Back

Unbiased mapping of cereblon neosubstrate landscape by high-throughput proteomics

Rankovic, Z.; Wu, Q.; Yang, J.; Nishiguchi, G.; Daub, H.; Shashikadze, B.; Machata, S.; Graef, T.; Schwalb, B.; Bartoschek, D.; Ohmayer, U.; Bednarz, A. H.; McGowan, K.; Shi, Z.; Price, J.; Mayasundari, A.; Yang, L.; Demichev, V.; Steger, M.

2024-10-19 biochemistry
10.1101/2024.10.18.618633 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Molecular glue degraders (MGDs) are small molecules that harness the ubiquitin-proteasome system to induce degradation of target proteins, including those lacking conventional druggable pockets. Given the challenges in their rational design, MGD discovery predominantly relies on screening-based approaches, such as cell viability assays. However, one potential limitation of such screening methods is the risk of overlooking non-essential neosubstrates of potential therapeutic value. To address this concern, we present a high-throughput proteome-wide MGD screening platform utilizing label-free, data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry (DIA-MS) for integrated proteomics and ubiquitinomics analysis. Processing a diverse set of 100 CRBN-ligands across two cancer cell lines reveals a broad array of neosubstrates, including 50 novel candidates validated by MS-based ubiquitinomics. These findings considerably expand the current landscape of CRBN-mediated neosubstrates. Comprehensive hit validation and structure-degradation relationship analyses guided by global proteomics, identifies highly selective and potent phenyl glutarimide-based degraders of novel neosubstrates, including KDM4B, G3BP2 and VCL, none of which contain the classical CRBN degron motif. This study demonstrates that comprehensive, high-throughput proteomic screening offers new opportunities in MGD drug discovery.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.