Advertisement

Recent Advances in Activity-Based Protein Profiling of Proteases

  • Suravi Chakrabarty
  • Jan Pascal Kahler
  • Merel A. T. van de Plassche
  • Roeland Vanhoutte
  • Steven H. L. VerhelstEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology book series (CT MICROBIOLOGY, volume 420)

Abstract

The activity of proteases is tightly regulated, and dysregulation is linked to a variety of human diseases. For this reason, ABPP is a well-suited method to study protease biology and the design of protease probes has pushed the boundaries of ABPP. The development of highly selective protease probes is still a challenging task. After an introduction, the first section of this chapter discusses several strategies to enable detection of a single active protease species. These range from the usage of non-natural amino acids, combination of probes with antibodies, and engineering of the target proteases. A next section describes the different types of detection tags that facilitate the read-out possibilities including various types of imaging methods and mass spectrometry-based target identification. The power of protease ABPP is illustrated by examples for a selected number of proteases. It is expected that some protease probes that have been evaluated in animal models of human disease will find translation into clinical application in the near future.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work in the Verhelst Laboratory is generously supported by the FWO, Stichting Alzheimer Onderzoek, KU Leuven, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the Ministerium für Innovation, Wissenschaft und Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, the Senatsverwaltung für Technologie und Forschung des Landes Berlin, and the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung.

References

  1. Abuelyaman AS et al (1994) Fluorescent derivatives of diphenyl [1-(N-Peptidylamino)alkyl]phosphonate esters: synthesis and use in the inhibition and cellular localization of serine proteases. Bioconjug Chem 5(5):400–405.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bc00029a004CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Abuelyaman AS et al (1997) Synthesis and kinetic studies of diphenyl 1-(N-peptidylamino)alkanephosphonate esters and their biotinylated derivatives as inhibitors of serine proteases and probes for lymphocyte granzymes. Arch Biochem Biophys 344(2):271–280.  https://doi.org/10.1006/abbi.1997.0231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Adibekian A et al (2011) Click-generated triazole ureas as ultrapotent in vivo-active serine hydrolase inhibitors. Nat Chem Biol 7(7):469–478.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.579CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Bachovchin DA et al (2009) Identification of selective inhibitors of uncharacterized enzymes by high-throughput screening with fluorescent activity-based probes. Nat Biotechnol 27(4):387–394.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1531CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Bachovchin DA et al (2014) A high-throughput, multiplexed assay for superfamily-wide profiling of enzyme activity. Nat Chem Biol 10(8):656–663.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.1578CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bedner E et al (2000) Activation of caspases measured in situ by binding of fluorochrome-labeled inhibitors of caspases (FLICA): correlation with DNA fragmentation. Exp Cell Res 259(1):308–313.  https://doi.org/10.1006/excr.2000.4955CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Béliveau F, Désilets A, Leduc R (2009) Probing the substrate specificities of matriptase, matriptase-2, hepsin and DESC1 with internally quenched fluorescent peptides. The FEBS Journal 276(8):2213–2226.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-4658.2009.06950.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Ben-Nun Y et al (2015) Photodynamic quenched cathepsin activity based probes for cancer detection and macrophage targeted therapy. Theranostics 5(8):847–862.  https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.10854CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger AB et al (2006a) Identification of early intermediates of caspase activation using selective inhibitors and activity-based probes. Mol Cell 23(4):509–521.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2006.06.021CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Berger AB, Sexton KB, Bogyo M (2006b) Commonly used caspase inhibitors designed based on substrate specificity profiles lack selectivity. Cell Res 16(12):961–963.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.cr.7310112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Blum G et al (2005) Dynamic imaging of protease activity with fluorescently quenched activity-based probes. Nat Chem Biol 1(4):203–209.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio728CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Blum G et al (2007) Noninvasive optical imaging of cysteine protease activity using fluorescently quenched activity-based probes. Nat Chem Biol 3(10):668–677.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.2007.26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Boatright KM, Salvesen GS (2003) Mechanisms of caspase activation. Curr Opin Cell Biol 15(6):725–731.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2003.10.009CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Bogyo M et al (1997) Covalent modification of the active site threonine of proteasomal β subunits and the Escherichia coli homolog HsIV by a new class of inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94(13):6629–6634.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.13.6629CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Bogyo M et al (2000) Selective targeting of lysosomal cysteine proteases with radiolabeled electrophilic substrate analogs. Chem Biol 7(1):27–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1074-5521(00)00061-2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Britton M et al (2009) Selective inhibitor of proteasome’s caspase-like sites sensitizes cells to specific inhibition of chymotrypsin-like sites. Chem Biol 16(12):1278–1289.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2009.11.015CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. de Bruin G et al (2016) Proteasome subunit selective activity-based probes report on proteasome core particle composition in a native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis fluorescence-resonance energy transfer assay. J Am Chem Soc 138(31):9874–9880.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.6b04207CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bugge TH, Antalis TM, Wu Q (2009) Type II transmembrane serine proteases. J Biol Chem 284(35):23177–23181.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.R109.021006CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Carril M (2017) Activatable probes for diagnosis and biomarker detection by MRI. J Mater Chem B 5(5):4332–4347.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C7TB00093FCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Coffelt SB, Wellenstein MD, de Visser KE (2016) Neutrophils in cancer : neutral no more. Nature Publishing Group 16(7):431–446.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc.2016.52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cutter JL et al (2012) Topical application of activity-based probes for visualization of brain tumor tissue. PLoS ONE 7(3):e33060.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033060CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. DeBruin G et al (2016) A set of activity-based probes to visualize human (Immuno)proteasome activities. Angew Chem—Int Ed 55(13):4199–4203.  https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201509092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dooley CT, Houghten RA (1993) The use of positional scanning synthetic peptide combinatorial libraries for the rapid determination of opioid receptor ligands. Life Sci 52(18):1509–1517.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3205(93)90113-HCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Edgington LE et al (2009) Noninvasive optical imaging of apoptosis by caspase-targeted activity-based probes. Nat Med 15(8):967–U177.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.1938CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Eitelhuber AC et al (2015) Activity-based probes for detection of active MALT1 paracaspase in immune cells and lymphomas. Chem Biol (Elsevier Ltd) 22(1):129–138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2014.10.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Van Esbroeck ACM et al (2017) Activity-based protein profiling reveals off-target proteins of the FAAH inhibitor BIA 10-2474. Science 356(6342):1084–1087.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7497CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Falgueyret JP et al (2004) An activity-based probe for the determination of cysteine cathepsin protease activities in whole cells. Anal Biochem 335(2):218–227.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2004.09.005CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Florea BI et al (2010) Activity-based profiling reveals reactivity of the murine thymoproteasome-specific subunit b 5t. Chem Biol (Elsevier Ltd) 17(8):795–801.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2010.05.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fonovic M et al (2007) Proteomics evaluation of chemically cleavable activity-based probes. Mol Cell Proteomics 6(10):1761–1770.  https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M700124-MCP200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Fontan L et al (2012) MALT1 small molecule inhibitors specifically suppress ABC-DLBCL In Vitro and In Vivo. Cancer Cell (Elsevier Inc.,) 22(6):812–824.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2012.11.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gaikwad HK et al (2018) Molecular imaging of cancer using X-ray computed tomography with protease targeted iodinated activity-based probes. Nano Lett 18(3):1582–1591.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b03813CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Geurink PP et al (2013) Incorporation of non-natural amino acids improves cell permeability and potency of specific inhibitors of proteasome trypsin-like sites. J Med Chem 56(3):1262–1275.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jm3016987CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Gevaert K et al (2003) Exploring proteomes and analyzing protein processing by mass spectrometric identification of sorted N-terminal peptides. Nat Biotechnol 21(5):566–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Greenbaum D et al (2000) Epoxide electrophiles as activity-dependent cysteine protease profiling and discovery tools. Chem Biol 7(8):569–581.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1074-5521(00)00014-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Greenbaum D et al (2002) Chemical approaches for functionally probing the proteome. Mol Cell Proteomics 1(1):60–68.  https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.T100003-MCP200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Hachmann J et al (2012) Mechanism and specificity of the human paracaspase MALT1. Biochem J 443(1):287–295.  https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20120035CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Hachmann J, Salvesen GS (2016) The paracaspase MALT1. Biochimie 122:324–338.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2015.09.018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Haedke U et al (2013) Tuning probe selectivity for chemical proteomics applications. Curr Opin Chem Biol 17(1):102–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpa.2012.11.024CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Hailfinger S et al (2009) Essential role of MALT1 protease activity in activated B cell-like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106(47):19946–19951.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907511106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Häußler D et al (2016) Phosphono bisbenzguanidines as irreversible dipeptidomimetic inhibitors and activity-based probes of matriptase-2. Chem Eur J 22(25):8525–8535.  https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201600206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Häußler D et al (2017) A fluorescent-labeled phosphono bisbenzguanidine as an activity-based probe for matriptase. Chem Eur J 23(22):5205–5209.  https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201700319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Hight MR et al (2014) A peptide-based positron emission tomography probe for in vivo detection of caspase activity in apoptotic cells. Clin Cancer Res 20(8):2126–2135.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2444CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Hoenderdos K, Condliffe A (2013) The neutrophil in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: too little, too late or too much, too soon? Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 48(5):531–539.  https://doi.org/10.1165/rcmb.2012-0492TRCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Hong J-A et al (2017) Development of a smart activity-based probe to detect subcellular activity of asparaginyl endopeptidase in living cells. Org Biomol Chem (Royal Society of Chemistry) 1:8018–8022.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c7ob01467hCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hu M et al (2011) Multicolor, one- and two-photon imaging of enzymatic activities in live cells with fluorescently quenched activity-based probes (qABPs). J Am Chem Soc 133(31):12009–12020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ides J et al (2014) Synthesis and in vivo preclinical evaluation of an18F labeled uPA inhibitor as a potential PET imaging agent. Nucl Med Biol (Elsevier Inc.,) 41(6):477–487.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2014.03.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jessani N et al (2002) Enzyme activity profiles of the secreted and membrane proteome that depict cancer cell invasiveness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99(16):10335–10340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Joyce JA et al (2004) Cathepsin cysteine proteases are effectors of invasive growth and angiogenesis during multistage tumorigenesis. Cancer Cell 5(5):443–453.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1535-6108(04)00111-4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Kam CM et al (1993) Biotinylated isocoumarins, new inhibitors and reagents for detection, localization, and isolation of serine proteases. Bioconjug Chem 4(6):560–567.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bc00024a021CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Kasperkiewicz P et al (2014) Design of ultrasensitive probes for human neutrophil elastase through hybrid combinatorial substrate library profiling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(7):2518–2523.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1318548111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Kasperkiewicz P et al (2015) Design of a selective substrate and activity based probe for human neutrophil serine protease 4. PloS one 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kasperkiewicz P, Altman Y, D’Angelo M et al (2017) Toolbox of fluorescent probes for parallel imaging reveals uneven location of serine proteases in neutrophils. J Am Chem Soc 139(29):10115–10125.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.7b04394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Kato D et al (2005) Activity-based probes that target diverse cysteine protease families. Nat Chem Biol 1(1):33–38.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Kessler BM et al (2001) Extended peptide-based inhibitors efficiently target the proteasome and reveal overlapping specificities of the catalytic beta-subunits. Chem Biol 8(9):913–929.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1074-5521(01)00069-2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Kim D, Jetson RR, Krusemark CJ (2017) A DNA-assisted immunoassay for enzyme activity via a DNA-linked, activity-based probe. Chemical communications (Cambridge, England), 53(68), pp. 9474–9477.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c7cc05236gCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kleifeld O et al (2010) Isotopic labeling of terminal amines in complex samples identifies protein N-termini and protease cleavage products. Nat Biotechnol 28(3):281–288.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Kolodziejek I et al (2011) Proteasome activity imaging and profiling characterizes bacterial effector syringolin A. Plant Physiol 155(1):477–489.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.163733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Kovács J et al (2017) Proteasome activity profiling uncovers alteration of catalytic β2 and β5 subunits of the stress-induced proteasome during salinity stress in tomato roots. Front Plant Sci 8(107).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00107
  59. Lanchec E et al (2017) The type II transmembrane serine protease matriptase cleaves the amyloid precursor protein and reduces its processing to beta-amyloid peptide. J Biol Chem 292:20669–20682.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M117.792911CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. LeBeau AM et al (2013) Imaging a functional tumorigenic biomarker in the transformed epithelium. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(1):93–98.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218694110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Lechtenberg BC et al (2015) The elastase-PK101 structure: Mechanism of an ultrasensitive activity-based probe revealed. ACS Chem Biol 10(4):945–951.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cb500909nCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Li G et al (2017) An activity-dependent proximity ligation platform for spatially resolved quantification of active enzymes in single cells. Nat Commun 8(1).  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01854-0
  63. Li N et al (2013) Relative quantification of proteasome activity by activity-based protein profiling and LC-MS/MS. Nat Protoc (Nature Publishing Group) 8(6):1155–1168.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2013.065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Liu Y, Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF (1999) Activity-based protein profiling: the serine hydrolases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96(26):14694–14699.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.26.14694CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Matthews DJ, Wells JA (1993) Substrate phage: selection of protease substrates by monovalent phage display. Science (New York, N.Y.) 260(5111):1113–1117.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.8493554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Mc Guire C et al (2013) Paracaspase MALT1 deficiency protects mice from autoimmune-mediated demyelination. J Immunol 190(6):2896–2903.  https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1201351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Menou A et al (2017) Human airway trypsin-like protease, a serine protease involved in respiratory diseases. Am J Lung Cell Mol Physiol 312(107):657–668.  https://doi.org/10.1152/ajplung.00509.2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Méthot N et al (2004) A caspase active site probe reveals high fractional inhibition needed to block DNA fragmentation. J Biol Chem 279(27):27905–27914.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M400247200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Miller GS, List K (2013) The matriptase-prostasin proteolytic cascade in epithelial development and pathology. Cell Tissue Res 351:245–253.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00441-012-1348-1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Misas-Villamil JC et al (2017) Subunit-selective proteasome activity profiling uncovers uncoupled proteasome subunit activities during bacterial infections. Plant J 90(2):418–430.  https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.13494CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Morell M et al (2013) Coupling protein engineering with probe design to inhibit and image matrix metalloproteinases with controlled specificity. J Am Chem Soc 135(24):9139–9148.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja403523pCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. Murata S et al (2007) Regulation of CD8+ T cell development by thymus-specific proteasomes. Science 316(5829):1349–1353.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1141915CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Oberst MD et al (2003) The activation of matriptase requires its noncatalytic domains, serine protease domain, and its cognate inhibitor. J Biol Chem 278(29):26773–26779.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M304282200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Oberst MD et al (2005) HAI-1 regulates activation and expression of matriptase, a membrane-bound serine protease. Am J Physiol—Cell Physiol 289:462–470.  https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.00076.2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ong S-E et al (2002) Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture, SILAC, as a simple and accurate approach to expression proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics 1(5):376–386.  https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M200025-MCP200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Perera NC et al (2012) NSP4, an elastase-related protease in human neutrophils with arginine specificity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(12):6229–6234.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1200470109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Pop C, Salvesen GS (2009) Human caspases: activation, specificity, and regulation. J Biol Chem 284(33):21777–21781.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.R800084200CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. Poreba M et al (2014) Unnatural amino acids increase sensitivity and provide for the design of highly selective caspase substrates. Cell Death Differ 21(9):1482–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Poreba M, Salvesen GS, Drag M (2017) Synthesis of a HyCoSuL peptide substrate library to dissect protease substrate specificity. Nat. Protoc (Nature Publishing Group) 12(10):2189–2214.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2017.091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Powers JC et al (2002) Irreversible inhibitors of serine, cysteine, and threonine proteases. Chem Rev 102(12):4639–4750.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cr010182vCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Rawlings ND, Barrett AJ, Finn R (2018) Twenty years of the MEROPS database of proteolytic enzymes, their substrates and inhibitors. Nucleic Acids Res 44(February):343–350.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv1118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Ren G et al (2011) Non-invasive imaging of cysteine cathepsin activity in solid tumors using a (64)Cu-labeled activity-based probe. PLoS One 6(11)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rut W et al (2017) Extended substrate specificity and first potent irreversible inhibitor/activity-based probe design for Zika virus NS2B-NS3 protease. Antiviral Res 139:88–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2016.12.018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Saghatelian A et al (2004) Activity-based probes for the proteomic profiling of metalloproteases. PNAS 101(27):10000–10005.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402784101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Sanman LE, Bogyo M (2014) Activity-based profiling of proteases. Annu Rev Biochem 83:249–273.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-060713-035352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Schechter I, Berger A (1967) On the size of the active site in proteases. I. Papain. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 27(2):157–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Schilling O, Overall CM (2008) Proteome-derived, database-searchable peptide libraries for identifying protease cleavage sites. Nat Biotechnol 26(6):685–694.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Screen M et al (2010) Nature of pharmacophore influences active site specificity of proteasome inhibitors. The J Biol Chem. Am Soc Biochem Mol Biol 285(51):40125–34.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m110.160606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Segal E et al (2015) Detection of intestinal cancer by local, topical application of a quenched fluorescence probe for cysteine cathepsins. Chem Biol 22(1):148–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2014.11.008CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. Serim S, Baer P, Verhelst SHL (2015) Mixed alkyl aryl phosphonate esters as quenched fluorescent activity-based probes for serine proteases. Org Biomol Chem. Roy Soc Chem 13(8):2293–9.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ob02444cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sharifzadeh S et al (2017) Novel electrophilic scaffold for imaging of essential penicillin-binding proteins in Streptococcus pneumoniae. ACS Chem Biol 12:2849–2857.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.7b00614CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  92. Shaulov-Rotem Y et al (2016) A novel quenched fluorescent activity-based probe reveals caspase-3 activity in the endoplasmic reticulum during apoptosis. Chem. Sci. Roy Soc Chems 7(2):1322–1337.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C5SC03207ECrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Sieber SA et al (2004) Microarray platform for profiling enzyme activities in complex proteomes. J Am Chem Soc 126(48):15640–15641.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja044286+CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Silvestri L et al (2008) the serine protease matriptase-2 (TMPRSS6) inhibits hepcidin activation by cleaving membrane hemojuvelin. Cell Metab 8(6):502–511.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2008.09.012CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  95. Soehnlein O et al (2017) Neutrophils as protagonists and targets in chronic inflammation. Nat Publishing Group 17(4):248–261.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nri.2017.10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Tanaka K, Kasahara M (1998) The MHC class I ligand-generating system: roles of immunoproteasomes and the interferon-gamma-inducible proteasome activator PA28. Immunol Rev 163:161–176.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-065X.1998.tb01195.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Thornberry NA et al (1997) A combinatorial approach defines specificities of members of the caspase family and granzyme B: functional relationships established for key mediators of apoptosis. J Biol Chem 272(29):17907–17911.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.272.29.17907CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Vangestel C et al (2016) Preclinical evaluation of [(111) In]MICA-401, an activity-based probe for SPECT imaging of in vivo uPA activity. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 11:448–458.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cmmi.1706CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Venne AS et al (2013) Novel highly sensitive, specific, and straightforward strategy for comprehensive N-terminal proteomics reveals unknown substrates of the mitochondrial peptidase Icp55. J Proteome Res 12(9):3823–3830.  https://doi.org/10.1021/pr400435dCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Verdoes M, Verhelst SHL (2016) Detection of protease activity in cells and animals Biochim Biophys Acta—Proteins and Proteomics (Elsevier B.V.) 1864(1):130–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbapap.2015.04.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Verhelst SHL, Fonovic M, Bogyo M (2007) A mild chemically cleavable linker system for functional proteomic applications. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 46(8):1284–1286.  https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200603811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Vickers CJ, González-Páez GE, Wolan DW (2013) Selective detection of caspase-3 versus caspase-7 using activity-based probes with key unnatural amino acids. ACS Chem Biol 8(7):1558–1566.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cb400209wCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Vidmar R et al (2017) Protease cleavage site fingerprinting by label-free in-gel degradomics reveals pH-dependent specificity switch of legumain. The EMBO J 36(16):2455–2465.  https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201796750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Wang C, Meynard D, Lin HY (2014) The role of TMPRSS6/matriptase-2 in iron regulation and anemia. Front in Pharmacol 5(114):1–6.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2014.00114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Willems LI et al (2011) Bioorthogonal chemistry: applications in activity-based protein profiling. Acc Chem Res 44(9):718–729.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar200125kCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Withana NP et al (2016) Dual-modality activity-based probes as molecular imaging agents for vascular inflammation. J Nucl Med 57(10):1583–1590.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.171553CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. Wolf EV et al (2013) A new class of rhomboid protease inhibitors discovered by activity-based fluorescence polarization. PLoS ONE 8(8).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0072307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Xiao J et al (2013) A coupled protein and probe engineering approach for selective inhibition and activity-based probe labeling of the caspases. J Am Chem Soc 135(24):9130–9138.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja403521uCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  109. Xin BT et al (2016) Development of new Malt1 inhibitors and probes. Bioorg Med Chem (Elsevier Ltd) 24(15):3312–3329.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmc.2016.03.035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Yang P, Liu K (2015) Activity-based protein profiling: recent advances in probe development and applications. ChemBioChem 16(5):712–724.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cbic.201402582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Yang Y et al (2013) a simple and effective cleavable linker for chemical proteomics applications. Mol Cell Proteomics 12(1):237–244.  https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M112.021014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. Yang Y, Fonovic M, Verhelst SH (2017) Cleavable linkers in chemical proteomics applications. Methods Mol Biol 1491:185–203.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6439-0_14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. Yu JW et al (2011) Crystal structure of the mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma translocation 1 (MALT1) paracaspase region. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108(52):21004–21009.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1111708108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. Yuan Y et al (2015) Controlled intracellular self-assembly and disassembly of 19F nanoparticles for MR imaging of caspase 3/7 in zebrafish. ACS Nano 9(1):761–768.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nn5062657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. Yue X et al (2014) Novel 19 F activatable probe for the detection of matrix metalloprotease-2 Activity by MRI/MRS. Mol Pharm 11(11):4208–4217.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp500443xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  116. Zou F et al (2012) Application of a novel highly sensitive activity-based probe for detection of cathepsin G. Anal Biochem (Elsevier Inc.,) 421(2):667–672.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2011.11.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suravi Chakrabarty
    • 1
  • Jan Pascal Kahler
    • 1
  • Merel A. T. van de Plassche
    • 1
  • Roeland Vanhoutte
    • 1
  • Steven H. L. Verhelst
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Laboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Cellular & Molecular MedicineKU Leuven—University of LeuvenLouvainBelgium
  2. 2.Leibniz Institute for Analytical Sciences ISASDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations