David G. Nettesheim

Bio: David G. Nettesheim is an academic researcher from Abbott Laboratories. The author has contributed to research in topics: Protein structure & Ascomycin. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 35 publications receiving 8814 citations.

An inhibitor of Bcl-2 family proteins induces regression of solid tumours

Abstract: Proteins in the Bcl-2 family are central regulators of programmed cell death, and members that inhibit apoptosis, such as Bcl-X(L) and Bcl-2, are overexpressed in many cancers and contribute to tumour initiation, progression and resistance to therapy. Bcl-X(L) expression correlates with chemo-resistance of tumour cell lines, and reductions in Bcl-2 increase sensitivity to anticancer drugs and enhance in vivo survival. The development of inhibitors of these proteins as potential anti-cancer therapeutics has been previously explored, but obtaining potent small-molecule inhibitors has proved difficult owing to the necessity of targeting a protein-protein interaction. Here, using nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)-based screening, parallel synthesis and structure-based design, we have discovered ABT-737, a small-molecule inhibitor of the anti-apoptotic proteins Bcl-2, Bcl-X(L) and Bcl-w, with an affinity two to three orders of magnitude more potent than previously reported compounds. Mechanistic studies reveal that ABT-737 does not directly initiate the apoptotic process, but enhances the effects of death signals, displaying synergistic cytotoxicity with chemotherapeutics and radiation. ABT-737 exhibits single-agent-mechanism-based killing of cells from lymphoma and small-cell lung carcinoma lines, as well as primary patient-derived cells, and in animal models, ABT-737 improves survival, causes regression of established tumours, and produces cures in a high percentage of the mice.

Structure of Bcl-xL-Bak peptide complex: recognition between regulators of apoptosis.

Abstract: Heterodimerization between members of the Bcl-2 family of proteins is a key event in the regulation of programmed cell death. The molecular basis for heterodimer formation was investigated by determination of the solution structure of a complex between the survival protein Bcl-x L and the death-promoting region of the Bcl-2-related protein Bak. The structure and binding affinities of mutant Bak peptides indicate that the Bak peptide adopts an amphipathic α helix that interacts with Bcl-x L through hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions. Mutations in full-length Bak that disrupt either type of interaction inhibit the ability of Bak to heterodimerize with Bcl-x L .

X-ray and NMR structure of human Bcl-xL, an inhibitor of programmed cell death.

Abstract: THE Bcl-2 family of proteins regulate programmed cell death by an unknown mechanism. Here we describe the crystal and solution structures of a Bcl-2 family member, Bcl-xL (ref. 2). The structures consist of two central, primarily hydrophobic alpha-helices, which are surrounded by amphipathic helices. A 60-residue loop connecting helices alpha1 and alpha2 was found to be flexible and non-essential for anti-apoptotic activity. The three functionally important Bcl-2 homology regions (BH1, BH2 and BH3) are in close spatial proximity and form an elongated hydrophobic cleft that may represent the binding site for other Bcl-2 family members. The arrangement of the alpha-helices in Bcl-xL is reminiscent of the membrane translocation domain of bacterial toxins, in particular diphtheria toxin and the colicins. The structural similarity may provide a clue to the mechanism of action of the Bcl-2 family of proteins.

Solution structure of the antiapoptotic protein bcl-2.

Abstract: The structures of two isoforms of Bcl-2 that differ by two amino acids have been determined by NMR spectroscopy. Because wild-type Bcl-2 behaved poorly in solution, the structures were determined by using Bcl-2/Bcl-xL chimeras in which part of the putative unstructured loop of Bcl-2 was replaced with a shortened loop from Bcl-xL. These chimeric proteins have a low pI compared with the wild-type protein and are soluble. The structures of the two Bcl-2 isoforms consist of 6 α-helices with a hydrophobic groove on the surface similar to that observed for the homologous protein, Bcl-xL. Comparison of the Bcl-2 structures to that of Bcl-xL shows that although the overall fold is the same, there are differences in the structural topology and electrostatic potential of the binding groove. Although the structures of the two isoforms of Bcl-2 are virtually identical, differences were observed in the ability of the proteins to bind to a 25-residue peptide from the proapoptotic Bad protein and a 16-residue peptide from the proapoptotic Bak protein. These results suggest that there are subtle differences in the hydrophobic binding groove in Bcl-2 that may translate into differences in antiapoptotic activity for the two isoforms.

Rationale for Bcl-XL/Bad peptide complex formation from structure, mutagenesis, and biophysical studies

Abstract: The three-dimensional structure of the anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-xL complexed to a 25-residue peptide from the death promoting region of Bad was determined using NMR spectroscopy. Although the overall structure is similar to Bcl-xL bound to a 16-residue peptide from the Bak protein (Sattler et al., 1997), the Bad peptide forms additional interactions with Bcl-xL. However, based upon site-directed mutagenesis experiments, these additional contacts do not account for the increased affinity of the Bad 25-mer for Bcl-xL compared to the Bad 16-mer. Rather, the increased helix propensity of the Bad 25-mer is primarily responsible for its greater affinity for Bcl-xL. Based on this observation, a pair of 16-residue peptides were designed and synthesized that were predicted to have a high helix propensity while maintaining the interactions important for complexation with Bcl-xL. Both peptides showed an increase in helix propensity compared to the wild-type and exhibited an enhanced affinity for Bcl-xL.

Mitochondria and apoptosis

Abstract: A variety of key events in apoptosis focus on mitochondria, including the release of caspase activators (such as cytochrome c), changes in electron transport, loss of mitochondrial transmembrane potential, altered cellular oxidation-reduction, and participation of pro- and antiapoptotic Bcl-2 family proteins. The different signals that converge on mitochondria to trigger or inhibit these events and their downstream effects delineate several major pathways in physiological cell death.

The biochemistry of apoptosis

Abstract: Apoptosis - the regulated destruction of a cell - is a complicated process. The decision to die cannot be taken lightly, and the activity of many genes influence a cell's likelihood of activating its self-destruction programme. Once the decision is taken, proper execution of the apoptotic programme requires the coordinated activation and execution of multiple subprogrammes. Here I review the basic components of the death machinery, describe how they interact to regulate apoptosis in a coordinated manner, and discuss the main pathways that are used to activate cell death.

The Bcl-2 Protein Family: Arbiters of Cell Survival

Abstract: Bcl-2 and related cytoplasmic proteins are key regulators of apoptosis, the cell suicide program critical for development, tissue homeostasis, and protection against pathogens. Those most similar to Bcl-2 promote cell survival by inhibiting adapters needed for activation of the proteases (caspases) that dismantle the cell. More distant relatives instead promote apoptosis, apparently through mechanisms that include displacing the adapters from the pro-survival proteins. Thus, for many but not all apoptotic signals, the balance between these competing activities determines cell fate. Bcl-2 family members are essential for maintenance of major organ systems, and mutations affecting them are implicated in cancer.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.