RESEARCH PAPER
Future appeal of comparative studies on putative binding sites of HIV-1 virus-encoded proteolytic enzyme inhibitor of different Food and Drug Administration-approved compounds
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Medical Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
2
Science and Technology Unit, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
3
Molecular Diagnostics Unit, Department of Molecular Biology, the Regional Laboratory, Ministry of Health (MOH), Makkah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
4
Department of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
Submission date: 2020-01-22
Acceptance date: 2020-02-06
Publication date: 2020-06-28
HIV & AIDS Review 2020;19(2):78-86
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease enzyme is one of the most promising therapeutic targets for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) treatment. Due to mutation of the virus, there is always a room for new agents.
Material and methods:
The aim of in silico molecular docking study was to analyze and compare the binding mode of seven Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved HIV protease enzyme inhibitors, and to understand their structural requirements to inhibit an enzyme by using Schrodinger model as well as to evaluate a free energy of binding of these inhibitors with an enzyme.
Results:
The binding mode analysis showed that the active site was present at the interface of two chains A and B of the enzyme and the crucial amino acid remained responsible for the binding of inhibitors to the HIV-1 protease, which could help to classify the inhibitors as better drug targets. Results of this comparative binding mode analysis of seven FDA-approved drugs could be potential and useful for designing of a new effective inhibitor of HIV-1 protease. Out of seven inhibitors drugs, only two drugs present the best inhibition. HIV protease-nelfinavir complex with PDB: 2Q64 and HIV protease D30N, and R41A double mutant-tipranavir complex in PDB: 1D4S double mutant V82F and I84V, were used as templates for applying the mutations on HIV protease active site. Furthermore, the structure-based computer-assisted search for the comparison of the two inhibitors of HIV protease was completed. On the other hand, tipranavir seems to be a broad specificity inhibitor, as no changes in the bond lengths with the introduction of mutations were observed.
Conclusions:
Tipranavir could be targeted more effectively for designing future drug analogues, as it is less vulnerable to mutations. HIV mutants reported in this study could also be used for preliminary identification of specific inhibitors, as drugs that may alter the HIV protease activity for medicinal use.
REFERENCES (24)
1.
Hall HI, Song R, Rhodes P, et al.; HIV Incidence Surveillance Group Estimation of HIV incidence in the United States. JAMA 2008; 300: 520-529.
2.
Anderson RM, May RM. Epidemiological parameters of HIV transmission. Nature 1988; 333: 514-519.
3.
Weiss RA. How does HIV cause AIDS? Science 1993; 5112: 1273-1279.
4.
Hamers RL, de Wit TFR, Holmes CB. HIV drug resistance in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet HIV 2018; 4: 30173-30175.
5.
Hornak V, Simmerling C. Targeting structural flexibility in HIV-1 protease inhibitor binding. Drug Discov Today 2007; 12: 132-138.
6.
Brower ET, Bacha UM, Kawasaki Y, Freire E. Inhibition of HIV-2 protease by HIV-1 protease inhibitors in clinical use. Chem Biol Drug Des 2008; 71: 298-305.
7.
Rodès B, Sheldon J, Toro C, Jimènez V, Alvarez MA, Soriano V. Susceptibility to protease inhibitors in HIV-2 primary isolates from patients failing antiretroviral therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006; 57: 709-713.
8.
Freedberg DI, Ishima R, Jacob J, Wang YX, Kustanovich I, Louis JM, Torchia DA. Rapid structural fluctuations of the free HIV protease flaps in solution: relationship to crystal structures and comparison with predictions of dynamics calculations. Protein Sci 2002; 11: 221-232.
9.
Adachi M, Ohhara T, Kurihara K, Tamada T, Honjo E, Okazaki N, et al. Structure of HIV-1 protease in complex with potent inhibitor KNI-272 determined by high-resolution X-ray and neutron crystallography. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009; 106: 4641-4646.
10.
Vriend G. WHAT IF: A molecular modeling and drug design program. J Mol Graph 1990; 8: 52-56.
11.
Laskowski RA, MacArthur MW, Moss DS, Thornton JM. PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Cryst 1993; 26: 283-291.
12.
Colovos C, Yeates TO. Verification of protein structures: patterns of nonbonded atomic interactions. Protein Sci 1993; 2: 1511-1519.
13.
Bowie JU, Lüthy R, Eisenberg D. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science 1991; 253: 164-170.
14.
Pontius J, Richelle J, Wodak SJ. Deviations from standard atomic volumes as a quality measure for protein crystal structures. Mol Biol 1996; 264: 121-136.
15.
Bikadi Z, Hazai E. Application of the PM6 semi-empirical method to modeling proteins enhances docking accuracy of AutoDock. J Cheminform 2009; 1: 15.
16.
Berendsen HJC, Postma JPM, Vangunsteren WF, Dinola A, Haak JR. Molecular-dynamics with coupling to an external bath. J Chem Phys 1984; 81: 3684-3690.
17.
Navia MA, Fitzgerald PM, McKeever BM, Leu CT, Heimbach JC, Herber WK, et al. Three-dimensional structure of aspartyl protease from human immunodeficiency virus HIV-1. Nature 1989; 337: 615-620.
18.
Toth G, Borics A. Flap opening mechanism of HIV-1 protease. J Mol Graph Model 2006; 24: 465-474.
19.
Imamichi T. Action of anti-HIV drugs and resistance: reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors. Curr Pharm Des 2004; 10: 4039-4053.
20.
Iacob SA, Iacob DG, Jugulete G. Improving the adherence to antiretroviral therapy, a difficult but essential task for a successful HIV treatment-clinical points of view and practical considerations. Front Pharmacol 2017; 8: 831.
21.
Desvergne A, Genin E, Marèchal X, Gallastegui N, Dufau L, Richy N, et al. Dimerized linear mimics of a natural cyclopeptide (TMC-95A) are potent noncovalent inhibitors of the eukaryotic 20S proteasome. J Med Chem 2013; 56: 3367-3378.
22.
Rick SW, Erickson JW, Burt SK. Reaction path and free energy calculations of the transition between alternate conformations of HIV-1 protease. Proteins 1998; 32: 7-16.
23.
Tie Y, Boross PI, Wang YF, Gaddis L, Liu F, Chen X, et al. Molecular basis for substrate recognition and drug resistance from 1.1 to 1.6 angstroms resolution crystal structures of HIV-1 protease mutants with substrate analogs. FEBS J 2005; 272: 5265-5277.
24.
Collins JR, Burt SK, Erickson JW, Flap opening in HIV-1 protease simulated by ‘activated’ molecular dynamics. Nat Struct Biol 1995; 2: 334-338.