Cancer is one of the leading causes of premature mortality, and demographic trends predict a further increase in its incidence. This highlights the need to discover new target molecules and to validate existing ones on novel targets. The cellular proteostasis network, in which molecular chaperones—particularly heat shock proteins—play a key role, is essential for maintaining cell stability. Among them, Hsp90β is one of the most important, as its involvement in sustaining the tumor phenotype makes it a promising target for the development of new anticancer drugs. To date, research has mainly focused on inhibitors of the N-terminal domain of Hsp90; however, due to their toxicity and induction of the heat shock response, alternative strategies targeting the C-terminal domain are gaining increasing attention. The co-crystal structure of a non-covalent C-terminal domain inhibitor complexed with Hsp90 has not yet been experimentally determined, which hinders further development.
The key interaction within the proposed binding pocket has been identified as an ionic bond between the basic center of the compound and the glutamic acid residue at position 489 in the protein sequence. Using site-directed mutagenesis by overlap extension', two mutations were introduced to alter this interaction. Cloning was performed using the pET28 expression plasmid with a His-tag sequence and E. coli strain TOP10 One Shot™, while expression was carried out in the NiCo21 (DE3) strain. Proteins were isolated and purified on an ÄKTA system using HisTrap and SEC columns, and their presence and purity were confirmed by western blotting. The affinities of novobiocin and UL-Hsp90-1 for mutant Hsp90β were evaluated using microscale thermophoresis (MST).
Binding assays with novobiocin confirmed affinities in a similar range to those observed for recombinant wild-type Hsp90β, indicating that the mutations do not significantly affect novobiocin binding and that the E489 residue is not crucial for the interaction. Across the entire concentration range of UL-Hsp90-1, no binding to Hsp90β mutants was detected, suggesting that UL-Hsp90-1 interacts with a different binding site on Hsp90β than novobiocin. Definitive confirmation would require determination of the corresponding co-crystal structure.
|