Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS AuthorChoice logoLink to ACS AuthorChoice
. 2014 Mar 21;57(8):3511–3521. doi: 10.1021/jm500183r

Discovery of a Potent and Selective α3β4 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor Antagonist from an α-Conotoxin Synthetic Combinatorial Library

Yi-Pin Chang †, Jayati Banerjee †, Cheryl Dowell ‡,§, Jinhua Wu †, Reena Gyanda †, Richard A Houghten †, Lawrence Toll †, J Michael McIntosh ‡,§, Christopher J Armishaw †,*
PMCID: PMC4358631  PMID: 24649848

Abstract

graphic file with name jm-2014-00183r_0009.jpg

α-Conotoxins are disulfide-rich peptide neurotoxins that selectively inhibit neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs). The α3β4 nAChR subtype has been identified as a novel target for managing nicotine addiction. Using a mixture-based positional-scanning synthetic combinatorial library (PS-SCL) with the α4/4-conotoxin BuIA framework, we discovered a highly potent and selective α3β4 nAChR antagonist. The initial PS-SCL consisted of a total of 113 379 904 sequences that were screened for α3β4 nAChR inhibition, which facilitated the design and synthesis of a second generation library of 64 individual α-conotoxin derivatives. Eleven analogues were identified as α3β4 nAChR antagonists, with TP-2212-59 exhibiting the most potent antagonistic activity and selectivity over the α3β2 and α4β2 nAChR subtypes. Final electrophysiological characterization demonstrated that TP-2212-59 inhibited acetylcholine evoked currents in α3β4 nAChRs heterogeneously expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes with a calculated IC50 of 2.3 nM and exhibited more than 1000-fold selectivity over the α3β2 and α7 nAChR subtypes. As such, TP-2212-59 is among the most potent α3β4 nAChRs antagonists identified to date and further demonstrates the utility of mixture-based combinatorial libraries in the discovery of novel α-conotoxin derivatives with refined pharmacological activity.

Introduction

Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) are a family of ligand gated ion channels that are involved in a variety of central and peripheral nervous systems functions including memory, cognition, and reward.1 Neuronal nAChRs are composed of a pentameric complex of closely related, yet functionally distinct protein subunits arranged around a central cation-conducting pore.2 In the CNS, nAChRs may consist exclusively of α-subunits (homomeric) or contain combinations of α- and β-subunits (heteromeric). This gives rise to a large number of different receptor subtypes, each of which exhibits distinct pharmacological functions and may be involved in various neuropathological states.3

Neuronal nAChRs that are present in mesocorticolimbic reward pathways are important targets for studying nicotine addiction and in the development of smoking cessation therapeutics.4 For example, the α4β2 nAChR is the most predominant nAChR subtype found in the central nervous system and, as such, is a target for varenicline, a currently approved smoking cessation medication.5 However, the α3β4 nAChR expressed in the medial habenula has also been found to play a significant role in nicotine addiction.6−8 For example, 18-methoxycoronaridine (18-MC) and α-conotoxin AuIB were shown to block the α3β4 nAChR in the medial habenula in rats, thus reducing nicotine self-administration.9,10 More recently, AT-1001, a potent and relatively selective α3β4 nAChR antagonist, was shown to block nicotine self-administration in rats following systemic administration.11 On the other hand, varenicline also exhibits α3β4 nAChR agonist activity,12,13 which may account for several observed peripheral and central side effects, including nausea, gastrointestinal symptoms, and suicidal ideation. Therefore, novel antagonists that potently and selectively block the α3β4 nAChR are valuable tools for probing the role that this receptor plays in nicotine addiction and could lead to the development of safer smoking cessation therapeutics.

α-Conotoxins are a family of small, disulfide-rich peptides isolated from the venoms of carnivorous marine cone snails.14 The remarkable nAChR selectivity of α-conotoxins provides a unique structural template for designing novel nAChR antagonists with increased inhibitory potencies.15 Typically, α-conotoxins consist of 12–20 amino acids and contain two highly conserved disulfide bonds. In native α-conotoxins, the disulfide bonds are linked via the Cys1-Cys3 and Cys2-Cys4 (globular) connectivity, although two additional misfolded isomers are also possible with connectivity between Cys1-Cys4 and Cys2-Cys3 (ribbon) and between Cys1-Cys2 and Cys3-Cys4 (beads). Native α-conotoxins exhibit a well-defined structural framework that projects two loops of intervening amino acid residues between Cys2-Cys3 and Cys3-Cys4 that are denoted as the m- and n-loops, respectively (Figure 1). The amino acids contained within these loops are highly variable across the α-conotoxin family, with subtle modifications of these residues often having a profound influence on the potency and selectivity toward different nAChR subtypes.14 Therefore, the relative ease of chemical synthesis and conserved structural characteristics of α-conotoxins allow further optimization of their nAChR selectivity and antagonist potency.16

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Design of the mixture-based PS-SCL based on the α4/4-conotoxin framework. The conserved cysteine framework and native (globular) disulfide bond connectivity are indicated. Conserved Gly, Ser, and Pro residues are shown in gray. On is a single defined position, and X is an equimolar mixture of 22 natural and non-natural l-amino acids.

Several α-conotoxins are known to target the α3β4 nAChR with varying degrees of potency and selectivity (Table 1). For example, α-conotoxin AuIB has been used as a probe to study the role of the α3β4 nAChR in the medial habenula, although such studies are limited by its relatively low inhibitory potency.10,17 Recently, α-conotoxin TxID was characterized as being the most potent and selective α3β4 nAChR α-conotoxin antagonist, thus making it a valuable probe for studying this receptor.18 On the other hand, α-conotoxin BuIA is a potent α3β4 nAChR antagonist, but it also targets a broad range of subtypes, including α3β2, α6/α3β2β3, and α6/α3β4 nAChRs.19 Significantly, BuIA exhibits a unique 4/4 loop framework that is not commonly found in other known α-conotoxins (Figure 1).20 The inhibitory function and binding kinetics of BuIA have been examined on cloned nAChRs expressed in Xenopus oocytes.19,21 BuIA blocks several β2- and β4-containing heteromeric nAChRs, with the highest potency against α3- and chimeric α6-containing receptors.19,22 Significantly, nAChR with β4-containing subunits exhibited slower off-rates when compared to the corresponding β2-containing nAChR.19,21 Similar results were found in both human and mouse α3β2 nAChRs and their α3β4 counterparts, suggesting that β-subunit selectivity is conserved across species.19 Notably, Pro6 of BuIA is a critical determinant for distinguishing between β2 and β4 subunits, where substitution with 4-hydroxyproline (Hyp) (i.e., BuIA[P6O]) exhibited significant selectivity for α6β4 over α6β2 nAChR.23

Table 1. α-Conotoxins That Target the α3β4 nAChRa.

graphic file with name jm-2014-00183r_0008.jpg

Open in a new tab
a

Conserved cysteine residues are indicated with a box. The native disulfide bond connectivity is between Cys1-Cys3 and Cys2-Cys4. B is 2-aminobutyric acid (Abu). Z is norvaline (Nva).

With continued interest in developing novel nAChR ligands as probes for studying the role that these receptors play in nicotine addiction, we have utilized a synthetic combinatorial strategy to develop a potent and highly selective α3β4 nAChR antagonist using the unique α4/4-conotoxin framework exhibited by BuIA. A positional scanning synthetic combinatorial library (PS-SCL) based on the variable positions within the α4/4-conotoxin framework was synthesized and screened for α3β4 nAChR inhibitory activity to identify novel amino acid residues in each variable position within this framework. This led to the design and synthesis of a second generation library of individual BuIA derivatives, of which one analogue was identified as being among the most potent and selective of α-conotoxins targeting the α3β4 nAChR characterized to date.

Results

Design and Synthesis of the α4/4-Conotoxin PS-SCL

A PS-SCL based on the α4/4-conotoxin loop framework was prepared to facilitate the identification of amino acid substitutions at key positions within the m- and n-loops that give rise to α3β4 nAChR antagonistic activity (Figure 1). In native α-conotoxins targeting neuronal nAChRs, the four cysteine residues, together with Gly1, Ser4, and Pro6, are generally conserved. However, the remaining six positions are highly variable and were used as diversity positions within the framework. As such, six sublibraries were prepared, where On is a single defined position, and X is an equimolar mixture of 22 natural and non-natural l-amino acids (see x-axes in Figure 2). All proteinogenic amino acids were used, with the exceptions of Cys and Met, which were omitted from the sample mixtures to avoid the formation of oxidation byproducts. As such, 2-aminobutyric acid (Abu) and norleucine (Nle) were included as isosteric replacements of Cys and Met, respectively, in the X and On positions. Norvaline (Nva) was also included to complete the series of side chains containing hydrophobic alkyl groups. Moreover, Hyp is a commonly occurring post-translational modification found in several α-conotoxins that was also included in the construction of the library.24,25

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Initial screening of the α4/4-conotoxin BuIA PS-SCL for α3β4 nAChR inhibition using the fluorescent membrane potential assay. The library was screened in triplicate at 100 μM, and the percentages of inhibition were calculated by comparing the potency of 10 μM mecamylamine (MCA), which was defined as 100% inhibition. Residues that were selected for the synthesis of a second generation library of individual analogues are marked with an asterisk. Amino acids indicated with a cross-hatch pattern correspond to native α-conotoxin BuIA residues.

The PS-SCL was composed of 132 mixture samples, each of which contained 5 153 632 compounds across six sublibraries, with a total of 113 379 904 possible individual amino acid combinations in the entire library. The library was assembled using the “tea bag” method with Boc-SPPS chemistry,26 followed by a two-step “low–high” HF cleavage procedure.27X-positions were coupled as a cocktail of amino acids using adjusted predetermined ratios to compensate for the differences in reactivity between different amino acid resides in competitive couplings.28 The formation of disulfide bonds was achieved by cosolvent assisted oxidative folding (50% isopropanol in aqueous ammonium bicarbonate buffer at pH 8.2), which was previously shown to maximize the accumulation of the native globular isomer of α-conotoxin BuIA.29 A simplified desalting procedure that employed disposable solid-phase extraction (SPE) columns was used for the rapid and efficient preparation of library samples in parallel prior to initial pharmacological screening.29 Note that the globular and ribbon isomers of selected second generation individual analogues were later synthesized separately to confirm their identity and were purified by RP-HPLC prior to formal functional characterization.

Screening of the α4/4-Conotoxin PS-SCL for α3β4 nAChR Inhibition

The 132 PS-SCL mixture samples were each screened for inhibition of rat α3β4, α3β2, and α4β2 nAChRs in the fluorescent membrane potential assay,30 using HEK293 cell lines stably expressing each nAChR subtype.31,32 Each sample was screened at 100, 10, and 1 μM, based on the total concentration of α-conotoxin contained within the mixture. Screening of the PS-SCL for α3β4 nAChR inhibition indicated a dose-dependent inhibitory activity, with a concentration of 100 μM allowing discrete active mixtures corresponding to specific amino acid substitutions to be identified in each position within the α4/4-conotoxin BuIA framework (Figure 2). However, no significant preference for amino acids was apparent at each position for α3β2 and α4β2 nAChRs at 100 μM, with a majority of the PS-SCL mixtures exhibiting >80% inhibition. Because no discrete active hits could be identified from α3β2 and α4β2 nAChR screening, individual second generation analogues were designed based on the α3β4 nAChR screen. As such, the two amino acid residues identified in each position as exhibiting the highest antagonistic activity for the α3β4 nAChR subtype were selected for the design of a second generation library of individual α-conotoxin analogues (Table 2).

Table 2. Selection of Amino Acid Residues for Second Generation Library Synthesis.

position
O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6
Amino Acid
His Pro Phe Trp Nle Pro
Nle Abu Ile Abu Nva Tyr
Open in a new tab

At the O1 position, His was clearly identified as the most potent, exhibiting 100% inhibition of the α3β4 nAChR subtype, and was selected for the synthesis of a second generation library. Nle, which exhibited 80% inhibition of the α3β4 nAChR, was also selected. Thr, which is the native amino acid in BuIA, exhibited 60% inhibition of α3β4 nAChR and was not selected for the second generation library.

At the O2 position, the native Pro residue in BuIA exhibited a 90% inhibitory potency for the α3β4 nAChR subtype, indicating that the structure of two consecutive Pro residues in the m-loop is important for sustaining conformational integrity and thus was selected for the synthesis of the second generation library. Abu exhibited a similar inhibitory potency to Pro (90%) and was also selected for the second generation library synthesis. Furthermore, the hydrophobic amino acids Leu and Val each exhibited >80% inhibition of α3β4 nAChR.

At the O3 position, the hydrophobic amino acids Phe and Ile were selected for the second generation library. Notably, Ala, which is the native residue at this position in BuIA, together with Nle also exhibited greater than 80% of inhibitory activity for the α3β4 nAChR subtype.

At the O4 position, Trp and Abu clearly produced the greatest inhibitory potency for the α3β4 nAChRs (approximately 100%) and were selected for the synthesis of the second generation library.

At the O5 position, the unbranched hydrophobic amino acids Nva and Nle were selected for the second generation library. Leu, which is the native residue at this position in BuIA, also produced 90% inhibition.

At the O6 position, the native Tyr residue in BuIA exhibited a 100% inhibitory potency for the α3β4 nAChR subtype and was selected for the second generation library. Interestingly, a constrained Pro residue at this position that would be expected to induce a structural distortion also gave rise to high inhibitory activity (90%).

Synthesis and Screening of a Second Generation Library of Individual α-Conotoxin Analogues

A second generation library (TP-2212) was synthesized and consisted of 64 individual α-conotoxin sequences that were constructed from systematic combinations of selected amino acid residues identified from PS-SCL screening against the α3β4 nAChR at 100 μM (Table 3). Following assembly and cleavage, each α-conotoxin analogue was oxidized using 50% isopropanol in aqueous ammonium bicarbonate buffer at pH 8.2 as used to prepare the PS-SCL. A majority of samples indicated efficient folding to one predominant isomer as determined by analytical LC–MS (Figure 3). For the initial screen of the second generation library, all samples were desalted in parallel using SPE columns and screened as crude samples (Figure 3), which allowed any side products including misfolded disulfide bond isomers that were present in the preparation of the PS-SCL to be retained during the synthesis of individual analogues. This approach increased the probability of identifying the major active component.

Table 3. Sequences of Individual Second Generation α4/4-Conotoxin Analogues and Their % Inhibition of α3β4 nAChR at 10 μM Relative to Mecamylamine in the Fluorescent Membrane Potential Assaya.

TP-2212 O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 % inhibtion (±SEM) TP-2212 O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 % inhibition (±SEM)
BuIA Thr Pro Ala Val Leu Tyr 94.4 ± 3.2 33 His Pro Phe Trp Nle Tyr 44.0 ± 4.9
1 His Pro Phe Trp Nle Pro 15.3 ± 4.1 34 Nle Pro Phe Trp Nle Tyr 60.2 ± 1.9
2 Nle Pro Phe Trp Nle Pro 14.2 ± 7.7 35 His Abu Phe Trp Nle Tyr 101.4 ± 0.7
3 His Abu Phe Trp Nle Pro 22.3 ± 4.6 36 Nle Abu Phe Trp Nle Tyr 76.0 ± 1.3
4 Nle Abu Phe Trp Nle Pro 22.1 ± 2.7 37 His Pro Ile Trp Nle Tyr 43.9 ± 3.8
5 His Pro Ile Trp Nle Pro 10.1 ± 2.3 38 Nle Pro Ile Trp Nle Tyr 51.8 ± 4.1
6 Nle Pro Ile Trp Nle Pro 6.3 ± 1.2 39 His Abu Ile Trp Nle Tyr 55.7 ± 1.7
7 His Abu Ile Trp Nle Pro 15.4 ± 2.4 40 Nle Abu Ile Trp Nle Tyr 68.6 ± 0.9
8 Nle Abu Ile Trp Nle Pro 51.4 ± 2.0 41 His Pro Phe Abu Nle Tyr 106.2 ± 1.1
9 His Pro Phe Abu Nle Pro 29.1 ± 4.0 42 Nle Pro Phe Abu Nle Tyr 106.6 ± 0.7
10 Nle Pro Phe Abu Nle Pro 54.6 ± 2.9 43 His Abu Phe Abu Nle Tyr 110.2 ± 0.6
11 His Abu Phe Abu Nle Pro 35.5 ± 5.4 44 Nle Abu Phe Abu Nle Tyr 106.3 ± 0.9
12 Nle Abu Phe Abu Nle Pro 36.6 ± 4.1 45 His Pro Ile Abu Nle Tyr 67.2 ± 1.0
13 His Pro Ile Abu Nle Pro 38.1 ± 3.7 46 Nle Pro Ile Abu Nle Tyr 63.8 ± 2.1
14 Nle Pro Ile Abu Nle Pro 31.3 ± 5.4 47 His Abu Ile Abu Nle Tyr 110.1 ± 0.6
15 His Abu Ile Abu Nle Pro 36.2 ± 2.9 48 Nle Abu Ile Abu Nle Tyr 72.6 ± 1.1
16 Nle Abu Ile Abu Nle Pro 42.9 ± 4.6 49 His Pro Phe Trp Nva Tyr 47.8 ± 3.2
17 His Pro Phe Trp Nva Pro 49.0 ± 3.3 50 Nle Pro Phe Trp Nva Tyr 61.6 ± 1.0
18 Nle Pro Phe Trp Nva Pro 37.1 ± 5.3 51 His Abu Phe Trp Nva Tyr 72.1 ± 2.0
19 His Abu Phe Trp Nva Pro 36.2 ± 6.9 52 Nle Abu Phe Trp Nva Tyr 67.9 ± 1.2
20 Nle Abu Phe Trp Nva Pro 41.1 ± 5.3 53 His Pro Ile Trp Nva Tyr 56.5 ± 3.0
21 His Pro Ile Trp Nva Pro 44.8 ± 5.9 54 Nle Pro Ile Trp Nva Tyr 58.3 ± 2.8
22 Nle Pro Ile Trp Nva Pro 38.9 ± 4.0 55 His Abu Ile Trp Nva Tyr 47.5 ± 6.2
23 His Abu Ile Trp Nva Pro 38.7 ± 1.8 56 Nle Abu Ile Trp Nva Tyr 61.9 ± 3.1
24 Nle Abu Ile Trp Nva Pro 44.8 ± 2.9 57 His Pro Phe Abu Nva Tyr 92.6 ± 0.5
25 His Pro Phe Abu Nva Pro 36.0 ± 3.9 58 Nle Pro Phe Abu Nva Tyr 96.4 ± 1.1
26 Nle Pro Phe Abu Nva Pro 35.7 ± 3.9 59 His Abu Phe Abu Nva Tyr 109.2 ± 0.6
27 His Abu Phe Abu Nva Pro 47.0 ± 1.6 60 Nle Abu Phe Abu Nva Tyr 104.0 ± 0.5
28 Nle Abu Phe Abu Nva Pro 40.3 ± 4.1 61 His Pro Ile Abu Nva Tyr 62.3 ± 2.4
29 His Pro Ile Abu Nva Pro 45.1 ± 3.7 62 Nle Pro Ile Abu Nva Tyr 50.9 ± 4.0
30 Nle Pro Ile Abu Nva Pro 45.7 ± 5.4 63 His Abu Ile Abu Nva Tyr 84.5 ± 1.6
31 His Abu Ile Abu Nva Pro 41.2 ± 2.8 64 Nle Abu Ile Abu Nva Tyr 59.4 ± 3.8
32 Nle Abu Ile Abu Nva Pro 19.2 ± 1.9                
Open in a new tab
a

The canonical sequence for each individual compound is Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-O1-Pro-O2-Cys-O3-O4-O5-O6-Cys.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Representative LC–MS analysis of TP-2212-59. (A) LC analysis of TP-2212-59 samples. Samples were analyzed using a C18 column (50 mm × 4.6 mm i.d.) with a gradient of 0–60% acetonitrile containing 0.1% formic acid over 12 min at a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min and monitored at 214 nm. Crude samples (bottom) were desalted in parallel using SPE cartridges prior to initial library screening. Globular and ribbon isomers for further pharmacological characterization (center and top, respectively) were synthesized using a two-step regioselective folding approach and purified to >95% homogeneity as described in the Experimental Section. (B) Representative electrospray ionization MS of TP-2212-59. The final mass was calculated from the observed [M + 2H]2+ ion: calculated mass, 1382.9; expected mass, 1382.5.

The second generation library compounds were screened for inhibition of the α3β4 nAChR at 10 μM using the fluorescent membrane potential assay (Figure 4 and Table 3). Of the 64 individual α-conotoxin samples screened, 11 exhibited greater than 80% inhibition and were defined as active hits. Of these 11 active hits, the substitution of His in the O1 position (compounds 35, 41, 43, 47, 57, 59, and 63) and Nle (compounds 42, 44, 58, and 60) exhibited more than 80% inhibition. The native Pro residue (compounds 41, 42, 57, and 58) along with Abu (compounds 35, 43, 44, 47, 59, 60, and 63) were compatible at the O2 position. For the O3 position, the substitution of Phe (compounds 35, 41, 42, 43, 44, and 57-60) and Ile (compounds 47 and 63) also produced >80% inhibitory activity. Of the 11 active hits, 10 (compounds 41–44, 47, 57–60, and 63) contain Abu at the O4 position, with compound 35 being the only compound containing Trp at this position. Compounds containing two selected amino acids at the O5 position (Nle in compounds 35, 41, 42, 43, 44, and 47; Nva in compounds 57–60 and 63) were also identified as active hits. Notably, a distinct trend was observed at the O6 position between Pro (compounds 1–32) Tyr (compounds 33–64), where the substitution of Pro significantly decreased inhibitory activity, while the native Tyr residue of α-conotoxin BuIA at this position retained its potency for α3β4 nAChR.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Fluorescent membrane potential assay screening of the second generation individual library at 10 μM. Compounds that exhibited >80% inhibition at 10 μM (indicated with a solid line and asterisk) were selected for further chemical and pharmacological characterization.

Identification and Characterization of Active Hits

The 11 active hits were selected for further characterization and assessment of nAChR antagonistic activity. First, both the globular and ribbon isomers of each α-conotoxin analogue were synthesized to confirm the identity of the active component from second generation library screening. Each pair of Cys residues was differentially protected using MeBzl and Acm protecting groups followed by a two-step oxidation procedure and purified using RP-HPLC to obtain each isomer in >95% purity (Figure 3). Both isomers were analyzed by LC–MS and co-injected with the major products obtained from the second generation library, which confirmed that the globular isomer was the major product in each of the selected second generation library samples. However, the ribbon isomer was also present as a minor isomer when Nle was substituted in the O1 position.

To confirm the identity of the active component of each of the 11 active hits from the second generation library, both globular and ribbon isomers were tested for α3β4 nAChR inhibitory activity using the fluorescent membrane potential assay (Table 4 and Figure 5). For each compound, the globular isomer potently inhibited the α3β4 nAChR while the ribbon isomer of each compound exhibited no inhibitory activity up to 10 μM, thus confirming that the globular isomer was the active component of each of the selected second generation library screening samples.

Table 4. Inhibitory Potencies (IC50 ± SEM (nM)) of 11 Selected Compounds Identified as Active Hits from Initial Screening of the Second Generation Library for α3β4, α3β2, and α4β2 nAChRs Using the Fluorescent Membrane Potential Assay (n = 4).

TP-2212 sequence α3β4 Hill slope α3β2 Hill Slope α4β2 Hill slope
BuIA Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-Thr-Pro-Pro-Cys-Ala-Val-Leu-Tyr-Cys 265 ± 17 –1.06 26 ± 1.0 –1.20 >10000 ND
35 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Abu-Cys-Phe-Trp-Nle-Tyr-Cys 1727 ± 151 –1.08 >10000 ND >10000 ND
41 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Pro-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nle-Tyr-Cys 469 ± 19 –0.94 >10000 ND >10000 ND
42 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-Nle-Pro-Pro-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nle-Tyr-Cys 397 ± 24 –0.96 >10000 ND >10000 ND
43 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Abu-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nle-Tyr-Cys 307 ± 37 –0.94 >10000 ND >10000 ND
44 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-Nle-Pro-Abu-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nle-Tyr-Cys 310 ± 29 –1.00 >10000 ND >10000 ND
47 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Abu-Cys-Ile-Abu-Nle-Tyr-Cys 463 ± 9.0 –0.96 >10000 ND >10000 ND
57 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Pro-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nva-Tyr-Cys 298 ± 22 –0.97 >10000 ND >10000 ND
58 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-Nle-Pro-Pro-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nva-Tyr-Cys 345 ± 31 –1.01 >10000 ND >10000 ND
59 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Abu-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nva-Tyr-Cys 183 ± 36 –1.05 >10000 ND >10000 ND
60 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-Nle-Pro-Abu-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nva-Tyr-Cys 320 ± 14 –0.99 >10000 ND >10000 ND
63 Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-His-Pro-Abu-Cys-Ile-Abu-Nva-Tyr-Cys 1934 ± 77 –0.93 >10000 ND >10000 ND
Open in a new tab

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Functional characterization of selected individual α4/4-conotoxins for α3β4 nAChR inhibition using the fluorescent membrane potential assay.

With the exception of compounds 35 and 63, all of the selected compounds exhibited inhibitory potencies for the α3β4 nAChR subtype that were comparable to that of BuIA in the fluorescent membrane potential assay (Table 4 and Figure 5). To further test for selectivity, each of the 11 active hits was also tested for α3β2 and α4β2 nAChR inhibitory activity. Significantly, all of compounds exhibited increased selectivity for the α3β4 nAChR when compared to α-conotoxin BuIA, with no antagonist activity observed for the α3β2 and α4β2 nAChR subtypes up to 10 μM (Table 4).

Compounds 57, 58, 59, and 60 were further tested for competitive inhibition of [3H]epibatidine binding to α3β4 and α4β2 nAChRs expressed in HEK293 cell membranes (Figure 6 and Table 5). The binding data correlate with results obtained from fluorescent membrane potential assay, with compound 59 exhibiting moderately increased potency toward α3β4 nAChR when compared to BuIA. Furthermore, no significant binding to the α4β2 nAChR was observed for any compound up to 10 μM (data not shown). These results provided further evidence that these compounds selectively bind to the endogenous α3β4 nAChR binding site.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Radioligand binding assays of BuIA and compounds 57–60 bound to the α3β4 nAChR subtype. [3H]Epibatidine was used as a hot ligand in the α3β4 nAChR ligand–receptor binding assay.

Table 5. Inhibition of [3H]Epibatidine Binding of Selected Compounds to α3β4 nAChR Expressed in HEK293 Cell Membranes.

TP-2212 Ki ± SEM (nM)
BuIA 851 ± 137
57 794 ± 65
58 1107 ± 9
59 270 ± 11
60 980 ± 122
Open in a new tab

Electrophysiological Characterization

Compounds 57, 58, 59, and 60 were further tested for α7 nAChR inhibitory activity by recording ACh-evoked currents in Xenopus oocytes. While compound 57 inhibited the response by 49.8% ± 3.2% at 10 μM, no inhibition of the α7 nAChR was observed for compounds 58, 59, and 60 up to 10 μM. TP-2212-59 (compound 59) was selected for further functional characterization by recording ACh-evoked currents mediated by α3β4 and α3β2 nAChR subtypes heterologously expressed in Xenopus oocytes. TP-2212-59 potently blocked the α3β4 subtype. However, TP-2212-59 exhibited very slow washout kinetics, with 90–120 min required to reach steady-state equilibrium that prohibited the accurate measurement of inhibition at concentrations below 10 nM (Figure 7A). Despite the slow washout kinetics at the α3β4 nAChR, TP-2212-59 clearly exhibited dose-dependent inhibition to a concentration of 10 nM (Figure 7B). In order to calculate an IC50 value for TP-2212-59 at the α3β4 nAChR, the top and bottom of the curve were constrained to 100% and 0% responses, respectively. This allowed determination of an IC50 value for TP-2212-59, which was calculated to be 2.3 nM. In contrast, no inhibition of the α3β2 nAChR was observed up to 10 μM, thus confirming a >1000-fold selectivity for the α3β4 subtype (Figure 7C). Together, these results suggest that TP-2212-59 is among the most potent and selective α-conotoxins that target the α3β4 nAChR subtype to be characterized thus far.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

Functional characterization of TP-2212-59 for α3β4 and α3β2 nAChR inhibition of acetylcholine evoked currents in Xenopus oocytes. ACh (300 μM) was applied as a 1 s pulse once per minute to Xenopus oocytes expressing rat nAChRs. (A) TP-2212-59 (10 nM) was perfusion applied to oocytes expressing α3β4 nAChRs until steady-state block of the ACh current was achieved. TP-2212-59 was then washed out and recovery of block measured. (B) Concentration response of TP-2212-59 on the α3β4 nAChR. The top and bottom of the curve were constrained to 100 and 0, respectively. The IC50 value is calculated as 2.3 nM. n = 3–5 oocytes for each peptide concentration. (C) TP-2212-59 was applied as a 10 μM static bath for 5 min to oocytes expressing rat α3β2 nAChRs (1000 times higher peptide concentration than that used for α3β4 nAChRs). Representative traces are shown for each nAChR subtype.

Discussion

Venomous marine cone snails utilize natural combinatorial libraries of peptide neurotoxins that target an array of receptors in the central and peripheral nervous systems to immobilize and capture their more agile prey.33 Among these are the α-conotoxins, which exhibit exquisite selectivity against different nAChR subtypes and thus are important research tools for studying a variety of neuropathological conditions, including pain, memory, cognition, and tobacco addiction. Their highly conserved three-dimensional structure and relative ease of synthesis by solid-phase peptide synthesis mean that α-conotoxins represent excellent structural scaffolds for developing large synthetic combinatorial libraries for functional screening.

Genomic and pharmacologic data have suggested the α3β4 nAChR subtype as a novel target for studying tobacco dependence and drug abuse.7,8 Furthermore, α3-containing nAChRs have been implicated in neuropathic pain.34,35 However, to determine the precise role of the α3β4 nAChR subtype in nicotine addiction and pain, potent and selective ligands for this receptor are rare. As a result, novel subtype-selective nAChR antagonists are crucial for the fundamental understanding of reward and pain pathways and may pave the way for the development of clinically effective smoking cessation drugs and analgesics that circumvent unwanted side effects.

In this study, we have utilized the unique α4/4-conotoxin framework as a template for constructing a high diversity mixture-based synthetic α-conotoxin combinatorial library for functional screening of the α3β4 nAChR subtype. BuIA is among only a few α-conotoxins identified so far that possesses the 4/4 framework, with a vast majority of neuronally active α-conotoxins possessing the more ubiquitous 4/7 framework.14 BuIA is a potent antagonist of a broad range of nAChRs, including α3β2 and α3β4 nAChRs. Importantly, it is able to kinetically discriminate between β2- and β4-containing nAChR subtypes.19,21 Modifications to key amino acid residues within the m- and n-loop allow its kinetics and selectivity to be fine-tuned. However, the design of functionally active and selective compounds remains a challenging task due to the conserved binding site of different nAChR subtypes that play an important role in the allosteric binding of ligands.

Previously, we reported the use of PS-SCLs based on α-conotoxin and small molecule frameworks for identifying pharmacologically active compounds that target nAChRs.36−38 Here, we have extended our synthetic combinatorial approach using the α4/4-conotoxin framework as a template for synthesizing and screening a mixture-based PS-SCL for the discovery of potent and selective antagonists of the α3β4 nAChR. The PS-SCL consisted of a total of 113 379 904 α-conotoxin sequences, which expands immensely upon the diversity of conotoxin libraries previously reported by our group.36,37

The fluorescent membrane potential assay was used to screen the PS-SCL mixtures for α3β4, α3β2, and α4β2 antagonistic activity.30 Though previous data suggest that inhibitory potencies obtained by this assay are significantly lower than those obtained from electrophysiological recordings, the assay has the advantage of allowing screening in a high-throughput manner and has proven to be useful for determining relative inhibitory potencies and selectivity of α-conotoxins for various nAChR subtypes and was used for initial screening and characterization of compounds.37,39−41 Screening of the 132 PS-SCL mixture samples for inhibition of rat α3β4 nAChR expressed in HEK293 cells using the fluorescent membrane potential assay allowed discrete active hits to be rapidly identified for this receptor. However, complementary counterscreening against α3β2 and α4β2 nAChRs could not readily identify active hits for these subtypes, suggesting that the unique α4/4-conotoxin framework may be in an optimized conformation to interact within the α3β4 nAChR binding site.

Significantly, novel amino acid residues were identified at each position, although each of the native residues of BuIA was also found to exhibit a moderate to high inhibitory potency for α3β4 nAChR. Notably, mixtures corresponding to native α-conotoxin BuIA residues were identified as the most active samples in the O2 and O6 positions (i.e., Pro and Tyr, respectively). A second generation library of individual analogues was designed based exclusively on the screening of α3β4 nAChR. From the initial screening of the 64 individual second generation α4/4-conotoxin sequences that were synthesized, 11 compounds exhibited >80% inhibition of α3β4 nAChR and were selected for further chemical and pharmacological characterization. Despite extensive mutation of key residues within the α4/4-conotoxin framework, each of these 11 analogues spontaneously formed the correct folded globular isomer upon oxidative folding, although the misfolded ribbon isomer was also present when Nle was substituted in the O1 position. For all analogues, the globular isomer was confirmed as the active component of the second generation library samples.

His and Nle were identified at the O1 position, suggesting a possible hydrogen bond acceptor within a hydrophobic pocket of the endogenous binding site. Of significance, His is present in the O1 position in several conotoxins targeting α3β4 nAChR, including α-conotoxins TxID, GIC, PeIA, and RegIIA (see Table 1). Therefore, it is important that His was clearly defined as an active hit from initial PS-SCL screening among all other residues, which strongly suggests that the O1 is a major determinant for selectively targeting the α3β4 nAChR.

The substitution of Abu was tolerated at the O2 position and indicates that conformationally relaxed α-conotoxin BuIA analogues may have a positive effect on the binding kinetics and thus are able to improve both binding affinity and specificity. The result correlates with a NMR structural study where the active globular isomer was found to be structurally relaxed while the inactive ribbon isomer exhibited a well-defined conformation.42 The substitution of Phe at the O3 position appears to play a crucial role in the increasing of activity. When compared to α-conotoxin BuIA, it is apparent that bulkier and smaller amino acids are preferred at the O4 and O5 positions, respectively. Significantly, all of the active sequences contained tyrosine at the O6 position, which is the native amino acid residue found in BuIA. Though Pro was selected at the O6 position based on PS-SCL screening, none of the individual sequences containing Pro at this position were identified as active hits. This was not surprising, since substitution with proline would be expected to introduce detrimental structural distortion into the well-defined α-conotoxin framework. Interestingly, the eight of the canonical α4/4-conotoxin sequences, defined as Gly-Cys-Cys-Ser-(His or Nle)-Pro-(Abu or Pro)-Cys-Phe-Abu-Nle-Tyr-Cys-NH2 (compounds 41–44 and 57-60), exhibited the most potent inhibition of α3β4 nAChR.

Significantly, of the 11 compounds selected for further functional characterization in the fluorescent membrane potential assay, each was highly selective for α3β4 nAChR, with no inhibitory activity for the α3β2 and α4β2 subtypes observed up to 10 μM. In contrast, α-conotoxin BuIA was shown to be 10-fold more selective for the α3β2 in the fluorescent membrane potential assay, which directly correlates with previously reported data obtained from electrophysiological recordings.19

Of the four analogues selected for further characterization in the radioligand binding assay, each compound displayed potent inhibition of [3H]epibatidine binding to α3β4 nAChR expressed in HEK293 cell membranes, which indicates competitive binding to the endogenous ligand binding site as exhibited by other α-conotoxins. By contrast, other ligands that potently block the α3β4 nAChR in functional assays, such as 18-MC and mecamylamine, do not inhibit [3H]epibatidine binding because these compounds bind to the central lumen of the receptor.43,44 Notably, compound 59 (TP-2212-59) was shown to exhibit moderately increased inhibition of [3H]epibatidine binding when compared to the other conotoxin analogues tested, including native α-conotoxin BuIA, and was thus selected for further functional characterization.

TP-2212-59 was tested for inhibition of ACh-evoked currents in α3β4, α3β2, and α7 nAChRs expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Though the slow washout kinetics prohibited measurements at concentrations lower than 10 nM, compound 59 inhibited α3β4 nAChR activity by 75% at this concentration, with a calculated IC50 value of 2.3 nM. α-Conotoxin BuIA also exhibits slow off-rates for β4-containing subtypes, which may contribute to the higher binding affinity and thus increased potency. However, while the off-rates for β4-containing receptors are in general slower, BuIA exhibits an approximately 5-fold greater selectivity for α3β2 over α3β4 nAChR subtypes, with IC50 values of 5.72 and 27.7 nM, respectively.19 In contrast, TP-2212-59 displayed a >1000-fold selectivity for α3β4 nAChR, with no inhibition of the α3β2 and α7 nAChR observed up to 10 μM. These data confirm that TP-2212-59 exhibits increased potency and selectivity for the α3β4 nAChR compared to α-conotoxin BuIA and is therefore among the most potent and selective α-conotoxin derivatives that target the α3β4 nAChR characterized to date.

This work demonstrates that a synthetic mixture-based combinatorial approach using the α4/4-conotoxin framework provides an excellent template for the identification of selective α3β4 nAChR antagonists. Moreover, TP-2212-59 is among the most potent and selective α-conotoxin antagonists that target the α3β4 nAChR and therefore is a valuable probe to elucidate the function of this receptor in a wide range of experimental paradigms that require α3β4 nAChR activation. For example, the effects of TP-2212-59 on nicotine self-administration and associated side effects in rodents are currently being examined by our group.11 Such studies may lead to the development of α3β4 nAChR antagonists as novel smoking cessation drugs with fewer side effects than presently available options.

Experimental Section

Chemical Synthesis of PS-SCL and Individual α-Conotoxin Analogues

The PS-SCL and individual α4/4-conotoxin analogues were assembled by solid-phase peptide synthesis using 4 cm × 4 cm polypropylene tea bags, each containing 100 mg of 4-methylbenzhydrylamine resin (ChemImpex, Wood Dale, IL). Couplings were performed using tert-butyloxycarbonyl (Boc)/2-(1H-benzotriazol-1-yl)-1,1,3,3-tetramethyluronium hexafluorophosphate (HBTU) chemistry with in situ neutralization.45 For the PS-SCL, X-positions were coupled as a cocktail of Nα-Boc protected amino acids using adjusted concentration ratios to compensate for the relative reaction rates in competitive couplings.28 The following amino acid side chain protecting groups were used for each respective amino acid: Arg, 4-toluenesulfonyl (Tos); Asn, 1-xanthanyl (Xan); Asp, O-cyclohexyl (OcHxl); Cys, 4-methylbenzyl (MeBzl) or N-acetomidomethyl (Acm); Glu, OcHxl; His, Tos; Hyp, benzyl (Bzl); Ser, Bzl; Trp, formyl (For); Tyr, 2-bromobenzyloxycarbonyl (BrZ). Following assembly, the tea bags were treated with 30% piperidine to remove the formyl protecting group from Trp; the N-terminal Boc protecting group was removed with trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), neutralized, and then pretreated with low HF (25% HF, 60% dimethylsulfide, 10% p-cresol, 5% 1,2-ethanedithiol) for 2 h at 0 °C. Finally, the peptides were cleaved from the resin using HF/p-cresol (9:1) for 2 h at 0 °C. The HF was evaporated under a stream of nitrogen. The peptide was precipitated with cold diethyl ether, centrifuged, washed again with additional ether, centrifuged, and lyophilized from 50% acetonitrile/0.1% TFA. The purity and molecular mass of individually synthesized peptides were confirmed using analytical LC–MS (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan).

Crude samples were individually oxidized by rigorously agitating each sample in a solution of 0.1 M ammonium bicarbonate, 50% isopropyl alcohol, pH 8.2, for 3 days at room temperature in an open vessel on an orbital shaker platform.29 Following evaporation of the isopropyl alcohol in vaccuo (Genevac Rocket, Ipswich, U.K.), samples were isolated in parallel with solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridges using a 24-sample vacuum manifold.29 For SPE cartridge semipurification, the sample was loaded by passing through an Oasis; 3 cc, 540 mg SPE cartridge (Waters) pre-equilibrated with buffer A and washed with a further 10 mL of buffer A to remove hydrophilic impurities (i.e., buffer salts). The α-conotoxin product was then eluted with 65% aqueous acetonitrile/0.1% TFA (buffer E, 10 mL), collected in a clean tube, and lyophilized. Selected compounds for further pharmacological characterization were purified to >95% homogeneity by preparative RP-HPLC using a C18 Luna column (Phenomenex) using a linear gradient of 0–45% buffer B (95% aqueous acetonitrile/0.1% TFA) over 60 min at a flow rate of 20 mL/min.

Regioselective synthesis of selected compounds for further characterization (i.e., globular and ribbon isomers) was achieved by stirring reduced/S-acetomidomethyl-protected peptides in 0.1 M ammonium acetate containing 30% DMSO, pH 5.8, for 2 days, followed by isolation by preparative RP-HPLC. Partially protected purified peptides (∼10 mg) were dissolved in 80% methanol (25 mL), and 0.1 M HCl was added (1 mL), followed by 0.1 M I2 in methanol (2.5 mL). The solution was stirred for 10 min before quenching with 0.1 M sodium thiosulfate. Finally, fully oxidized peptides were purified to >95% homogeneity using preparative RP-HPLC as described above.

Fluorescent Membrane Potential Assay

The fluorescent plate reader membrane potential blue assay was used for initial library screening and to determine inhibition of rat α3β4, α3β2, and α4β2 nAChRs by individual α-conotoxins. Briefly, KXα3β4R2, KXα3β2R2, or KXα4β2R2 HEK293 cells (kindly provided by Drs. Yingxian Xiao and Kenneth Kellar, Georgetown University, Washington, DC)32 were cultured in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator and maintained in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), penicillin/streptomycin (100 units/mL), and G-418 (0.5 mg/mL). The cells were split into poly-d-lysine coated clear bottom 96-well plates 24 h prior to the assay and grown to ∼80% confluency. The culture medium was aspirated, and the cells were washed twice with Hank’s buffered salt solution (HBSS). After washing, 75 μL of HBSS was added to each well, followed by 25 μL of PS-SCL mixtures or α-conotoxin test samples. Finally, membrane potential blue dye (100 μL) was added and the cells were incubated for a further 30 min at 37 °C prior to the assay with the FlexStation 3 microplate reader (Molecular Devices) measuring emission at 530 nm caused by excitation at 565 nm (cutoff 550 nm) before and up to 60 s after addition of epibatidine agonist solution to a concentration of 0.1 μM in assay buffer. The concentration–response for antagonists was measured on the basis of the maximal responses at different concentrations of the respective ligands to determine IC50 values, which were calculated using GraphPad Prism software (La Jolla, CA).

Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor Binding Assay

KXα3β4R2 and KXα4β2R2 HEK293 cells were cultured on 150 mm dishes as described above. Cells were harvested when confluent by scraping the plates with a rubber policeman, suspended in 50 mM Tris buffer, pH 7.4, homogenized using a Polytron homogenizer, and washed twice by centrifugation at 20000g (13 500 rpm) for 20 min. For binding, the cell membranes were incubated with the test compounds or mixtures in the presence of 0.31 nM [3H]epibatidine. After 2h of incubation at room temperature, samples were filtered using a Tomtec cell harvester through glass fiber filters presoaked in 0.05% polyethyleneimine. Filters were counted on a betaplate reader (Wallac). Nonspecific binding was determined by using 0.1 μM unlabeled epibatidine. IC50 values were determined by using the program GraphPad Prism. Ki values were calculated using the Cheng–Prusoff transformation: Ki = IC50/(1 + L/KD),46 where L is radioligand concentration and KD is the binding affinity of the radioligand, as determined previously by saturation analysis.

Electrophysiological Recordings

Capped cRNA for the various subunits was made using the mMessage mMachine in vitro transcription kit (Ambion, Austin, TX) following plasmid linearization. cRNA of the α3 chimera was combined with cRNA of high expressing β2 and β4 subunits or homomeric α7 subunits (in the pGEMHE vector) to give 200–500 ng/μL of each subunit cRNA. An amount of 50 nL of this mixture was injected into Xenopus oocytes, and the sample was incubated at 17 °C. Oocytes were injected within 1 day of harvesting, and recordings were made 2–4 days after injection. Oocytes were voltage-clamped and exposed to a 1 s pulse of 300 M μACh and peptide as described previously.47 For screening of receptor subtypes and for toxin concentrations of 1 μM and higher, once a stable agonist-response baseline was achieved, either ND-96 alone or ND-96 containing varying BuIA analogue concentrations was manually preapplied for 5 min under static bath conditions prior to agonist addition. For toxin concentrations of <1 μM, toxin was perfusion applied and responses to 1 s pulses of ACh were measured every 1 min. All recordings were performed at room temperature (∼22 °C).

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the James and Esther King Biomedical Research Program (New Investigator Grant 1KN02-33990 to C.J.A.) and funds from the State of Florida, Executive Officer of the Governor’s Department of Economic Opportunity, and National Institute of General Medical Sciences grants (Grants GM103801 and GM48677 to J.M.M). We thank Drs. Yingxian Xiao and Kenneth Kellar (Georgetown University, Washington, DC) for kindly providing the α3β4, α3β2, and α4β2 nAChR HEK293 cell lines used in the screening assays.

Glossary

Abbreviations Used

18-MC

18-methoxycoronaridine

ACh

acetylcholine

Acm

acetomidomethyl

Abu

2-aminobutyric acid

Boc

tert-butyloxycarbonyl

Hyp

4-hydroxyproline

LC–MS

liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry

MeBzl

4-methylbenzyl

MBHA

4-methylbenzylhydrylamine

nAChR

nicotinic acetylcholine receptor

Nle

norleucine

Nva

norvaline

PS-SCL

positional scanning synthetic combinatorial library

TFA

trifluoroacetic acid

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Funding Statement

National Institutes of Health, United States

References

  1. Taly A.; Corringer P.-J.; Guedin D.; Lestage P.; Changeux J. P. Nicotine receptors: allosteric transitions and therapeutic targets in the nervous system. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2009, 8, 733–750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Dani J. A.; Bertrand D. Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and nicotinic cholinergic mechanisms of the central nervous system. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2007, 47, 699–729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Jensen A.; Frølund B.; Liljefors T.; Krogsgaard-Larsen P. Neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors: structural revelations, target identifications and therapeutic inspirations. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 4705–4744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fowler C. D.; Kenny P. J. Nicotine aversion: neurobiological mechanisms and relevance to tobacco dependence vulnerability. Neuropharmacology 2013, 76Part B533–544. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Niaura R.; Jones C.; Kirkpatrick P. Varenicline. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2006, 5, 537–538. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Glick S. D.; Maisonneuve I. M.; Kitchen B. A. Modulation of nicotine self-administration in rats by combination therapy with agents blocking a3b4 nicotinic receptors. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2002, 448, 185–191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Berrettini W.; Yuan X.; Tozzi F.; Song K.; Francks C.; Chilcoat H.; Waterworth D.; Muglia P.; Mooser V. α-5/α-3 nicotinic receptor subunit alleles increase risk for heavy smoking. Mol. Psychiatry 2008, 13, 368–373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Maisonneuve I. M.; Glick S. D. Anti-addictive action of an iboga alkaloid congener: a novel mechanism for a novel treatment. Pharmacol., Biochem. Behav. 2003, 75, 607–618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Glick S. D.; Sell E. M.; McCallum S. E.; Maisonneuve I. M. Brain regions mediating α3β4 nicotine antagonist effects of 18-MC on nicotine self-administration. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2011, 669, 71–75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. McCallum S. E.; Cowe M. A.; Lewis S. W.; Glick S. D. α3β4 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the medial habenula modulate the mesolimbic dopaminergic response to acute nicotine in vivo. Neuropharmacology 2012, 63, 434–440. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Toll L.; Zaveri N.; Polgar W. E.; Jiang F.; Khroyan T. V.; Zhou W.; Xie X. S.; Stauber G. B.; Costello M. R.; Leslie F. M. AT-1001: a high affinity and selective α3β4 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist block nicotine self-administration in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology 2012, 81, 846–854. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Mihalak K. B.; Carroll F. I.; Luetje C. W. Varenicline is a partial agonist at α4β2 and a full agonist at α7 neuronal nicotinic receptors. Mol. Pharmacol. 2006, 70, 801–805. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Chatterjee S.; Steensland P.; Simms J. A.; Holgate J.; Coe J. W.; Hurst R. S.; Shaffer C. L.; Lowe J.; Rollema H.; Bartlett S. E. Partial agonists of the a3b4* neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor reduce ethanol comsumption and seeking in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology 2011, 36, 603–615. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Azam L.; McIntosh J. M. α-Conotoxins as pharmacological probes of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Acta. Pharmacol. Sin. 2009, 30, 771–783. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Armishaw C. J. Synthetic α-conotoxin mutants as probes for studying nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and in the development of novel drug leads. Toxins 2010, 2, 1470–1498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Muttenthaler M.; Akondi K. B.; Alewood P. F. Structure–activity studies on alpha-conotoxins. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2011, 17, 4226–4241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Luo S.; Kulak J. M.; Cartier G. E.; Jacobsen R. B.; Yoshikami D.; Olivera B. M.; McIntosh J. M. α-Conotoxin AuIB selectively blocks α3β4 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and nicotine-evoked norepinephrine release. J. Neurosci. 1998, 18, 8571–8579. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Luo S.; Zhangzun D.; Zhu X.; Wu Y.; Hu Y.; Christensen S.; Harvey P. J.; Akcan M.; Craik D. J.; McIntosh J. M. Characterization of a novel α-conotoxin TxID from Conus textile that potently blocks rat α3β4 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. J. Med. Chem. 2013, 56, 9655–9663. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Azam L.; Dowell C.; Watkins M.; Stitzel J. A.; Olivera B. M.; McIntosh J. M. α-Conotoxin BuIA, a novel peptide from Conus bullatus distinguishes among neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 80–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Chi S.-W.; Kim D.-H.; Olivera B. M.; McIntosh J. M.; Han K. H. NMR structure determination of α-conotoxin BuIA, a novel neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist with an unusual 4/4 disulfide scaffold. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2006, 349, 1228–1234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Shiembob D. L.; Roberts R. L.; Luetje C. W.; McIntosh J. M. Determinants of α-conotoxin BuIA selectivity on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor β subunit. Biochemistry 2006, 45, 11200–11207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kim H. W.; McIntosh J. M. α6 nAChR subunit residues that confer α-conotoxin BuIA selectivity. FASEB J. 2012, 26, 4102–4110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Azam L.; Maskos U.; Changeux J.-P.; Dowell C. D.; Christensen S.; De Biasi M.; McIntosh J. M. α-Conotoxin BuIA[T5A;P6O]: a novel ligand that discriminates between α6β4 and α6β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and blocks nicotine-stimulated norepinephrine release. FASEB J. 2011, 24, 5113–5123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Franco A.; Pisarewicz K.; Moller C.; Mora D.; Fields G. B.; Mari F. Hyperhydroxylation: a new strategy for neuronal targeting by venomous marine molluscs. Prog. Mol. Subcell. Biol. 2006, 43, 83–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Bergeron Z. L.; Chun J. B.; Baker M. R.; Sandall D. W.; Piegneur S.; Yu P. Y. C.; Thapa P.; Milisen J. W.; Tytgat J.; Livett B. G.; Bingham J.-P. A “conovenomic” analysis of the milked venom from the mollusk-hunting cone snail Conus textile: the pharmacological importance of post-translational modifications. Peptides 2013, 49, 145–158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Houghten R. A. General-method for the rapid solid-phase synthesis of large numbers of peptides: specificity of antigen–antibody interaction at the level of individual amino-acids. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1985, 82, 5131–5135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Tam J. P.; Heath W. F.; Merrifield R. B. SN2 deprotection of synthetic peptides with a low concentration of HF in dimethyl sulfide: evidence and application in peptide synthesis. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983, 105, 6442–6455. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ostresh J. M.; Winkle J. H.; Hamashin V. T.; Houghten R. A. Peptide libraries: determination of relative reaction rates of protected amino acids in competitive couplings. Biopolymers 1994, 34, 1681–1689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Gyanda R.; Banerjee J.; Chang Y.-P.; Phillips A. M.; Toll L.; Armishaw C. J. Oxidative folding and preparation of α-conotoxins for use in high-throughput structure–activity relationship studies. J. Pept. Sci. 2013, 19, 16–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Fitch R. W.; Xiao Y.; Kellar K. J.; Daly J. W. Membrane potential fluorescence: a rapid and highly sensitive assay for nicotinic receptor channel function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 4909–4914. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Xiao Y.; Meyer E. L.; Thompson J. M.; Surin A.; Wroblewski J.; Kellar K. J. Rat α3/β4 subtype of neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor stably expressed in a transfected cell line: pharmacology of ligand binding and function. Mol. Pharmacol. 1998, 54, 322–333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Xiao Y.; Kellar K. J. The comparative pharmacology and up-regulation of rat neuronal nicotinic receptor subtype binding sites stably expressed in transfected mammalian cells. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2004, 310, 98–107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Olivera B. M.; Rivier J.; Clark C.; Corpuz G. P.; Mena E. E.; Ramilo C. A.; Cruz L. J. Diversity of Conus neuropeptides. Science 1990, 249, 257–263. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Klimis H.; Adams D. J.; Callaghan B.; Nevin S.; Alewood P. F.; Vaughan C. W.; Mozar C. A.; Christie M. J. A novel mechanism of inhibition of high-voltage activated calcium channels by α-conotoxins contributes to relief of nerve-induced neuropathic pain. Pain 2011, 152, 259–266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Napier I. A.; Klimis H.; Rycroft B. K.; Jin A.-H.; Alewood P. F.; Motin L.; Adams D. J.; Christie M. J. Intrathecal α-conotoxins Vc1.1, AuIB and MII acting on distinct nicotinic receptor subtypes reverse signs of neuropathic pain. Neuropharmacology 2012, 62, 2202–2207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Armishaw C. J.; Banerjee J.; Ganno M. L.; Reilley K. J.; Eans S. O.; Mizrachi E.; Gyanda R.; Hoot M. R.; Houghten R. A.; McLaughlin J. P. Discovery of novel antinociceptive α-conotoxin analogs from the direct in vivo screening of a synthetic mixture-based combinatorial library. ACS Comb. Sci. 2013, 15, 153–161. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Armishaw C. J.; Singh N.; Medina-Franco J.; Clark R. J.; Scott K. C. M.; Houghten R. A.; Jensen A. A. A synthetic combinatorial strategy for developing α-conotoxin analogs as potent α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285, 1809–1821. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Wu J.; Zhang Y.; Maida L.; Santos R. G.; Welmaker G. S.; Lavoi T. M.; Nefzi A.; Yu Y.; Houghten R. A.; Toll L.; Giulianotti M. A. Scaffold ranking and positional scanning utilized in the discovery of nAChR-selective compounds suitable for optimization studies. J. Med. Chem. 2013, 56, 10103–10117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Armishaw C. J.; Jensen A. A.; Balle T.; Clark R. J.; Harpsøe K.; Skonberg C.; Liljefors T.; Strømgaard K. The rational design of α-conotoxin analogues targeting α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors: improved antagonistic activity by incorporation of proline derivatives. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 9498–9512. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Banerjee J.; Yongye A.; Chang Y.-P.; Gyanda R.; Medina-Franco J.; Armishaw C. J. Design and synthesis of α-conotoxin GID analogs as selective α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists. Biopolymers 2014, 102, 78–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Armishaw C. J.; Jensen A. A.; Balle L. D.; Scott K. C. M.; Sørensen L.; Strømgaard K. Improving the stability of α-conotoxin AuIB through N-to-C cyclization: the effect of spacer length on stability and activity at nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Antiox. Redox Signaling 2011, 14, 65–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Jin A.-H.; Brandstaetter H.; Nevin S. T.; Tan C. C.; Clark R. J.; Adams D. J.; Alewood P. F.; Craik D. J.; Daly N. L. Structure of α-conotoxin BuIA: influences of disulfide connectivity on structural dynamics. BMC Struct. Biol. 2007, 7, 28–41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Arias H. R.; Bhumireddy P.; Bouzat C. Molecular mechanisms and binding site locations for noncompetitive antagonists of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 2006, 38, 1254–1276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Arias H. R.; Rosenberg A.; Feuerbach D.; Targowska-Duda K. M.; Maciejewski R.; Jozwiak K.; Moaddel R.; Glick S. D.; Wainer I. W. Interaction of 18-methoxycoronaridine with nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in different conformational states. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2010, 1798, 1153–1163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Schnölzer M.; Alewood P.; Jones A.; Alewood D.; Kent S. B. H. In situ neutralization in Boc-chemistry solid phase peptide synthesis. Int. J. Pept. Protein Res. 1992, 40, 180–193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Cheng Y.; Prussoff W. H. Relationship between the inhibition constant (Ki) and the concentration of inhibitor which causes 50 per cent inhibition (IC50) of an enzymatic reaction. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1973, 22, 3099–3108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Cartier G. E.; Yoshikami D.; Gray W. R.; Luo S.; Olivera B. M.; McIntosh J. M. A new α-conotoxin which targets α3β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. J. Biol. Chem. 1996, 271, 7522–7528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. McIntosh J. M.; Dowell C.; Watkins M.; Garrett J. E.; Yoshikami D.; Olivera B. M. α-Conotoxin GIC from Conus geographus, a novel peptide antagonist of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 33610–33615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. McIntosh J. M.; Plazas P. V.; Watkins M.; Gomez-Casati M. E.; Olivera B. M.; Elgoyhen A. B. A novel α-conotoxin, PeIA, cloned from Conus pergrandis, discriminates between rat α9α10 and α7 nicotinic cholinergic receptors. J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 30107–30112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Franco A.; Kompella S. N.; Akondi K. B.; Melaun C.; Daly N. L.; Luetje C. W.; Alewood P. F.; Craik D. J.; Adams D. J.; Marí F. RegIIA: an α4/7-conotoxin from the venom of Conus regius that potently blocks α3β4 nAChRs. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2012, 83, 419–426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Medicinal Chemistry are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES