Premium
Peptide Architecture: Adding an α‐Helix to the PYY Lysine Side Chain Provides Nanomolar Binding and Body‐Weight‐Lowering Effects
Author(s) -
Pedersen Søren L.,
Sasikumar Pottayil G.,
Vrang Niels,
Jensen Knud J.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
chemmedchem
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.817
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1860-7187
pISSN - 1860-7179
DOI - 10.1002/cmdc.200900521
Subject(s) - helix (gastropod) , peptide , receptor , alpha helix , amphiphile , chemistry , peptide yy , pentapeptide repeat , stereochemistry , biochemistry , biology , protein structure , neuropeptide y receptor , neuropeptide , ecology , organic chemistry , snail , copolymer , polymer
The gut hormone PYY3‐36 influences food intake and body weight via interaction with hypothalamic presynaptic Y2 receptors (Y2R). Novel Y2R‐selective analogues of PYY3‐36 are therefore potential drug candidates for the treatment of obesity. It has been hypothesized that PYY3‐36 and possibly also the related PP‐fold peptides, NPY and PP, bind to the membrane via their amphipathic α‐helix prior to receptor interaction. The PYY3‐36 amphipathic α‐helix causes the peptide to associate with the membrane, making it essential for Y receptor potency as it potentially guides the C‐terminal pentapeptide into the correct conformation for receptor activation. Based on this hypothesis, the importance of the amphipathic nature of PYY3‐36, as well as the ability of amphipathic α‐helices to interact in solution to form di‐ and tetramers, we redesigned the peptide architecture by addition of an amphipathic α‐helix via the Lys 4 side chain of PYY3‐36. Two different amphipathic sequences were introduced; first, PYY17‐31, the native α‐helix of PYY, and secondly, its retro counterpart, PYY31‐17, which is also predicted to form an α‐helix. Moreover, several different turn motifs between the branching point and the additional α‐helix were tested. Several novel peptides with nanomolar Y2R binding affinities, as well as increased Y receptor selectivity, were identified. CD experiments showed the modifications to be well accepted, and an increase in mean ellipticity (ME) signifying an increased degree of α‐helicity was observed. Receptor binding experiments indicated that the direction of the additional α‐helix is less important, in contrast to the turn motifs, which greatly affect the Y1R binding and thus determine the Y1R activity. Conversely, the structure–activity relationships from in vivo data showed that the peptide containing the retro‐sequence was inactive, even though the binding data demonstrated high affinity and selectivity. This demonstrates that radical redesign of peptide architecture can provide nanomolar binding with improved subtype selectivity and with in vivo efficacy.