Molecular Docking - Study of Potential Cyclophilin-Dependent Mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 Viral Entry
Aneta Maria Molenda*
Department of Molecular Genetics, UK
*Corresponding Author: Aneta Maria Molenda, Department of Molecular Genetics, UK.
Received:
April 27, 2023; Published: May 30, 2023
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this article is to analyse interaction of the SARS-CoV2 fragments
with cyclophilins and to validate the mechanism of the viral entry involving spike glycoprotein or membrane
proteins.
Coronavirus Disease: COVID-19 is a disease caused by RNA virus that got potential to
cause respiratory and intestinal illness in humans as well as animals. There are 7 different type of Coronavirus
diseases (229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1, MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2) reported in humans that are known to cause
illness ranging from common cold to more severe forms [1]. The epicentre of the COVID-19 disease was Wuhan city, Huban province of China where a cluster of unexplained pneumonia cases of unknown aetiology were officially reported on Dec 31 2019 [2]. Though Covid-19 has a lower mortality rate (2.3%) than SARS (9.5%) or MERS (34.4%) it is highly transmissible and has rapidly progressed from epidemic to pandemic scale [3].
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; Covid-19; Docking
References
- “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention”. Coronavirus (2020).
- World Health Organisation. “Pneumonia of unknown cause - China” (2020).
- Petrosillo., et al. “COVID-19, SARS and MERS: are they closely related?” Clinical Microbiology and Infection 26.6 (2020): 729-734.
- Li., et al. “Structure, function, and evolution of coronavirus spike proteins”. Annual Review of Virology 3 (2016): 237-261.
- Almehdi., et al. “SARS-CoV-2 spike protein: pathogenesis, vaccines, and potential therapies”. Infection 49.5 (2021): 855-876.
- Fani M., et al. “Comparison of the COVID-2019 (SARS-CoV-2) pathogenesis with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV infections”. Future Medicine Ltd Future Virology 15.5 (2020): 317-323.
- Huang., et al. “Structural and functional properties of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein: potential antivirus drug development for COVID-19”. Acta Pharmacologica Sinica 41 (2020): 1141-1149.
- Bianchi., et al. “Sars-CoV-2 Envelope and Membrane Proteins: Structural Differences Linked to Virus Characteristics?” Hindawi BioMed Research International (2020): 6.
- Mahtarin., et al. “Structure and dynamics of membrane protein in SARS-CoV-2”. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics (2020): 4725-4738.
- Neuman BW., et al. “A structural analysis of M protein in coronavirus assembly and morphology”. The Journal of Structural Biology 174 (2011): 11-22.
- Radzikowska., et al. “Distribution of ACE2, CD147, CD26, and other SARS‐CoV‐2 associated molecules in tissues and immune cells in health and in asthma, COPD, obesity, hypertension, and COVID‐19 risk factors”. Allergy 75.11 (2020): 2829-2845.
- Gur., et al. “Conformational transition of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein between its closed and open states”. The Journal of Chemical Physics 153.7 (2020): 075101.
- Lan., et al. “Structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain bound to the ACE2 receptor”. Nature 581.7807 (2020): 215-220.
- Kumari., et al. “Cyclophilins Proteins in search of function”. Plant Signaling and Behavior 8.1 (2013): e22734.
- Qu., et al. “The Roles of CD147 and/or Cyclophilin A in Kidney Diseases Review Article”. Hindawi Publishing Corporation Mediators of Inflammation (2014): 10.
- Chen., et al. “Function of HAb18G/CD147 in Invasion of Host Cells by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus”. The Journal of Infectious Diseases 191.5 (2005): 755-760.
- Parkinson., et al. “Dynamic data-driven meta-analysis for prioritisation of host genes implicated in COVID-19”. Scientific Report 10.1 (2020): 22303.
- Allain., et al. “Cyclophilin B Binding to Platelets Supports Calcium-Dependent Adhesion to Collagen”. Blood 94.3 (1999): 976-983.
- Allain., et al. “Interaction with glycosaminoglycans is required for cyclophilin B to trigger integrin-mediated adhesion of peripheral blood T lymphocytes to extracellular matrix”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) of the United States of America 99.5 (2002): 2714-2719.
- Bukrinsky., et al. “Extracellular cyclophilins in health and disease”. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta General Subjects 1850.10 (2015): 2087-2095.
- Hopkins., et al. “The role of immunophilins in viral infection”. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta General Subjects 1850.10 (2015): 2103-2110.
- Dawar., et al. “Cyclophilin A: A Key Factor in Virus Replication and Potential Target for Anti-viral Therapy”. Current Issues in Molecular Biology 21 (2017): 1-20.
- Wilde., et al. “Cyclophilins and cyclophilin inhibitors in nidovirus replication”. Virology 522 (2018): 46-55.
- Jean-Michel Pawlotsky. “COVID-19 Pandemic: Time to Revive the Cyclophilin Inhibitor Alisporivir”. Clinical Infectious Diseases® 71.16 (2020): 2191-2194.
- Ma., et al. “NIM811, a Cyclophilin Inhibitor, Exhibits Potent In Vitro Activity against Hepatitis C Virus Alone or in Combination with Alpha Interferon”. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 50.9 (2006): 2976-2982.
- Pushkarsky., et al. “CD147 facilitates HIV‐1 infection by interacting with virus‐associated cyclophilin A”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) of the United States of America 98 (2001): 6360-6365.
- Braaten., et al. “Cyclophilin A regulates HIV-1 infectivity, as demonstrated by gene targeting in human T cells”. The European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) Journal 20.6 (2001): 1300-1309.
- Watashi., et al. “Cyclophilin B is a functional regulator of hepatitis C virus RNA polymerase”. Molecular Cell 19.1 (2005): 111-122.
- Elfikya., et al. “Novel guanosine derivatives against MERS CoV polymerase: An in silico perspective”. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics (2020): 1-9.
- Pfefferle., et al. “The SARS-Coronavirus-Host Interactome: Identification of Cyclophilins as Target for Pan-Coronavirus Inhibitors”. The Public Library of Science (PLOS) Pathogens 7.10 (2011): e1002331.
- Sauerhering., et al. “Cyclophilin inhibitors restrict Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus via interferon-λ in vitro and in mice”. European Respiratory Journal 56 (2020): 1901826.
- Clausen., et al. “SARS-CoV-2 Infection Depends on Cellular Heparan Sulfate and ACE2”. Cell 183.4 (2020): 1043-1057.e15.
- Hao., et al. “Binding of the SARS-CoVCoV-2 Spike Protein to Glycans”. Science Bulletin (Beijing) 66.12 (2021): 1205-1214.
- Mycroft-West., et al. “The 2019 coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) surface protein (Spike) S1 Receptor Binding Domain undergoes conformational change upon heparin binding”. Pre-print version posted April 29, (2020).
- Helal., et al. “Molecular basis of the potential interaction of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to CD147 in COVID-19 associated-lymphopenia”. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics (2020): 1-11.
- Wang., et al. “The cyclophilins”. Genome Biology 6.7 (2005): 226.
- Sekhon., et al. “Cyclophilin A-mediated mitigation of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2”. Bioengineering and Translational Medicine 8 (2023): e10436.
- Saphire., et al. “Host cyclophilin A mediates HIV-1 attachment to target cells via heparans”. The European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) Journal 18.23 (1991): 6771-6785.
- Pakula., et al. “Syndecan-1/CD147 association is essential for cyclophilin B-induced activation of p44/42 mitogen-activated protein kinases and promotion of cell adhesion and chemotaxis”. Glycobiology 17.5 (2007): 492-503.
- Prakash., et al. “Human Cyclophilin B forms part of a multi-protein complex during erythrocyte invasion by Plasmodium falciparum”. Nature Communications 8 (2017): 1548.
- Walls., et al. “Structure, Function, and Antigenicity of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Glycoprotein”. Cell 180 (2020): 281-292.
- Fehr., et al. “Coronaviruses: an overview of their replication and pathogenesis”. Methods in Molecular Biology 1282 (2015): 1-23.
- Vajda., et al. “New additions to the ClusPro server motivated by CAPRI”. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 85.3 (2017): 435-444.
- Kozakov., et al. “The ClusPro web server for protein-protein docking”. Nature Protocols 12.2 (2017): 255-278.
- Kozakov., et al. “How good is automated protein docking?” Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 81.12 (2013): 2159-2166.
- Kong., et al. “COVID-19 Docking Server: An interactive server for docking small molecules, peptides and antibodies against potential targets of COVID-19”. Bioinformatics (2020): btaa645.
- Kong., et al. “CoDockPP: a multistage approach for global and site-specific protein-protein docking”. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 59.8 (2019): 3556-3564.
- Kong., et al. “Template‐based modeling and ab‐initio docking using CoDock in CAPRI”. Proteins-Structure Function and Bioinformatics 88.8 (2020): 1100-1109.
- Trott., et al. “AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization and multithreading”. The Journal of Computational Chemistry 31 (2010): 455-461.
- Li., et al. “Correcting the impact of docking pose generation error on binding affinity prediction”. BMC Bioinformatics 17 (2016): 308.
- Seizer., et al. “Extracellular cyclophilin A activates platelets via EMMPRIN (CD147) and PI3K/Akt signaling, which promotes platelet adhesion and thrombus formation in vitro and in vivo”. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology 35 (2015): 655-663.
- Cao., et al. “Probing the formation, structure and free energy relationships of M protein dimers of SARS-CoV-2”. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal 20 (2022): 573-582.
- Neuman., et al. “A structural analysis of M protein in coronavirus assembly and morphology”. The Journal of Structural Biology 174.1 (2011): 11-22.
Citation
Copyright