ABSTRACT
Presenilin-mediated endoproteolysis of transmembrane proteins plays a key role in physiological signaling and in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease and some cancers. Numerous inhibitors have been found via library screens, but their structural mechanisms remain unknown. We used several biophysical techniques to investigate the structure of human presenilin complexes and the effects of peptidomimetic γ-secretase inhibitors. The complexes are bilobed. The head contains nicastrin ectodomain. The membrane-embedded base has a central channel and a lateral cleft, which may represent the initial substrate docking site. Inhibitor binding induces widespread structural changes, including rotation of the head and closure of the lateral cleft. These changes block substrate access to the catalytic pocket and inhibit the enzyme. Intriguingly, peptide substrate docking has reciprocal effects on the inhibitor binding site. Similar reciprocal shifts may underlie the mechanisms of other inhibitors and of the "lateral gate" through which substrates access to the catalytic site.
Subject(s)
Benzodiazepinones/chemistry , Enzyme Inhibitors/chemistry , Peptidomimetics/chemistry , Presenilin-1/chemistry , Recombinant Fusion Proteins/chemistry , Allosteric Regulation , Amyloid Precursor Protein Secretases/chemistry , Catalytic Domain , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Ligands , Membrane Glycoproteins/chemistry , Molecular Docking Simulation , Presenilin-1/antagonists & inhibitors , Presenilin-1/genetics , Protein Structure, Tertiary , Proteolysis , Recombinant Fusion Proteins/genetics , Structure-Activity RelationshipABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Signal peptide peptidase (SPP), a member of the presenilin-like intra-membrane cleaving aspartyl protease family, migrates on Blue Native (BN) gels as 100 kDa, 200 kDa and 450 kDa species. SPP has recently been implicated in other non-proteolytic functions such as retro-translocation of MHC Class I molecules and binding of misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). These high molecular weight SPP complexes might contain additional proteins that regulate the proteolytic activity of SPP or support its non-catalytic functions. RESULTS: In this study, an unbiased iTRAQ-labeling mass spectrometry approach was used to identify SPP-interacting proteins. We found that vigilin, a ubiquitous multi-KH domain containing cytoplasmic protein involved in RNA binding and protein translation control, selectively enriched with SPP. Vigilin interacted with SPP and both proteins co-localized in restricted intracellular domains near the ER, biochemically co-fractionated and were part of the same 450 kDa complex on BN gels. However, vigilin does not alter the protease activity of SPP, suggesting that the SPP-vigilin interaction might be involved in the non-proteolytic functions of SPP. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified and validated vigilin as a novel interacting partner of SPP that could play an important role in the non-proteolytic functions of SPP. This data adds further weight to the idea that intramembrane-cleaving aspartyl proteases, such as presenilin and SPPs, could have other functions besides the proteolysis of short membrane stubs.
