AbstractDiscovery of false-positive target binding, due to assay interference or aggregation, presents a significant problem for drug discovery programs. These issues may often be unrealized and could lead researchers astray if not subject to independent verification of reproducibility and/or on-target mechanism of action. Although well-documented for small molecules, this issue has not been widely explored for peptide modality. As a case study, we demonstrate that two purported KRas inhibitors, stapled peptide SAH-SOS1A and macrocyclic peptide cyclorasin 9A5, exemplify false-positive molecules – both in terms of their sub-micromolar KRas binding affinities and their on-target cellular activities. We observed that the apparent binding of fluorescein-labeled SAH-SOS1A given by a fluorescence polarization assay is sensitive to detergent. False-positive readouts can arise from peptide adsorption to the surface of microplates. Hence, we used surface plasmon resonance and isothermal titration calorimetry to unambiguously show that both SAH-SOS1A and cyclorasin 9A5 are non-binders for KRas. Thermal shift assay and hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry further demonstrate that both peptides destabilize KRas and induce unfolding of the protein. Furthermore, both peptides caused significant release of intracellular lactate dehydrogenase, suggesting that membrane rupture rather than on-target activity is accountable for their reported cytotoxicity. Finally, both peptides exhibited off-target activities by inhibiting the proliferation of U-2 OS and A549 cells, despite their independency of the KRas signaling pathway. Our findings demonstrate the critical need to employ orthogonal binding assays and cellular counter-screens to de-risk false-positive molecules. More rigorous workflows should lead to improved data and help obviate inadvertent scientific conclusions.Significance statementFalse positive molecule hits occur frequently in high-throughput screens and can contaminate the scientific literature. This has become an increasingly serious issue in small molecule drug discovery and chemical probe development and it is not surprising that peptides may be similarly prone to assay interference. Using KRas as a target and two known macrocyclic peptide inhibitors as a case study, we clearly show that reporter-free biophysical assays and cellular counter-screens offer the solution to detect and de-risk the potential of false-positive compounds. We further discuss the advantages, limitations and overall strategic importance of such methods.
Antifungal benzo[b]thiophene 1,1-dioxide IMPDH inhibitors exhibit pan-assay interference (PAINS) profiles
