Aug
12
Mon
2013
Invited Talk: Osteoarthritis: diagnosis, treatment and challenges @ Acharya Hall
Aug 12 @ 11:42 am – 12:07 pm

hideakiHideaki Nagase, Ph.D.
Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology-Centre for Degenerative Diseases, University of Oxford, UK


Osteoarthritis: diagnosis, treatment and challenges

Hideaki Nagase1, Ngee Han Lim1, George Bou-Gharios1, Ernst Meinjohanns2  and Morten Meldal3

  1. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, London, W6 8LH  UK
  2. Carlsberg Laboratory, Copenhagen, Denmark,
  3. Nano-Science Center, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent age-related degenerative joint disease. With the expanding ageing population, it imposes a major socio-economic burden on society.  A key feature of OA is a gradual loss of articular cartilage and deformation of bone, resulting in the impairment of joint function. Currently, there is no effective disease-modifying treatment except joint replacement surgery. There are many possible causes of cartilage loss (e.g. mechanical load, injury, reactive oxygen species, aging, etc.) and etiological factors (obesity, genetics), but the degradation of cartilage is primarily caused by elevated levels of active metalloproteinases.  It is therefore attractive to consider proteinase inhibitors as potential therapeutics. However, there are several hurdles to overcome, namely early diagnosis and continuous monitoring of the efficacy of inhibitor therapeutics. We are therefore aiming at developing non-invasive probes to detect cartilage degrading metalloproteinase activities.

We have designed in vivo imaging probes to detect MMP-13 (collagenase 3) activity that participates in OA by degrade cartilage collagen II and MMP-12 (macrophage elastase) activity involved in inflammatory arthritis. These activity-based probes consist of a peptide that is selectively cleaved by the target proteinase, a near-infrared fluorophore and a quencher. The probe’s signal multiplies upon proteolysis.  They were first used to follow the respective enzyme activity in vivo in the mouse model of collagen-induced arthritis and we found MMP-12 activity probe (MMP12AP) activation peaked at 5 days after onset of the disease, whereas MMP13AP activation was observed at 10-15 days. The in vivo activation of these probes was inhibited by specific low molecule inhibitors.  We proceeded to test both probes in the mouse model of OA induced by the surgical destabilization of medial meniscus of the knee joints.  In this model, degradation of knee cartilage is first detected histologically 6 weeks after surgery with significant erosion detectable at 8 weeks. Little activation of MMP12AP was detected, which was expected, as macrophage migration is not obvious in OA. MMP13AP, on the other hand, was significantly activated in the operated knee at 6 weeks compared with the non-operated contralateral knee, but there were no significant differences between the operated and sham-operated knees.  At 8 weeks, however, the signals in the operated knees were significantly higher than both the contralateral and sham-operated controls. Activation of aggrecanases and MMP-13 are observed before structural changes of cartilage. We are therefore currently improving the MMP-13 probe for earlier detection by attaching it to polymers that are retained in  cartilage.

 

Aug
13
Tue
2013
Invited Talk: Nanoscale Simulations – Tackling Form and Formulation Challenges in Drug Development and Drug Delivery @ Sathyam Hall
Aug 13 @ 2:15 pm – 2:40 pm

lalithaLalitha Subramanian, Ph.D.
Chief Scientific Officer & VP, Services at Scienomics, USA


Nanoscale Simulations – Tackling Form and Formulation Challenges in Drug Development and Drug Delivery

Lalitha Subramanian, Dora Spyriouni, Andreas Bick, Sabine Schweizer, and Xenophon Krokidis Scienomics

The discovery of a compound which is potent in activity against a target is a major milestone in Pharmaceutical and Biotech industry. However, a potent compound is only effective as a therapeutic agent when it can be administered such that the optimal quantity is transported to the site of action at an optimal rate. The active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) has to be tested for its physicochemical properties before the appropriate dosage form and formulation can be designed. Some of the commonly evaluated parameters are crystal forms and polymorphs, solubility, dissolution behavior, stability, partition coefficient, water sorption behavior, surface properties, particle size and shape, etc. Pharmaceutical development teams face the challenge of quickly and efficiently determining a number of properties with small quantities of the expensive candidate compounds. Recently the trend has been to screen these properties as early as possible and often the candidate compounds are not available in sufficient quantities. Increasingly, these teams are leveraging nanoscale simulations similar to those employed by drug discovery teams for several decades. Nanoscale simulations are used to predict the behavior using very little experimental data and only if this is promising further experiments are done. Another aspect where nanoscale simulations are being used in drug development and drug delivery is to get insights into the behavior of the system so that process failures can be remediated and formulation performance can be improved. Thus, the predictive screening and the in-depth understanding leads to experimental efficiency resulting in far-reaching business impacts.

With specific examples, this talk will focus on the different types of nanoscale simulations used to predict properties of the API in excipients and also provide insight into system behavior as a function of shelf life, temperature, mechanical stress, etc.

Aug
14
Wed
2013
Plenary Talk: Combined Crystallography and SAXS Methods for Studying Macromolecular Complexes @ Amriteshwari Hall
Aug 14 @ 9:38 am – 10:19 am

JeffPerryJeff Perry, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, University of California, Riverside


Combined Crystallography and SAXS Methods for Studying Macromolecular Complexes

Recent developments in small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) are rapidly providing new insights into protein interactions, complexes and conformational states in solution, allowing for detailed biophysical quantification of samples of interest1. Initial analyses provide a judgment of sample quality, revealing the potential presence of aggregation, the overall extent of folding or disorder, the radius of gyration, maximum particle dimensions and oligomerization state. Structural characterizations may include ab initio approaches from SAXS data alone, or enhance structural solutions when combined with previously determined crystal/NMR domains. This combination can provide definitions of architectures, spatial organizations of the protein domains within a complex, including those not yet determined by crystallography or NMR, as well as defining key conformational states. Advantageously, SAXS is not generally constrained by macromolecule size, and rapid collection of data in a 96-well plate format provides methods to screen sample conditions. Such screens include co-factors, substrates, differing protein or nucleotide partners or small molecule inhibitors, to more fully characterize the variations within assembly states and key conformational changes. These analyses are also useful for screening constructs and conditions that are most likely to promote crystal growth. Moreover, these high throughput structural determinations can be leveraged to define how polymorphisms affect assembly formations and activities. Also, SAXS-based technologies may be potentially used for novel structure-based screening, for compounds inducing shape changes or associations/diassociations. This is addition to defining architectural characterizations of complexes and interactions for systems biology-based research, and distinctions in assemblies and interactions in comparative genomics. Thus, SAXS combined with crystallography/NMR and computation provides a unique set of tools that should be considered as being part of one’s repertoire of biophysical analyses, when conducting characterizations of protein and other macromolecular interactions.

1 Perry JJ & Tainer JA. Developing advanced X-ray scattering methods combined with crystallography and computation. Methods. 2013 Mar;59(3):363-71.

Jeff (1)