Human apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) endonuclease APE1 hydrolyzes phosphodiester bonds on the 5′ side of an AP-site, and some damaged nucleotides such as 1,N6-ethenoadenosine (εA), α-adenosine (αA), and 5,6-dihydrouridine (DHU). To investigate the mechanism behind the broad substrate specificity of APE1, we analyzed pre-steady-state kinetics of conformational changes in DNA and the enzyme during DNA binding and damage recognition. Molecular dynamics simulations of APE1 complexes with one of damaged DNA duplexes containing εA, αA, DHU, or an F-site (a stable analog of an AP-site) revealed the involvement of residues Asn229, Thr233, and Glu236 in the mechanism of DNA lesion recognition. The results suggested that processing of an AP-site proceeds faster in comparison with nucleotide incision repair substrates because eversion of a small abasic site and its insertion into the active site do not include any unfavorable interactions, whereas the insertion of any target nucleotide containing a damaged base into the APE1 active site is sterically hindered. Destabilization of the α-helix containing Thr233 and Glu236 via a loss of the interaction between these residues increased the plasticity of the damaged-nucleotide binding pocket and the ability to accommodate structurally different damaged nucleotides. Nonetheless, the optimal location of εA or αA in the binding pocket does not correspond to the optimal conformation of catalytic amino acid residues, thereby significantly decreasing the cleavage efficacy for these substrates.

The design of effective target-specific drugs for COVID-19 treatment has become an intriguing challenge for modern science. The SARS-CoV-2 main protease, M^pro, responsible for the processing of SARS-CoV-2 polyproteins and production of individual components of viral replication machinery, is an attractive candidate target for drug discovery. Specific M^pro inhibitors have turned out to be promising anticoronaviral agents. Thus, an effective platform for quantitative screening of M^pro-targeting molecules is urgently needed. Here, we propose a pre–steady-state kinetic analysis of the interaction of M^pro with inhibitors as a basis for such a platform. We examined the kinetic mechanism of peptide substrate binding and cleavage by wild-type M^pro and by its catalytically inactive mutant C145A. The enzyme induces conformational changes of the peptide during the reaction. The inhibition of M^pro by boceprevir, telaprevir, GC-376, PF-00835231, or thimerosal was investigated. Detailed pre–steady-state kinetics of the interaction of the wild-type enzyme with the most potent inhibitor, PF-00835231, revealed a two-step binding mechanism, followed by covalent complex formation. The C145A M^pro mutant interacts with PF-00835231 approximately 100-fold less effectively. Nevertheless, the binding constant of PF-00835231 toward C145A M^pro is still good enough to inhibit the enzyme. Therefore, our results suggest that even noncovalent inhibitor binding due to a fine conformational fit into the active site is sufficient for efficient inhibition. A structure-based virtual screening and a subsequent detailed assessment of inhibition efficacy allowed us to select two compounds as promising noncovalent inhibitor leads of SARS-CoV-2 M^pro.

Apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) endonucleases are the key DNA repair enzymes in the base excision repair (BER) pathway, and are responsible for hydrolyzing phosphodiester bonds on the 5′ side of an AP site. The enzymes can recognize not only AP sites but also some types of damaged bases, such as 1,N⁶-ethenoadenosine, α-adenosine, and 5,6-dihydrouridine. Here, to elucidate the mechanism underlying such a broad substrate specificity as that of AP endonucleases, we performed a computational study of four homologous APE1-like endonucleases: insect (Drosophila melanogaster) Rrp1, amphibian (Xenopus laevis) APE1 (xAPE1), fish (Danio rerio) APE1 (zAPE1), and human APE1 (hAPE1). The contact between the amino acid residues of the active site of each homologous APE1-like enzyme and the set of damaged DNA substrates was analyzed. A comparison of molecular dynamic simulation data with the known catalytic efficiency of these enzymes allowed us to gain a deep insight into the differences in the efficiency of the cleavage of various damaged nucleotides. The obtained data support that the amino acid residues within the “damage recognition” loop containing residues Asn222–Ala230 significantly affect the catalytic-complex formation. Moreover, every damaged nucleotide has its unique position and a specific set of interactions with the amino acid residues of the active site.

Apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APE1) is one of the most important enzymes in base excision repair. Studies on this enzyme have been conducted for a long time, but some aspects of its activity remain poorly understood. One such question concerns the mechanism of damaged-nucleotide recognition by the enzyme, and the answer could shed light on substrate specificity control in all enzymes of this class. In the present study, by pulsed electron–electron double resonance (DEER, also known as PELDOR) spectroscopy and pre–steady-state kinetic analysis along with wild-type (WT) APE1 from Danio rerio (zAPE1) or three mutants (carrying substitution N253G, A254G, or E260A), we aimed to elucidate the molecular events in the process of damage recognition. The data revealed that the zAPE1 mutant E260A has much higher activity toward DNA substrates containing 5,6-dihydro-2′-deoxyuridine (DHU), 2′-deoxyuridine (dU), alpha-2′-deoxyadenosine (αA), or 1,N6-ethenoadenosine (εA). Examination of conformational changes in DNA clearly revealed multistep DNA rearrangements during the formation of the catalytic complex. These structural rearrangements of DNA are directly associated with the capacity of damaged DNA for enzyme-induced bending and unwinding, which are required for eversion of the damaged nucleotide from the DNA duplex and for its placement into the active site of the enzyme. Taken together, the results experimentally prove the factors that control substrate specificity of the AP endonuclease zAPE1.

Apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APE1) is responsible for the hydrolysis of the phosphodiester bond on the 5′ side of an apurinic/apyrimidinic site during base excision repair. Moreover, in DNA, this enzyme can recognize nucleotides containing such damaged bases as 5,6-dihydro-2′-deoxyuridine (DHU), 2′-deoxyuridine (dU), alpha-2′-deoxyadenosine (αA), and 1,N6-ethenoadenosine (εA). Previously, by pulsed electron–electron double resonance spectroscopy and pre-steady-state kinetic analysis, we have revealed multistep DNA rearrangements during the formation of the catalytic complex. In the present study, the modeling of the eversion trajectory of nucleotides with various damaged bases was performed by directed molecular dynamics simulations. It was found that each damaged base at the beginning of the eversion interacts with protein loop Val196-Arg201, which should be moved to enable further nucleotide eversion. This movement involves a shift in loop Val196-Arg201 away from loop Asn253-Thr257 and requires the disruption of contacts between these loops. The Glu260Ala substitution facilitates the separation of the two loops. Moreover, conformational changes in the Asn253-Thr257 loop should occur in the second half of the lesion eversion trajectory. All these perturbations within the protein globule tend to reduce steric interactions of each damaged base with the protein during the eversion of the nucleotide from DNA and movement to the active site. These perturbations are important determinants of substrate specificity of endonuclease APE1.

Mau DNA polymerase is a family A DNA polymerase isolated from Massilia aurea. In this study, a recombinant plasmid, His₆-tagged Mau-pET28c, was constructed. His-tagged Mau was expressed in Escherichia coli Rosseta 2 (DE3) competent cells and, after optimization of purification conditions, was successfully isolated via a two-step purification system by Ni²⁺-chelating affinity chromatography followed by heparin affinity chromatography. The biochemical properties of Mau DNA polymerase were investigated next. This polymerase showed maximal polymerase activity at 30 °C, pH 8.4–8.8, 2–10 mM MgCl₂, and 10–40 mM KCl. Kinetic parameters of correct and incorrect dNTP incorporation as well as DNA-binding affinity were determined too. K^dNTP_d,app values were found to be 16 µM for correct dNTP and 200–500 µM for incorrect dNTP. The kinetic parameter k_cat turned out to be 0.2 s⁻¹ for correct dNTP incorporation and an order of magnitude less for incorrect dNTP incorporation. It was demonstrated that Mau DNA polymerase has 5′→3′ and 3′→5′ exonuclease activities associated with the main activity.