By
From the Theodor Kocher Institute, University of Bern, CH-3000 Bern 9, Switzerland
In our first review on chemokines (1), we suggested that
blockade of the IL-8 receptor or inhibition of IL-8 gene
expression could be a new principle for designing antiinflammatory agents. The unexpected growth of the chemokine family and consequent redundancy of the system
eventually made it clear that acting at the level of chemokine gene expression was rather hopeless, but the idea of
influencing inflammation with chemokine receptor antagonists has remained valid and inhibitors were recently put
to the test. A new literature, including several articles in
this issue of The Journal of Experimental Medicine, indicate
that the idea was worth trying.
By scanning mutagenesis (2) and selective deletion or substitution
of NH2-terminal residues (3, 4) it was shown that the Glu-Leu-Arg (ELR) motif preceding the first cysteine is essential for IL-8 activity. The ELR motif is conserved in all
CXC chemokines that act on neutrophils (ELR chemokines) and is recognized by both IL-8 receptors, CXCR1
and CXCR2. It contributes to high-affinity binding and is
the receptor triggering part of the molecule (5). The ELR
motif alone, however, is not sufficient since linear and cyclic ELR-containing oligopeptides do not bind to the IL-8
receptors nor stimulate neutrophils (4). ELR chemokines
have additional, selective binding sites, and it was not possible to confer activity on neutrophils to IP10 or monocyte
chemoattractant protein (MCP)-1 by introducing the ELR
motif at the NH2 terminus (4). The three-dimensional nuclear magnetic resonance structure of IL-8 (6) shows that the conformationally disordered NH2-terminal domain is
anchored by the disulfide bonds to the well-ordered core
of the protein. It is believed that interactions with domains
of the core determine receptor selectivity and facilitate the
access of the ELR motif to the receptor triggering site.
The first chemokine antagonist was obtained by truncation of IL-8. The analogue with an NH2-terminal arginine
followed by the first cysteine, (R)IL-8, is inactive on neutrophils, but still has considerable receptor affinity and efficiently competes for binding with IL-8 and other ELR
chemokines inhibiting their biological activities. Other antagonists were obtained by substitution within the ELR
motif, and one of the most potent is (AAR)IL-8 (7). Antagonists are also generated by truncation of other ELR
chemokines, which have high affinity for CXCR2, but
only low affinity for CXCR1. Although (R)IL-8 blocks
equally well, CXCR1 and CXCR2, the corresponding analogues of GRO NH2 terminally truncated CC chemokines are also potent antagonists. MCP-1 derivatives obtained by deletion
of eight or nine NH2-terminal residues, MCP-1(9-76) and
MCP-1(10-76) block CCR2 and prevent the responses
elicited by MCP-1, MCP-2, and MCP-3, but not by
RANTES, macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1 The recent discovery that
chemokine receptors, together with CD4, act as recognition sites for HIV infection and that some chemokines have
HIV-suppressive activity (14) boosted the search for therapeutic strategies targeting chemokine receptors. A basic question had to be answered, however, before going to
work. Is the inhibition of viral entry dependent on chemokine activity and/or chemokine receptor signaling, or are
the chemokines simply competing for the virus binding
site? It was shown that the entry of M-tropic strains is prevented by RANTES antagonists (13, 15). This was an important observation since the use of natural chemokines to
block infection was considered potentially dangerous because of side effects due to leukocyte activation.
In this issue, Wu et al. (16) show that CCR5 can be
blocked by mAbs. Although chemokines and viral gp120
compete for the same receptor, their binding sites are partly
different. To map the sites, Wu et al. (16) generated a panel
of mAbs and studied their effects on the interaction of
M-tropic HIV-1 strains and chemokines with chimeric receptors consisting of different portions of CCR5 and CCR2b.
An antibody, 2D7, recognizing the second extracellular loop of CCR5 blocks the binding and the biological activity of all three chemokine ligands, RANTES, MIP-1 Chemokines and chemokine
mutants with antagonist properties are far from being ideal
drugs. As proteins, they pose galenical problems and are
unlikely to be orally active. This issue of The Journal of Experimental Medicine brings news from Europe, Japan, and the
United States indicating that HIV-coreceptor interactions can be inhibited with chemokine-unrelated, low-molecular weight compounds. Three compounds are presented
that were previously known for their inhibitory effects on
HIV replication. They block the entry of T-, but not M-tropic
strains by interacting with CXCR4. In cells expressing
only CXCR4 and CD4, inhibition of dual-tropic strains is
also observed.
Schols et al. (17) describe the effect of AMD3100, which
belongs to a class of heterocyclic compounds called bicyclams. AMD3100 inhibits the entry of T-tropic viruses,
competes for the binding of an mAb that is specific for
CXCR4, and blocks SDF-1 dependent Ca2+ mobilization
and chemotaxis in receptor-expressing cells. Together with
the lack of effects on CCR5-, CCR1-, and CCR2b-dependent activities, these data demonstrate that AMD3100 is selective for CXCR4. AMD3100 appears to be effective in
vivo and, as suggested by in vitro data, to be more potent as
inhibitor of HIV entry than of SDF-1-mediated functions.
This dissociation may be important because blockade of
SDF-1 activity could be dangerous, as suggested by the defects observed in mice lacking the SDF-1 gene (18).
Murakami et al. (19) present an 18-residue peptide, T22,
an amusing derivative of polyphemusin II, that specifically
inhibits Env-dependent fusion and infection by T-tropic
strains of cells transfected with CXCR4 and CD4, as well
as PBMC. Since T22 also inhibits Ca2+ mobilization induced by SDF-1, the antiviral activity is likely to depend
on competition for coreceptor binding by the virus. As for
the bicyclam, the in vitro data suggest that significant antiviral activity is obtained at concentrations of T22 that only partially block the responses to SDF-1. More thorough
studies, however, must be performed to clarify this point.
Interestingly, Murakami et al. have compared T22 with an
inactive analogue of similar size and physicochemical properties. This control strengthens the evidence for the selective mode of action of T22.
Doranz et al. (20) describe similar effects of a highly cationic oligopeptide containing nine arginines, ALX40-4C,
that inhibits Env-dependent fusion and entry of T-tropic
HIV strains by interacting with CXCR4. ALX40-4C also
prevents Ca2+ mobilization in response to SDF-1 and the
binding of Hoxie's mAb, 12G5, which is known to recognize the first and second extracellular loop of CXCR4 and
to inhibit virus entry. The interaction between ALX40-4C
and the receptor loops is likely to depend on charge since
the loops contain several anionic residues. Such an interaction cannot occur with CCR5, explaining why infection
by M-tropic viruses is not affected by ALX40-4C. The authors point out that their antiviral compound also inhibits
infection by type 1 herpes simplex suggesting that interactions with other receptor proteins may occur.
It is somewhat surprising that all three low molecular
weight coreceptor inhibitors described in this issue interact
with CXCR4 and not with other coreceptors. Since the
compounds were all known for their antiviral properties, it
is possible that the screening criteria adopted for their selection were biased in favor of inhibition of CXCR4-dependent viruses. On the other hand, inhibitors of CXCR4
may simply be easier to find. The present finding of three
structurally different compounds with similar biological effects indicates that modeling of the interactions with the
receptor could help to design compounds that bind to CCR5, or preferably to more than one coreceptor.
The evidence for effective chemokine
receptor blockade by small compounds, some of which
have a good chance to be bioavailable after oral application,
is a promising starting point. The current developments
should not be restricted to antiviral therapy, since chemokine antagonists can be potentially useful as antiinflammatory, antiallergic, and immunoregulatory agents. A paper
that appeared in the July 7th issue of The Journal of Experimental Medicine demonstrates that a selective antagonist of
CCR2, the MCP receptor, has antinflammatory properties
in vivo. Gong et al. (21) show that repeated injections of a
truncated analogue of MCP-1, MCP-1(9-76), prevents the
chronic inflammatory arthritis that spontaneously develops
in MRL-lpr mice. In contrast, controls that were treated with wild-type MCP-1 had more marked arthritis symptoms. Given the selectivity of the antagonist the results of
this study highlight the validity of chemokine receptor
blockade as antiinflammatory principle.
Although the present papers clearly show that chemokine receptor inhibitors are promising as potential drugs,
considerable work still has to be done to gain information
about specificities and the mode of action of the inhibitors.
It is also important to define shared and selective recognition sites for chemokines and the V3 loop of gp120, and to
determine their affinities and their binding kinetics. With
this background it will be possible to optimize low molecular weight compounds as inhibitors of the binding of
gp120 or chemokines, and to design antagonists that act on
multiple receptors.
and platelet factor (PF) 4, (R) growth
regulated protein (GRO)
and (R)PF4, block only CXCR2 (8). These observations indicate that receptor selectivity of
ELR chemokines is determined by binding domains beyond the NH2-terminal region. It is interesting, however,
that the arginine preceding the first cysteine is an absolute
requirement for recognition by both IL-8 receptors and
that the Arg-Cys1 arrangement also occurs in the chemokines that act via CXCR3 (IP10 and Mig) and CXCR4
(stromal cell-derived factor [SDF]-1).
,
or MIP-1
(9). By contrast the corresponding truncation
analogues of RANTES, RANTES(9-68), and MCP-3,
MCP-3(10-76), block more than one CC chemokine receptor and inhibit the responses induced by MCP-1,
MCP-3, and RANTES (10). The loss of selectivity suggests that determinants within the NH2-terminal domain are important for receptor recognition by these chemokines. In
addition, antagonists were obtained by NH2-terminal extension of MCP-3 with Arg-Glu-Phe (11) or RANTES
with a methionine (12), and by chemical modification of
the NH2 terminus of RANTES (13).
, and
MIP-1
, as well as infection by M-tropic and dual-tropic
HIV-1 strains indicating that this domain is shared by the
chemokines and gp120. By contrast, antibodies binding to
the NH2-terminal region of CCR5 block infection, but
have no effect on chemokine activity. Wu et al. consider
the second extracellular loop as the most promising target
for blocking agents because this domain appears to be essential for chemokine as well as virus binding.
Address correspondence to Marco Baggiolini, Theodor Kocher Institute, University of Bern, PO Box, CH 3000 Bern 9, Switzerland. Phone: 41-31-31 4141; FAX: 41-31-631-3799.
Received for publication 29 August 1997.
This work was supported by grant 31-039744.93 to M. Baggiolini and B. Moser, and by grant 438+-050291 to B. Moser from the Swiss National Science Foundation.
1. | Baggiolini, M., A. Walz, and S.L. Kunkel. 1989. Neutrophil-activating peptide-1/interleukin 8, a novel cytokine that activates neutrophils. J. Clin. Invest. 84: 1045-1049 [Medline]. |
2. |
Hébert, C.A.,
R.V. Vitangcol, and
J.B. Baker.
1991.
Scanning mutagenesis of interleukin-8 identifies a cluster of residues required for receptor binding.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:
18989-18994
|
3. |
Clark-Lewis, I.,
C. Schumacher,
M. Baggiolini, and
B. Moser.
1991.
Structure-activity relationships of interleukin-8 determined using chemically synthesized analogs. Critical role of
NH2-terminal residues and evidence for uncoupling of neutrophil chemotaxis, exocytosis, and receptor binding activities.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:
23128-23134
|
4. | Clark-Lewis, I., B. Dewald, T. Geiser, B. Moser, and M. Baggiolini. 1993. Platelet factor 4 binds to interleukin 8 receptors and activates neutrophils when its N terminus is modified with Glu-Leu-Arg. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 90: 3574-3577 [Abstract]. |
5. | Baggiolini, M., B. Dewald, and B. Moser. 1994. Interleukin-8 and related chemotactic cytokines-CXC and CC chemokines. Adv. Immunol. 55: 97-179 [Medline]. |
6. | Rajarathnam, K., I. Clark-Lewis, and B.D. Sykes. 1994. 1H NMR studies of interleukin 8 analogs: characterization of the domains essential for function. Biochemistry. 33: 6623-6630 [Medline]. |
7. |
Moser, B.,
B. Dewald,
L. Barella,
C. Schumacher,
M. Baggiolini, and
I. Clark-Lewis.
1993.
Interleukin-8 antagonists
generated by N-terminal modification.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:
7125-7128
|
8. |
Jones, S.A.,
B. Dewald,
I. Clark-Lewis, and
M. Baggiolini.
1997.
Chemokine antagonists that discriminate between interleukin-8 receptors-selective blockers of CXCR2.
J. Biol.
Chem.
272:
16166-16169
|
9. | Gong, J.-H., and I. Clark-Lewis. 1995. Antagonists of monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 identified by modification of functionally critical NH2-terminal residues. J. Exp. Med. 181: 631-640 [Abstract]. |
10. |
Gong, J.H.,
M. Uguccioni,
B. Dewald,
M. Baggiolini, and
I. Clark-Lewis.
1996.
RANTES and MCP-3 antagonists bind
multiple chemokine receptors.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:
10521-10527
|
11. | Masure, S., L. Paemen, P. Proost, J. Van Damme, and G. Opdenakker. 1995. Expression of a human mutant monocyte chemotactic protein 3 in Pichia pastoris and characterization as an MCP-3 receptor antagonist. J. Interferon Cytokine Res. 15: 955-963 [Medline]. |
12. |
Proudfoot, A.E.I.,
C.A. Power,
A.J. Hoogewerf,
M.O. Montjovent,
F. Borlat,
R.E. Offord, and
T.N.C. Wells.
1996.
Extension of recombinant human RANTES by the retention of the initiating methionine produces a potent antagonist.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:
2599-2603
|
13. |
Simmons, G.,
P.R. Clapham,
L. Picard,
R.E. Offord,
M.M. Rosenkilde,
T.W. Schwartz,
R. Buser,
T.N.C. Wells, and
A.E.I. Proudfoot.
1997.
Potent inhibition of HIV-1 infectivity in macrophages and lymphocytes by a novel CCR5 antagonist.
Science (Wash. DC).
276:
276-279
|
14. | D'Souza, M.P., and V.A. Harden. 1996. Chemokines and HIV-1 second receptors-confluence of two fields generates optimism in AIDS research. Nat. Med. 2: 1293-1300 [Medline]. |
15. | Arenzana-Seisdedos, F., J.L. Virelizier, D. Rousset, I. Clark-Lewis, P. Loetscher, B. Moser, and M. Baggiolini. 1996. HIV blocked by chemokine antagonist. Nature (Lond.). 383: 400 [Medline]. |
16. |
Wu, L.,
G. LaRosa,
N. Kassam,
D.J. Gordon,
H. Heath,
N. Ruffing,
H. Chen,
J. Humblias,
M. Samson,
M. Parmentier,
J.P. Moore, and
C.R. Mackay.
1997.
Interaction of chemokine receptor CCR5 with its ligands: multiple domains for
HIV-1 gp120 binding and a single domain for chemokine
binding.
J. Exp. Med.
186:
1373-1381
|
17. |
Schols, D.,
S. Struyf,
J. Van Damme,
J.A. Esté,
G. Henson, and
E. De Clercq.
1997.
Inhibition of T-tropic HIV strains
by selective antagonization of the chemokine receptor CXCR4.
J. Exp. Med.
186:
1383-1388
|
18. | Nagasawa, T., S. Hirota, K. Tachibana, N. Takakura, S. Nishikawa, Y. Kitamura, N. Yoshida, H. Kikutani, and T. Kishimoto. 1996. Defects of B-cell lymphopoiesis and bone-marrow myelopoiesis in mice lacking the CXC chemokine PBSF/SDF-1. Nature (Lond.). 382: 635-638 [Medline]. |
19. |
Murakami, T.,
T. Nakajima,
Y. Koyanagi,
K. Tachibana,
N. Fujii,
H. Tamamura,
N. Yoshida,
M. Waki,
A. Matsumoto,
O. Yoshie,
T. Kishimoto,
N. Yamamoto, and
T. Nagasawa.
1997.
A small molecule CXCR4 inhibitor that blocks T cell-
line tropic HIV-1 infection.
J. Exp. Med.
186:
1389-1393
|
20. |
Doranz, B.J.,
K. Grovit-Ferbasi,
M.P. Sharron,
S.H. Mao,
M.B. Goetz,
E.S. Daar,
R.W. Doms, and
W.A. O'Brien.
1997.
A small-molecule inhibitor directed against the chemokine receptor CXCR4 prevents its use as an HIV-1 coreceptor.
J. Exp. Med.
186:
1395-1400
|
21. |
Gong, J.H.,
L.G. Ratkay,
J.D. Waterfield, and
I. Clark-Lewis.
1997.
An antagonist of monocyte chemoattractant
protein 1 (MCP-1) inhibits arthritis in the MRL-lpr mouse
model.
J. Exp. Med.
186:
131-137
|