersen BA, Klepeis JL, Kolossvary I, Moraes MA, Sacerdoti FD (2006) Scalable algorithms for molecular dynamics simulations on commodity clusters. In ACM/IEEE SC 2006 Conference (SC’06).  https://doi.org/10.1109/SC.2006.54
  32. 32.
    Jorgensen WL (2006) QikProp. Schrödinger LLC, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical SciencesManipal Academy of Higher EducationManipalIndia

Personalised recommendations