Research Article | Volume 11, Issue 1, January, 2023

Integration of mutational and molecular docking studies: An in silico approach to assess the stability and binding potential of CYP3A4

Archana Anthappagudem Sreenivas Enaganti Bhima Bhukya   

Open Access   

Published:  Nov 22, 2022

DOI: 10.7324/JABB.2023.110122
Abstract

CYP3A4 is a major cytochrome P450 liable for almost half of CYP450 mediated Phase 1 drug metabolism. Because of its broad substrate specificity and high level of expression in the liver this enzyme plays a dominant role in drug metabolism. This study aimed to investigate the influence of single amino acid substitution on protein structural stability and ligand binding affinity through docking studies. Single site mutations are created in the CYP3A4 sequence and checked all the sites for the favorable and stable mutations using CUPSAT and SDM tools. Based on the results of CUPSAT and SDM tools, three mutations (H65R, D154E, and K422N) were found to be more favorable and stable, hence modeled using DS modeler. Docking studies were carried out for wild and mutant modeled structures with the compounds Imipramine, Midazolam, Nifedipine, and Quinidine using DS libdock. The docking results suggested that the H65R, D154E, and K422N having a docking scores of 121.907, 121.658, and 134.605, respectively, are more significant in comparison to wild CYP3A4 (87.126). Among the three mutated models, K422N mutant has been identified as more stable as supported by stability and docking assessment and may be taken into consideration for further in vitro studies.


Keyword:     CUPSAT Cytochrome P450 Metabolism Mutation SDM


Citation:

Anthappagudem A, Enaganti S, Bhukya B. Integration of mutational and molecular docking studies: An in silico approach to assess the stability and binding potential of CYP3A4. J App Biol Biotech. 2023;11(1):161-170. https://doi.org/10.7324/JABB.2023.110122

Copyright: Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license.

HTML Full Text
Reference

1. Esteves F, Rueff J, Kranendonk M. The central role of cytochrome P450 in xenobiotic metabolism-a brief review on a fascinatingenzyme family. J Xenobiot 2021;11:94-114.https://doi.org/10.3390/jox11030007

2. Guengerich FP. Intersection of the roles of cytochrome P450 enzymes with xenobiotic and endogenous substrates: Relevance to toxicity and drug interactions. Chem Res Toxicol 2017;30:2-12.https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00226

3. Spicakova A, Bazgier V, Skálová L, Otyepka M, Anzenbacher P. β?caryophyllene oxide and trans-nerolidol affect enzyme activity of CYP3A4-in vitro and in silico studies. Physiol Res 2019;68:51-8.https://doi.org/10.33549/physiolres.934323

4. Guengerich FP. A history of the roles of cytochrome P450 enzymes in the toxicity of drugs. Toxicol Res 2021;37:1-23.https://doi.org/10.1007/s43188-020-00056-z

5. Niwa T, Okamoto A, Narita K, Toyota M, Kato K, Kobayashi K, et al. Comparison of steroid hormone hydroxylation mediated by cytochrome P450 3A subfamilies. Arch Biochem Biophys 2020;682:108283.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2020.108283

6. Jackson KD, Durandis R, Vergne MJ. Role of cytochrome P450 enzymes in the metabolic activation of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Int J Mol Sci 2018;19:2367.https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19082367

7. Sevrioukova IF, Poulos TL. Structural basis for regiospecific midazolam oxidation by human cytochrome P450 3A4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2017;114:486-91.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616198114

8. Deodhar M, Al Rihani SB, Arwood MJ, Darakjian L, Dow P, Turgeon J, et al. Mechanisms of CYP450 inhibition: Understanding drug-drug interactions due to mechanism-based inhibition in clinical practice. Pharmaceutics 2020;12:846.https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics12090846

9. Kumondai M, Rico EM, Hishinum E, Ueda A, Saito S, Saigusa D, et al. Functional characterization of 40 CYP3A4 variants by assessing midazolam 1-hydroxylation and testosterone 6β-hydroxylation. Drug Metab Dispos 2021;49:212-20.https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.120.000261

10. Zhou XY, Hu XX, Wang CC, Lu XR, Chen Z, Liu Q, et al. Enzymatic activities of CYP3A4 allelic variants on quinine 3-hydroxylation in vitro. Front Pharmacol 2019;10:591.https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2019.00591

11. Arendse LB, Blackburn JM. Effects of polymorphic variation on the thermostability of heterogenous populations of CYP3A4 and CYP2C9 enzymes in solution. Sci Rep 2018;8:1-14.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30195-1

12. Gaedigk A, Sundberg MI, Miller NA, Leeder JS, Carrillo MW, Klein TE. The pharmacogene variation (PharmVar) consortium: Incorporation of the human cytochrome p450 (CYP) allele nomenclature database. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2018;103:399-40.https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.910

13. Guttman Y, Nudel A, Kerem Z. Polymorphism in cytochrome P450 3A4 is ethnicity related. Front Genet 2019;10:224.https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2019.00224

14. Fang P, Tang PF, Xu RA, Zheng X, Wen J, Bao SS, et al. Functional assessment of CYP3A4 allelic variants on lidocaine metabolism in vitro. Drug Des Dev Ther 2017;11:3503-10.https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S152366

15. Hu GX, Dai DP, Wang H, Huang XX, Zhou XY, Cai J, et al. Systematic screening for CYP3A4 genetic polymorphisms in a Han Chinese population. Pharmacogenomics 2017;18:369-79.https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs-2016-0179

16. Yong CC, Zheng X, Liu TH, Wang CC, Tang PF, Chen Z, et al. Functional characterization of 21 CYP3A4 variants on amiodarone metabolism in vitro. Xenobiotica 2019;49:120-6.https://doi.org/10.1080/00498254.2017.1414971

17. Quiroga I, Scior T. Induced fit for cytochrome P450 3A4 based on molecular dynamics. ADMET DMPK 2019;7:252-66.https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.729

18. Bawono P, Dijkstra M, Pirovano W, Feenstra A, Abeln S, Heringa J. Multiple sequence alignment. In: Methods in Molecular Biology. New York: Humana Press; 2017. p. 167-89.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6622-6_8

19. Pandurangan AP, Montaño BO, Ascher DB, Blundell TL. SDM: A server for predicting effects of mutations on protein stability. Nucleic Acids Res 2017;45:W229-35.https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx439

20. Sanavia T, Birolo G, Montanucci L, Turina P, Capriotti E, Fariselli P. Limitations and challenges in protein stability prediction upon genome variations: Towards future applications in precision medicine. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 2020;18:1968-79.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2020.07.011

21. Ashkenazy H, Abadi S, Martz E, Chay O, Mayrose I, Pupko T, et al. Consurf 2016: An improved methodology to estimate and visualize evolutionary conservation in macromolecules. Nucleic Acids Res 2016;44:W344-50.https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw408

Article Metrics

23 Absract views 21 PDF Downloads 44 Total views

Related Search

By author names

Citiaion Alert By Google Scholar