Download PDF
Drug Res (Stuttg) 2024; 74(02): 81-88
DOI: 10.1055/a-2211-2218
Original Article

Structure-Based Drug Design for Targeting IRE1: An in Silico Approach for Treatment of Cancer

Alireza Poustforoosh
1   Medicinal and Natural Products Chemistry Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
,
Sanaz Faramarz
2   Applied Cellular and Molecular Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
,
Mohammad Hadi Nematollahi 
2   Applied Cellular and Molecular Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
3   Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Afzalipour School of Medicine, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
,
Mehdi Mahmoodi
2   Applied Cellular and Molecular Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
,
Mahdiyeh Azadpour
4   Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran
› Author Affiliations Fundings Vice Chancellor for Research and Technology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences — http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100021077; 98001132 This study was granted by the Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran by project No. 98001132.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Correction: Structure-Based Drug Design for Targeting IRE1: An in Silico Approach for Treatment of CancerDrug Res (Stuttg) 2024; 74(02): e1-e1
DOI: 10.1055/a-2235-8845

Abstract

Background Endoplasmic Reticulum (ER) stress and Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) play a key role in cancer progression. The aggregation of incorrectly folded proteins in the ER generates ER stress, which in turn activates the UPR as an adaptive mechanism to fix ER proteostasis. Inositol-requiring enzyme 1 (IRE1) is the most evolutionary conserved ER stress sensor, which plays a pro-tumoral role in various cancers. Targeting its’ active sites is one of the most practical approaches for the treatment of cancers.

Objective In this study, we aimed to use the structure of 4μ8C as a template to produce newly designed compounds as IRE1 inhibitors.

Methods Various functional groups were added to the 4μ8C, and their binding affinity to the target sites was assessed by conducting a covalent molecular docking study. The potential of the designed compound for further in vitro and in vivo studies was evaluated using ADMET analysis.

Results Based on the obtained results, the addition of hydroxyl groups to 4μ8C enhanced the binding affinity of the designed compound to the target efficiently. Compound 17, which was constructed by the addition of one hydroxyl group to the structure of 4μ8C, can construct a strong covalent bond with Lys907. The outcomes of ADMET analysis indicated that compound 17 could be considered a drug-like molecule.

Conclusion Our results revealed that designed compound 17 could inhibit IRE1 activity. Therefore, this designed compound is a remarkable inhibitor of IRE1 and introduces a promising therapeutic strategy for cancer treatment.

Key words

cancer - UPR response - IRE1 - 4μ8C - molecular docking - In-silico methods


Publication History

Received: 18 September 2023

Accepted: 13 November 2023

Article published online:
22 December 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Raymundo DP, Doultsinos D, Guillory X, Carlesso A, Eriksson LA, Chevet E. Pharmacological targeting of IRE1 in cancer. Trends in cancer 2020; 6: 1018-1030
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Paydar P, Asadikaram G, Nejad HZ. et al Epigenetic modulation of BRCA-1 and MGMT genes, and histones H4 and H3 are associated with breast tumors. Journal of Cellular Biochemistry 2019; 120: 13726-13736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wang C-Q, Tang C-H, Tzeng H-E. et al Impacts of RETN genetic polymorphism on breast cancer development. Journal of Cancer 2020; 11: 2769
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Shai A, Galouk E, Miari R, Tareef H, Sammar M, Zeidan M, Rayan A, Falah M. Inhibiting mutant KRAS G12D gene expression using novel peptide nucleic acid‑based antisense: A potential new drug candidate for pancreatic cancer. Oncology Letters 2022; 23: 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Zhang L, Liu W, Wang Q, Li Q, Wang H, Wang J, Teng T, Chen M, Ji A, Li Y. New drug candidate targeting the 4A1 orphan nuclear receptor for medullary thyroid cancer therapy. Molecules 2018; 23: 565
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Falah M, Rayan M, Rayan A. A novel paclitaxel conjugate with higher efficiency and lower toxicity: a new drug candidate for cancer treatment. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2019; 20: 4965
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Urra H, Dufey E, Avril T, Chevet E, Hetz C. Endoplasmic reticulum stress and the hallmarks of cancer. Trends in cancer 2016; 2: 252-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Roy A, Kumar A. ER stress and unfolded protein response in cancer cachexia. Cancers 2019; 11: 1929
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Wang Y, Wang K, Jin Y, Sheng X. Endoplasmic reticulum proteostasis control and gastric cancer. Cancer Letters 2019; 449: 263-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Limia CM, Sauzay C, Urra H, Hetz C, Chevet E, Avril T. Emerging roles of the endoplasmic reticulum associated unfolded protein response in cancer cell migration and invasion. Cancers 2019; 11: 631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lee J-H, Jeong J, Jeong EM, Cho S-Y, Kang JW, Lim J, Heo J, Kang H, Kim I-G, Shin D-M. Endoplasmic reticulum stress activates transglutaminase 2 leading to protein aggregation. International Journal of Molecular Medicine 2014; 33: 849-855
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Naidoo N. ER and aging—protein folding and the ER stress response. Ageing research reviews 2009; 8: 150-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Urra H, Dufey E, Lisbona F, Rojas-Rivera D, Hetz C. When ER stress reaches a dead end. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Molecular Cell Research 2013; 1833: 3507-3517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sheng X, Nenseth HZ, Qu S, Kuzu OF, Frahnow T, Simon L, Greene S, Zeng Q, Fazli L, Rennie PS. IRE1α-XBP1s pathway promotes prostate cancer by activating c-MYC signaling. Nature communications 2019; 10: 323
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Beaupere C, Dinatto L, Wasko BM, Chen RB, VanValkenburg L, Kiflezghi MG, Lee MB, Promislow DE, Dang W, Kaeberlein M. Genetic screen identifies adaptive aneuploidy as a key mediator of ER stress resistance in yeast. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2018; 115: 9586-9591
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Leary M, Heerboth S, Lapinska K, Sarkar S. Sensitization of drug resistant cancer cells: a matter of combination therapy. Cancers 2018; 10: 483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Shi W, Chen Z, Li L, Liu H, Zhang R, Cheng Q, Xu D, Wu L. Unravel the molecular mechanism of XBP1 in regulating the biology of cancer cells. Journal of Cancer 2019; 10: 2035
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Amawi H, Hussein NA, Ashby CR, Alnafisah R, Sanglard LM, Manivannan E, Karthikeyan C, Trivedi P, Eisenmann KM, Robey RW. Bax/tubulin/epithelial-mesenchymal pathways determine the efficacy of silybin analog HM015k in colorectal cancer cell growth and metastasis. Frontiers in pharmacology 2018; 9: 520
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Riaz TA, Junjappa RP, Handigund M, Ferdous J, Kim H-R, Chae H-J. Role of endoplasmic reticulum stress sensor IRE1α in cellular physiology, calcium, ROS signaling, and metaflammation. Cells 2020; 9: 1160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bouchecareilh M, Higa A, Fribourg S, Moenner M, Chevet E. Peptides derived from the bifunctional kinase/RNase enzyme IRE1α modulate IRE1α activity and protect cells from endoplasmic reticulum stress. The FASEB Journal 2011; 25: 3115-3129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Siwecka N, Rozpędek-Kamińska W, Wawrzynkiewicz A, Pytel D, Diehl JA, Majsterek I. The structure, activation and signaling of IRE1 and its role in determining cell fate. Biomedicines 2021; 9: 156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Carlesso A, Chintha C, Gorman AM, Samali A, Eriksson LA. Binding analysis of the Inositol-requiring enzyme 1 kinase domain. Acs Omega 2018; 3: 13313-13322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Harrington PE, Biswas K, Malwitz D, Tasker AS, Mohr C, Andrews KL, Dellamaggiore K, Kendall R, Beckmann H, Jaeckel P. Unfolded protein response in cancer: IRE1α inhibition by selective kinase ligands does not impair tumor cell viability. ACS medicinal chemistry letters 2015; 6: 68-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Feldman HC, Tong M, Wang L, Meza-Acevedo R, Gobillot TA, Lebedev I, Gliedt MJ, Hari SB, Mitra AK, Backes BJ. Structural and functional analysis of the allosteric inhibition of IRE1α with ATP-competitive ligands. ACS chemical biology 2016; 11: 2195-2205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Mehrabani M, Raeiszadeh M, Najafipour H, Esmaeli Tarzi M, Amirkhosravi A, Poustforoosh A, Mohammadi MA, Naghdi S, Mehrabani M. Evaluation of the Cytotoxicity, Antibacterial, Antioxidant, and Anti-inflammatory Effects of Different Extracts of Punica granatum var. pleniflora. Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2020; 27: 414-425
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sanches M, Duffy NM, Talukdar M, Thevakumaran N, Chiovitti D, Canny MD, Lee K, Kurinov I, Uehling D, Al-Awar R. Structure and mechanism of action of the hydroxy–aryl–aldehyde class of IRE1 endoribonuclease inhibitors. Nature communications 2014; 5: 4202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Tang C-HA, Ranatunga S, Kriss CL, Cubitt CL, Tao J, Pinilla-Ibarz JA, Del Valle JR, Hu C-CA. Inhibition of ER stress–associated IRE-1/XBP-1 pathway reduces leukemic cell survival. The Journal of clinical investigation 2014; 124: 2585-2598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Cross BC, Bond PJ, Sadowski PG, Jha BK, Zak J, Goodman JM, Silverman RH, Neubert TA, Baxendale IR, Ron D. The molecular basis for selective inhibition of unconventional mRNA splicing by an IRE1-binding small molecule. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2012; 109: E869-E878
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Mihăşan M. What in silico molecular docking can do for the ‘bench-working biologists’. Journal of biosciences 2012; 37: 1089-1095
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Meng X-Y, Zhang H-X, Mezei M, Cui M. Molecular docking: a powerful approach for structure-based drug discovery. Current computer-aided drug design 2011; 7: 146-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Fan J, Fu A, Zhang L. Progress in molecular docking. Quantitative Biology 2019; 7: 83-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Poustforoosh A, Faramarz S, Nematollahi MH, Hashemipour H, Negahdaripour M, Pardakhty A. In silico SELEX screening and statistical analysis of newly designed 5mer peptide-aptamers as Bcl-xl inhibitors using the Taguchi method. Computers in Biology and Medicine 2022; 146: 105632
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Poustforoosh A, Hashemipour H, Tüzün B, Pardakhty A, Mehrabani M, Nematollahi MH. Evaluation of potential anti-RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) drugs against the newly emerged model of COVID-19 RdRP using computational methods. Biophysical chemistry 2021; 272: 106564
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Poustforoosh A, Faramarz S, Nematollahi MH, Hashemipour H, Tüzün B, Pardakhty A, Mehrabani M. 3D-QSAR, molecular docking, molecular dynamics, and ADME/T analysis of marketed and newly designed flavonoids as inhibitors of Bcl-2 family proteins for targeting U-87 glioblastoma. Journal of Cellular Biochemistry 2022; 123: 390-405
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Rants'o TA, Van der Westhuizen CJ, van Zyl RL. Optimization of covalent docking for organophosphates interaction with Anopheles acetylcholinesterase. Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling 2022; 110: 108054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Poustforoosh A, Hashemipour H, Tüzün B, Azadpour M, Faramarz S, Pardakhty A, Mehrabani M, Nematollahi MH. The impact of D614G mutation of SARS-COV-2 on the efficacy of anti-viral drugs: A comparative molecular docking and molecular dynamics study. Current microbiology 2022; 79: 241
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Taslimi P, Erden Y, Mamedov S, Zeynalova L, Ladokhina N, Tas R, Tuzun B, Sujayev A, Sadeghian N, Alwasel SH. The biological activities, molecular docking studies, and anticancer effects of 1-arylsuphonylpyrazole derivatives. Journal of biomolecular structure and dynamics 2021; 39: 3336-3346
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Pavlović N, Heindryckx F. Targeting ER stress in the hepatic tumor microenvironment. The FEBS Journal 2022; 289: 7163-7176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Ricci D, Tutton S, Marrocco I, Ying M, Blumenthal D, Eletto D, Vargas J, Boyle S, Fazelinia H, Qian L. An interdomain helix in IRE1α mediates the conformational change required for the sensor's activation. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2021; 296: 100781
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Mahdizadeh SJ, Carlesso A, Eriksson LA. Deciphering the selectivity of inhibitor MKC9989 towards residue K907 in IRE1α; a multiscale in silico approach. RSC advances 2020; 10: 19720-19729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Carlesso A, Eriksson LA. Selective inhibition of IRE1 signalling mediated by MKC9989: new insights from molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulations. ChemistrySelect 2019; 4: 3199-3203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Carlesso A, Chintha C, Gorman AM, Samali A, Eriksson LA. Merits and pitfalls of conventional and covalent docking in identifying new hydroxyl aryl aldehyde like compounds as human IRE1 inhibitors. Scientific reports 2019; 9: 3407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Dong J, Wang N-N, Yao Z-J, Zhang L, Cheng Y, Ouyang D, Lu A-P, Cao D-S. ADMETlab: a platform for systematic ADMET evaluation based on a comprehensively collected ADMET database. Journal of cheminformatics 2018; 10: 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Wang Y, Xing J, Xu Y, Zhou N, Peng J, Xiong Z, Liu X, Luo X, Luo C, Chen K. In silico ADME/T modelling for rational drug design. Quarterly reviews of biophysics 2015; 48: 488-515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Wishart DS. Improving early drug discovery through ADME modelling: an overview. Drugs in R & D 2007; 8: 349-362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Lipinski CA. Lead-and drug-like compounds: the rule-of-five revolution. Drug discovery today: Technologies 2004; 1: 337-341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Jorgensen WL, Duffy EM. Prediction of drug solubility from structure. Advanced drug delivery reviews 2002; 54: 355-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Poustforoosh A, Nematollahi MH, Hashemipour H, Pardakhty A. Recent advances in Bio-conjugated nanocarriers for crossing the Blood-Brain Barrier in (pre-) clinical studies with an emphasis on vesicles. Journal of Controlled Release 2022; 343: 777-797
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Asadikaram G, Poustforoosh A, Pardakhty A, Torkzadeh-Mahani M, Nematollahi MH. Niosomal virosome derived by vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein as a new gene carrier. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2021; 534: 980-987
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar