Biochemical Characterization of FIKK Kinase from
Cryptosporidium parvum and Discovery of Potent
Inhibitors.
by
Khan Tanjid Osman
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Molecular Genetics University of Toronto
© Copyright by Khan Tanjid Osman 2016
ii
Biochemical Characterization of FIKK Kinase from
Cryptosporidium parvum and Discovery of Potent Inhibitors.
Khan Tanjid Osman
Doctor of Philosophy
Molecular Genetics
University of Toronto
2016
Abstract
Cryptosporidium parasites cause serious human and animal diseases and affect millions of
children worldwide. Drug discovery attempts against the parasites are insufficient and new drug
targets are necessary. C. parvum harbors some unique protein kinases including one called FIKK
kinase. FIKKs are parasite-specific protein kinases with distinctive sequence motifs and
restricted to phylum Apicomplexa. The biochemistry and biology of the evolutionarily conserved
members of the FIKK family have not been elucidated before this project. I explored the
biochemical nature of the most conserved FIKK members in C. parvum and malaria causing P.
falciparum, known as CpFIKK and PfFIKK8, respectively. I have identified the soluble domain
boundary of the proteins and their substrate preferences, and characterized their activity in vitro.
FIKKs need a ~40 residue extension to the predicted kinase domain to be soluble. They prefer
Ser as phosphoacceptor residue flanked by Arg at the -3 and +3 positions in the substrate.
Because their biological roles have not been completely elucidated, potent, selective and cell
iii
permeable inhibitors would be useful to understand the biological roles of FIKKs in parasites.
Here, I report the first Cryptosporidium FIKK (CpFIKK) inhibitor and its selectivity profile. I
systematically explored the structure activity relationship for CpFIKK inhibition and for
selectivity against CpCDPK1. I identified 4b as a potent (IC50 = 0.2 nM) inhibitor of CpFIKK
catalytic activity, and confirmed CpFIKK binding using a thermal melt assay. Minor variations
of inhibitor structure led to significant change in selectivity profiles against CpCDPK1 and
identified CpCDPK1 selective as well as dually acting C. parvum FIKK-CDPK1 inhibitors from
the same structural class of compounds. I evaluated these CpFIKK inhibitors for inhibition of
parasite growth in vitro. The observed effect in parasite growth did not correlate with CpFIKK
inhibition.
iv
Dedication
To my parents
Dr. Khan Towhid Osman and Ms. Taslima Begum
From whom I inherited my set of kinase genes
v
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I like to thank my advisor Dr. Aled M. Edwards. It has been a privilege to
work under his supervision. His tremendous support, endless patience, sincerity and guidance
were crucial for the fulfillment of my project. His views on science, enthusiasm and wonderful
ideas motivated me to take risk and challenge myself, helped me to design experiments and
forced me to think outside the box. I appreciate his contributions of time, advice and funding to
make my research productive, fun and stimulating. I count myself extremely fortunate to be
supervised by such an outstanding science leader and one of the frontline advocates of open
access science.
Most of my research work was conducted in the Structural Parasitology laboratory within the
Structural Genomics Consortium (SGC), Toronto (thesgc.org). I would like to thank the principal
investigator of the group and my co-supervisor Dr. Raymond Hui for his excellent support.
Working in a super-productive lab under his leadership helped my research tremendously. I am
greatly thankful for the time, patience, effort and ideas he contributed for my project. I would
also like to extend my sincere gratitude to the supervisory committee members Drs. Frank
Sicheri and Scott Gray-Owen for their suggestions, ideas and time that led this research towards
right direction. I am specially grateful to Dr. Vijayaratnam Santhakumar from ChemNet, SGC,
for leading the inhibitor compound discovery project.
Lab members of Structural Parasitology helped me immensely in numerous ways. Special thanks
to Diego Lovato, Linda Lin, Mehrnaz Amani, Ashley Hutchinson, Majida El Bakkhouri, Tania
Hills, David Hou, Wei Qiu, Maria Mangos, Dunquan Jiang and Verena Brand for their
tremendous support. I am grateful to the members from other groups of SGC for their assistance,
specially to Peter Loppnau for cloning, Ashley Hutchinson for protein expression, Guillermo
Senisterra and Abdellah Allali-Hassani for biophysical and biochemical assays, and Mani
Ravichandran for crystallography. I would like to extend my gratitude to Greg Brothers, Merilyn
Pereira and Rebecca Clare of SGC for their kind support in administrative matters.
This work was aided by several collaborations and I would like to thank all of the awesome
collaborators: laboratories of Dr. Benjamin Turk from Yale University, Dr. Mark Lautens from
University of Toronto, Dr. Dana Mordue from New York Medical College, Christopher Huston
vi
from University of Vermont, Dr. Serge Muyldermans from VIB Structural Biology Research
Center, Dr. Bill Zuercher from University of North Carolina. Particularly, I would like to thank
Hua Jane Lou from Turk lab for peptide library screening, to Rajiv S. Jumani from Huston lab
for performing Cryptosporidium parvum inhibition assays, to Juntao Ye from Lautens lab for
synthesizing inhibitor compounds and to Odaelys Walwyn from Mordue lab for performing
Toxoplasma gondii inhibition assays. During the period of my PhD program, I have visited many
labs to learn different techniques on cell biology and genetics experiments and I want to express
my sincere gratitude to Dr. John Parkinson from SickKids, University of Toronto (for T. gondii
cellular and inhibition assays), Dr. David Sibley from Washington University in St. Louis (for T.
gondii genetic manipulation techniques) and Dr. Momar Ndao (for C. parvum cellular and
inhibition assays) for their kind permission to work in their labs.
This research was funded by different academic and industry partners through the SGC. The
SGC is a registered charity (number 1097737) that receives funds from AbbVie, Bayer Pharma
AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Canada Foundation for Innovation, Eshelman Institute for
Innovation, Genome Canada through Ontario Genomics Institute, Innovative Medicines
Initiative (EU/EFPIA) [ULTRA-DD grant no. 115766], Janssen, Merck & Co., Novartis Pharma
AG, Ontario Ministry of Economic Development and Innovation, Pfizer, São Paulo Research
Foundation-FAPESP, Takeda, and the Wellcome Trust. I would like to thank all of the funders
for providing me with this opportunity.
Last but not least, I want to thank my family members, without whom this work would not be
possible. My parents encouraged and motivated me to pursue the PhD degree. Finally, I would
like to thank my wonderful wife Ms. Sadiah Mussarrat for her support, love and care. Her
comfort, guidance and assistance were indispensable for me throughout this work.
vii
Table of Contents
Contents
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................v
Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter 1 ..........................................................................................................................................1
Introduction .................................................................................................................................1 1
1.1 Cryptosporidium causes serious human and animal diseases ..............................................1
1.2 Epidemiology, taxonomy and life cycle of C. parvum ........................................................2
1.3 Drug discovery efforts against Cryptosporidium and other apicomplexans ........................5
1.4 Targeting protein kinases in parasites for new drug discovery: learning from the past ......7
1.4.1 Ligand-substrate interaction in protein kinases .......................................................8
1.4.2 Known inhibitors of parasite kinases .....................................................................10
1.5 The Cryptosporidium kinome: a hub of unique kinases ....................................................11
1.6 The FIKK kinase family ....................................................................................................13
1.6.1 Number of FIKK members in apicomplexan genomes .........................................13
1.6.2 Domain architectures and known biological functions of FIKKs .........................14
1.6.3 Lone FIKKs are orthologous to FIKK8 from P. falciparum .................................19
1.6.4 FIKKs contain putatively active kinase domains...................................................19
1.6.5 The FIKK kinase domains share some features of atypical protein kinases ..........21
1.6.6 Evidence for catalytically active FIKKs ................................................................23
1.7 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................25
viii
Chapter 2 ........................................................................................................................................26
Biochemical characterization of FIKKs from C. parvum (CpFIKK) and P. falciparum 2
(PfFIKK8) .................................................................................................................................26
2.1 Soluble FIKK constructs include an extension region .......................................................26
2.2 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 are active kinases ..........................................................................39
2.2.1 Purified FIKKs bind ATP ......................................................................................30
2.2.2 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 autophosphorylate ............................................................31
2.2.3 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 phosphorylate exogenous substrates ................................32
2.3 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 target serine with flanking arginines ............................................39
2.3.1 Positional-scanning peptide array ..........................................................................33
2.3.2 Characterization of enzyme parameters using optimized substrates .....................37
2.4 Materials and methods .......................................................................................................39
2.4.1 Cloning and expression ..........................................................................................39
2.4.2 Differential static light scattering (DSLS) .............................................................40
2.4.3 In vitro phosphorylation .........................................................................................41
2.4.4 Kinase substrate peptide assay ...............................................................................41
2.4.5 Enzymatic assay .....................................................................................................42
Chapter 3 ........................................................................................................................................43
Identification of potent inhibitors of CpFIKK ..........................................................................43 3
3.1 Inhibitor screening yielded multiple naphthyridine-based CpFIKK-inhibitors .................44
3.2 Selectivity of 4a within C. parvum kinome .......................................................................45
3.3 Structure activity relationship of CpFIKK inhibitors ........................................................46
3.4 Orthogonal confirmation of CpFIKK inhibition ................................................................52
3.5 Selectivity profile of CpFIKK inhibitor 4b against human kinases ...................................54
3.6 Structural understanding of inhibitor binding ....................................................................59
3.7 Materials and methods .......................................................................................................63
ix
3.7.1 Enzymatic inhibition assay ....................................................................................63
3.7.2 Screening with human kinases ...............................................................................64
3.7.3 X-ray crystallography ............................................................................................64
Chapter 4 ........................................................................................................................................66
Phenotypic effects of CpFIKK inhibitors on parasites .............................................................66 4
4.1 Evaluation of CpFIKK inhibitors in C. parvum growth inhibition ....................................66
4.2 Chemical genetics experiments with FIKK knock out (KO) strains of T. gondii..............69
4.3 Materials and methods .......................................................................................................71
4.3.1 C. parvum growth inhibition assay ........................................................................71
4.3.2 T. gondii growth inhibition and cystogenesis inhibition assay ..............................72
Chapter 5 ........................................................................................................................................73
Discussion .................................................................................................................................73 5
5.1 The role of N-terminal extension (NTE) ...........................................................................74
5.2 FIKK kinases are unique in substrate preference ..............................................................75
5.3 CpFIKK/CpCDPK1-inhibitors: what makes them selective? ............................................76
5.3.1 The Hydrophobic region I selectivity: role of gatekeeper .....................................77
5.3.2 Selectivity between CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 ..........................................................79
5.3.3 A common inhibitor for both CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 provides insights to
design CpFIKK-selective inhibitors. .....................................................................80
5.4 Parasite killing by compound 4b is probably due to CDPK1 inhibition............................81
5.5 Utility of a chemical tool to understand the biological role of CpFIKK in parasites ........82
References ......................................................................................................................................85
x
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Family, genus, species and strains from the phylum Apicomplexa and the number of
FIKK members in their genomes. ................................................................................................. 14
Table 1.2 FIKK proteins from P. falciparum and P. reichenowi. ................................................ 16
Table 1.3 Domain boundaries of the kinase domains (KD) of the FIKK proteins from different
apicomplexans............................................................................................................................... 20
Table 1.4 Key catalytic motifs of FIKK proteins from different organisms. ............................... 24
Table 2.1 Cloning and expression profile of constructs of PfFIKK8, CpFIKK and TgFIKK. ..... 27
Table 2.2 Normalized average intensity values of enzyme screening spots for PfFIKK8l in Fig.
2.5 A .............................................................................................................................................. 35
Table 2.3 Normalized average intensity values of enzyme screening spots for CpFIKKd in Fig.
2.5 B .............................................................................................................................................. 36
Table 2.4 List of consensus peptides tested and the kinetic parameters obtained, including the
Michaelis constant (Km), turnover (kcat) and catalytic efficiency (kcat/Km). ............................ 39
Table 2.5 Kinetic parameters of purified FIKK proteins in using ATP. ....................................... 39
Table 3.1 Cryptosporidium kinases tested for selectivity. The construct boundaries of the kinases
are included. .................................................................................................................................. 45
Table 3.2 CpFIKK kinase activity of compounds 4a-i and selectivity against CpCDPK1. ......... 48
Table 3.3 CpFIKK kinase activity of compounds 4m-q and selectivity against CpCDPK1. ....... 50
Table 3.4 CpFIKK kinase activity of compounds 4r, 5a, and 6 and selectivity against CpCDPK1.
....................................................................................................................................................... 52
Table 3.5 Thermal stabilization of CpFIKK by inhibitors. ........................................................... 53
Table 3.6 Percentage of activity of human kinases in the presence of 500 nM 4b. ...................... 56
xi
Table 3.7 Probable inhibitor interacting residues in TgCDPK1, CpCDPK1 and CpFIKK .......... 60
Table 3.8 Data collection, phasing, and refinement statistics for the TgCDPK1 co-crystal
structures. ...................................................................................................................................... 65
Table 4.1 Parasite invasion inhibition profiles of CpFIKK inhibitors. ......................................... 68
Table 5.1 Substrate preference of different protein kinases. ........................................................ 76
Table 5.2 Highest inhibited protein kinases from human kinome by compound 4b at 500 nM and
the gatekeeper residues. ................................................................................................................ 79
xii
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 C. parvum life cycle. ..................................................................................................... 4
Figure 1.2 Representation of the bilobate structure of a typical protein kinase. ............................ 8
Figure 1.3 Representation of the ATP binding pocket of a typical protein kinase. ........................ 9
Figure 1.4 Evolutionary relationships between the C. parvum kinases. ....................................... 12
Figure 1.5 Domain construction of the FIKK proteins. ................................................................ 15
Figure 1.6 Phylogenetic tree of the FIKKs from different apicomplexans. .................................. 18
Figure 1.7 Sequence alignment of the kinase domains of the orthologous FIKKs from different
apicomplexans............................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 2.1 Test expression gel showing that constructs PfFIKK8h to PfFIKK8o were soluble. . 28
Figure 2.2 Purity of the purified proteins...................................................................................... 29
Figure 2.3 Thermal melting curves of CpFIKK and ΔTm values for both kinases with different
ligands. .......................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 2.4 Maps of phosphorylated residues in (A) PfFIKK8l and (B) CpFIKKd (C) MBP. ..... 32
Figure 2.5 Peptide substrate preference array of PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK identifies a motif. ....... 34
Figure 2.6 Enzymatic activities of recombinant FIKKs (A) PfFIKK8o (B) PfFIKK8l and
CpFIKKd (C). ............................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 2.7 Enzyme kinetics of FIKKs with ATP. ......................................................................... 38
Figure 3.1 Molecular structures of compounds 4a and 4j. PKIS IDs and IC50 values against
CpFIKK are shown. ...................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 3.2 The naphthyridine derivative with HsALK5 active site. ............................................. 47
Figure 3.3 The enzymatic inhibition of CpFIKK and CpCDPK1 by 4b. ..................................... 49
xiii
Figure 3.4 CpFIKK stabilization by 4b in differential static light scattering (DSLS or thermal
melt) assay. ................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 3.5 Selectivity of 4b against 140 human kinases. .............................................................. 55
Figure 3.6 Structure analysis of parasite kinases with compound 4b. .......................................... 60
Figure 3.7 Sequence alignment of the kinase domains of TgCDPK1, CpCDPK1 and CpFIKK. 62
Figure 3.8 Thermal melt assay with CpFIKK-gatekeeper-residue-mutant CpFIKKΔS516M. .......... 63
Figure 4.1 Inhibition of C. parvum growth in vitro. ..................................................................... 69
Figure 4.2 In vitro growth inhibition results of wild type (WT) and FIKK knocked out (KO)
strains of T. gondii with compound 4b. ........................................................................................ 70
Figure 5.1 Sequence alignment of the N-terminal extension of different apicomplexan FIKKs. 75
Figure 5.2 Representation of the active site of TgCDPK1 occupied by compound 4b. ............... 78
Figure 5.3 A) Active site of the co-crystal structure of CGP060476-TgCDPK1 (top left) and
superposed structures of CGP060476 and 4b-bound TgCDPK1 (bottom left). B) Proposed
compound structures to occupy the Hydrophobic region II of CpFIKK. ..................................... 80
1
Chapter 1
Introduction 1
1.1 Cryptosporidium causes serious human and animal diseases
Cryptosporidium parasites belong to the phylum of unicellular parasites Apicomplexa. The
phylum contains some medically important human parasites that cause serious human diseases.
These include malaria-causing Plasmodium falciparum, a global opportunistic parasite
Toxoplasma gondii, and Cryptosporidium parvum (and C. hominis), which causes severe
diarrhoea in infants and AIDS patients.
Cryptosporidium is an enteric parasite of human, cattle and poultry. Children under the age of
five in under-developed regions of the world are most vulnerable, with hundreds of thousands
dying every year and millions infected and often re-infected (Ochoa, Salazar-Lindo, and Cleary
2004; Checkley et al. 2015; Striepen 2013; Kotloff et al. 2013). Developmental problems among
this age group of children are also associated with Cryptosporidium infection (Guerrant et al.
1999). It is also a significant veterinary concern affecting ruminants and poultry. There are also
periodic outbreaks of cryptosporidiosis in North America and Europe. With the advancement of
very effective vaccine productions against rotaviruses, Cryptosporidium is soon expected to be
the most important diarrheal agent in world.
Cryptosporidiosis is a disease of watery diarrhea, sometimes with prolonged and chronic
infection (Bouzid et al. 2013; Current and Garcia 1991) and sometimes accompanied by
stomach-ache, nausea, vomiting and fever. Non-specific symptoms, such as myalgia, weakness,
malaise, headache and anorexia can occur occasionally (Current and Garcia 1991). A
symptomatic but self-limiting disease occurs in immunocompetent individuals. However,
immunocompromised individuals, such as HIV infected patients, show symptoms of acute and
prolonged diarrhea, which can be deadly if HIV infection is not treated (Hunter and Nichols
2002; Manabe et al. 1998). HIV infected individuals can also develop extra-intestinal infections,
such as in gall-bladder, biliary tract, pulmonary system and pancreas (Hunter and Nichols 2002).
2
1.2 Epidemiology, taxonomy and life cycle of C. parvum
Cryptospodium transmission occurs by the faecal-oral route. Ingestion of contaminated food or
water is the most common cause for human infections or outbreaks. Cryptosporidium was the
major etiological agent of waterborne parasitic outbreaks worldwide between 2004 and 2010,
responsible for 60.3% of them (Baldursson and Karanis 2011). However, human-to-human
contact or animal-to-human contact can also cause transmission (Xiao 2010).
Being in the apicomplexan phylum, Cryptosporidium shares some features with parasites from
Eucoccidioirida, which contains parasites Toxoplasma, Cyclospora, Isospora and Sarcocystis.
These include environmental cyst production, similar Type I fatty acid metabolic pathways and
polyketide synthetic enzymes and having a number of extracellular proteins sharing similar
domain architecture (Templeton et al. 2010). However, despite the similarities, Cryptosporidium
differs significantly from the eucoccidian parasites and its biology and physiology resembles the
more primitive gregarine parasites (Carreno, Martin, and Barta 1999; Leander, Clopton, and
Keeling 2003). Unlike most apicomplexans, Cryptosporidium has lost the apicoplast organelle as
well as genomes for plastid and mitochondria (Zhu, Keithly, and Philippe 2000; Xu 2004;
Abrahamsen et al. 2004). There are multiple Cryptosporidium-specific and gregarine-like
features that also separate this parasite from eucoccidians. For example, Cryptosporidium
parasites occupy an intracellular, but extracytoplasmic location in the infected host cell;
possesses two morpho-functional types of oocysts: thin and thick walled, which are very small
(5.0 – 4.5 µm for C. parvum) and lack sporocyst, micropyle and polar granules (Petry 2004);
nutrient uptake from host cells is facilitated by multi-membranous feeder organelles formed in
the host-parasite attachment site and at the base of the parasitophorous vacuole (PV); parasites
are not sensitive towards anti-coccidal agents tested (Cabada and White 2010); antibodies against
gregarine parasites cross react with Cryptosporidium parasites (Bull et al. 1998); and
Cryptosporidium has gregarine like life-cycle stages, for example gamont like extracellular
stages (Borowski et al. 2010; Karanis and Aldeyarbi 2011; Hijjawi et al. 2002; Koh et al. 2013).
These features, supplemented with molecular studies, suggest that Cryptosporidium parasites are
more like gregarine parasites than eucoccidian (Carreno, Martin, and Barta 1999; Leander,
Clopton, and Keeling 2003). Phylogenetic association with gregarine parasites have been
elucidated too by recent whole genome analysis (Templeton et al. 2010). Future and more
detailed comparative genomic studies and further characterization will provide a clearer
3
understanding about the phylogeny of the parasite and new ideas about investigating the
epidemiology, pathogenicity, treatment and control of Cryptosporidium parasites.
There have been 27 species of Cryptosporidium identified so far (U. Ryan and Hijjawi 2015; U.
N. A. Ryan, Fayer, and Xiao 2014). 19 species infect mammals, 3 infect birds, 2 infect reptiles, 2
in fishes, and 1 has been found in amphibians. C. hominis is highly specific for human, whereas
C. parvum has a broader range and most of them are transmitted zootonically, except for the
subtype IIc family, which is transmitted anthroponotically (Xiao 2010; U. N. A. Ryan, Fayer,
and Xiao 2014).
Cryptosporidium exhibits a monoxenous (development restricted to a single host system), but
complex life cycle with multiple developmental stages involving both sexual and asexual life
cycles, which are completed within the gastrointestinal tract of hosts (Figure 1.1). The life cycle
can be divided into six major developmental phases: exystation, merogony, gametogony,
fertilization, oocyst wall formation and sporogony (Current and Garcia 1991).
The life cycle begins in a susceptible host with the ingestion of the sporulated oocysts. Upon
ingestion the exystation occur, which is thought to be triggered by multiple factors, such as
reducing conditions, temperature, carbon dioxide, pancreatic enzymes and bile salts (Blagburn et
al. 1987; Fayer and Leek 1984; Robertson, Campbell, and Smith 1993). Exystation helps four
sporozoites to come out of a single oocyst, and the sporozoites glide over the intestinal epithelial
cells (Okhuysen and Chappell 2002; X. M. Chen et al. 2004; Wetzel et al. 2005). The sporozoites
secrete apical complex components to allow them to invade the host cells. Throughout the whole
life cycle of Cryptosporidium the parasite preferentially infects the host cells at the apical site.
The apical complex is made up of micronemes, a single rhoptry and dense granules (Tetley et al.
1998). With the help of these components the sporozoites invade the host cells and the host cell
membrane encloses the parasites, forming the parasitophorous vacuole (PV) (Petersen et al.
1992; Boulter-Bitzer, Lee, and Trevors 2007; Tomley and Soldati 2001). Each sporozoite
transforms into a spherical trophozoite and undergoes merogony to form type I mermont
containing eight merozoites. After the merozoites are released, they attach to more epithelial
cells and either remain as type I mermonts or convert to type II mermonts. Type II mermonts
contain four merozoites each and after their release, the merozoites attach to epithelial cells, but
instead of producing more mermonts, these merozoites undergo gametogony. One merozoite
4
produces either a microgamont or a macrogamont. Each microgamont undergoes mitotic division
and emerge into at least 16 additional microgametes. Similarly, macrogamonts differentiate into
macrogametocytes, which are located and fertilized by the microgametes after being released
from the PV. The resulting diploid zygote undertakes two rounds of asexual sporogony to
produce an oocyst with four haploid sporozoites inside (Smith and Rose 1998). As mentioned
earlier, the oocysts can be of two types, thin walled and thick walled (Current and Reese 1986).
The thin walled oocysts can autoinfect the same host once they are liberated from the epithelium
and exyst (Current and Reese 1986). The thick walled oocysts are excreted from the lumen to the
outside of the body through feces and spread in the environment can infect another host. The
persistence and chronic infection occurs due to both of the autoinfection and recycling of the
type I mermonts (Smith and Rose 1998).
Figure 1.1 C. parvum life cycle. (Copied from Bouzid et al. 2013, Cryptosporidium
pathogeneciry and virulence. Courtesy of Clinical Microbiology Reviews, ASM.)
5
1.3 Drug discovery efforts against Cryptosporidium and other apicomplexans
Anti-cryptosporidium drug discovery has been hampered by many factors. Continuous culturing
and genetic manipulations had been extremely difficult until very recently (Vinayak et al. 2015).
Rodent models are considered inadequate too. Because of the limited tools, understanding the
biology of the parasite at the molecular level has been challenging, and identifying targets,
proper testing and validating new drugs remain very difficult.
Sometimes, well studied organisms can be exploited to understanding the biology and inhibition
of another less understood organism from similar evolutionary family or group. Two other
organisms apicomplexans, P. falciparum and T. gondii have been studied explicitly and are being
used as models for Cryptosporidium. The problem with this approach is that apicomplexans,
despite being in the same family, exhibit very different life cycles and host and environmental
preferences. Cryptosporidium metabolism is particularly different from that of P. falciparum and
T. gondii: Cryptosporidium lost its plastid-derived apicoplast and lacks the citric acid cycles and
cytochrome systems in the remnant mitochondrion. Cryptosporidium parasites also lack some
enzymes for de novo synthesis of amino acids, nucleotide and sugars (Abrahamsen, 2004; Xu,
2004). The loss of multiple important genes from the metabolic pathways suggests that the
parasite relies heavily on the scavenging nutrients and other factors from the host and a unique
group of genes may be involved in these pathways, rather than de novo synthesis, that are not
found in human and animals. Therefore, many classic drugs that are effective against many of
the other apicomplexans are not effective against Cryptosporidium, which limits the drug
discovery attempts. There is a need for identifying new drug targets (Miyamoto and Eckmann
2015).
Different cellular pathways including lipid metabolism, energy metabolism and signaling
pathways are essential for survival or completing life cycle or transmission in these parasitic
organisms. Proteins playing roles in these pathways may serve as new drug targets against
Cryptsporidium, especially which are unique to the parasite. For example, a recent report has
identified an essential enzyme called long chain fatty acyl-coenzyme A synthetase (LC-ACS) as
potential new target of ACS inhibitor triacsin A and showed efficacy in mice (Guo et al. 2014).
6
The most extensively studied pathway for drug discovery in Cryptosporidium is purine salvage.
The parasites are not able to synthesize de novo purine nucleotides and are completely dependent
on salvaging guanine nucleotides from the host via a pathway involving inosine 5’-
monophosphate dehydrogenase (IMPDH) (Umejiego et al. 2004). The IMPDH gene has been
laterally transferred from bacteria and is structurally distinct from mammalian IMPDH making it
potentially an important drug target (Striepen et al. 2004). A number of structurally diverse
inhibitors of CpIMPDH inhibitors have been identified by high-throughput screening (Striepen et
al. 2004) and some showed activity in mouse infection model as well (Gorla et al. 2014). Some
peptide inhibitors of CpIMPDH have also shown efficacy in enzymatic inhibition, however, the
in vivo activity needs to be verified (Jefferies et al. 2015). Nevertheless, IMPDH in
Cryptosporidium has been found to be potential drug targets and needs to be further explored for
drug development.
Some other molecular targets tested are calcium dependent protein kinases, such as CDPK1
(Castellanos-Gonzalez et al. 2013; Kuhlenschmidt et al. 2016; Artz et al. 2011) and cysteine
proteases (Perez-Cordon et al. 2011). Cysteine proteases are associated with host cell invasion.
The other essential function of these proteins in the completion of the life cycle is helping in
exystation. Cysteine protease inhibitors show promising results both in vivo and in vitro studies.
However, the selectivity by these compounds for the 20 or more cysteine papain-like proteases
remains to be identified (Ndao et al. 2013).
Current cryptosporidiosis treatment is limited to only a single approved drug, called
nitazoxanide, by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Nitazoxanide is effective against
other parasitic and viral infections too. The efficacy of this drug against cryptosporidiosis in
HIV-negative individuals varies between 50-90% (Amadi et al. 2002). The drug is well tolerated
too. However, for the immunocompromised individuals like HIV-infected individuals and
malnourished children, where the pathogenesis is severe, the drug is inactive (Amadi et al. 2002)
and administration is not FDA approved for this group of patients.
Other anti-cryptosporidium interventions have been developed and tested clinically, but have
lower efficacy than nitazoxanide and have not been approved by FDA for cryptosporidiosis
treatment. For example, paromomycin shows some level of efficacy against the disease in
immunocompetent individuals (Perkins, Wu, and Le Blancq 1998). However, the clinical results
7
in HIV-infected individuals are highly variable (Hewitt et al. 2000). Some immunotherapy has
been developed to restore immunocompetency in AIDS patients (Mead 2014). However,
nitazoxanide treatment remained the most effective therapeutic choice against cryptosporidiosis
in immunocompetent individuals while no effective treatments are available against
immunodeficient individuals (Miyamoto and Eckmann 2015).
As mentioned before, Cryptosporidium is very different from some of the better studied parasites
P. falciparum and T. gondii. However, there are some efforts taken to repurpose some of the
known parasitic drugs. These attempts include refurbishing FDA approved drugs and chemical
compounds from the malaria box by Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV) that have been
tested against the C. parvum in vitro and multiple compounds have been identified having IC50s
<10 µM (Bessoff et al. 2014). However, none of these compounds have been clinically tested yet
for cryptosporidiosis.
1.4 Targeting protein kinases in parasites for new drug discovery: learning from the past
In humans, phosphorylation of proteins by kinases plays role in regulation of multiple essential
cellular processes including transcription, translation, protein synthesis, cell cycle and apoptosis.
Life cycles of apicomplexan parasites are composed of multiple stages having morphologically
and phenotypically different forms in each stage, suggesting ample opportunities for
pharmacological inhibition. Protein kinases may be suitable targets in parasites because protein
kinases are known to trigger development of the stages (Kato, Sugi, and Iwanaga 2012).
However, suitability of kinases as drug targets for Cryptosporidium is not clear because our
understanding of the biology of Cryptosporidium at the molecular level is still limited. That
said, protein kinases are better studied in Plasmodium and Toxoplasma, and in these organisms
protein kinase inhibitors demonstrate anti-parasitic activity. Therefore I hypothesize protein
kinases will participate in essential events shared across apicomplexans and homologous protein
kinases will have similar functions and be pharmacologic targets in Cryptosporidium
8
1.4.1 Ligand-substrate interaction in protein kinases
Protein kinases catalyze phosphorylation reaction by hydrolyzing ATP in the presence of Mg2+
and transferring a phosphate group from ATP to an amino acid of a substrate protein or peptide.
The kinase domain is highly conserved among eukaryotes. Its sequence can be divided into 12
subdomains that fold to produce a bilobate 3D structure (Figure 1.2). The catalytic pocket
situates between two lobes, where ATP binds too. The ATP-binding segment in the pocket is
called the ‘hinge’ and it connects the two lobes. The adenine ring of the ATP makes hydrogen
bonds with residues from the hinge region and this anchors ATP in the pocket during the
reaction. Ribose and the triphosphate interact with a hydrophilic channel and span up to the
substrate-binding site. There is a conserved activation loop in every kinase; this is marked by
conserved DFG and APE motifs at the beginning and the end of the loop, respectively. The
activation loop can adopt different conformational states, such as a catalytically competent
conformer (Figure 1.2 A) or an inactive conformer in which the active site is blocked (Figure
1.2B).
A. Active conformation, B. Inactive conformation. The activation loop movement helps the
protein to toggle between active and inactive conformations.
A
Figure 1.2 Representation of the bilobate structure of a typical protein kinase.
B
9
Hinge and ATP are shown in blue and red lines, respectively. Hydrogen bonding between the
hinge and the ATP are shown by dotted lines. Regions that are targeted by different types of
kinase inhibitors are shaded in different colors.
Most common kinase inhibitors bind in the hinge region at the active site by mimicking the
hydrogen bonding with adenine of ATP. These are classified as type I inhibitors. Compounds
exploiting the ribose binding site or the triphosphate binding regions are not very common. More
recently developed inhibitors, types II-V, are not ATP-competitive. They act by inducing a
conformational change in the target enzyme in a way that the kinases no longer can function.
Type II inhibitors not only bind at the ATP-binding pocket, but also occupy the hydrophobic,
allosteric pocket exposed by the movement of the DFG motif at an ‘out’ position. Type III
inhibitors occupy the catalytic pocket but do not interact with the ‘hinge’ region and occupy the
Figure 1.3 Representation of the ATP binding pocket of a typical protein kinase.
10
DFG-out hydrophobic pocket. Type IV are truly allosteric inhibitors binding away from the
catalytic site and type V inhibitors are bivalent or bisubstrate inhibitor compounds and interacts
with the kinase irreversibly. Figure 1.3 shows the representations of the chemical space and
inhibitor binding modes of different kinase inhibitors.
1.4.2 Known inhibitors of parasite kinases
Protein kinases have been studied for many years as drug targets and there are currently more
than 25 approved drugs that target human kinases (Zhang, Yang, and Gray 2008). Rich
biochemical and structural tools are available to study kinases. These tools have been applied to
understand the parasite kinases and to target them with small molecules. In Plasmodium, the best
studied parasite, protein kinases play roles in different life cycle stages. For example, PfPK2,
PfPKB, PfCDPK1 and PfPKA function in erythrocyte invasion (Kumar et al. 2004; Kato et al.
2008; Merckx et al. 2008; Bansal et al. 2013), PfCDPK1, PfGSK3, PfPK7 and PfPKA play roles
during replication at the erythrocyte stages (Bansal et al. 2013; Droucheau et al. 2004; Dorin et
al. 2005; Merckx et al. 2008) and PfCDPK5 plays roles in egress (Dvorin et al. 2011). PbCDPK6
is critical in invasion during liver stage (Coppi et al. 2007), PbCDPK4, PfMAP2 and PfPKG are
functional during gametogenesis (Billker et al. 2004; McRobert et al. 2008; Rangarajan et al.
2005) and PbCDPK3 function during ookinete migration in the mosquito (Ishino et al. 2006). In
T. gondii, TgCDPK1 and TgPKG1 work in invasion (Lourido et al. 2010; Donald et al. 2002),
TgCDPK1 functions in egress (Lourido et al. 2010), TgNEK1, TgCK1, TgTPK2 and TgPKA are
critical for cell proliferation (Kurokawa et al. 2011; C.-T. Chen and Gubbels 2013; Khan et al.
2002; Donald et al. 2005), TgMAPK1, TgPKA and TgEIF2K play roles in stress response and
stage conversions (Cao et al. 2015; Kurokawa et al. 2011; Sullivan et al. 2004) and T. gondii
specific protein kinases ROP18, -16 and -38 are important in host immune system manipulation
(Talevich and Kannan 2013; Fox et al. 2016). Recently, TgFIKK was found to play role in tissue
cyst formation in T. gondii (Skariah et al. 2016). Functions of the very few members of the C.
parvum proteome are known. One of the most studied kinases, CpCDPK1, has been found to be
essential for parasite growth in vitro (Larson et al. 2012; Castellanos-Gonzalez et al. 2013).
Small molecule inhibitors targeting some of the protein kinases from Plasmodium and
Toxoplasma parasites have produced phenotypic changes in the parasites, i.e. reduction of
11
growth, blockage in stage conversions and inhibition of infection processes (Eaton, Weiss, and
Kim 2006; Wiersma et al. 2004; Donald et al. 2006; Sicard et al. 2011; Carruthers, Giddings, and
Sibley 1999; Wei et al. 2002). For example, non-selective inhibitors of PKG (e.g. Compound 1)
(Wiersma et al. 2004), PKA (e.g. H89) (Syin et al. 2001), CDK (e.g. Purvalanol A) (Donald et al.
2005) and MAPK (e.g. U0126) (Sicard et al. 2011) reduce growth of both parasites. Inhibitors
targeting small gatekeepers in the kinase active site (e.g. bumped kinase inhibitor or BKIs)
inhibit orthologous CDPK kinases CpCDPK1 (S. M. Johnson et al. 2012; Larson et al. 2012),
PfCDPK4 (Ojo et al. 2014) and TgCDPK1 (S. M. Johnson et al. 2012; Wernimont et al. 2010),
and block host infection and parasite growth. PKA (Eaton, Weiss, and Kim 2006) and PKG
(Ramdani et al. 2015) inhibitors inhibit gametogenesis in Plasmodium. These studies suggest that
parasite kinases can be potential drug targets to block growth and transmission of parasites and
should be explored more extensively to identify potential drug targets.
1.5 The Cryptosporidium kinome: a hub of unique kinases
The kinome of C. parvum (CpKinome) is smaller but more diverse than those in T. gondii and P.
falciparum. At least 73 protein kinases have been identified in C. parvum; these belong to sub-
families AGC, CaMK, CK1, CMGC, TKL, Atypical and OPKs (other protein kinases) (Artz et
al. 2011). No STE and tyrosine kinases have been identified. A quarter of the kinases identified
have no known orthologues in other eukaryotic kinomes.
Two sets of kinases in CpKinome have orthologues within apicomplexans and other orders, but
not in mammals. Being evolutionary conserved among apicomplexans, these kinases can be
considered potentially important for the parasites. The first group is called the calcium dependent
protein kinases (CDPK), which are regulated by Ca2+
in the cellular environment (Billker,
Lourido, and Sibley 2009). There are eight CDPKs in the C. parvum kinome and each has
multiple EF-hands that bind Ca2+
to become active. CpCDPK1 orthologues in P. falciparum and
T. gondii are essential for parasite infection; they play role in invasion of host cells and egress.
CpCDPK1 has been found to be essential in parasite growth in vitro by inhibition studies (Larson
et al. 2012; Castellanos-Gonzalez et al. 2013).
12
A second group of unique kinases are the FIKKs. These kinases are unique in sequence and are
restricted toapicomplexan parasites, but are not well studied. I decided to focus on this relatively
less well-understood kinase sub-family to understand their function and inhibition and explore if
they are drug targets. The next sections discuss FIKK kinases from different parasites.
The families are colour-coded as follows: AGC (yellow), CK1 (orange), Atypical (pink), CaMK
(blue), CMGC (green), TKL (red), and OPK (grey). CpFIKK belong to the OPK family.
Figure 1.4 Evolutionary relationships between the C. parvum kinases. Maximum
likelihood tree from a rapid bootstrap analysis describing the classification of the 73 C.
parvum protein kinases. (Copied from Artz et al., 2011, The Cryptosporidium parvum
kinome. Courtesy of BioMed Central Genomics.)
13
1.6 The FIKK kinase family
1.6.1 Number of FIKK members in apicomplexan genomes
Protein kinases comprise one of the largest protein families in eukaryotic genomes. The size of
the kinome varies widely throughout the apicomplexan clades, e.g. 90, 159 and 73 membered
kinomes are present in P. falciparum, T. gondii and C. parvum, respectively. Not all
apicomplexans contain obvious FIKK orthologues. FIKK kinases have been identified in
genomes of some apicomplexan families - Cryptosporidiiae, Plasmodiiae, Sarcocytidae and
Eimeriidae (Table 1.1), but not in genomes from piroplasms containing Babesiidae and
Theileriidae families, and in Gregarinidae. Some of FIKK-containing species are potent human
pathogens.
The number of FIKK genes varies between species and even among species from the same
genus. Three closely related Plasmodium species, P. falciparum, P. reichenowi and P. gaboni
genomes contain more than 20 FIKK members each (Otto et al. 2014; Schneider and Mercereau-
Puijalon 2005). (Sundararaman et al. 2016). P. falciparum and P. reichenowi contain 21
members each and P. gaboni contains 22 member. The only outlier or non-orthologous (22nd
)
FIKK in P. gaboni is found in chromosome 9 and called PfFIKK9.15. Remarkably, all three
species, having the expanded FIKK family are from the Laverania subgenus (Sundararaman et
al. 2016). All the other FIKK-containing parasites possess a single member. The reason for the
expansion in two Plasmodium species is not clear. Predictions include their role in virulence
related host cell modifications during human and chimp malaria. The answer though is likely
more complex; according to current annotation, multiple Plasmodium species contain no FIKK
members (Table 1.1).
The FIKK genes are distributed throughout the chromosomes of P. falciparum and P. reichenowi
genomes. 12 out of 14 chromosomes from these parasites have at least a single FIKK gene (no
FIKK genes have been found in chromosomes 2 and 6). The location of FIKK genes within the
single FIKK-containing Plasmodium genomes tends to be influenced by the evolutionary
relationship between species. For example, the single gene in evolutionarily close species P.
berghei, P. yoleii and P. chaubadi contain the FIKK gene in the 12th
chromosome, whereas, P.
vivax and P. knowlesi contain the gene in the 1st chromosome. A single FIKK gene has been
found in other, but not all, apicomplexan parasites. Table 1.1 presents the number of FIKK
14
members in different parasites. CpFIKK gene is found at the chromosome 5 of the C. parvum
genome.
The data were collected from Eukaryotic pathogen database resources (eupathdb.org).
1.6.2 Domain architectures and known biological functions of FIKKs
FIKKs are conserved in their domain architecture. All the FIKKs contain a C-terminally
conserved kinase domain and a non-conserved N-terminal region (Figure 1.5). Paralogous FIKK
sequences, except the FIKK8, from P. falciparum and P. reichenowi (PfFIKK8 and PrFIKK8)
Table 1.1 Family, genus, species and strains from the phylum Apicomplexa and the
number of FIKK members in their genomes.
15
contain two additional domains or motifs at the very N-terminal region. The additional domains
are either a transmembrane domain (TMD) or a signal peptide (SP) and are situated very close to
the N-terminal. The predicted TMD or SP lengths varied from 17 to 42 residues (Table 1.2). 2
FIKKs (PfFIKK5, PfFIKK7.2,) do not contain any transmembrane region but retained the,signal
peptide.
All FIKK sequences from P. falciparum (PfFIKK) and P. reichenowi (PrFIKK), except FIKK8s,
contain an export signal, known as the PEXEL motif. This penta-residue motif is found in many
Plasmodium proteins and helps parasite proteins to be exported from the parasitophorous vacuole
to the different compartments of the infected erythrocyte cells. PEXEL motifs have been found
downstream of the TMD or SP. CpFIKK, like Pf- and PrFIKK8s, does not contain any signal
peptide or transmembrane regions.
Figure 1.5 Domain construction of the FIKK proteins.
16
Total length and boundaries of the kinase domains (KD) and other motifs are mentioned here.
The domain boundaries were predicted with Prosite and the signal and transmembrane
sequences were predicted by Pfam.
Table 1.2 FIKK proteins from P. falciparum and P. reichenowi.
17
Substrate selectivity of protein kinases is often achieved by localization the protein kinases to
distinct subcellular compartments or structures. In Plasmodium species, as many as 400 proteins,
including many of the FIKK paralogues, are secreted and have been assigned to the remodeling
process of the host cells (Cooke et al. 2004; Maier et al. 2009; Marti et al. 2005). Some of the
secreted FIKK members, containing the PEXEL motif, are localized to a distinct cellular
compartment called the Maurer’s cleft (PfFIKK4.1, PfFIKK9.3, PfFIKK9.6 and PfFIKK12)
and/or in infected erythrocyte (IE) membranes (PfFIKK12). PfFIKK4.1 has been found to
phosphorylate an erythrocyte cytoskeleton protein, dematin, and takes part in the remodeling
process (Brandt and Bailey 2013). A more recent study has shown that PfFIKK4.2 is exported to
another distinct cellular structure, called the K-dots, in infected erythrocytes (Kats et al, 2014).
Two other Pf- and PrFIKKs, FIKK5 and FIKK7.2, do not have a TMD or SP and can be
predicted not to anchor to any membranes, but possess PEXEL motifs. Therefore, they may be
secreted protein, but not anchored. PrFIKK7.2 has a stop codon on the PEXEL motif and is
predicted as non-exported. In addition to this, knock-out studies on three PfFIKKs suggests that,
although not essential for parasite survival, PfFIKK4.1, PfFIKK7.1 and PfFIKK12 play roles in
remodeling the infected erythrocyte membrane. This role might be achieved by the FIKKs to be
directly present in the IE membrane. Finally, although the presence of these sequence motifs
suggests a secreted function, this is not universally true. For example, despite containing a
PEXEL motif (RNLSE) and TMD, one of the PfFIKKs, PfFIKK9.2 was localized inside the
parasite in infected erythrocytes (Table 1.2).
FIKK8s (Pf and Pr) and the sole FIKKs from other organisms lack the PEXEL motif in the
sequence. They also do not contain any TMD or SP. Accordingly, FIKK8s and sole FIKKs are
predicted to be non-exported kinases. Indeed, a co-localization study by Skariah et al. (2016) has
discovered that FIKK from T. gondii, TgFIKK, is located in the posterior part of T. gondii
tachyzoites in the infected host cells and co-localized with the proteins from the basal complex.
TgFIKK is not essential in the lytic cycle in vitro and for acute infection in vivo (Skariah et al.
2016).
18
CpFIKK orthologues clustered together. The tree was created with ClustaW2-Phylogeny tool
using multiple sequence alignment of the full sequences of FIKKs and was rendered with
TreeDyn server. A neighbor-joining algorithm was employed having distance matrix enabled.
Figure 1.6 Phylogenetic tree of the FIKKs from different apicomplexans.
CpFIKK and
orthologues
19
1.6.3 Lone FIKKs are orthologous to FIKK8 from P. falciparum
Pf- and PrFIKK8 and the sole FIKKs from other apicomplexan organisms, e.g. CpFIKK, lack all
of the three N-terminal components found in the other Pf- and PrFIKKs. Sequence analysis of
the kinase domains of FIKK8s and orthologous FIKKs shows that they have higher sequence
similarities than rest of PfFIKKs. Moreover, on average, FIKK8s and sole-FIKKs have longer
protein sequences than other FIKKs. To further investigate the evolutionary relationship of the
FIKKs, I created a phylogenetic tree with the full sequences of the FIKKs from different
organisms (Figure 1.6). FIKK8s and the sole FIKKs from different apicomplexans were found to
group together suggesting that FIKK8s from Pf- and PrFIKK family are homologues of the sole-
FIKKs in different apicomplexan genomes. FIKK8s may also be the ancestral FIKK member in
the P. falciparum and P. reichenowi genomes too, where the FIKK family has been expanded in
to 21 members.
1.6.4 FIKKs contain putatively active kinase domains
Typical eukaryotic PKs contain a conserved catalytic core that is important for activity.
Sequence comparison of FIKKs with a canonical protein kinase, human protein kinase A
(HsPKA), showed that most of the catalytically important residues are conserved among FIKKs,
with some notable exceptions (Table 1.4). A characteristic feature of an active protein kinase is
the presence of the catalytic triad in the sequence, which includes the three invariant residues
D166 (catalytic activity), N171 and D184 (Mg2+
-binding) (residue numbers correspond to
HsPKA). All the known FIKK kinases retain the catalytic triad. The invariant K72 (salt-bridge
and ATP binding) and E91 (in HsPKA) of the canonical ePKs are conserved throughout the
FIKK family. The most conserved other catalytically important residues are also conserved
among FIKK kinase domains (Table 3). These conservations initially suggest putatively active
kinase members are present in the FIKK family.
Two key regions play critical roles during catalysis reaction by kinases - the catalytic loop and
the activation segment. Subdomain VIb contains the catalytic loop, which has a conserved motif
HRDLKxxN (Y instead of H in HsPKA). FIKK8s, CpFIKK and other orthologues contain an
invariant HLDLTPEN motif in the catalytic loop. The invariant D of this motif acts as the
catalytic base that accepts the hydrogen removed from the hydroxyl group being phosphorylated.
20
The arginine in this motif is often associated with autophosphorylation of the kinase at the
activation loop. FIKKs lack this residue and in most cases this residue is replaced by a Leu. The
activation segment starts with a conserved DFG motif and ends with APE motif. In FIKKs, the
2nd
and 3rd
positions of DFG motif are not conserved, and have D(L/F)(S/A/G) sequences. The
invariant D chelates Mg2+
that bridges gamma and beta phosphates of ATP and positions the
gamma phosphate for transfer to substrate.
Protein kinases toggle between active and inactive conformations by forming and deforming two
hydrophobic spines - the catalytic spine (C-spine) and the regulatory spine (R-spine). During
activation, the spines are formed as a result of binding of ATP. The C-spine is composed of the
following residues A70, V57, L173, I174, M128, M231 and L227 in HsPKA and the ATP
molecule is positioned between V57 and L173 during activation. The R-spine is composed of
Table 1.3 Domain boundaries of the kinase domains (KD) of the FIKK proteins
from different apicomplexans.
21
four residues L106, L95, F185, Y164 in HsPKA. Construction of both spines is required for a
kinase to obtain an active conformation. Unfortunately, no structure of any member of the FIKK
family has been solved yet and therefore, pinpointing the spine components in FIKKs is
particularly difficult, given the fact that some regions of the FIKK kinase domain sequences do
not align well with any other ePKs. The closest structural homologue of CpFIKK kinase domain
in protein data bank (PDB.org) is human MNK1 kinase having less than 19% sequence identity
(PDB ID 2HW6). As this sequence identity, it would be too speculative to predict the spine
residues from sequence alignments and homology modelling.
About 10% of human kinases are predicted to be pseudokinases (Manning et al. 2002), enzymes
that share sequence similarity with protein kinases but lack some or all of the residues important
for catalysis. The fraction increases in some parasite kinomes; the Toxoplasma kinome, for
example, is predicted to contain ~30% pseudokinases (Peixoto et al. 2010). Pseudokinases
usually lack multiple catalytically important residues and components of the spines and are
unable to form the hydrophobic spines. Increasing evidence suggests that pseudokinases have
potential noncatalytic functions in signaling pathways. For example, ROP2 from T. gondii, a
pseudokinase that has an incomplete C-spine, has been found to play critical role in parasite
virulence (Taylor et al. 2013).
1.6.5 The FIKK kinase domains share some features of atypical protein kinases
The overall sequence identity between FIKKs and other eukaryotic protein kinases is very low.
FIKKs may this be considered a diverged kinase sub-family, and be classified as atypical protein
kinases.
Atypical protein kinases are catalytically active and share structural features and catalytic core
with typical protein kinases, but can vary in some of the conserved motifs comprising classical
protein kinases domains. For example, Haspin, an active atypical protein kinase, contains a non-
canonical DYT motif instead of DFG and the APE motif is completely absent.
Here, I examined FIKK sequences to determine if FIKKs have atypical kinase like features. The
first noticeable difference in FIKKs is that their kinase domains do not have the canonical
22
GxGxxG motif in the first subdomain. Instead, FIKK8s and orthologues have a conserved
GxSxxS motif (Figure 1.6). Sequences in other FIKKs vary in this region, but the first Gly is
present in most of the members. Indeed, the first Gly position is the most conserved in the motif
throughout the protein kinome. This said, although highly conserved, the canonical GxGxxG
motif is not essential for a protein kinase to be active.
Conserved motifs and the sub-domain boundaries are indicated on the top of the alignment.
Activation segment (DFG to APE motifs) is shown by red bar. The subdomain boundaries are
determined by following Hanks and Hunter (1995).
Non-canonical DLG or DYG motifs are found in many other protein kinases, including human
and apicomplexan kinases, e.g. HsNek7 (DLG), HsNek9 (DYG) and PfCDK (DLG) etc.
Substitution of Ala by Pro in the APE motif is not very rare either. Examples include human
Janus kinase 2 (HsJak2) and Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (HsBtk). In some proteins, the Ala is
Figure 1.7 Sequence alignment of the kinase domains of the orthologous FIKKs from
different apicomplexans.
23
replaced by Ser, e.g. in interleukin-2-inducible T-cell kinase (Itk). Interestingly, beside FIKKs,
another parasite specific kinase family, ROPKs, also contain the PPE motif instead of APE in the
activation segment. Thus, although the FIKK sequences diverge from the canonical motifs, each
FIKK variant can be found in at least one other member of the eukaryotic protein kinome.
In addition to the above features, some of the FIKK-specific conserved motifs and insert
sequences are unique to the FIKK family. Non-canonical insert sequences have been found
mostly in the subdomain II, III, IV and VIII regions of different FIKKs sequences. The activation
segment of Plasmodium FIKKs contains a 16-residue insert, and the FIKKs from
Cryptosporidium and Toxoplasma species have an even longer insert in this region. Sequence
alignment of the kinase domains of the orthologous FIKKs is shown in Figure 1.7.
1.6.6 Evidence for catalytically active FIKKs
Sequence analysis can be used to predict whether a protein kinase is catalytically active, but
experimental evidence is still essential for confirmation. Some unique sub-families of kinases
present in Apicomplexans are predicted to be pseudokinases and some, for example ROPKs in
Toxoplasma parasites, have many predicted pseudokinases (Talevich and Kannan 2013). Some
of the pseudokinases appear to be functionally important for parasite biology, despite lack of
catalytic ability.
All the FIKK sequences found in the parasite genome databases have complete catalytic triads
(D166, N171 and D184 in HsPKA) and on this basis are predicted to be catalytically active.
However, other features in the sequences in some of the FIKKs are more consistent with
pseudokinases. For example, four FIKK sequences, PfFIKK7.2, PrFIKK7.2, PrFIKK9.5 and
PrFIKK9.2 contain ‘in sequence’ stop codon(s). Although these may result from genome
sequencing errors or database deposition failures, they are for now considered pseudokinases.
Another FIKK8 orthologue, EtFIKK, lacks the first, second and last subdomains of the canonical
kinase domain. Two other sequences - PfFIKK4.2 and PrFIKK4.2, contain long inserts of
repeated sequences in the kinase domain, although an insert-excluded recombinant version of the
PfFIKK4.2 showed in vitro kinase activity by one study (Kats et al. 2014).
24
The FIKK family members have proven difficult to express and purify, and thus not many have
been shown to be catalytically active. Exported FIKK members, including PfFIKK4.1,
PfFIKK4.2, PfFIKK12 and PfFIKK4.1, have been found to be active (Nunes et al. 2010; Nunes
et al. 2007; Kats et al. 2014; Brandt and Bailey 2013). PfFIKK4.1 was able to phosphorylate
human dematin , and PfFIKK4.2 and PfFIKK12 phosphorylated myelin basic protein (MBP), a
generic kinase substrate (Kats et al. 2014; Nunes et al. 2007). I have also shown recently that the
putatively non-exported FIKKs, PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK show both auto-phosphorylation and
kinase activity on specific substrates. Thus, we are now accruing increasing evidence that the
FIKKs comprise a family of catalytically active kinases.
Table 1.4 Key catalytic motifs of FIKK proteins from different organisms.
25
1.7 Conclusion
In broad terms, I set out to explore FIKKs as drug targets. The specific objectives of my thesis
are to - a) better understand the biochemistry of orthologous FIKK proteins from C. parvum
(CpFIKK) and P. falciparum (PfFIKK8), b) identify inhibitors against CpFIKK as chemical
probes or early drug leads, in order to provide confidence in the concept that FIKK8 might be a
drug target, c) investigate if the chemical inhibitors have biological relevance. To achieve these
goals, I carried out the following experiments during my PhD research project. First, I
developed methods to express and purify the FIKK kinase domains from C. parvum and P.
falciparum. In so doing I identified a new domain, found adjacent to the kinase domain, and
showed that this domain was essential for expression of the FIKK kinase domain. Second, using
biochemical and screening approaches, I characterized the enzymatic properties of the enzyme,
as well as its substrate preferences. Third, I developed a screening assay and I identified small
molecule inhibitors of CpFIKK enzyme, and confirmed inhibition using orthogonal assays.
Fourth, I performed structure-activity relationship assay with compounds targeting CpFIKK and
checked selectivity of potent compounds against panels of CpKinases and human kinases. Fifth,
I investigated if potent CpFIKK inhibitors have any effect on the cellular growth of the parasites.
My studies will help us understanding the biochemistry, biology and inhibition of FIKK kinases
from apicomplexan parasites.
26
Chapter 2 Part of this chapter has been published in the Journal of
Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology, 2015 Jun;201(2):85-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2015.06.002.
Biochemical characterization of FIKKs from C. 2
parvum (CpFIKK) and P. falciparum (PfFIKK8)
Protein kinases play essential roles in many important cellular pathways. Their catalytic
activities are regulated in many different ways (Endicott, Noble, and Johnson 2012; Huse and
Kuriyan 2002; L. N. Johnson, Noble, and Owen 1996; Nolen, Taylor, and Ghosh 2004) and
substrate specificity is achieved mostly through the recognition of the peptide sequence around
the phospho-acceptor residues but also via their cellular localization. The rate of the reactions,
ligand binding affinity, substrate preference and regulation of the catalysis differ from kinase to
kinase based on their sequences and structures. As yet it is not possible to predict all the catalytic
functions of these enzymes and thus it is essential to biochemically characterize a novel kinase to
understand its behaviour.
My goal in this chapter is to understand the biochemical features of FIKK kinases from P.
falciparum and C. parvum. I used high-throughput techniques to clone, express and purify
FIKKs from the two parasites and developed enzyme assays to characterize them and determine
substrate preference. This is the first biochemical characterization of the evolutionarily
conserved FIKK proteins from C. parvum (CpFIKK) and P. falciparum (PfFIKK8).
2.1 Soluble FIKK constructs include an extension region
To improve the chance of obtaining an expressible, soluble and stable protein construct, I
initially cloned at least 6 constructs of different lengths into bacterial expression vectors, usually
keeping the predicted catalytic domains intact. To design the lengths of the constructs, I used
bioinformatic prediction tools that predicted catalytic domain lengths (Prosite and Pfam),
secondary structures (psipred), and disordered (psipred), hydrophobic (TMpred) and
transmembrane (TMpred) regions.
27
21 PfFIKK8, 6 CpFIKK and 9 TgFIKK constructs were cloned and tested for expression. The
well-expressed constructs (>1 mg soluble and stable protein per litre of culture) are marked by
“Y” in the right column. Among the expressing constructs, PfFIKK8l (N1025-L1457), PfFIKK8o
(M1049-L1457) and CpFIKKd (K344-I796) were selected for the biochemical analysis.
Table 2.1 Cloning and expression profile of constructs of PfFIKK8, CpFIKK and TgFIKK.
28
The catalytic domains are located at the C-termini of the FIKK sequences, and therefore I mostly
varied the lengths at the N-terminal regions of the kinase domains (KD). I tried to design
constructs avoiding the disordered and hydrophobic regions in the N-terminal regions and
keeping the catalytic domain intact.
I initially cloned 6-8 constructs for each of PfFIKK8, TgFIKK and CpFIKK (Table 2.1) using
an Escherichia coli system successfully used previously for parasite PKs (Vedadi et al. 2007),
and that appended an N-terminal hexa-His tag to help to purify the proteins. None of the TgFIKK
constructs expressed a soluble version. Many constructs of PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK expressed, but
only those including an extension at the N-terminus of the predicted kinase domain (KD) yielded
soluble and stable protein samples (Table 2.1). To understand the expression pattern better, I
screened an additional 21 construct of PfFIKK8, more rigorously exploring the requirement for
the extension region (P915 to K1056). I found that the inclusion of 38 or more residues at the N-
terminal extension (NTE) was essential for the expression of the protein (Table 2.1, Figure 2.1).
The inclusion of an extra N-terminal region was needed to express CpFIKK. For PfFIKK8 the
minimal well expressed construct encoded 409 amino acid residues (M1049-L1457). The NTE
contains both polar and non-polar residues as well as multiple potential phospho-acceptor
residues (S/Y) (Figure 2.1). To obtain protein for biochemical studies, I purified two constructs
(recombinant proteins) from PfFIKK8 and one of CpFIKK
(PfFIKK8l, PfFIKK8o and CpFIKKd in Table 2.1) by Ni-affinity and size exclusion
chromatography. The purity is shown in the Figure 2.2. The proteins were concentrated to >5
mg/mL. These were used to assess their auto-phosphorylation activity and determine their ability
to phosphorylate a set of common peptide substrates.
The shortest soluble construct was PfFIKK8o, containing an N-terminal extension starting at
S1049. The predicted kinase domain based on alignment with known kinases without an N-
terminal extension (i.e. a few amino acids upstream of the glycine-rich region) starts around
PfFIKK8s at D1087.
Figure 2.1 (A) Test expression gel showing that constructs PfFIKK8h to PfFIKK8o (see
Table 2.1) were soluble. (B)
29
10 µg of protein of each sample was resolved by SDS-PAGE and stained with Coomassie Blue.
Protein molecular weight markers show the relative size of the proteins.
95 kDa
70 kDa
62 kDa
51 kDa
42 kDa
29 kDa
22 kDa
PfFIKK8
Figure 2.2 Purity of the purified proteins.
30
2.2 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 are active kinases
Almost 10% of the human kinases are predicted to be catalytically inactive or pseudokinases
(Manning et al. 2002). Toxoplasma has the highest number of pseudokinases (about 30% of the
genome) of all known genomes (Peixoto et al. 2010). Therefore, there is always a chance that a
newly characterized kinase from an apicomplexan genome turns out to be catalytically dead.
Pseudokinases harbour mutations in the positions that are critically important residues for
catalysis (Manning et al. 2002). However, despite the mutations, some of the pseudokinases (e.g.
WNK kinases) that were thought to be catalytically incompetent find ways to catalyze the
phosphorylation reaction (Xu et al. 2000; Taylor and Kornev 2011). Therefore, prediction of
catalytically active kinases from the sequence is not very straightforward and this is especially
difficult if the kinase family is evolutionary distant from the known and well-studied families
and sequence similarity is poor. Because of these considerations, although the sequence
prediction suggests that PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK are active kinases (Chapter 1), it was still very
important to show this.
2.2.1 Purified FIKKs bind ATP
Protein kinases catalyze the transfer of the γ-phosphate from a Mg2+
-ATP complex to their
substrates. Although most of the catalytically important residues are predicted to be present in
FIKK kinases, FIKKs lack the canonical GxGxxG ATP-binding motif, raising the possibility that
the kinases do not interact with ATP. To test whether the purified FIKKs bind ATP, I employed
differential static light scattering (DSLS), which is a thermal shift assay (Vedadi et al. 2010;
Senisterra et al. 2006). I found that the stability of the proteins increased when bound to ATP and
ADP, where ADP-binding showed higher stability (Figure 2.3). This suggests that the ATP-
binding pocket of the kinase is functional.
However, ATP-binding alone does not provide evidences of an active kinase and despite having
ATP-binding ability, some pseudokinases are not catalytically active or perform phosphorylation
reaction (Murphy et al. 2014). Therefore, even though PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK proteins bind ATP,
there is a need to prove that the recombinant kinases are catalytically active. We employed
phosphorylation reaction assays for this proof.
31
Purified CpFIKK denatured in the presence or absence of ligands and the melting temperature
was measured, as described in the Materials and Methods. The transition points or melting
temperatures (Tm) were computed (inset). The ATP containing sample (red) showed a 2oC
temperature shift (ΔTm) from the control sample (no ligand). ADP produced the highest ΔTm
and non-hydrolysable ATP analogue, AMPPNP, showed almost similar ΔTm as that of ATP.
2.2.2 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 autophosphorylate
Protein kinases display a variety of regulatory mechanisms (L. N. Johnson, Noble, and Owen
1996; Huse and Kuriyan 2002; Nolen, Taylor, and Ghosh 2004). A common method of
activating a protein kinase is through auto-phosphorylation, where the kinase adds a phosphate
group to itself (cis) or to another protomer (trans). Autophosphorylation activity can be an initial
indication of a whether a protein kinase does or does not have catalytic activity. In the absence of
knowing a suitable substrates, I tested if the purified FIKKs autophosphorylate.
To test for autophosphorylation, purified PfFIKK8 (PfFIKK8l) and CpFIKK
(CpFIKKd) samples were incubated with ATP and MgCl2 (2 mM each) for overnight at room
Figure 2.3 Thermal melting curves of CpFIKK and ΔTm values for both kinases with
different ligands.
32
temperature. The samples were then trypsinized and the peptides resolved using LC–MS–MS. I
used the maps of the resulting peptides (Figure 2.4 A and B) to identify 6 phospho-serines (pS)
in the Plasmodium sample, 5 phospho-serines and 4 phospho-threonines (pT) in
the Crytposporidium sample and one phospho-tyrosine (pY) on each. One of the phosphorylated
serines (pS1320) on PfFIKK8 is located in the predicted activation loop. The corresponding
serine on CpFIKK was not detected. Furthermore, some of the phosphorylated residues were
found in the NTE, including a phospho-serine that is conserved in both proteins.
2.2.3 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 phosphorylate exogenous substrates
Given that the FIKK samples are active, I set out experiments to determine if the FIKKs are
active on exogenous substrates, using bovine casein, bovine histones (H1 and H3), bovine
myelin basic protein (MBP) and Syntide-2 (PLARTLSVAGLPGKK) as generic substrates. I
incubated the kinases in the presence of ATP and MgCl2 (same conditions as
autophosphorylation reactions) and monitored the phosphorylation by LC-MS-MS. Both proteins
(PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK) phosphorylated bovine MBP and Syntide-2. MBP was phosphorylated
on multiple Ser and Thr residues LC-MS-MS (Figure 2.4 C). Since MBP is particularly Arg-
rich, this led to my initial hypothesis that the FIKKs might prefer basic residues in their
substrates.
Both FIKKs were autophosphorylated and MBP was phosphorylated by CpFIKK. Residues with
post-translational modifications are highlighted in green. Yellow regions represent those
identified by MS. In A and B Phospho-serines in the NTE are highlighted in red while those in
the catalytic domain are circled in blue. Conserved phosphoserines are highlighted in solid
squares. Serines that are conserved in both proteins but only phosphorylated in one are
highlighted in squares with a dashed border. The latter includes a serine in the activation loop
(pS1320) on PfFIKK8l. While this serine is conserved in CpFIKKd, it was not covered in the MS
analysis. All the phosphorylated residues are circled blue in MBP (C).
Figure 2.4 Maps of phosphorylated residues in (A) PfFIKK8l and (B) CpFIKKd (C) MBP.
33
2.3 CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 target serine with flanking arginines
The cellular substrates for the FIKKs are unknown, but understanding the substrate sequence
preferences may provide clues to identifying potential biological substrates. Here I carried out
two different experiments to discover the substrate preferences of CpFIKK and PfFIKK8.
2.3.1 Positional-scanning peptide array
To determine the sequence preferences of PfFIKK8l and CpFIKKd in an unbiased manner, I
collaborated with Dr. Benjamin Turk’s laboratory at Yale University to test the proteins using a
positional-scanning peptide array (C. Chen and Turk 2011). Both kinases demonstrated a strong
preference for basic residues (Figrue 2.5), primarily Arg at positions −3 and +3 relative to the
A
B
C
34
phosphorylation site. Arginine in the −4 position was also favoured by both kinases, albeit not as
strongly. In addition, both selected Ser over Thr as the phosphate acceptor by about 2–3-fold
(Tables 2.2 and 2.3).
A), B) Peptide array probing FIKK8 substrate specified by radiolabeled kinase assay. Different
amino acids and their fixed positions are mentioned at the X and Y axis respectively. The spot
intensity at the 0 position shows that FIKK8s prefer Ser over Thr/Tyr. Arg at the +3 and -3
positions were highly preferred by the FIKK8s. C), D) The sequence logo of FIKK8s substrate
preference was built from the normalized average intensities of the spots from the peptide array.
Intensities having higher values than phosphor-acceptor residues were only taken into account.
The height of the amino acids is indicative of the probability of the preference at the single
position.
Figure 2.5 Peptide substrate preference array of PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK identifies a motif.
A B
C D
35
Table 2.2 Normalized average intensity values of enzyme screening spots for PfFIKK8l in
Fig. 2.5 A (average of two runs).
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
P 0.72 0.47 0.28 0.03 2.05 0.03 0.16 0.27 1.19
G 0.59 0.71 0.21 0.82 1.12 0.95 0.27 1.11 1.05
A 0.55 0.62 0.27 1.05 2.35 0.41 0.88 0.85 0.99
C 0.88 0.66 0.14 0.41 1.51 0.57 1.72 0.80 0.58
S 1.91 1.00 0.55 5.49 0.98 1.39 1.33 3.53 1.48 1.44
T 1.74 1.00 0.28 3.10 0.96 0.61 1.05 3.08 0.71 1.09
V 1.27 0.89 0.15 0.66 0.62 0.25 1.14 0.50 0.86
I 1.32 0.98 0.13 0.33 0.48 0.28 0.26 0.51 0.99
L 1.08 0.43 0.13 0.74 0.12 0.69 0.18 0.67 0.91
M 0.95 1.09 0.23 1.49 0.55 2.05 0.24 1.35 1.13
F 0.97 0.86 0.24 0.49 1.32 1.26 1.09 0.98 1.10
Y 1.87 1.12 0.12 0.48 1.65 1.59 1.58 1.01 0.79
W 1.20 1.04 0.18 0.41 1.73 0.61 1.45 1.42 1.21
H 0.85 1.25 1.87 0.62 2.33 2.19 1.98 1.27 1.69
K 1.04 1.47 2.89 0.63 0.34 0.86 0.30 1.31 1.91
R 0.71 2.96 11.68 0.96 0.49 1.88 0.31 4.52 0.84
Q 0.71 1.32 0.31 1.34 0.68 0.41 0.19 0.34 0.92
N 0.58 0.93 0.15 0.28 0.33 3.38 0.49 0.34 0.63
D 0.57 0.52 0.07 0.32 0.12 0.12 0.51 0.41 0.44
E 0.48 0.67 0.12 0.34 0.28 0.10 0.60 0.14 0.24
pT 0.43 0.94 0.14 0.13 0.38 0.05 0.11 0.06 0.14
pY 0.97 1.51 0.18 0.24 1.46 0.19 0.16 0.11 0.14
36
Table 2.3 Normalized average intensity values of enzyme screening spots for CpFIKKd in
Fig. 2.5 B (average of two runs).
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
P 0.57 0.88 0.64 0.10 2.10 0.07 0.09 0.11 1.17
G 1.14 0.95 0.44 0.83 1.69 0.37 0.30 0.67 0.75
A 0.61 0.83 0.60 1.43 1.91 0.64 0.74 0.48 0.97
C 0.75 0.93 0.24 0.50 1.62 0.65 2.14 0.53 0.71
S 2.18 1.37 0.61 4.35 1.52 1.58 1.43 2.48 0.82 1.58
T 1.32 0.89 0.35 2.45 0.89 0.42 0.92 2.24 0.37 0.87
V 0.75 0.96 0.22 0.68 0.68 0.42 1.01 0.22 0.96
I 0.69 1.11 0.23 0.45 0.53 0.70 0.50 0.30 1.23
L 1.24 0.60 0.17 0.82 0.19 1.58 0.25 0.45 0.86
M 1.08 1.02 0.35 1.43 0.62 2.69 0.35 0.74 0.95
F 1.05 0.79 0.29 0.76 1.27 2.50 1.25 0.66 0.97
Y 1.39 0.99 0.36 0.64 1.59 2.44 2.04 0.73 1.07
W 0.71 0.65 0.34 0.48 1.53 1.33 1.35 0.72 0.87
H 0.94 1.08 1.69 0.67 1.92 1.36 1.80 1.46 1.65
K 1.39 1.18 2.84 0.53 0.32 0.37 0.42 1.18 2.04
R 1.59 2.18 9.42 0.69 0.26 0.46 0.82 9.37 0.91
Q 0.93 1.31 0.53 1.35 0.53 0.37 0.66 0.31 1.10
N 0.53 0.86 0.29 0.48 0.41 1.48 0.86 0.53 0.58
D 0.51 0.64 0.16 0.53 0.13 0.07 0.27 0.23 0.37
E 0.64 0.77 0.22 0.83 0.29 0.15 0.44 0.08 0.39
pT 0.87 1.24 0.32 0.23 0.43 0.04 0.21 0.06 0.12
pY 0.98 1.49 0.35 0.55 1.71 0.34 0.49 0.06 0.16
37
2.3.2 Characterization of enzyme parameters using optimized substrates
To evaluate the contributions of the arginines and other flanking residues to phosphorylation
efficiency, we designed an optimized peptide substrate (PO) with the sequence RRRAPSFYRK,
as well as three variants. The variants featured mutations of Arg to Ala at the +3 (PAR) and −3
(PRA), as well as PT, a truncated version of PO. Using an LDH–PK coupled kinase
assay (Kiianitsa, Solinger, and Heyer 2003), I compared the kinetics of both FIKKs using these
substrates. The two PfFIKK8 constructs and CpFIKKd behaved very similarly to each other
with almost all the peptides (Figure 2.6). All the kinetic parameters were within the same order
of magnitude, though CpFIKKd appeared more active than its P. falciparum orthologues. Similar
Michaelis constants (Km) and catalytic efficiency values (kcat) were obtained using PO and PT for
all three FIKK samples. On the other hand, both mutants (PAR and PRA) resulted in
higher Km and lower kcat values, thus, emphasizing the importance of the flanking arginines.
All three FIKK8 constructs are most active against PO and PT (the truncated version of PO).
Replacing Arg in the -3 or +3 position substantially reduced activity in most cases. PfFIKK8o
behaved very similarly as the longer PfFIKK8l.
Figure 2.6 Enzymatic activities of recombinant FIKKs (A) PfFIKK8o (B) PfFIKK8l
and CpFIKKd (C).
38
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
[ATP] (μM)
Velo
city (
nm
ol/m
in/m
g)
CpFIKKd
PfFIKK8o
PfFIKK8l
Figure 2.7 Enzyme kinetics of FIKKs with ATP.
39
Table 2.4 List of consensus peptides tested and the kinetic parameters obtained, including
the Michaelis constant (Km), turnover (kcat) and catalytic efficiency (kcat/Km).
Peptides Km (μM) kcat (min-1) kcat/Km (μM
-1min
-1)
Name Sequence PfFIKK8l CpFIKKd PfFIKK8l CpFIKKd PfFIKK8l CpFIKKd
PO RRRAPSFYRK 11.0±0.9 7.0±1.5 31.0±0.7 77.0±4.6 2.8 12
PAR RRAAPSFYRK 74.0±6.3 10.0±0.4 38.0±1.8 70.0±0.7 0.5 7
PRA RRRAPSFYAK 150±42 100±4 20.0±5.6 120.0±2.8 0.1 1.2
PT --RAPSFYR- 19.0±0.8 18±1 31.0±0.5 80.0±1.5 1.6 4.5
Table 2.5 Kinetic parameters of purified FIKK proteins in using ATP (PT was used as the
phospho-acceptor substrate).
2.4 Materials and methods
2.4.1 Cloning and expression
The full length DNA constructs of PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK were cloned from cDNA library of P.
falciparum 3D7 (generous donation from the laboratory of Dr. Kevin Kain, Toronto General
Hospital) and C. parvum Iowa I genomic DNA (obtained from MR4) into the pET15-MHL
Km (μM) kcat (min-1) kcat/Km (μM
-1min
-1)
PfFIKK8l CpFIKKd PfFIKK8l CpFIKKd PfFIKK8l CpFIKKd
11.0±0.8 48.0±0.9 16.0±0.3 78.0±0.5 1.6 1.6
40
vector (http://www.sgc.utoronto.ca/SGC-WebPages/toronto-vectors.php). DNA constructs were
sub-cloned from the full-length constructs and appended with an N-terminal hexa-histidine tag
including an integrated TEV cleavage site (MHHHHHHSSGRENLYFQ*G) into the pET15-
MHL vector. Small-scale test expression was performed with all the cloned constructs according
to Savitsky et al. (2010).
All constructs were grown and purified as previously described (Vedadi et al. 2007) using the
Lex bioreactor system (Harbinger Biotechnology and Engineering Corp. (Epiphyte3), Toronto,
ON, Canada) and BL21(DE3)-V2R-pACYC-LamP as the expression host, which includes a
plasmid for co-expression of λ-phosphatase to suppress protein phosphorylation. To mitigate the
effect of the high number of cysteines, 2 mM TCEP was included in every purification steps to
minimize aggregation. Both PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK kinase domains eluted as monomers from a
Superdex S200 gel-filtration column (GE Life Sciences). The identities of the purified proteins
were verified by mass spectrometry analysis (ESI-TOF, Agilent Technologies, Toronto, ON,
Canada), which also confirmed the absence of phosphorylation. Proteins were concentrated to >8
mg/mL in a buffer containing 10 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), 500 mM NaCl and 2 mM 2-
mercaptoethanol or TCEP, and stored at –80oC.
2.4.2 Differential static light scattering (DSLS)
To study the stability of the purified FIKK samples and to identify potential ligands, we assayed
samples using differential static light scattering. This was carried out using the StarGazer
instrument (Harbinger Biotechnology and Engineering Corp. (Epiphyte3), Toronto, Canada).
The assay was performed using 2 µM of protein and 2 mM ligand in 384-well plates. Samples
were buffered in 100 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), and included 150 mM NaCl. The experiments were
conducted between 20°C to 85°C at a heating rate of 1°C per minute. The recorded scattered
light reads were fitted to the Boltzmann sigmoid function using Bioactive software and plotted
against the temperature (Figure 2.3), and the inflection point is termed Tm.
41
2.4.3 In vitro phosphorylation
For phosphorylation reactions, 20 µM of purified PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK were incubated for 12
h, 24 h and 48 h at room temperature in reaction buffer (10 mM HEPES (pH7.5), 500 mM NaCl
and 2 mM TCEP (tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine) containing 2 mM ATP and 2 mM MgCl2, and
the reactions were stopped by adding 10 mM EDTA. To measure MBP phosphorylation, 100 µM
of MBP (Sigma) was added to 20 µM FIKK proteins in reaction buffer containing 2 mM ATP
and 2 mM MgCl2 and incubated for 12 h at room temperature. Phosphorylation was detected by
mass spectrometry, by measuring an 80 Da mass increase using an Agilent electrospray-
ionisation time-of-flight (ESI-TOF) mass spectrometer. Prior to injection into the mass
spectrometer, the protein was resolved from small molecules by liquid chromatography on a C3
reverse-phase column with 0.1% formic acid and eluted with a methanol gradient. MS data were
analyzed with Agilent TOF Protein Confirmation Software.
Phosphorylated residues on FIKKs and MBP were mapped by LC-MS-MS in the Mass
Spectrometry facility of SickKids, Canada. For this experiment, proteins were digested with
trypsin (13 ng/µL trypsin in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and 10 mM DTT) for 3 hours at
37oC. The digested peptides were loaded onto a 150 μm ID pre-column (Magic C18, Michrom
Biosciences) at 4 μL/min and separated over a 75 μm ID analytical column packed into an
emitter tip containing the same packing material. The peptides were eluted over 60 min. at 300
nL/min. using a 0 to 40% acetonitrile gradient in 0.1% formic acid using an EASY n-LC nano-
chromatography pump (Proxeon Biosystems, Odense Denmark). The peptides were eluted into
an LTQ-Orbitrap hybrid mass spectrometer (Thermo-Fisher, Bremen, Germany) operated in a
data dependent mode. MS was acquired at 60,000 FWHM resolutions in the FTMS and MS-MS
was carried out in the linear ion trap. 6 MS-MS scans were obtained per MS cycle. The Raw data
was searched using Mascot (Matrix Sciences, London UK). The final data were analyzed with
SF3 software (Proteome Software, Scaffold, www.proteomesoftware.com/products/scaffold)
2.4.4 Kinase substrate peptide assay
This work was performed in collaboration with the laboratory of Dr. Benjamin Turk at Yale
University, USA. The substrate specificities of PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK were determined by
42
incubating 20 nM of each purified enzyme with an array of 200 peptide mixtures (50 µM in 50
mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM DTT, 0.1% Tween 20, 50 µM ATP
including 0.03 µCi/µl [γ-33
P]ATP) as described (Yeh et al. 2011). Most (198) peptide mixtures
had the general sequence Y-A-X-X-X-X-X-S/T-X-X-X-X-A-K-K(biotin), where X indicates an
equimolar mixture of the 17 amino acids excluding Cys, Ser and Thr, and S/T indicates an
equimolar mixture of Ser and Thr. In the context of this sequence, a single X position was fixed
as one of the 20 unmodified amino acids, pThr or pTyr. Two additional peptides having the
sequence Y-A-X-X-X-X-X-Z-X-X-X-X-A-K-K(biotin), in which Z was either Ser or Thr, were
included to assess phosphoacceptor residue preference. The assay was performed in 1536-well
plates (2 µL/well). After incubating 2 hr at 30 ºC, aliquots (200 nl) from each well were spotted
onto a streptavidin membrane (SAM2 biotin capture membrane, Promega), which was washed,
dried and exposed to a phosphor imager screen. Spot intensities were quantified using the
software accompanying the imaging system (QuantityOne, BioRad). The intensity data were
normalized by dividing each value by the average of all values corresponding to a single position
in the peptide. Heat maps were generated from log transformed quantified data (average of two
separate experiments for each kinase) using Microsoft Excel.
2.4.5 Enzymatic assay
Kinase activity was measured using an NADH-coupled LDH-PK ATPase assay according to the
method previously described by Kiianitsa et al. (2003). A 96-well format was used and the
method was adapted for use with high ATP concentrations. Peptides were obtained from Peptide
2.0 (Peptide 2.0 Inc., http://www.peptide2.com). The proteins at different concentrations (1 nM,
5 nM and 10 nM) for different peptides were pre-incubated in reaction solution (including 0.5
mM ATP, 150 µM NADH, 30 µM PEP, 10 mM MgCl2 and a LDH-PK mix from Sigma (with 3
units of LDH per ml)) for 30 mins at room temperature. A 2 fold serial dilution of peptides
starting from 100 µM were added to initiate the reaction. For measuring Km of ATP, 50 µM of
PT (RAPSFYR) was used as phospho-acceptor substrate; and ATP was diluted serially from 250
µM (2 fold serial dilution). In this case, the reaction was initiated by adding ATP to the reaction
solution. Initial rates were calculated and at least triplicate data were analyzed using SigmaPlot 9
(Systat Software Inc., www.sigmaplot.com).
43
Chapter 3 Part of this chapter has been submitted in the Journal of
Medicinal Chemistry and is currently under review.
Identification of potent inhibitors of CpFIKK 3
A potent, selective and cell permeable inhibitor, or a ‘chemical probe’, aids both in
understanding the biological function of a protein and in providing evidence for its suitability as
a drug target (Arrowsmith et al. 2015; Frye 2010). Protein kinase inhibitors, especially the most
common type I inhibitors, are usually very promiscuous due to the highly conserved binding
sites of the kinase, and there are numerous reports as evidence of misusing promiscuous
compounds as chemical probes (reviewed by Arrowsmith et al. 2015). Developing potent and
selective inhibitors against human protein kinases is a subject of extensive ongoing studies
(Knapp et al. 2013), and the highest quality chemical probes against protein kinases are being
recommended by a chemical probes portal (www.chemicalprobes.org/search/site/kinase). A
selective CpFIKK inhibitor would be very useful for understanding CpFIKK biology.
Even though there is no generally accepted definition of a chemical probe, some common and
basic features define the characteristics of inhibitor molecules that can be used as a chemical
probes (Frye 2010): the enzymatic inhibition potency should strongly associate with cellular
and/or in vivo potency; molecular mechanisms should be clearly defined; the probe should be
freely available for research; and the probe should have enough data on its chemical and physical
properties; and the probe should have proven utility to address a biological question.
One of my aims in developing enzymatic and biophysical assay platforms for screening the
CpFIKK proteins was to identify and develop chemical inhibitors of CpFIKK. The first step to
obtain a chemical probe is to identify a chemical compound(s) that binds and inhibits the target
protein. The approach I used was to screen purified CpFIKK against a library of ~2,500 small
molecules enriched for type 1 kinase inhibitors, to select and validate potential hits and to
optimize the validated hits into more selective inhibitors in collaboration with medicinal
chemists. I employed biophysical and biochemical techniques to screen and develop potent and
selective inhibitors against C. parvum FIKK kinase. This chapter describes the results.
44
3.1 Inhibitor screening yielded multiple naphthyridine-based CpFIKK-inhibitors
In order to identify inhibitors of CpFIKK, I screened focused libraries of ~2500 compounds at
100 µM concentration with recombinant and purified CpFIKK kinase using two orthogonal
methods: binding using differential static light scattering (DSLS) and inhibition using enzyme
assays (Materials and Methods). From these studies, I identified two compounds 4a and 4j
(Figure 3.1) as potent inhibitors of CpFIKK kinase; these had IC50 of 3 nM and 224 nM,
respectively. These compounds, both 1,5-naphthyridine derivatives, were derived from the
Published Kinase Inhibitor Set (PKIS) assembled and distributed by GSK (Drewry, Willson, and
Zuercher 2014).
The PKIS set was particularly useful to me because the inhibition and selectivity profiles of each
of these small molecule inhibitors was already known against the human kinome (Elkins et al.
2015), and one of my aims was to develop a FIKK inhibitor with minimal activity against human
enzymes. The compounds have a common scaffold of a 1,5-naphthyridine, an amino-pyrazole
and a phenyl moiety (Figure 3.1)
4a
PKIS ID: GW780159X
IC50 = 3 nM
4j
PKIS ID: GW785804X
IC50 = 224 nM
Figure 3.1 Molecular structures of compounds 4a and 4j. PKIS IDs and IC50 inhibition
potency against CpFIKK are shown.
45
3.2 Selectivity of 4a within C. parvum kinome
Compound 4a was tested for selectivity against 14 Cryptosporidium kinases (Table 3.1) by
DSLS and also, if available, using enzyme assays. The C. parvum kinases were cloned and
characterized either by me or other members of our laboratory. I developed biochemical assays
for some of these enzymes (CpCDPK1 [cgd3_920], CpCDPK3 [cgd5_820], CpCDPK4
[cgd7_40], CpGSK [cgd4_240], CpCDK [cgd5_2510].). My approach to monitor selectivity was
to screen all the compounds for binding to the purified kinases first, and then run enzyme assays
with the binders against the kinases for which I had managed to develop enzyme assays.
Compound 4a stabilized and inhibited only CpCDPK1 significantly (IC50 84 nM); it showed
<2ºC shift against all the other kinases and >10 µM IC50 in the assays.
Interestingly, compound 4a had already showed some selectivity when tested against 300 human
kinases, inhibiting only HsALK5 at 10 nM (Gellibert et al. 2004), HsKDR at 100 nM (33%
inhibition) and two others with >50% inhibition at 1µM (KDR, 67%; MAP4K4, 60%; P38a
MAPK, 50%) (Elkins et al. 2015). In summary, compound 4a was a very promising hit, with
Table 3.1 Cryptosporidium kinases tested for selectivity with compound 4a. The
thermal shift and IC50 values are shown.
46
potent activity against the target kinase and minimal off-target activity against human kinases.
In order to optimize its selectivity and potency, I performed a hit expansion by systematically
exploring the structure-activity-relationship (SAR) for the CpFIKK inhibition and selectivity
against CpCDPK1. The results are described here.
3.3 Structure activity relationship of CpFIKK inhibitors
Compound 4a is a known inhibitor of human HsALK5 kinase (IC50 10 nM) (Gellibert et al.,
2004) and the active sites of CpFIKK kinase and HsALK5 are predicted to be very similar.
Therefore, in the absence of a crystal structure for CpFIKK, I used the inhibitor-bound crystal
structures of HsALK5 (e.g. PDB ID 1VJY) to guide the initial SAR. The idea was to design
compounds by exploring the regions whose modification changed HsALK5 activity and binding
in previous studies (Gellibert et al., 2004).
HsALK5 had been co-crystallized with naphthyridine derivatives that are type I kinase inhibitors
and bind at the ATP binding site of the kinase by interacting with the hinge region. In the crystal
structures, the N1 of the naphthyridine ring and the backbone NH of His-283 make a hydrogen
bond in the hinge region and this bond is critical for the activity of the majority of the known
kinase inhibitors as well as for the ATP binding (Figure 3.2). I did not vary the naphthyridine
ring during my initial exploration of the SAR. Two hydrogen bonds are formed between the
pyrazole moiety and aspartate (D351) from the DFG motif and catalytic lysine (K232). My goal
was to perform the SAR until I obtain a very potent inhibitor. Initially, substitution patterns at the
phenyl group, which extends towards the selectivity pocket the HsALK5 structure (Figrue 3.2),
were explored systematically. All the compounds synthesized were tested for activity against the
CpFIKK kinase and for selectivity against CpCDPK1. The chemical synthesis was performed by
Dr. Juntao Ye and colleagues in the laboratory of Dr. Mark Lautens at the University of
Toronto. The results are summarized in the table 3.2.
47
Interaction of a naphthyridine compound (golden) at the HsALK5 catalytic cleft is shown. A)
features the electrostatic bonds observed between the compound and active site residues. The
naphthyridine group of the compound interacts with the hinge residue H283. Two additional
bonds were observed between the imidazole moiety and the invariant Lys (K232) and Asp
(D351). B) shows the hydrophobic region (purple) where the phenyl moiety is poised. The phenyl
moiety is also very close to the so called gatekeeper residue (S280). (PDB ID 1VJY)
Figure 3.2 The naphthyridine derivative with HsALK5 active site (Gellibert et al. 2004).
48
Table 3.2 CpFIKK kinase activity of compounds 4a-i and selectivity against CpCDPK1.
Compounds Ar CpFIKK IC50 (nM)
CpCDPK1 IC50 (nM)
4a
3 ± 0.3 84 ± 7
4b
0.2 ± 0.1 190 ± 9
4c
42 ± 12 190 ± 20
4d
220 ± 40 210 ± 15
4e
180 ± 20 260 ± 20
4f
4100 ± 750 1500 ± 230
4g
1200 ± 620 350 ± 70
49
4h
>10000 74 ± 15
4i
>10000 >10000
4j
200 ± 40 220 ± 30
4k
3260 ± 820 375 ± 25
4l
>10000 2600 ± 370
Figure 3.3 The enzymatic inhibition of CpFIKK and CpCDPK1 by 4b.
50
By analyzing the activities of the various derivatives, I found that small hydrophobic groups in
the meta position are preferred for CpFIKK activity, and increase selectivity against CpCDPK1.
Compared with the unsubstituted compound (4c), addition of a chloro group (4a) improves
CpFIKK activity by about 15 fold and addition of a methyl group (4b) significantly improves
FIKK activity (IC50 0.2 nM) and selectivity (940 fold) against CpCDPK1 (Figure 3.3). Larger
alkyl groups, ethyl (4h) and isopropyl groups (4i), result in complete loss of CpFIKK activity
and interestingly the addition of an ethyl group (4h) maintains activity for CpCDPK1. Fluoro
(4d) and methoxy (4e) additions decrease CpFIKK activity by 4-5 fold and the more polar cyano
(4f) and trifluoromethy (4g) groups decrease CpFIKK activity significantly. We observed no
significant impact of polar groups at this position on selectivity against CpCDPK1.
At the para position, the fluoro group is tolerated with a moderate drop in CpFIKK activity
(compare 4c and 4j) but did not improve selectivity against CpCDPK1. The chloro (4k) and
methoxy (4l) groups lead to a >100 fold drop (compare 4c and 4k, 4l) in CpFIKK activity. The
effect of di-substitution at the phenyl ring was also explored and the results are summarized in
Table 3.3. Addition of a para fluoro group (4m and 4n) to the most potent CpFIKK compounds,
4a and 4b, lead to a moderate drop in CpFIKK activity and no improvement in selectivity against
CpCDPK1. Both dimethyl (4o) and dichloro (4p and 4q) groups lead to significant drop in FIKK
activity, but as observed with meta ethyl group (4h), dimethyl group (4o) maintains potent
CpCDPK1 activity.
Table 3.3 CpFIKK kinase activity of compounds 4m-q and selectivity against CpCDPK1.
51
Compounds Ar CpFIKK IC50 (nM)
CpCDPK1 IC50 (nM)
4m
25 ± 6 450 ± 74
4n
140 ± 50 73 ± 9
4o
2900 ± 850 19 ± 2
4p
750 ± 60 >10000
4q
>10000 3500 ± 340
52
Table 3.4 CpFIKK kinase activity of compounds 4r, 5a, and 6 and selectivity against
CpCDPK1.
Compound CpFIKK IC50 (nM)
CpCDPK1 IC50 (nM)
4r >10000 400 ± 180
5a >10000 330 ± 60
6 3600 ± 287 1510 ± 195
Within the limited variations explored at the napthyridine and aminothiazole rings, none of the
substitutions are tolerated, indicating that there is only a small pocket in this region of FIKK.
Methyl substitution at the naphthyridine ring (4r) and acetyl (5a) and methyl (6) substitutions at
the aminogroup at the thiazole ring led to almost complete drop in CpFIKK activity (Table 3.4).
However, compounds 4p and 5a retain moderate CpCDPK1 activity. These results suggest that
there are very limited options of exploring at the aminothiazole and naphthyridine groups to
obtain active compounds, whereas the phenyl ring variations is the principal determinant of the
potency.
3.4 Orthogonal confirmation of CpFIKK inhibition
I used differential static light scattering (DSLS) to confirm the binding of representative CpFIKK
inhibitors identified using biochemical assays (Kiianitsa, Solinger, and Heyer 2003). All
CpFIKK inhibitors, including the most potent inhibitor 4b (Figure 3.4), showed a significant
53
increase in thermal stabilization, and the inactive compound 4o showed no significant thermal
stabilization of the CpFIKK protein upon binding (Table 3.5).
Table 3.5 Thermal stabilization of CpFIKK by inhibitors.
Compound 4a 4b 4l 4m 4o
Thermal shift (ºC) 5.1 5.2 4.7 3.6 0.82
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Temperature (oC)
Lig
ht
scat
teri
ng
inte
nsi
ty (
AU
)
5.2oC
+ Compound 4b
No Ligand
Figure 3.4 CpFIKK stabilization by 4b in differential static light scattering (DSLS or
thermal melt) assay.
54
3.5 Selectivity profile of CpFIKK inhibitor 4b against human kinases
To begin to understand the selectivity of the newly synthesized inhibitors against the human
kinome, 4b was screened against a panel of 140 human kinases (~25% of the human kinome) at
the International Centre for Kinase Profiling, MRC, UK (Bain et al. 2007).
Only 6 protein kinases showed >50% inhibition of activity when screened with the compound at
500 nM, >100 times the potency for CpFIKK (Figure 3.3, Table 3.6). The complete list of the
kinases and their inhibition activities are shown in Table 3.6. Not surprisingly, ALK5
(TGFBR1), KDR (VEG-FR2) and P38A-MAPK showed 86%, 59% and 91% inhibition of
activity, respectively, by 4b. These three kinases were also inhibited by 4a in a previous study
(Elkins et al. 2015). In addition, four other kinases, TAK1, RIPK2, PKD1 and Yes1, were also
inhibited by 4b significantly (60%, 70% and 91% and 47%, respectively at 500 nM). These
results suggest that 4b is a moderately selective inhibitor.
55
The figure was reproduced courtesy of Cell Signaling Technology, Inc. (www.cellsignal.com).
The kinases that have been used in this screening assay are marked with red (<50% inhibition),
blue (50 – 90% inhibition) and green (>90% inhibition) circles. 6 enzymes that were inhibited
>50% of their activity by compound 4b are shown in the table. 500 nM 4b was used.
Figure 3.5 Selectivity of 4b against 140 human kinases shown on the human protein kinase
tree.
56
Table 3.6 Percentage of inhibition of the activities of human kinases in the presence of 500
nM 4b.
Human Protein Kinases % of inhibition MAP4K5 0
S6K1 0
MARK2 0
JNK1 0
GCK 0
DYRK1A 0
HIPK2 0
RSK1 0
PKBb 0
JAK2 0
TTBK2 0
CAMKKb 0
SGK1 0
PKCz 0
ERK8 0
MARK3 0
TLK1 0
PRK2 0
Aurora A 0
AMPK (hum) 0
OSR1 0
CK2 0
MEKK1 0
PINK 0
PAK6 0
ULK2 0
PDK1 0
MAP4K3 0
TTK 0
MARK4 0
TSSK1 0
p38g MAPK 0
DYRK2 0
EF2K 0
PKA 0
MSK1 0
IR 0
PKBa 0
MKK1 0
IKKb 0
CK1γ2 0
p38d MAPK 0
MST4 0
GSK3b 0
SRPK1 0
57
ROCK 2 0
PKCa 0
MKK2 0
EIF2AK3 0
CAMK1 0
TTBK1 0
BRSK1 0
EPH-B1 0
IRAK4 0
MST2 0
IRAK1 0
DYRK3 0
CHK1 0
NEK6 0
MAPKAP-K2 0
PLK1 0
WNK1 0
PHK 0
PAK5 0
MLK1 0
CDK9-Cyclin T1 0
ASK1 0
ERK1 0
TIE2 0
PAK4 0
HIPK1 0
ULK1 0
PRAK 0
BTK 0
SIK2 0
Src 0
HIPK3 0
SmMLCK 0
EPH-A4 0
CDK2-Cyclin A 0
IGF-1R 0
PKCγ 0
PAK2 0
NEK2a 0
LKB1 0
IKKe 0
CHK2 0
MLK3 0
PIM2 0
ERK5 0
RSK2 0
MAPKAP-K3 0
MNK1 1
CSK 1
MPSK1 1
EPH-B4 1
EPH-A2 1
58
TAO1 1
PDGFRA 1
MNK2 2
CK1δ 3
PIM1 3
ZAP70 3
TrkA 3
STK33 3
MKK6 4
DAPK1 4
SYK 5
EPH-B2 5
IRR 6
MELK 9
MARK1 9
PIM3 9
MST3 9
DDR2 9
JNK3 10
Aurora B 11
BRSK2 11
EPH-B3 11
TESK1 13
SIK3 14
NUAK1 14
Lck 15
FGF-R1 15
ABL 19
p38b MAPK 20
ERK2 20
JNK2 21
TBK1 23
CLK2 24
MINK1 26
BRK 26
HER4 40
YES1 47
VEG-FR 59
TAK1 60
RIPK2 70
TGFBR1 86
p38a MAPK 91
PKD1 91
59
3.6 Structural understanding of inhibitor binding
Protein structures in complex with small molecule inhibitors provide insights into the interaction
and inhibition mechanism and opportunities to design more selective and potent inhibitors.
Hence, I attempted to co-crystallize active compounds with CpFIKK, CpCDPK1, and its
homologue TgCDPK1 (CDPK1 from T. gondii). I was able to obtain co-crystals structures of
TgCDPK1 with multiple hit compounds (PDB ID 5DVT, 5DVU and 5DVR), including the most
potent CpFIKK inhibitor 4b, at 2.05Å resolution (5DVT). Compound 4b inhibits recombinant
TgCDPK1 at 19 nM IC50 and shows >5oC thermal shift upon binding.
As described above, naphthyridine compounds are ATP-competing type I class of kinase
inhibitors and bind to the active site of the kinases by anchoring with the hinge region (Gellibert
et al. 2004). The co-crystal structure of TgCDPK1-4b shows that the naphthyridine moiety
interacts with the backbone of tyrosine (Tyr131) at the hinge region via a hydrogen bond that
anchors the compound at the active site (Figure 3.4B). Two residues, Asp195 from the DFG-
motif and Ser61 from the Gly-rich loop, are also at close vicinity (3-4 Å) and form weak
electrostatic bonds with the amino group of the aminothiazole moiety; these probably act as
secondary anchors in the interaction. The phenyl ring is located at the hydrophobic selectivity
pocket where the so called ‘gatekeeper’ residue is a smaller residue (Gly128). The gatekeeper
residue often plays role in inhibitor selectivity and the smaller gatekeeper of TgCDPK1 and
CpCDPK1 (also Gly) has been exploited in multiple studies to design selective inhibitors of
these kinases (S. M. Johnson et al. 2012; Kuhlenschmidt et al. 2016; Castellanos-Gonzalez et al.
2013). CpFIKK also contain a smaller residue (Ser516) at the gatekeeper position suggesting a
common mechanism of inhibition.
I superposed the co-crystal structures of NM-PP1-bound CpCDPK1 (PDB ID 3NCG) with the
4b-bound TgCDPK1 (5DVT) to understand the interaction patterns of the compounds in
CpCDPK1 (Figure 3.4 C). The kinase domains of the two kinases show great sequence similarity
(~70%) and not surprisingly, the two ligand interaction pockets in 3D space are almost identical.
One exception is the position of Gly-rich loop of the empty CpCDPK1 active site, which is
slightly drifted away from the binding site, probably because no charged groups in the compound
60
(NM-PP1) anchor the Ser in the Gly-rich loop of CpCDPK1. Sequence comparison suggests that
the ligand binding pocket is also similar between CpCDPK1 and CpFIKK, except for the
residues contributing from the first two subdomains (Table 3.7). The first two subdomains of
CpFIKK kinase domain align poorly with CpCDPK1 and any other classic eukaryotic kinases,
and the alignment we used (Clustal Omega run and then manual curating) is probably not very
reliable at this region. Other exceptions include the presence of a cysteine (Cys) in CpFIKK at
the -1 position of the canonical DFG-motif (DFA motif in CpFIKK), which is an Ile in
CpCDPK1; Met112 of CpCDPK1 is replaced by a Gln in CpFIKK too. These differences
probably confer the differences in affinity between the CpFIKK and CpCDPK1 proteins with the
inhibitor compounds.
Table 3.7 Probable inhibitor interacting residues in TgCDPK1, CpCDPK1 and CpFIKK.
Some residues have been omitted in CpFIKK due to lack of sequence similarity with
canonical kinases.
A) Surface representation of the ligand binding pocket of TgCDPK1 (PDB ID 5DVT). B)
Interacting residues of TgCDPK1 (grey) with 4b and superposed CpCDPK1 (golden). Hinge
binding by the naphthyridine group and an electrostatic interaction between the aminothiazole
moiety and the invariant Asp (D195) was observed. C) Superposed structures of 4b-TgCDPK1
(grey) and apo-CpCDPK1(golden) are shown.
TgCDPK1 L57 S61 V65 A78 M112 L114 L126 G128 Y131 L181 I194 D195
CpCDPK1 L S V A M L I G Y I I D
CpFIKK L - - - N A L S Y I C D
Figure 3.6 Structure analysis of parasite kinases with compound 4b.
61
A.
B. C.
Hinge
DFG motif
Gly-rich loop
62
The residues and residue-numbers in TgCDPK1 sequence are indicated by red fonts on top of
the alignment.
To understand if smaller gatekeeper at the active site plays role in 4b binding in CpFIKK, I
generated and purified a gatekeeper mutant version of the protein, CpFIKKΔS516M, in which
the serine was replaced by methionine. The mutant protein was completely active. When I tested
the mutant using a binding assay (Figure 3.8), I found that the mutant enzyme bound AMPPNP,
a non-hydrolyzable ATP analog, but not 4b. 4b also did not inhibit the enzymatic test of the
gatekeeper mutant. This suggests that the Ser gatekeeper in CpFIKK creates a pocket that is
important for the inhibition by naphthyridine compounds.
Figure 3.7 Sequence alignment of the kinase domains of TgCDPK1, CpCDPK1 and
CpFIKK.
63
Thermal shift of the protein is observed with AMPPNP, but not with compound 4b.
3.7 Materials and methods
3.14.1 Enzymatic inhibition assay
An NADH coupled LDH-PK ATPase assay was used to measure the kinase activity according to
procedures described in the Chapter 2. The concentrations of proteins in the reaction were 1.2
nM (CpCDPK1) and 10 nM (CpFIKK). Inhibitor compounds were solubilized at the stock
concentration of 10 mM in 100% DMSO and were applied in the reaction from 25 µM
downward with 2 fold dilutions. Syntide 2.0 (PLARTLSVAGLPGKK) for CpCDPK1 and P5
(RRRAPSFYRK) for CpFIKK were the substrates used as the phosphoacceptor peptides. The
reaction solution contained 0.25 mM of ATP and 0.1 mM of peptide substrates. The CpCDPK1
Figure 3.8 Thermal melt assay with CpFIKK-gatekeeper-residue-mutant CpFIKKΔS516M.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
No ligand
4b
AMPPNP+MgCl2
Inte
nsi
ty (
AU
)
Temperature (oC)
64
reaction contained 2 mM CaCl2 in addition to the original reaction mixture. Inhibition parameters
were plotted and calculated by using Sigmaplot.
3.7.2 Screening with human kinases
This work was performed in collaboration with International Centre for Kinase Profiling (ICKP),
MRC, UK (www.kinase-screen.mrc.ac.uk/kinase-screen-express). For this assay, I provided 25.5
µM of compounds in 100% DMSO. The compounds were diluted 51 fold to make the final
reaction concentration of 500 nM. The screening assays were performed following the protocol
described by Bain et al. (2007).
3.7.3 X-ray crystallography
A purified sample of the tag-intact TgCDPK1 kinase domain was crystallized using the sitting
drop vapour diffusion method in the presence of inhibitors at room temperature. All crystals
were obtained by mixing one part of protein solution (10 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 500 mM NaCl, 2
mM TCEP) at 20 mg/mL containing 1 mM inhibitor with one part of reservoir solution. The
reservoir solution contained 20% PEG3350 and 0.2 M di-sodium-tartarate (pH 7.5). Large plate-
shaped crystals appeared within four weeks of incubation and were cryo-protected in glycerol
supplemented mother liquor before being flash cooled in liquid nitrogen. The diffraction data
were collected at 1.9 Å resolution using an X-ray source (APS BEAMLINE 24-ID-E) equipped
with CCD ADSC QUANTUM 315 detector, processed with XDS (Kabsch 2010) and extracted
with PDB_EXTRACT 3.15 (Yang et al. 2004).
The structure was determined by molecular replacement. Inactivated TgCDPK1 crystal structure
(PDB ID 3KU2) served as a search model for solving the inhibitor-TgCDPK1 co-crystal
structures. Phaser (McCoy 2006; McCoy et al. 2007) was used for the molecular replacement
calculations, while model building was performed with COOT (P. Emsley et al. 2010; Paul
Emsley and Cowtan 2004) and the structures were refined with Phenix (Adams et al. 2010) and
data scaling was performed with Aimless 0.5.15 (Evans and Murshudov 2013) from the CCP4
suite of programs (Winn et al. 2011). Relevant data collection and refinements statistics are
65
shown in Table 3.8. The coordinates for the structure and their structure factors have been
deposited with the Protein Data Bank (http://www.pdb.org) (Berman et al. 2000).
Table 3.8 Data collection, phasing, and refinement statistics for the TgCDPK1 co-
crystal structures.
66
Chapter 4 Part of this chapter has been submitted in the Journal of
Medicinal Chemistry and is currently under review.
Phenotypic effects of CpFIKK inhibitors on parasites 4
My aim in generating high affinity inhibitors was to use them to understand the biology of the
FIKK enzymes and to explore their suitability as drug targets. In the last Chapter, I described the
discovery of a potent selective in vitro CpFIKK inhibitor. However, many drugs or inhibitors
that show efficacy in vitro are not bioavailable or show off target phenotypic effects, and thus it
is critical to link phenotypic observation with inhibition of the specific protein target. At this
point, with the potency of the compounds confirmed enzymatically, with the scaffold derived
from a drug-like compound, and with promising results about selectivity, I set out to find a
biological system to analyze cellular effects of CpFIKK inhibition. For this I explored the effects
of the CpFIKK/CpCDPK1 inhibitors on the growth of two parasites C. parvum and T. gondii by
taking advantage of the assays and genetic advances made by our collaborators. This chapter
describes the results.
4.1 Evaluation of CpFIKK inhibitors in C. parvum growth inhibition
Inhibitors against CpFIKK proteins, if bioavailable, would likely disrupt the FIKK-mediated
functions in the parasites. However, we showed previously that CpFIKK inhibitors also inhibit
recombinant CpCDPK1 potently. Therefore, if administered on parasites we would expect to see
dual protein specific phenotypic changes in the parasites at higher concentrations, e.g. at >1 µM.
However, because compound 4b has a huge selectivity window due to enzymatic potency
between CpFIKK and CpCDPK1 (>1000 fold potent towards CpFIKK) I expected CpFIKK-
specific phenotypic effect on the parasites at lower concentrations.
Understanding the biological roles of proteins in C. parvum is especially difficult because most
of the different stages of life cycle have not been recapitulated in vitro (Striepen 2013). At this
moment, with our collaborator’s laboratory settings, the only phenotypic effect that can be
scored is inhibition of parasite growth at the asexual life cycle stage.
67
Selective chemical inhibition of CpCDPK1 shows growth inhibition of C. parvum
(Kuhlenschmidt et al. 2016; Castellanos-Gonzalez et al. 2013). However, since we do not know
the biology of CpFIKK, we do not know if we will see any growth related phenotypic effect by
chemically knocking down FIKK gene function, although this is the only assay currently
available. To understand if CpFIKK has any growth related phenotypic effects in C. parvum, I
collaborated with the laboratory of Dr. Christopher Huston, Vermont University, to test the
impact of the compounds on C. parvum growth in vitro.
In order to understand the role of FIKK in C. parvum growth, I evaluated (in collaboration) the
in vitro parasitic activity of 5 compounds with varying CpFIKK activity (4a, 4b, 4d, 4o with
CpFIKK IC50 3 nM, 0.2 nM, 221 nM, 2930 nM respectively) including a FIKK inactive
compound 4q (CpFIKK IC50 >10,000 nM).
For this inhibition experiment, the compounds were added to the host cell (HCT) prior to
infection with the parasites. All the CpFIKK active compounds inhibited parasite growth with
EC50 ≤5.5 µM but the CpFIKK inactive compound 4q had no effect, suggesting that the
inhibition was target based. However, the observed EC50 did not correlate with the CpFIKK
inhibition IC50. The most CpFIKK active compounds 4a and 4b required concentrations to kill
the parasites that were 1840 and 12800 fold higher than the IC50 for CpFIKK inhibition and only
66 and 14 fold higher concentrations than the IC50 to inhibit CpCDPK1, respectively (Table 4.1).
Moreover, even though 4d and 4o showed significant growth inhibition at 6 and 1.3 fold higher
concentrations than enzymatic potency, these concentrations were also 6-204 fold higher than
their CpCDPK1 inhibition IC50 (Table 4.1). Therefore, it is highly likely that inhibition of
CDPK1, or perhaps another cellular target, is responsible for the cell killing. Inhibition of
CpFIKK likely has no effect in C. parvum growth.
Inhibitors that target CpCDPK1 kill the C. parvum parasite (Castellanos-Gonzalez et al. 2013;
Kuhlenschmidt et al. 2016), and CpCDPK1 was posited as a potential drug target for
Cryptosporidiosis. However, I found no strong correlation between CpCDPK1 inhibition and
growth inhibition, suggesting that the CDPK1 inhibitors are also killing through a different
target(s). This corroborates a previous study with another set of small molecule inhibitors
(Kuhlenschmidt et al. 2016). CpFIKK selective inhibitors from different structural classes will be
needed to establish the involvement of CpFIKK in parasite growth and can be a subject of future
68
studies. This said, CpFIKK-inhibitors from this study are already suitable to study the role of the
protein in other stages of life cycle, when other stage-specific biological assays become
available. In conclusion, our potent and CpFIKK inhibitor 4b could serve as a useful tool for
understanding the biological role of FIKK in C. parvum. Even though compound 4b and the
other inhibitors showed parasite growth inhibition, the disconnection between the enzymatic and
cellular data suggests strongly that FIKK is not essential for parasite growth.
Table 4.1 Parasite invasion inhibition profiles of CpFIKK inhibitors.
Compounds EC50 (µM) EC50 potency compared
to CpFIKK IC50 (Fold)
EC50 potency compared
to CpCDPK1 IC50 (Fold)
4a 5.52 1840 66
4b 2.56 12800 14
4d 1.33 6 6
4o 3.88 1.3 204
4q No inhibition Not applicable Not applicable
69
Activity data of most potent CpFIKK- inhibitor 4b, equally potent CpFIKK/CpCDPK1- inhibitor
4d and inactive compound 4q are shown here.
4.2 Chemical genetics experiments with FIKK knock out (KO) strains of T. gondii
Genetic manipulation of Cryptosporidium parasites has been notoriously difficult and only
recently has there been some progress (Vinayak et al. 2015). In the absence of suitable
Cryptosporidium FIKK knock-out strains, I wanted to test the CpFIKK-compounds in another
apicomplexan that has a single member of FIKK and where gene manipulation was better
developed. One such well-studied apicomplexan parasite is T. gondii. Since the CpFIKK and
Figure 4.1 Inhibition of C. parvum growth in vitro.
70
TgFIKK are thought to be orthologous proteins and the single members of FIKKs are retained
evolutionarily in these genomes, similar biological roles might be expected. My collaborators
from the laboratory of Dr. Dana Mordue (NYMC, USA), recently generated a FIKK knock out
(KO) strain of T. gondii (Pru strains) and discovered that FIKK is essential for cyst formation
and survival under stress, but apparently is not essential for completing the asexual life cycle
(Skariah et al. 2016). We found previously that the CpFIKK-inhibitors also inhibit CDPK1 from
T. gondii; compound 4b inhibits the recombinant TgCDPK1 at 19 nM IC50. TgCDPK1 plays an
essential role in exocytosis and chemical inhibition of TgCDPK1 shows growth inhibition (S. M.
Johnson et al. 2012; Hui, El Bakkouri, and Sibley 2015). Therefore, because compound 4b is
predicted to have dual FIKK/CDPK1 activity, the addition of 4b to T. gondii would be predicted
to inhibited cell growth due to TgCDPK1 inhibition and obstruct cyst formation due to TgFIKK
inhibition. The Mordue lab system allowed me to test the inhibitors against Toxoplasma species
to test if chemical knock down phenocopied the genetic KO and the growth inhibition occurs.
100% inhibition reached at 1 µM concentrations. No detectable difference observed between the
two samples.
Perc
enta
ge o
f gr
ow
th
[4b] (μM)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 0
WT
FIKK-KO
Figure 4.2 In vitro growth inhibition results of wild type (WT) and FIKK knocked out
(KO) strains of T. gondii with compound 4b.
71
My goal was to compare the phenotype of the CpFIKK-inhibitor treated wild type parasites with
the phenotype of TgFIKK-KO strains. The active compounds were tested against wild type (WT)
and FIKK-KO T. gondii. For growth inhibition assays, the compounds were administered at
different concentrations on the host cells (HFF) before the parasite infection. For the cyst
inhibition assay, the compounds at 1 µM were administered just before the induction of the cyst
production in the infected host cells. Compounds 4a, 4b, 4o and 4q were used for these assays.
At concentrations predicted to inhibit both FIKK and CDPK1, I found that compound 4b
inhibited the growth of the parasites but did not affect T. gondii cyst production (Figure 4.2). The
results, therefore, are not completely conclusive at this point, mainly because we do not know for
certain that these compounds inhibit TgFIKK. That said, the most likely scenario is that the
growth inhibition is due to TgCDPK1 inhibition.
4.3 Materials and methods
4.3.1 C. parvum growth inhibition assay
This experiment was performed in collaboration with the Huston lab at Vermont University.
Compound inhibition of C. parvum growth was tested using a previously developed microscopy-
based assay. Human ileocecal adenocarcinoma (HCT-8) cells (ATCC) were cultured in RPMI-
1640 medium (Invitrogen) supplemented with 10% heat inactivated FBS (Sigma), 120 U/mL
penicillin and 120μg/mL streptomycin (ATCC). Three-fold increasing concentrations of
compounds from 0.004 to 25 µM diluted in culture media were added to 100% confluent HCT-8
cells in clear well, back-walled 384-well plates (BD Falcon), followed by addition of
approximately 5500 excysted C. parvum Iowa strain oocysts (Bunchgrass Farms, USA) per well.
Oocysts were excysted with 10 mM HCl for 10 min at 37° C, followed by 2 mM solution of
sodium taurocholate (Sigma) for 10 min at 16°C and then diluted in culture media and added to
each well. After 48 h of infection, the wells were washed three times with 111 mM D-galactose,
fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde for 15 min at room temperature, permeabilized with 0.25%
Triton X100 in PBS for 10 min at 37°C, washed three times with PBS containing 0.1% Tween
20 and then blocked with 4% bovine serum albumin (BSA) (Sigma) in PBS for 2 h at 37°C.
Parasitophorous vacuoles of C. parvum were stained with 1.33 µg/mL fluorescein labeled Vicia
villosa lectin (Vector Laboratories) diluted in 1% BSA in PBS with 0.1% Tween 20. After 1 h
72
incubation at 37°C, the nuclear stain Hoechst 33258 (Anaspec) was added at 0.09 mM diluted in
water for another 15 min, followed by five washes with PBS containing 0.1% Tween 20 before
imaging. A Nikon Eclipse Ti2000 epifluorescence microscope with an EXi blue fluorescent
microscopy camera (QImaging, Canada) and NIS-Elements Advanced Research software
(Nikon, USA) was programmed to focus on the center of each well and acquire a three-by-three
composite of 20X field images. Nuclei and parasite numbers were quantified on exported .tif
files using previously developed macros and the batch function in ImageJ (National Institutes of
Health).
4.3.2 T. gondii growth inhibition and cystogenesis inhibition assay
This experiment was performed in Dana Mordue lab at New York Medical College (NYMC)
according to the protocol described by Maubon et al. (2010). Type II T. gondii wild type (WT)
and FIKK-KO Pru strain was used for both 50% effective concentration (EC50) determination
and in vitro cyst experiments. Knocked out strains were prepared according the protocol
describes by Skariah et al. (2016). Strains were maintained by serial passage in an HFF
monolayer under tachyzoite growth conditions at 37oC with 5% CO2 in Dulbecco’s modified
eagle medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10 fetal bovine serum (FBS, Invitrogen), 4 mM
glutamine, 500 U/mL penicillin and 250 U/mL streptomycin. On day 3, potential plaques were
counted under microscope to determine the inhibitory concentration of the compounds. Serial
dilution of compounds in concentrations ranging from 10 µM to 100 pM were used and results
were plotted from triplicated experiments.
Cyst induction or trachyzoite to bradyzoite conversion assay was performed according to
protocol previously described (Maubon et al. 2010). Cystogenic Type II strains were used.
Extracellular tachyzoites were allowed to invade HFF cells and natural cystogenesis was
achieved after 7 days. For inhibition assay the medium was replaced with 1 µM inhibitor
containing medium before the induction of cystogenesis. The cysts were assessed by
immunofluorescence assay (IFA).
73
Chapter 5
Discussion 5
Most biomedical studies, especially those on human signaling networks, have focused on
relatively few protein targets, and this is best exemplified in bibliometric studies of research on
the human kinome (Edwards et al. 2010). Parasite research is not very different. In order to
expand the parasite research scope, I chose to work on a relatively unknown kinase family, the
FIKK kinases from apicomplexan parasites, for my PhD project. My goal was to contribute to
the understanding the biochemical processes of signaling networks in parasites and thus shed
light on their biology. My ultimate goal was to explore the suitability of FIKK proteins as a
potential drug target in C. parvum, one of the relatively less studied human and animal parasites
of significant global health burden.
In this study, I developed methods to express and purify FIKK kinase domains from C. parvum
and P. falciparum. In so doing I identified an adjacent region to the kinase domain that is
essential for bacterial expression of CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 Using biochemical and screening
approaches, I characterized the enzymatic properties of the enzyme, as well as its substrate
preferences and developed a screening assay using which I identified small molecule inhibitors
of the CpFIKK enzyme, and confirmed their inhibition using orthogonal assays. Next, I
collaborated with a chemistry group (Lautens Lab) at the University of Toronto to generate new
compounds and analyzed their structure-activity relationship. Potent compounds were screened
against panels of Cp_kinases and human kinases to identify those that were most selective.
Finally, I investigated the effects of the most potent and selective CpFIKK inhibitors on the
cellular growth of the parasites. I discovered that CpFIKK is an active kinase and prefers Ser as a
phosphor-acceptor residue flanked by Arg at -3 and +3 positions on the substrate. A series of
naphthyridine-based compounds can inhibit the CpFIKK activity and the most potent inhibitor,
called the compound 4b, is also a CpCDPK1 inhibitor. Growth inhibition of the parasites in vitro
was also observed by these compounds, but there was little correlation between FIKK inhibition
and inhibition of cell growth. I conclude FIKK is not likely to be a drug target, at least for the
growth stages tested.
74
5.1 The role of N-terminal extension (NTE)
Protein kinases are regulated in a variety of ways. For example, some possess regulatory
subunits. These can modulate enzymatic activity in different ways, for example by binding to
specific molecules or ligands to activate the catalytic domain. For example, human PKA kinase
has two catalytic subunits and two regulatory subunits in a dimer; cAMP binding at the
regulatory subunits promotes a conformational rearrangement and releases the catalytic subunits
to phosphorylate their substrates (Huse and Kuriyan 2002; Nolen, Taylor, and Ghosh 2004). In
some cases, the regulatory subunits or domains are controlled through phosphorylation. For
example, in Src tyrosine kinase the linker between the non-catalytic SH2 and SH3 domains and
the C-terminal tail are phosphorylated to bring conformational changes, unblock the activation
site and thus, regulate their activity (L. N. Johnson, Noble, and Owen 1996; Huse and Kuriyan
2002). Another example of allosteric regulation by ligand binding and phosphorylation at the
non-catalytic domain/sub-unit is the EGF receptor kinase, where substrate binding at the non-
catalytic domain (EGF binding domain) promotes dimerization and subsequent phosphorylation
of the tail segment to drive the kinase towards active conformation (Nolen, Taylor, and Ghosh
2004; Endicott, Noble, and Johnson 2012).
The kinase domain of FIKKs contains a ~40 residue long region at the N-terminal region that
was needed for the expression of the catalytic domains (Figure 5.1). This region is only
conserved in Plasmodium species, but not so conserved in FIKKs from other parasites. I found
that this extension is needed for the kinase domains of PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK to be expressed in
bacterial and insect cell expression system and to be soluble (Figure 2.1, Table 2.1). However,
the findings do not necessarily confirm that the N-terminal extension has any role in catalytic
domain activation or regulation. It is possible that this extension region is an integral part of the
kinase domain, or simply interacts somehow with the expression machinery, because I was
unable to express a protein construct lacking the exo-kinase domain or extension part. Therefore,
the possibility that this extension has regulatory activity is yet to be explored in FIKKs and might
be subject to future studies.
75
* indicates the boundary between the N-terminal extension and the kinase domain.
5.2 FIKK kinases are unique in substrate preference
Protein kinases are essential for cell communication and they phosphorylate a wide variety of
substrates. The process of substrate recognition and phosphorylation by kinases is not random;
kinases are rather specific for certain substrate motifs. The phosphorylation motif refers to the
sequence around the phosphorylated residues S/T/Y on the protein/peptide substrates. Ser-Thr
kinases recognize either Ser or Thr or both on the suitable substrate. The specificity of substrate
preference is determined by the residues around the phospho-residue on the substrate. The
substrate recognition or phosphorylation motifs of different eukaryotic protein kinases (ePKs)
are provided in Table 5.1. FIKKs phosphorylate substrates that are rich in basic amino acids.
PfFIKK4.1 phosphorylates human dematin (Brandt and Bailey 2013), PfFIKK4.2 and PfFIKK12
phosphorylate MBP (Nunes et al. 2010)– both are rich in Arg content.
My initial study suggested that FIKKs might prefer Arg-rich substrates since they phosphorylate
Arg-rich MBP better than other generic substrates (Figure 2.4). The positional scanning peptide
array results suggest that both PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK favour Ser as a phosphoacceptor residue,
flanked by Arg at both -3 and +3 positions (Figure 2.5). Biochemical studies later confirmed
these results (Figure 2.6). This was the first time any of the FIKK members had been
Figure 5.1 Sequence alignment of the N-terminal extension of different apicomplexan
FIKKs.
76
biochemically characterized and the biochemical nature of FIKK’s substrate recognition
understood.
(Pinna and Ruzzene 1996; Songyang et al. 1994; Gui et al. 1994; Tessmer et al. 1977; Osman et
al. 2015).
X indicates any residue and ȹ indicates hydrophobic residues
5.3 CpFIKK/CpCDPK1-inhibitors: what makes them selective?
The most commonly used kinase inhibitors interact with the active site. The shape and
composition of kinase active sites allow for many possible interactions of kinase inhibitors, and
this has been exploited to generate selective inhibitors. Figure 1.3 shows the different interaction
regions in an active site of a typical protein kinase that can be exploited to design kinase
inhibitors. Here, I am attempting to explain the selectivity pattern of the naphthyridine
compounds.
Table 5.1 Substrate preference of different protein kinases.
77
5.3.1 The Hydrophobic region I selectivity: role of gatekeeper
One of the regions that is exploited during kinase inhibitor discovery attempts to gain selective
binding is the Hydrophobic region I, in which a bulky residue prevents binding by large
inhibitors. This bulky residue also has been termed the ‘gatekeeper’ residue. The size of the so-
called gatekeeper residue affects the accessibility of the hydrophobic region (Blencke, Ullrich,
and Daub 2003; Liu et al. 1999; Shah et al. 1997; Huang et al. 2009; Gorre et al. 2001). A
smaller residue at the gatekeeper position creates a relatively larger hydrophobic pocket and can
play role in selectivity of kinase inhibitors, since most of the eukaryotic protein kinases contain a
larger residue at this position. Approximately 20% of human kinases have a smaller amino acid
at this position and these kinases can be targeted by compounds having bulky moiety that fits
into the larger hydrophobic region. This is why the hydrophobic region close to the gatekeeper
is sometimes called ‘the selectivity pocket’. Many inhibitor discovery attempts targeting
TgCDPK1 are take advantage of the ability to use bulky compounds targeting the space left
unoccupied as a result of the small Gly residue as gatekeeper. Sequence alignment suggests that
CpFIKK contains a Ser (S516) at the gatekeeper position (Figure 3.5, Table 3.7), which might
also create a hydrophobic pocket for the inhibitors.
My compound screening and SAR studies uncovered a series of naphthyridine based compounds
with great potency against CpFIKK (Chapter 3). These were the first inhibitors reported for any
FIKK kinase family member. The most potent compounds were constructed with a naphthyridine
group, an amino-pyrazole moiety and a phenyl ring (Figure 3.1). In a previous study, Gellibert et
al. (2004) showed that the phenyl ring of similar naphthyridine compounds occupy the
Hydrophobic region I in HsALK5, which also contain a Ser as gatekeeper. Our TgCDPK1
structure also shows similar interactions with the naphthyridine inhibitors (PDB ID 5DVT,
5DVR, 5DVU). As previously pointed out, TgCDPK1 has a Gly (Gly128) at the gatekeeper
position allowing bulky kinase inhibitors (BKIs) to bind to this protein. If the residue is mutated
(modeled in Figure 5.3) to Met the chemical space at the hydrophobic region gets occupied by
the bulkier side chain and compound 4b will not be able to bind the active site. Indeed, I found
that a G128M mutated version of TgCDPK1 and a S516M mutated version of CpFIKK are
immune to compound 4b inhibition (Figure 3.8).
78
Golden shaded residues indicate Gly (left) and Met (right). The modeled G128M mutation shows
that there would be steric collision if Gly is mutated to larger residue, like Met.
However, a large hydrophobic pocket appears not obligatory for the activity of the compounds.
For example, among the mostly inhibited human kinases by compound 4b, at least two of them
have large gatekeeper residues (Table 5.2). Compound 4b shows 91% inhibition of the human
PKD1 kinase, which has a Met as the gatekeeper residue. These counter-intuitive results make it
is very difficult to predict what actually confers the potency and selectivity, and establishing the
reasons will require structural information about these proteins, especially HsPKD1. My
structure-superposition attempt suggests that gatekeeper Met of HsTAK1 (PDB ID 2EVA)
should have conflicted with the naphthyridine compounds. This needs to be further investigated
and a co-crystal structure of the compound 4b and HsPKD1 or HsTAK1 would answer some
questions about how the bulkier phenyl moitery would accommodate in the active sites having
larger residues and can be a subject of future studies.
Figure 5.2 Representation of the active site of TgCDPK1 occupied by compound 4b.
79
5.3.2 Selectivity between CpFIKK and PfFIKK8
Although the smaller gatekeeper in CpFIKK can accommodate the naphthyridine compounds,
this is not the only determinant of selectivity and potency. PfFIKK8 also has a Ser at the
gatekeeper position, but is not inhibited potently by the naphthyridine compounds. This
selectivity probably achieved due to the differences in sequences between the two proteins. Even
though PfFIKK8 and CpFIKK are evolutionarily close, the sequence identity between the kinase
domains is only 38%, and sequence alignment shows that these two proteins differ in multiple
regions in the kinase domains (Figure 1.6). For example, sequences vary at the subdomain II, IV,
VIA and IX. CpFIKK has inserts in the activation segment and at subdomain IX, and these are
absent from PfFIKK8. Several residues from the subdomains I to VII contribute to the active site
and inhibitor interactions. Variations in these regions may play roles in the naphthyridine
compound selectivity. These results indicate that there are some additional determinants, other
than the gatekeeper residue, that contribute to the potency and selectivity of the naphthyridine
compounds.
Table 5.2 Highest inhibited protein kinases from human kinome by compound 4b at
500 nM and the gatekeeper residues.
80
5.3.3 A common inhibitor for both CpFIKK and PfFIKK8 provides insights to design CpFIKK-selective inhibitors.
Although, I discovered very few hits from my screen of a ~2500 focused library, I obtained one
compound, called CGP060476, from a Novartis kinase inhibitor series that inhibits both CpFIKK
and PfFIKK8 at 5 µM and 3.3 µM IC50, respectively. This is a pan-kinase inhibitor targeting a
large numbers of human protein kinases, as well as CpGSK (cgd2_1060), CpCDPK2
(cdg7_1840), CpCDK (cgd_2510), CpCDPK1 and TgCDPK1 from my parasite recombinant
kinase panel.
Chemical structure of CGP060476 and its activity profile are shown in the right panel of Figure
A. ‘R’ moieties in Figure B are proposed to be added on the compound 4b.
A
Figure 5.3 A. Active site of the co-crystal structure of CGP060476-TgCDPK1 (top left)
and superposed structures of CGP060476 and 4b-bound TgCDPK1 (bottom left). B.
Proposed compound structures to occupy the Hydrophobic region II of CpFIKK.
81
B
The co-crystal structure of TgCDPK1-CGP060476 shows that this compound interacts with the
hinge and spans from the Hydrophobic region I to Hydrophobic region II (Figure 1.3, Figure 5.5,
golden). In this structure, I am especially interested about the chloro-phenyl moiety which
occupies the Hydrophobic region II of the active site, because this part is missing from the
naphthyridine compounds we created (Figure 5.5A, bottom). CpFIKK is targeted by
CGP060476; this means that the Hydrophobic region II of this protein can also be occupied by
hydrophobic moieties like alkyl or alkyl-aryls. Our SAR strategies did not explore inhibitors that
occupy the Hydrophobic region II and therefore, expanding the compounds at the naphthyridine
group with another hydrophobic hand might provide extra potency to the naphthyridine
compounds as well as achieve greater selectivity towards CpFIKK. Figure 5.5B shows some
examples of the chemical strategies that can be taken to design more compounds targeting the
Hydrophobic region II.
5.4 Parasite killing by compound 4b is probably due to CDPK1 inhibition
I tested the selectivity of CpFIKK inhibitor compound 4b with multiple C. parvum kinases
(Table 3.1), and found that compound 4b also showed significant potency against the CDPK1
orthologues from C. parvum and T. gondii (Chapter 3). When this compound was applied to C.
parvum and T. gondii parasites in vitro, I observed that growth inhibition was inhibited at
concentrations more consistent with inhibition of CDPK1 (or another target) than FIKK (S. M.
Johnson et al. 2012; Kuhlenschmidt et al. 2016; Castellanos-Gonzalez et al. 2013). Confidence
that the mechanism of killing was through CDPK1 was increased by my observation that
Compound 4q, which is inactive against both CpFIKK and CDPK1, showed no effect on growth.
Further supporting the hypothesis that FIKK is not a drug target was my observation that growth
82
inhibition did not correlate with biochemical inhibition of CpFIKK, when I tested a series of
FIKK inhibitors (Table 4.1). For example, the less potent CpFIKK inhibitor 4a kills the C.
parvum parasite with more potency than the more potent CpFIKK inhibitor 4b. The most likely
explanation for this is that CpFIKK is not essential in the growth at the lytic stage of the life
cycle.
Formally, I cannot be certain that the inhibitors made to CpFIKK also inhibited TgFIKK because
I was unable to express recombinant TgFIKK protein and test the activity of the inhibitors
directly. However it can be likely because the two proteins are evolutionarily related and share
considerable sequence similarity (Figure 1.6). The rationale to test my FIKK inhibitors in T.
gondii was to exploit its molecular genetics capabilities; T. gondii is the only parasite where the
FIKK protein has been knocked out. In KO strains, the absence of FIKK had no effect on the
lytic cycle, but was found to be important for tissue cyst production (Skariah et al. 2016). Hence,
the potent compounds were tested on T. gondii in vitro to find out any FIKK-specific target
engagement and phenotypic effect. We found no change in the tissue cyst production when
potent inhibitors (e.g. compound 4b) were applied; rather the only phenotypic effects we
observed was growth inhibition. Hence, the cellular assay suggests either that the naphthyridine
series of the inhibitors may not target TgFIKK potently enough to see a phenotype, that the
activity of FIKK is important for the phenotype or that the phenotype observed in the knock-out
is an off-target consequence of the gene disruption. We might also conclude that growth
inhibition is due to TgCDPK1 inhibition.
5.5 Utility of a chemical tool to understand the biological role of CpFIKK in parasites
Potent and specific small molecule inhibitors can be extremely useful tools to understand the
biological roles of the proteins, especially for the genes that are difficult to knock out. These
chemical tools can also be useful for other biological studies. A potent small molecule inhibitor,
like compound 4b, will be useful to find out the biological function of C. parvum, a parasite
where genetic manipulation is extremely difficult.
83
Unlike T. gondii, C. parvum does not produce tissue cysts during any stages of its life cycle. This
indicates that FIKKs might have been evolved to perform different functions in different
parasites. An alternate role for FIKKs might be especially possible for C. parvum because its
biology differs significantly from that in other apicomplexans (discussed in Chapter 1). Hence,
the role of FIKK in C. parvum might not be in growth but possibly in another stage of the
complex life cycle. Unfortunately, experimental set ups to investigate different life cycle stages
in C. parvum are not available currently due to difficulties in working with the parasites outside
living organisms. This restricts my ability to investigate FIKK’s role in different life cycle
stages. As newer assays of C. parvum biology become available, compound 4b, could be
extremely helpful in elucidating the function of FIKK.
A chemical probe (described in Chapter 3) would be an ideal tool for chemical biology
experiments on FIKK proteins. However, designing highly selective chemical probes for protein
kinases based on active site inhibitors is especially difficult because of the relatively conserved
binding sites of the kinases. Most “off the shelf” kinase inhibitors will target dozens of kinases,
and significant effort and characterization is required before a potent inhibitor will be useful as a
probe of a kinase function. Although the definition of a useful probe is evolving, we consider a
compound to be a kinase chemical probe if the compound –
has a potency less than 50 nM IC50 and potency confirmed by orthogonal assays
is >50 fold selective over other kinases and tested against proteins from other
families (GPCR, bromodomains etc.)
has cellular activity at < 1 µM in a target engagement assay and a cell –based activity
assay
is accompanied by negative control compounds
has no phenotype in cells harbouring the target kinase with an inactivating mutation
My CpFIKK inhibitor compound 4b meets some of the criteria, e.g. potency and negative control
tests, its cellular activity could not be tested, and thus we cannot be certain it engaged CpFIKK
in cells. The phenotypic changes that were observed at >1 µM were more likely due to off-target
activity. Moreover, we were only able to measure its off-target inhibition against 15% of the
Cpkinome. Among these kinases, two (CpFIKK and CpCDPK1) were inhibited by the
84
compound 4b, albeit the compound was far more selective for CpFIKK. Without fully exploring
the remainder of the kinome, it is not yet possible to approve consider 4b as a chemical probe.
Moreover, the same compound inhibits at least 5 human kinases with equivalent potency (Figure
3.3, Table 3.6).
It might be possible to improve the properties of 4b and meet chemical probe criteria. If I were to
do this, my strategies would be to –
1. determine the selectivity against other Cryptosporidium kinases by expanding the
kinase panel
2. create a mutant parasite harbouring an inactive FIKK enzyme as a control for cellular
activity
3. obtain permeability data on all the compounds tested on parasites
4. obtain target engagement data on all the compounds tested in parasites
5. identify a new chemical series by screening a wider variety of libraries. Compounds
from more than one chemical series will help to further validate or de-validate the
enzyme as a drug target.
85
References
Adams, Paul D., Pavel V. Afonine, Gábor Bunkóczi, Vincent B. Chen, Ian W. Davis, Nathaniel
Echols, Jeffrey J. Headd, et al. 2010. “PHENIX: A Comprehensive Python-Based System
for Macromolecular Structure Solution.” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological
Crystallography 66 (2): 213–21. doi:10.1107/S0907444909052925.
Amadi, Beatrice, Mwiya Mwiya, John Musuku, Angela Watuka, Sandie Sianongo, Ayman
Ayoub, and Paul Kelly. 2002. “Effect of Nitazoxanide on Morbidity and Mortality in
Zambian Children with Cryptosporidiosis: A Randomised Controlled Trial.” Lancet 360
(9343): 1375–80. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11401-2.
Arrowsmith, Cheryl H, James E Audia, Christopher Austin, Jonathan Baell, Jonathan Bennett,
Julian Blagg, Chas Bountra, et al. 2015. “The Promise and Peril of Chemical Probes.”
Nature Chemical Biology 11 (8): 536–41. doi:10.1038/nchembio.1867.
Artz, Jennifer D, Amy K Wernimont, Abdellah Allali-Hassani, Yong Zhao, Mehrnaz Amani,
Yu-Hui Lin, Guillermo Senisterra, et al. 2011. “The Cryptosporidium Parvum Kinome.”
BMC Genomics 12 (1). BioMed Central Ltd: 478. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-12-478.
Bain, Jenny, Lorna Plater, Matt Elliott, Natalia Shpiro, C. James Hastie, Hilary Mclauchlan, Iva
Klevernic, J. Simon C. Arthur, Dario R. Alessi, and Philip Cohen. 2007. “The Selectivity of
Protein Kinase Inhibitors: A Further Update.” Biochemical Journal 408 (3): 297–315.
doi:10.1042/BJ20070797.
Baldursson, Selma, and Panagiotis Karanis. 2011. “Waterborne Transmission of Protozoan
Parasites: Review of Worldwide Outbreaks - An Update 2004-2010.” Water Research 45
(20). Elsevier Ltd: 6603–14. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2011.10.013.
Bansal, Abhisheka, Shailja Singh, Kunal R. More, Dhiraj Hans, Kuldeep Nangalia, Manickam
Yogavel, Amit Sharma, and Chetan E. Chitnis. 2013. “Characterization of Plasmodium
Falciparum Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase 1 (PFCDPK1) and Its Role in Microneme
Secretion during Erythrocyte Invasion.” Journal of Biological Chemistry 288 (3): 1590–
86
1602. doi:10.1074/jbc.M112.411934.
Barbara A. Fox, Leah M. Rommereim, Rebekah B. Guevara et al. 2016. “The Toxoplasma
Gondii Rhoptry Kinome Is Essential for Chronic Infection.” mBio 7 (3): 1–12.
doi:10.1128/mBio.00193-16.Editor.
Berman, H M, J Westbrook, Z Feng, G Gilliland, T N Bhat, H Weissig, I N Shindyalov, and P E
Bourne. 2000. “The Protein Data Bank.” Nucleic Acids Research 28 (1): 235–42.
doi:10.1093/nar/28.1.235.
Bessoff, Kovi, Thomas Spangenberg, Jenna E. Foderaro, Rajiv S. Jumani, Gary E. Ward, and
Christopher D. Hustona. 2014. “Identification of Cryptosporidium Parvum Active Chemical
Series by Repurposing the Open Access Malaria Box.” Antimicrobial Agents and
Chemotherapy 58 (5): 2731–39. doi:10.1128/AAC.02641-13.
Billker, Oliver, Sandrine Dechamps, Rita Tewari, Gerald Wenig, Blandine Franke-Fayard, and
Volker Brinkmann. 2004. “Calcium and a Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase Regulate
Gamete Formation and Mosquito Transmission in a Malaria Parasite.” Cell 117 (4): 503–14.
doi:10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00449-0.
Billker, Oliver, Sebastian Lourido, and L David Sibley. 2009. “Calcium-Dependent Signaling
and Kinases in Apicomplexan Parasites.” Cell Host & Microbe 5 (6). Elsevier Inc.: 612–22.
doi:10.1016/j.chom.2009.05.017.
Blagburn, DS Lindsay, JJ Giambrone, CA Sundermann, FJ Hoerr. 1987. “Experimental
Cryptosporidiosis in Broiler Chickens.” Poultry Science 66 (3): 442–49.
Blencke, Stephanie, Axel Ullrich, and Henrik Daub. 2003. “Mutation of Threonine 766 in the
Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Reveals a Hotspot for Resistance Formation against
Selective Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.” Journal of Biological Chemistry 278 (17): 15435–40.
doi:10.1074/jbc.M211158200.
Borowski, H, R C Thompson, T Armstrong, and P L Clode. 2010. “Morphological
Characterization of Cryptosporidium Parvum Life-Cycle Stages in an in Vitro Model
System.” Parasitology 137 (1): 13–26. doi:10.1017/S0031182009990837.
87
Boulter-Bitzer, Jeanine I., Hung Lee, and Jack T. Trevors. 2007. “Molecular Targets for
Detection and Immunotherapy in Cryptosporidium Parvum.” Biotechnology Advances 25
(1): 13–44. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2006.08.003.
Bouzid, Maha, Paul R. Hunter, Rachel M. Chalmers, and Kevin M. Tyler. 2013.
“Cryptosporidium Pathogenicity and Virulence.” Clinical Microbiology Reviews 26 (1):
115–34. doi:10.1128/CMR.00076-12.
Brandt, Gabriel S., and Scott Bailey. 2013. “Dematin, a Human Erythrocyte Cytoskeletal
Protein, Is a Substrate for a Recombinant FIKK Kinase from Plasmodium Falciparum.”
Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology 191 (1). Elsevier B.V.: 20–23.
doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2013.08.003.
Bull, Stephanie, Rachel Chalmers, A. P. Sturdee, Alan Curry, and John Kennaugh. 1998. “Cross-
Reaction of an Anti-Cryptosporidium Monoclonal Antibody with Sporocysts of Monocystis
Species.” Veterinary Parasitology 77 (2-3): 195–97. doi:10.1016/S0304-4017(97)00090-3.
Cabada, Miguel M, and a Clinton White. 2010. “Treatment of Cryptosporidiosis: Do We Know
What We Think We Know?” Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases 23 (5): 494–99.
doi:10.1097/QCO.0b013e32833de052.
Cao, Lili, Zedong Wang, Shuchao Wang, Jiping Li, Xinglong Wang, Feng Wei, and Quan Liu.
2015. “Deletion of Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase 1 Inhibits Development and Growth
of Toxoplasma Gondii.” Parasitology Research, 797–805. doi:10.1007/s00436-015-4807-2.
Carreno, Ramon A., D S Martin, and John R. Barta. 1999. “Cryptosporidium Is More Closely
Related to the Gregarines than to Coccidia as Shown by Phylogenetic Analysis of
Apicomplexan Parasites Inferred Using Small-Subunit Ribosomal RNA Gene Sequences.”
Parasitology Research 85 (11): 899–904. doi:10.1007/s004360050655.
Carruthers, Vern B., Olivia K. Giddings, and L. David Sibley. 1999. “Secretion of Micronemal
Proteins Is Associated with Toxoplasma Invasion of Host Cells.” Cellular Microbiology 1
(3): 225–35. doi:10.1046/j.1462-5822.1999.00023.x.
Castellanos-Gonzalez, Alejandro, a. Clinton White, Kayode K. Ojo, Rama S R Vidadala,
88
Zhongsheng Zhang, Molly C. Reid, Anna M W Fox, et al. 2013. “A Novel Calcium-
Dependent Protein Kinase Inhibitor as a Lead Compound for Treating Cryptosporidiosis.”
Journal of Infectious Diseases 208 (8): 1342–48. doi:10.1093/infdis/jit327.
Checkley, William, A. Clinton White, Devan Jaganath, Michael J. Arrowood, Rachel M.
Chalmers, Xian Ming Chen, Ronald Fayer, et al. 2015. “A Review of the Global Burden,
Novel Diagnostics, Therapeutics, and Vaccine Targets for Cryptosporidium.” The Lancet
Infectious Diseases 15 (1): 85–94. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(14)70772-8.
Chen, Catherine, and Benjamin E Turk. 2011. “Analysis of Protein Kinase Specificity Using
Arrayed Positional Scanning Peptide Libraries.” Curr Protoc Mol BIol., no. 203: 1–17.
doi:10.1002/0471142727.mb1814s91.Analysis.
Chen, Chun-Ti, and Marc-Jan Gubbels. 2013. “The Toxoplasma Gondii Centrosome Is the
Platform for Internal Daughter Budding as Revealed by a Nek1 Kinase Mutant.” Journal of
Cell Science 126 (Pt 15): 3344–55. doi:10.1242/jcs.123364.
Chen, Xian Ming, Steven P. O’Hara, Bing Q. Huang, Jeremy B. Nelson, Jim Jung Ching Lin,
Guan Zhu, Honorine D. Ward, and Nicholas F. LaRusso. 2004. “Apical Organelle
Discharge by Cryptosporidium Parvum Is Temperature, Cytoskeleton, and Intracellular
Calcium Dependent and Required for Host Cell Invasion.” Infection and Immunity 72 (12):
6806–16. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.12.6806-6816.2004.
Cooke, Brian M., Klaus Lingelbach, Lawrence H. Bannister, and Leann Tilley. 2004. “Protein
Trafficking in Plasmodium Falciparum-Infected Red Blood Cells.” Trends in Parasitology
20 (12): 581–89. doi:10.1016/j.pt.2004.09.008.
Coppi, Alida, Rita Tewari, Joseph R. Bishop, Brandy L. Bennett, Roger Lawrence, Jeffrey D.
Esko, Oliver Billker, and Photini Sinnis. 2007. “Heparan Sulfate Proteoglycans Provide a
Signal to Plasmodium Sporozoites to Stop Migrating and Productively Invade Host Cells.”
Cell Host and Microbe 2 (5): 316–27. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2007.10.002.
Current, W L, and N C Reese. 1986. “A Comparison of Endogenous Development of Three
Isolates of Cryptosporidium in Suckling Mice.” The Journal of Protozoology 33 (1): 98–
108. doi:10.1111/j.1550-7408.1986.tb05567.x.
89
Current, W. L., and L. S. Garcia. 1991. “Cryptosporidiosis.” Clinical Microbiology Reviews 4
(3): 325–58. doi:10.1128/CMR.4.3.325.
Donald, Robert G K, John Allocco, Suresh B Singh, Bakela Nare, Scott P Salowe, Judyann
Wiltsie, and Paul A Liberator. 2002. “Toxoplasma Gondii Cyclic GMP-Dependent Kinase:
Chemotherapeutic Targeting of an Essential Parasite Protein Kinase.” Eukaryotic Cell 1 (3):
317–28. doi:10.1128/EC.1.3.317.
Donald, Robert G K, Tanya Zhong, Laurent Meijer, and Paul A. Liberator. 2005.
“Characterization of Two T. Gondii CK1 Isoforms.” Molecular and Biochemical
Parasitology 141 (1): 15–27. doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2005.01.011.
Donald, Robert G K, Tanya Zhong, Helen Wiersma, Bakela Nare, Dan Yao, Anita Lee, John
Allocco, and Paul A. Liberator. 2006. “Anticoccidial Kinase Inhibitors: Identification of
Protein Kinase Targets Secondary to cGMP-Dependent Protein Kinase.” Molecular and
Biochemical Parasitology 149 (1): 86–98. doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2006.05.003.
Dorin, Dominique, Jean Philippe Semblat, Patrick Poullet, Pietro Alano, J. P Dean Goldring,
Christina Whittle, Shelley Patterson, Debopam Chakrabarti, and Christian Doerig. 2005.
“PfPK7, an Atypical MEK-Related Protein Kinase, Reflects the Absence of Classical
Three-Component MAPK Pathways in the Human Malaria Parasite Plasmodium
Falciparum.” Molecular Microbiology 55 (1): 184–96. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2958.2004.04393.x.
Drewry, David H., Timothy M. Willson, and William J. Zuercher. 2014. “Seeding Collaborations
to Advance Kinase Science with the GSK Published Kinase Inhibitor Set (PKIS).” Current
Topics in Medicinal Chemistry 14 (3): 340–42. doi:10.2174/1568026613666131127160819.
Droucheau, Eliane, Aline Primot, Virginie Thomas, Denise Mattei, Marie Knockaert, Chris
Richardson, Pina Sallicandro, et al. 2004. “Plasmodium Falciparum Glycogen Synthase
Kinase-3: Molecular Model, Expression, Intracellular Localisation and Selective
Inhibitors.” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - Proteins and Proteomics 1697 (1-2): 181–96.
doi:10.1016/j.bbapap.2003.11.023.
Dvorin, Jeffrey D, Derek C Martyn, Saurabh D Patel, Joshua S Grimley, R Collins, Christine S
90
Hopp, a Taylor Bright, et al. 2011. “A Plant-Like Kinase in Plasmodium Falciparum
Regulates Parasite Egress From Erythrocytes.” Science 328 (5980): 910–12.
doi:10.1126/science.1188191.A.
Eaton, Michael S., Louis M. Weiss, and Kami Kim. 2006. “Cyclic Nucleotide Kinases and
Tachyzoite-Bradyzoite Transition in Toxoplasma Gondii.” International Journal for
Parasitology 36 (1): 107–14. doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2005.08.014.
Edwards, A M, R Isserlin, G D Bader, S V Frye, T M Willson, and F H Yu. 2010. “Too Many
Roads Not Taken.” Nature 470 (7333): 163–65.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation
&list_uids=21307913.
Elkins, Jonathan M, Vita Fedele, Marta Szklarz, Kamal R Abdul Azeez, Eidarus Salah, Jowita
Mikolajczyk, Sergei Romanov, et al. 2015. “Comprehensive Characterization of the
Published Kinase Inhibitor Set.” Nature Biotechnology 34 (1). doi:10.1038/nbt.3374.
Emsley, P., B. Lohkamp, W. G. Scott, and K. Cowtan. 2010. “Features and Development of
Coot.” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 66 (4). International
Union of Crystallography: 486–501. doi:10.1107/S0907444910007493.
Emsley, Paul, and Kevin Cowtan. 2004. “Coot: Model-Building Tools for Molecular Graphics.”
Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 60 (12 I). International
Union of Crystallography: 2126–32. doi:10.1107/S0907444904019158.
Endicott, Jane a, Martin E M Noble, and Louise N Johnson. 2012. “The Structural Basis for
Control of Eukaryotic Protein Kinases.” Annual Review of Biochemistry 81 (January): 587–
613. doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-052410-090317.
Evans, Philip R., and Garib N. Murshudov. 2013. “How Good Are My Data and What Is the
Resolution?” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 69 (7).
International Union of Crystallography: 1204–14. doi:10.1107/S0907444913000061.
Fayer, R, and R G Leek. 1984. “The Effects of Reducing Conditions, Medium, pH, Temperature,
and Time on in Vitro Excystation of Cryptosporidium.” The Journal of Protozoology 31 (4):
91
567–69. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6512726.
Frye, Stephen V. 2010. “The Art of the Chemical Probe.” Nature Chemical Biology 6 (3). Nature
Publishing Group: 159–61. doi:10.1038/nchembio.296.
Gellibert, Françoise, James Woolven, Marie-Hélène Fouchet, Neil Mathews, Helen Goodland,
Victoria Lovegrove, Alain Laroze, et al. 2004. “Identification of 1,5-Naphthyridine
Derivatives as a Novel Series of Potent and Selective TGF-Beta Type I Receptor
Inhibitors.” Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 47 (18): 4494–4506. doi:10.1021/jm0400247.
Gorla, Suresh Kumar, Nina N. McNair, Guangyi Yang, Song Gao, Ming Hu, Venkatakrishna R.
Jala, Bodduluri Haribabu, et al. 2014. “Validation of IMP Dehydrogenase Inhibitors in a
Mouse Model of Cryptosporidiosis.” Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 58 (3):
1603–14. doi:10.1128/AAC.02075-13.
Gorre, M E, M Mohammed, K Ellwood, N Hsu, R Paquette, P N Rao, and C L Sawyers. 2001.
“Clinical Resistance to STI-571 Cancer Therapy Caused by BCR-ABL Gene Mutation or
Amplification.” Science (New York, N.Y.) 293 (5531): 876–80.
doi:10.1126/science.1062538.
Guerrant, D I, S F Moore, A A Lima, P D Patrick, J B Schorling, and R L Guerrant. 1999.
“Association of Early Childhood Diarrhoea and Cryptosporidiosis with Impaired Physical
Fitness and Cognitive Function Four-Seven Years Later in a Poor Urban Community in
Northeast Brazil.” American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 61 (5): 707–13.
Gui, J F, H Tronchère, S D Chandler, and X D Fu. 1994. “Purification and Characterization of a
Kinase Specific for the Serine- and Arginine-Rich Pre-mRNA Splicing Factors.”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91 (23):
10824–28.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=45118&tool=pmcentrez&render
type=abstract.
Guo, Fengguang, Haili Zhang, Jason M. Fritzler, S. Dean Rider, Lixin Xiang, Nina N. Mcnair,
Jan R. Mead, and Guan Zhu. 2014. “Amelioration of Cryptosporidium Parvum Infection in
Vitro and in Vivo by Targeting Parasite Fatty Acyl-Coenzyme a Synthetases.” Journal of
92
Infectious Diseases 209 (8): 1279–87. doi:10.1093/infdis/jit645.
Hanks, Steven K, and Tony Hunter. 1995. “The Eukaryotic Protein Kinase Superfamily: Kinase
(Catalytic) Domain Structure and Classification.” The FASEB Journal 9: 576–96.
Hewitt, R G, C T Yiannoutsos, E S Higgs, J T Carey, P J Geiseler, R Soave, R Rosenberg, et al.
2000. “Paromomycin: No More Effective than Placebo for Treatment of Cryptosporidiosis
in Patients with Advanced Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection. AIDS Clinical Trial
Group.” Clinical Infectious Diseases : An Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases
Society of America 31 (4): 1084–92. doi:10.1086/318155.
Hijjawi, N. S., B. P. Meloni, U. M. Ryan, M. E. Olson, and R. C A Thompson. 2002. “Successful
in Vitro Cultivation of Cryptosporidium Andersoni: Evidence for the Existence of Novel
Extracellular Stages in the Life Cycle and Implications for the Classification of
Cryptosporidium.” International Journal for Parasitology 32 (14): 1719–26.
doi:10.1016/S0020-7519(02)00199-6.
Huang, Danzhi, Ting Zhou, Karine Lafleur, Cristina Nevado, and Amedeo Caflisch. 2009.
“Kinase Selectivity Potential for Inhibitors Targeting the ATP Binding Site : A Network
Analysis.” Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 1–7.
Hui, Raymond, Majida El Bakkouri, and L. David Sibley. 2015. “Designing Selective Inhibitors
for Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinases in Apicomplexans.” Trends in Pharmacological
Sciences 36 (7). Elsevier Ltd: 452–60. doi:10.1016/j.tips.2015.04.011.
Hunter, Paul R, and Gordon Nichols. 2002. “Epidemiology and Clinical Features of
Cryptosporidium Infection in Immunocompromised Patients Epidemiology and Clinical
Features of Cryptosporidium Infection in Immunocompromised Patients.” Clinical
Microbiology Reviews, 15 (1): 145–54. doi:10.1128/CMR.15.1.145.
Huse, Morgan, and John Kuriyan. 2002. “The Conformational Plasticity of Protein Kinases.”
Cell 109 (3): 275–82. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12015977.
Ishino, Tomoko, Yuki Orito, Yasuo Chinzei, and Masao Yuda. 2006. “A Calcium-Dependent
Protein Kinase Regulates Plasmodium Ookinete Access to the Midgut Epithelial Cell.”
93
Molecular Microbiology 59 (4): 1175–84. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2005.05014.x.
Johnson, L N, M E Noble, and D J Owen. 1996. “Active and Inactive Protein Kinases: Structural
Basis for Regulation.” Cell 85 (2): 149–58. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8612268.
Johnson, Steven M., Ryan C. Murphy, Jennifer a. Geiger, Amy E. Derocher, Zhongsheng Zhang,
Kayode K. Ojo, Eric T. Larson, et al. 2012. “Development of Toxoplasma Gondii Calcium-
Dependent Protein Kinase 1 (Tg CDPK1) Inhibitors with Potent Anti- Toxoplasma
Activity.” Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 55 (5): 2416–26. doi:10.1021/jm201713h.
Kabsch, Wolfgang. 2010. “Xds.” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography
66 (2): 125–32. doi:10.1107/S0907444909047337.
Karanis, P., and H. M. Aldeyarbi. 2011. “Evolution of Cryptosporidium in Vitro Culture.”
International Journal for Parasitology 41 (12). Australian Society for Parasitology Inc.:
1231–42. doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2011.08.001.
Kato, Kentaro, Atsushi Sudo, Kyousuke Kobayashi, Yukinobu Tohya, and Hiroomi Akashi.
2008. “Characterization of Plasmodium Falciparum Protein Kinase 2.” Molecular and
Biochemical Parasitology 162 (1): 87–95. doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2008.07.007.
Kato, Kentaro, Tatsuki Sugi, and Tatsuya Iwanaga. 2012. “Roles of Apicomplexan Protein
Kinases at Each Life Cycle Stage.” Parasitology International 61 (2). Elsevier Ireland Ltd:
224–34. doi:10.1016/j.parint.2011.12.002.
Kats, Lev M., Kate M. Fernandez, Fiona K. Glenister, Susann Herrmann, Donna W.
Buckingham, Ghizal Siddiqui, Laveena Sharma, et al. 2014. “An Exported Kinase
(FIKK4.2) That Mediates Virulence-Associated Changes in Plasmodium Falciparum-
Infected Red Blood Cells.” International Journal for Parasitology 44 (5). Australian
Society for Parasitology Inc.: 319–28. doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2014.01.003.
Khan, Farzana, Jianzhong Tang, Chang le Qin, and Kami Kim. 2002. “Cyclin-Dependent Kinase
TPK2 Is a Critical Cell Cycle Regulator in Toxoplasma Gondii.” Molecular Microbiology
45 (2): 321–32. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.03026.x.
Kiianitsa, Konstantin, Jachen a Solinger, and Wolf-Dietrich Heyer. 2003. “NADH-Coupled
94
Microplate Photometric Assay for Kinetic Studies of ATP-Hydrolyzing Enzymes with Low
and High Specific Activities.” Analytical Biochemistry 321 (2): 266–71.
doi:10.1016/S0003-2697(03)00461-5.
Knapp, Stefan, Paulo Arruda, Julian Blagg, Stephen Burley, David H Drewry, Aled Edwards,
Doriano Fabbro, et al. 2013. “A Public-Private Partnership to Unlock the Untargeted
Kinome.” Nature Chemical Biology 9 (1). Nature Publishing Group: 3–6.
doi:10.1038/nchembio.1113.
Koh, Wan, Peta L Clode, Paul Monis, and R C Andrew Thompson. 2013. “Multiplication of the
Waterborne Pathogen Cryptosporidium Parvum in an Aquatic Biofilm System.” Parasites
& Vectors 6: 270. doi:10.1186/1756-3305-6-270.
Kotloff, Karen L., James P. Nataro, William C. Blackwelder, Dilruba Nasrin, Tamer H. Farag,
Sandra Panchalingam, Yukun Wu, et al. 2013. “Burden and Aetiology of Diarrhoeal
Disease in Infants and Young Children in Developing Countries (the Global Enteric
Multicenter Study, GEMS): A Prospective, Case-Control Study.” The Lancet 382 (9888):
209–22. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60844-2.
Kuhlenschmidt, Theresa B., Florentine U Rutaganira, Shaojun Long, Keliang Tang, Kevan M
Shokat, Mark S Kuhlenschmidt, and L David Sibley. 2016. “Inhibition of Calcium-
Dependent Protein Kinase 1 (CDPK1) In Vitro by Pyrazolopyrimidine Derivatives Does
Not Correlate with Sensitivity of Cryptosporidium Parvum Growth in Cell Culture.”
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 60 (1): 570–79. doi:10.1128/AAC.01915-15.
Kumar, Amit, Ankush Vaid, Chiang Syin, and Pushkar Sharma. 2004. “PfPKB, a Novel Protein
Kinase B-like Enzyme from Plasmodium Falciparum. I. Identification, Characterization,
and Possible Role in Parasite Development.” Journal of Biological Chemistry 279 (23):
24255–64. doi:10.1074/jbc.M312855200.
Kurokawa, Hitomi, Kentaro Kato, Tatsuya Iwanaga, Tatsuki Sugi, Atsushi Sudo, Kyousuke
Kobayashi, Haiyan Gong, et al. 2011. “Identification of Toxoplasma Gondii cAMP
Dependent Protein Kinase and Its Role in the Tachyzoite Growth.” PLoS ONE 6 (7).
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022492.
95
Larson, Eric T., Kayode K. Ojo, Ryan C. Murphy, Steven M. Johnson, Zhongsheng Zhang,
Jessica E. Kim, David J. Leibly, et al. 2012. “Multiple Determinants for Selective Inhibition
of Apicomplexan Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase CDPK1.” Journal of Medicinal
Chemistry 55 (6): 2803–10. doi:10.1021/jm201725v.
Leander, Brian S., Richard E. Clopton, and Patrick J. Keeling. 2003. “Phylogeny of Grenarines
(Apicomplexa) as Inferred from a Small-Subunit rDNA and ??-Tubulin.” International
Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 53 (1): 345–54.
doi:10.1099/ijs.0.02284-0.
Liu, Y, A Bishop, L Witucki, B Kraybill, E Shimizu, J Tsien, J Ubersax, J Blethrow, D O
Morgan, and K M Shokat. 1999. “Structural Basis for Selective Inhibition of Src Family
Kinases by PP1.” Chem Biol 6 (9): 671–78. doi:10.1016/S1074-5521(99)80118-5.
Lourido, Sebastian, Joel Shuman, Chao Zhang, Kevan M Shokat, Raymond Hui, and L David
Sibley. 2010. “Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase 1 Is an Essential Regulator of Exocytosis
in Toxoplasma.” Nature 465 (7296). Nature Publishing Group: 359–62.
doi:10.1038/nature09022.
Maier, Alexander G., Brian M. Cooke, Alan F. Cowman, and Leann Tilley. 2009. “Malaria
Parasite Proteins That Remodel the Host Erythrocyte.” Nature Reviews Microbiology 7 (5):
341–54. doi:10.1038/nrmicro2110.
Manabe, Y C, D P Clark, R D Moore, J a Lumadue, H R Dahlman, P C Belitsos, R E Chaisson,
and C L Sears. 1998. “Cryptosporidiosis in Patients with AIDS: Correlates of Disease and
Survival.” Clinical Infectious Diseases : An Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases
Society of America 27 (3): 536–42. doi:10.1086/514701.
Manning, G, D B Whyte, R Martinez, T Hunter, and S Sudarsanam. 2002. “The Protein Kinase
Complement of the Human Genome.” Science (New York, N.Y.) 298 (5600): 1912–34.
doi:10.1126/science.1075762.
Marti, Matthias, Jake Baum, Melanie Rug, Leann Tilley, and Alan F. Cowman. 2005. “Signal-
Mediated Export of Proteins from the Malaria Parasite to the Host Erythrocyte.” Journal of
Cell Biology 171 (4): 587–92. doi:10.1083/jcb.200508051.
96
Maubon, Danièle, Alexandre Bougdour, Yung Sing Wong, Marie Pierre Brenier-Pinchart,
Aurélie Curt, Mohamed Ali Hakimi, and Hervé Pelloux. 2010. “Activity of the Histone
Deacetylase Inhibitor FR235222 on Toxoplasma Gondii: Inhibition of Stage Conversion of
the Parasite Cyst Form and Study of New Derivative Compounds.” Antimicrobial Agents
and Chemotherapy 54 (11): 4843–50. doi:10.1128/AAC.00462-10.
McCoy, Airlie J. 2006. “Solving Structures of Protein Complexes by Molecular Replacement
with Phaser.” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 63 (1).
International Union of Crystallography: 32–41. doi:10.1107/S0907444906045975.
McCoy, Airlie J., Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve, Paul D. Adams, Martyn D. Winn, Laurent C.
Storoni, and Randy J. Read. 2007. “Phaser Crystallographic Software.” Journal of Applied
Crystallography 40 (4). International Union of Crystallography: 658–74.
doi:10.1107/S0021889807021206.
McRobert, Louisa, Cathy J. Taylor, Wensheng Deng, Quinton L. Fivelman, Ross M. Cummings,
Spencer D. Polley, Oliver Billker, and David A. Baker. 2008. “Gametogenesis in Malaria
Parasites Is Mediated by the cGMP-Dependent Protein Kinase.” PLoS Biology 6 (6): 1243–
52. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060139.
Mead, Jan R. 2014. “Prospects for Immunotherapy and Vaccines against Cryptosporidium.”
Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics 10 (6): 1505–13. doi:10.4161/hv.28485.
Merckx, Anaïs, Marie Paule Nivez, Guillaume Bouyer, Pietro Alano, Gordon Langsley, Kirk
Deitsch, Serge Thomas, Christian Doerig, and Stéphane Egée. 2008. “Plasmodium
Falciparum Regulatory Subunit of cAMP-Dependent PKA and Anion Channel
Conductance.” PLoS Pathogens 4 (2). doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0040019.
Mitchell S. Abrahamsen, Thomas J. Templeton, Shinichiro Enomoto, Juan E. Abrahante, Guan
Zhu and Cheryl A. Lancto. 2004. “Complete Genome Sequence of the Apicomplexan,
Cryptosporidium Parvum.” Science 304: 441–45.
Miyamoto, Yukiko, and Lars Eckmann. 2015. “Drug Development against the Major Diarrhea-
Causing Parasites of the Small Intestine, Cryptosporidium and Giardia.” Frontiers in
Microbiology 6 (NOV): 1–17. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2015.01208.
97
Murphy, James M, Qingwei Zhang, Samuel N Young, Michael L Reese, Fiona P Bailey, Patrick
a Eyers, Daniela Ungureanu, et al. 2014. “A Robust Methodology to Subclassify
Pseudokinases Based on Their Nucleotide-Binding Properties.” The Biochemical Journal
457 (2): 323–34. doi:10.1042/BJ20131174.
Ndao, Momar, Milli Nath-Chowdhury, Mohammed Sajid, Victoria Marcus, Susan T.
Mashiyama, Judy Sakanari, Eric Chow, et al. 2013. “A Cysteine Protease Inhibitor Rescues
Mice from a Lethal Cryptosporidium Parvum Infection.” Antimicrobial Agents and
Chemotherapy 57 (12): 6063–73. doi:10.1128/AAC.00734-13.
Nolen, Brad, Susan Taylor, and Gourisankar Ghosh. 2004. “Regulation of Protein Kinases;
Controlling Activity through Activation Segment Conformation.” Molecular Cell 15 (5):
661–75. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2004.08.024.
Nunes, Marta C, J P Dean Goldring, Christian Doerig, and Artur Scherf. 2007. “A Novel Protein
Kinase Family in Plasmodium Falciparum Is Differentially Transcribed and Secreted to
Various Cellular Compartments of the Host Cell.” Molecular Microbiology 63 (2): 391–
403. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2958.2006.05521.x.
Nunes, Marta C, Mami Okada, Christine Scheidig-Benatar, Brian M Cooke, and Artur Scherf.
2010. “Plasmodium Falciparum FIKK Kinase Members Target Distinct Components of the
Erythrocyte Membrane.” PloS One 5 (7): e11747. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011747.
Ochoa, Theresa J., Eduardo Salazar-Lindo, and Thomas G. Cleary. 2004. “Management of
Children with Infection-Associated Persistent Diarrhea.” Seminars in Pediatric Infectious
Diseases 15 (4): 229–36. doi:10.1053/j.spid.2004.07.003.
Ojo, Kayode K., Richard T. Eastman, Ramasubbarao Vidadala, Zhongsheng Zhang, Kasey L.
Rivas, Ryan Choi, Justin D. Lutz, et al. 2014. “A Specific Inhibitor of pfcdpk4 Blocks
Malaria Transmission: Chemical-Genetic Validation.” Journal of Infectious Diseases 209
(2): 275–84. doi:10.1093/infdis/jit522.
Okhuysen, Pablo C., and Cynthia L. Chappell. 2002. “Cryptosporidium Virulence Determinants
- Are We There Yet?” International Journal for Parasitology 32 (5): 517–25.
doi:10.1016/S0020-7519(01)00356-3.
98
Osman, Khan, Hua Jane Lou, Wei Qiu, Verena Brand, Aled M Edwards, Benjamin E Turk, and
Raymond Hui. 2015. “Biochemical Characterization of FIKK8-a Unique Protein Kinase
from the Malaria Parasite Plasmodium Falciparum and Other Apicomplexans.” Molecular
and Biochemical Parasitology 201 (2). Elsevier B.V.: 85–89.
doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2015.06.002.
Otto, Thomas D, Julian C Rayner, Ulrike Böhme, Arnab Pain, Natasha Spottiswoode, Mandy
Sanders, Michael Quail, et al. 2014. “Genome Sequencing of Chimpanzee Malaria Parasites
Reveals Possible Pathways of Adaptation to Human Hosts.” Nature Communications 5:
4754. doi:10.1038/ncomms5754.
Peixoto, Lucia, Feng Chen, Omar S Harb, Paul H Davis, Daniel P Beiting, Catie Small
Brownback, Dinkorma Ouloguem, and David S Roos. 2010. “Integrative Genomic
Approaches Highlight a Family of Parasite-Specific Kinases That Regulate Host
Responses.” Cell Host & Microbe 8 (2). Elsevier Ltd: 208–18.
doi:10.1016/j.chom.2010.07.004.
Perez-Cordon, Gregorio, Weijia Nie, Diane Schmidt, Saul Tzipori, and Hanping Feng. 2011.
“Involvement of Host Calpain in the Invasion of Cryptosporidium Parvum.” Microbes and
Infection 13 (1). Elsevier Masson SAS: 103–7. doi:10.1016/j.micinf.2010.10.007.
Perkins, Margaret E., Teresa W. Wu, and Sylvie M. Le Blancq. 1998. “Cyclosporin Analogs
Inhibit in Vitro Growth of Cryptosporidium Parvum.” Antimicrobial Agents and
Chemotherapy 42 (4): 843–48.
Petersen, C., J. Gut, P. S. Doyle, J. H. Crabb, R. G. Nelson, and J. H. Leech. 1992.
“Characterization of a >900,000-M(r) Cryptosporidium Parvum Sporozoite Glycoprotein
Recognized by Protective Hyperimmune Bovine Colostral Immunoglobulin.” Infection and
Immunity 60 (12): 5132–38.
Petry, Franz. 2004. “Structural Analysis of Cryptosporidium Parvum.” Microscopy and
Microanalysis, 586–601. doi:10.1017/S1431927604040929.
Pinna, L a, and M Ruzzene. 1996. “How Do Protein Kinases Recognize Their Substrates?”
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1314 (3): 191–225.
99
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8982275.
Ramdani, Ghania, Bernina Naissant, Eloise Thompson, Florence Breil, Audrey Lorthiois, Florian
Dupuy, Ross Cummings, et al. 2015. “cAMP-Signalling Regulates Gametocyte-Infected
Erythrocyte Deformability Required for Malaria Parasite Transmission.” PLoS Pathogens
11 (5): e1004815. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004815.
Rangarajan, Radha, Amy K Bei, Deepa Jethwaney, Priscilla Maldonado, Dominique Dorin, Ali
A Sultan, and Christian Doerig. 2005. “A Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Regulates
Male Gametogenesis and Transmission of the Malaria Parasite Plasmodium Berghei.”
EMBO Reports 6 (5): 464–69. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400404.
Robertson, L J, A T Campbell, and H V Smith. 1993. “In Vitro Excystation of Cryptosporidium
Parvum.” Parasitology 106 ( Pt 1 (April 1992): 13–19. doi:10.1017/S003118200007476X.
Ryan, U N A, Ronald Fayer, and Lihua Xiao. 2014. “Cryptosporidium Species in Humans and
Animals: Current Understanding and Research Needs.” Parasitology 141 (13): 1667–85.
doi:10.1017/S0031182014001085.
Ryan, Una, and Nawal Hijjawi. 2015. “New Developments in Cryptosporidium Research.”
International Journal for Parasitology 45 (6). Australian Society for Parasitology Inc.:
367–73. doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2015.01.009.
Savitsky, P, J Bray, C D Cooper, B D Marsden, P Mahajan, N A Burgess-Brown, and O Gileadi.
2010. “High-Throughput Production of Human Proteins for Crystallization: The SGC
Experience.” J Struct Biol 172 (1): 3–13.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation
&list_uids=20541610.
Schneider, Achim G, and Odile Mercereau-Puijalon. 2005. “A New Apicomplexa-Specific
Protein Kinase Family: Multiple Members in Plasmodium Falciparum, All with an Export
Signature.” BMC Genomics 6 (January): 30. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-6-30.
Senisterra, Guillermo a, Eugene Markin, Ken Yamazaki, Raymond Hui, Masoud Vedadi, and
Donald E Awrey. 2006. “Screening for Ligands Using a Generic and High-Throughput
100
Light-Scattering-Based Assay.” Journal of Biomolecular Screening 11 (8): 940–48.
doi:10.1177/1087057106294699.
Shah, K, Y Liu, C Deirmengian, and K M Shokat. 1997. “Engineering Unnatural Nucleotide
Specificity for Rous Sarcoma Virus Tyrosine Kinase to Uniquely Label Its Direct
Substrates.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America 94 (8): 3565–70. doi:10.1073/pnas.94.8.3565.
Sicard, Audrey, Jean Philippe Semblat, Caroline Doerig, Romain Hamelin, Marc Moniatte,
Dominique Dorin-Semblat, Julie A. Spicer, et al. 2011. “Activation of a PAK-MEK
Signalling Pathway in Malaria Parasite-Infected Erythrocytes.” Cellular Microbiology 13
(6): 836–45. doi:10.1111/j.1462-5822.2011.01582.x.
Skariah, S., O. Walwyn, K. Engelberg, M.-J. Gubbels, C. Gaylets, N. Kim, B. Lynch, A. Sultan,
and D.G. Mordue. 2016. “The FIKK Kinase of Toxoplasma Gondii Is Not Essential for the
Parasite’s Lytic Cycle.” International Journal for Parasitology. Australian Society for
Parasitology Inc., 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2016.01.001.
Smith, Huw V., and Joan B. Rose. 1998. “Waterborne Cryptosporidiosis: Current Status.”
Parasitology Today 14 (1): 14–22. doi:10.1016/S0169-4758(97)01150-2.
Songyang, Z, S Blechner, N Hoagland, M F Hoekstra, H Piwnica-Worms, and L C Cantley.
1994. “Use of an Oriented Peptide Library to Determine the Optimal Substrates of Protein
Kinases.” Current Biology : CB 4 (11): 973–82.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7874496.
Striepen, Boris. 2013. “Time to Tackle Cryptosporidioisis.” Nature 503: 189–91.
Striepen, Boris, Andrea J P Pruijssers, Jinling Huang, Catherine Li, Marc-Jan Gubbels, Nwakaso
N Umejiego, Lizbeth Hedstrom, and Jessica C Kissinger. 2004. “Gene Transfer in the
Evolution of Parasite Nucleotide Biosynthesis.” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America 101 (9): 3154–59. doi:10.1073/pnas.0304686101.
Sullivan, William J, Jana Narasimhan, Micah M Bhatti, and Ronald C Wek. 2004. “Parasite-
Specific eIF2 (Eukaryotic Initiation Factor-2) Kinase Required for Stress-Induced
101
Translation Control.” The Biochemical Journal 380 (Pt 2): 523–31.
doi:10.1042/BJ20040262.
Sundararaman, Sesh A., Lindsey J. Plenderleith, Weimin Liu, Dorothy E. Loy, Gerald H. Learn,
Yingying Li, Katharina S. Shaw, et al. 2016. “Genomes of Cryptic Chimpanzee
Plasmodium Species Reveal Key Evolutionary Events Leading to Human Malaria.” Nature
Communications 7. Nature Publishing Group: 11078. doi:10.1038/ncomms11078.
Syin, Chiang, Daniel Parzy, Francois Traincard, Irène Boccaccio, Manju B. Joshi, David T. Lin,
Xiao Ming Yang, Karine Assemat, Christian Doerig, and Gordon Langsley. 2001. “The
H89 cAMP-Dependent Protein Kinase Inhibitor Blocks Plasmodium Falciparum
Development in Infected Erythrocytes.” European Journal of Biochemistry 268 (18): 4842–
49. doi:10.1046/j.1432-1327.2001.02403.x.
Talevich, Eric, and Natarajan Kannan. 2013. “Structural and Evolutionary Adaptation of Rhoptry
Kinases and Pseudokinases, a Family of Coccidian Virulence Factors.” BMC Evolutionary
Biology 13 (January): 117. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-13-117.
Taylor, Susan S, Andrey Shaw, Jiancheng Hu, Hiruy S Meharena, and Alexandr Kornev. 2013.
“Pseudokinases from a Structural Perspective.” Biochemical Society Transactions 41 (4):
981–86. doi:10.1042/BST20130120.
Taylor, Susan S., and a. P. Kornev. 2011. “Protein Kinases: Evolution of Dynamic Regulatory
Proteins.” Trends in Biochemical Sciences 36 (2): 65–77.
doi:10.1016/j.tibs.2010.09.006.Protein.
Templeton, Thomas J., Shinichiro Enomoto, Wei June Chen, Chin Gi Huang, Cheryl A. Lancto,
Mitchell S. Abrahamsen, and Guan Zhu. 2010. “A Genome-Sequence Survey for
Ascogregarina Taiwanensis Supports Evolutionary Affiliation but Metabolic Diversity
between a Gregarine and Cryptosporidium.” Molecular Biology and Evolution 27 (2): 235–
48. doi:10.1093/molbev/msp226.
Tessmer, G W, J R Skuster, L B Tabatabai, and D J Graves. 1977. “Studies on the Specificity
Peptide Substrates * of Phosphorylase Kinase Using.” Journal of Biological Chemistry 252
(16): 5666–71.
102
Tetley, Laurence, Samantha M A Brown, Vincent McDonald, and Graham H. Coombs. 1998.
“Ultrastructural Analysis of the Sporozoite of Cryptosporidium Parvum.” Microbiology 144
(12): 3249–55. doi:10.1099/00221287-144-12-3249.
Tomley, Fiona M., and Dominique S. Soldati. 2001. “Mix and Match Modules: Structure and
Function of Microneme Proteins in Apicomplexan Parasites.” Trends in Parasitology 17
(2): 81–88. doi:10.1016/S1471-4922(00)01761-X.
Umejiego, Nwakaso N., Catherine Li, Thomas Riera, Lizbeth Hedstrom, and Boris Striepen.
2004. “Cryptosporidium Parvum IMP Dehydrogenase.” Journal of Biological Chemistry
279 (39): 40320–27. doi:10.1074/jbc.M407121200.
Vedadi, Masoud, Cheryl H Arrowsmith, Abdellah Allali-Hassani, Guillermo Senisterra, and
Gregory a Wasney. 2010. “Biophysical Characterization of Recombinant Proteins: A Key to
Higher Structural Genomics Success.” Journal of Structural Biology 172 (1). Elsevier Inc.:
107–19. doi:10.1016/j.jsb.2010.05.005.
Vedadi, Masoud, Jocelyne Lew, Jennifer Artz, Mehrnaz Amani, Yong Zhao, Aiping Dong,
Gregory a Wasney, et al. 2007. “Genome-Scale Protein Expression and Structural Biology
of Plasmodium Falciparum and Related Apicomplexan Organisms.” Molecular and
Biochemical Parasitology 151 (1): 100–110. doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2006.10.011.
Vinayak S, Pawlowic MC, Sateriale A, Brooks CF, Studstill CJ, Bar-Peled Y, Cipriano MJ,
Striepen B. 2015. “Genetic Modification of the Diarrheal Pathogen Cryptosporidium
Parvum.” Nature 523 (7561): 477–80.
Wei, Shuang, Florentina Marches, Ben Daniel, Sabrina Sonda, Kim Heidenreich, and Tyler
Curiel. 2002. “Pyridinylimidazole p38 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Inhibitors Block
Intracellular Toxoplasma Gondii Replication.” International Journal for Parasitology 32
(8): 969–77. doi:10.1016/S0020-7519(02)00061-9.
Wernimont, Amy K, Jennifer D Artz, Patrick Finerty, Yu-Hui Lin, Mehrnaz Amani, Abdellah
Allali-Hassani, Guillermo Senisterra, et al. 2010. “Structures of Apicomplexan Calcium-
Dependent Protein Kinases Reveal Mechanism of Activation by Calcium.” Nature
Structural & Molecular Biology 17 (5): 596–601. doi:10.1038/nsmb.1795.
103
Wetzel, Dawn M., Joann Schmidt, Mark S. Kuhlenschmidt, J. P. Dubey, and L. David Sibley.
2005. “Gliding Motility Leads to Active Cellular Invasion by Cryptosporidium Parvum
Sporozoites.” Infection and Immunity 73 (9): 5379–87. doi:10.1128/IAI.73.9.5379-
5387.2005.
Wiersma, Helen I., Stefan E. Galuska, Fiona M. Tomley, L. David Sibley, Paul A. Liberator, and
Robert G K Donald. 2004. “A Role for Coccidian cGMP-Dependent Protein Kinase in
Motility and Invasion.” International Journal for Parasitology 34 (3): 369–80.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2003.11.019.
Winn, Martyn D., Charles C. Ballard, Kevin D. Cowtan, Eleanor J. Dodson, Paul Emsley, Phil R.
Evans, Ronan M. Keegan, et al. 2011. “Overview of the CCP4 Suite and Current
Developments.” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 67 (4).
International Union of Crystallography: 235–42. doi:10.1107/S0907444910045749.
Xiao, Lihua. 2010. “Molecular Epidemiology of Cryptosporidiosis: An Update.” Experimental
Parasitology 124 (1). Elsevier Inc.: 80–89. doi:10.1016/j.exppara.2009.03.018.
Xu, B. Bing-e Xu, Jessie M. English, Julie L. Wilsbacher, Steve Stippec, Elizabeth J. Goldsmith,
And, and Melanie H. Cobbi. 2000. “WNK1, a Novel Mammalian Serine/Threonine Protein
Kinase Lacking the Catalytic Lysine in Subdomain II.” Journal of Biological Chemistry 275
(22): 16795–801. doi:10.1074/jbc.275.22.16795.
Xu, Ping. 2004. “The Genome of Cryptosporidium Hominis.” Nature 431 (October): 557–61.
doi:10.1038/nature02990.
Yang, Huanwang, Vladimir Guranovic, Shuchismita Dutta, Zukang Feng, Helen M. Berman, and
John D. Westbrook. 2004. “Automated and Accurate Deposition of Structures Solved by X-
Ray Diffraction to the Protein Data Bank.” Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological
Crystallography 60 (10). International Union of Crystallography: 1833–39.
doi:10.1107/S0907444904019419.
Yeh, Yuh Ying, Khyati H. Shah, Chi Chi Chou, He Hsuan Hsiao, Kristie M. Wrasman, Joseph S.
Stephan, Demetra Stamatakos, Kay Hooi Khoo, and Paul K. Herman. 2011. “The
Identification and Analysis of Phosphorylation Sites on the Atg1 Protein Kinase.”
104
Autophagy 7 (7): 716–26. doi:10.4161/auto.7.7.15155.
Zhang, J, P L Yang, and N S Gray. 2008. “Targeting Cancer with Small Molecule Kinase
Inhibitors.” Nature Reviews Cancer 9 (1): 28–39. doi:10.1172/JCI76094.genomically.
Zhu, Guan, Janet S Keithly, and Herve Philippe. 2000. “What Is the Phylogenetic Position of
Cryptosporidium?” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 50:
1673–81.