Fragment screening of stabilized G-protein-coupled receptors using biophysical methods.

Biophysical studies with G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are typically very challenging due to the poor stability of these receptors when solubilized from the cell membrane into detergent solutions. However, the stability of a GPCR can be greatly improved by introducing a number of point mutations into the protein sequence to give a stabilized receptor or StaR®. Here, we present the utility of StaRs for biophysical studies and the screening of fragment libraries. Two case studies are used to illustrate the methods: first, the screening of a library of fragments by surface plasmon resonance against the adenosine A(2A) receptor StaR, demonstrating how very small and weakly active xanthine fragments can be detected binding to the protein on chips; second, the screening and detection of fragment hits of a larger fragment library in an NMR format called TINS (target-immobilized NMR screening) against the ß(1) adrenergic StaR.

Target immobilization as a strategy for NMR-based fragment screening: comparison of TINS, STD, and SPR for fragment hit identification.

Fragment-based drug discovery (FBDD) has become a widely accepted tool that is complementary to high-throughput screening (HTS) in developing small-molecule inhibitors of pharmaceutical targets. Because a fragment campaign can only be as successful as the hit matter found, it is critical that the first stage of the process be optimized. Here the authors compare the 3 most commonly used methods for hit discovery in FBDD: high concentration screening (HCS), solution ligand-observed nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and surface plasmon resonance (SPR). They selected the commonly used saturation transfer difference (STD) NMR spectroscopy and the proprietary target immobilized NMR screening (TINS) as representative of the array of possible NMR methods. Using a target typical of FBDD campaigns, the authors find that HCS and TINS are the most sensitive to weak interactions. They also find a good correlation between TINS and STD for tighter binding ligands, but the ability of STD to detect ligands with affinity weaker than 1 mM K(D) is limited. Similarly, they find that SPR detection is most suited to ligands that bind with K(D) better than 1 mM. However, the good correlation between SPR and potency in a bioassay makes this a good method for hit validation and characterization studies.