Published on Web 10/12/2004
A Chemoenzymatic Approach to Glycopeptide Antibiotics
Hening Lin and Christopher T. Walsh*
Contribution from the Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology,
Armenise 616, HarVard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115
Received August 11, 2004; E-mail: christopher_walsh@hms.harvard.edu
Abstract: Many biologically active natural products are constrained by macrocyclization and modified with
carbohydrates. These two types of modifications are essential for their biological activities. Here we report
a chemoenzymatic approach to make carbohydrate-modified cyclic peptide antibiotics. Using a thioesterase
domain from the decapeptide tyrocidine synthetase, 13 head-to-tail cyclized tyrocidine derivatives were
obtained with one to three propargylglycines incorporated at positions 3-8. These cyclic peptides were
then conjugated to 21 azido sugars via copper(I)-catalyzed cycloaddition. Antibacterial and hemolytic assays
showed that the two best glycopeptides, Tyc4PG-14 and Tyc4PG-15, have a 6-fold better therapeutic index
than the natural tyrocidine. We believe this method will also be useful for modifying other natural products
to search for new therapeutics.
Sharpless and co-workers (Figure 2B).4 This cycloaddition
reaction has been used by several groups in various bioconju-
Introduction
A variety of natural products with antibiotic activities are of
polyketide (PK) origin, such as erythromycin and daunomycin,
or of nonribosomal peptide (NRP) origin, such as novobiocin
and vancomycin, or are PK/NRP hybrids, such as bleomycin
(Figure 1). Macrocyclization and glycosylation are the two late-
stage modifications in the biosynthesis of many PK or NRP
natural products, the stage that usually confers the biological
activity per se, or an improved property such as solubility or
target affinity.1 The widespread occurrence of such tailoring
macrocyclization and glycosylation encourages us to make novel
glycosylated cyclic peptides and to study the effect of different
carbohydrates on their activity.
gation experiments and has proved to be robust.5-9 In the past
two decades, the ability to make complex glycoconjugates,
including glycopeptides and glycoproteins, has increased dra-
matically.10,11 In the field of natural product modification, both
chemical and enzymatic methods and natural and unnatural
linkages have been used to conjugate carbohydrates to
peptides.12-19 However, chemical methods to form glyco-
conjugates normally require several transformations to install
appropriate functional groups for the conjugation reaction, and
the yield could be low. On the other hand, enzymatic methods
suffer from the availability of glycosyl donor substrates
(normally TDP-sugars, which are difficult to make even via
We have designed a chemoenzymatic approach to make
carbohydrate-modified cyclic peptides, which begins, as the first
example, with the cyclic decapeptide tyrocidine (Tyc) as the
peptide scaffold onto which various carbohydrates will be
attached. The head-to-tail cyclic peptide scaffold of Tyc can be
generated enzymatically by the excised thioesterase domain (TE)
from the tyrocidine synthetase using the corresponding linear
peptide N-acetyl cysteamine (SNAC) thioester as the substrate
(Figure 2A).2 This 35 kDa TE has relaxed substrate specificity
and can tolerate substitutions at most of the substrate’s 10
residues.2,3 Cyclization is accompanied by variable amounts of
enzyme-mediated, competing thioester hydrolysis. Utilizing Tyc
TE's relaxed substrate specificity, we planned to make alkyne-
containing cyclic peptides by enzymatic macrocyclization and
then conjugated them to azido sugars to produce glycosylated
cyclic peptides using the copper(I)-catalyzed [3 + 2] cyclo-
addition, a reaction condition that was recently developed by
(4) Rostovtsev, V. V.; Green, L. G.; Fokin, V. V.; Sharpless, K. B. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 2596-2599.
(5) Wang, Q.; Chan, T. R.; Hilgraf, R.; Fokin, V. V.; Sharpless, K. B.; Finn,
M. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 3192-3193.
(6) Speers, A. E.; Adam, G. C.; Cravatt, B. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 4686, 125,
4686-4687.
(7) Lee, L. V.; Mitchell, M. L.; Huang, S.-J.; Fokin, V. V.; Sharpless, K. B.;
Wong, C.-H. J. Am. Chem. Soc 2003, 125, 9588-9589.
(8) Link, A. J.; Tirrell, D. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 11164-11165.
(9) Deiters, A.; Cropp, T. A.; Mukherji, M.; Chin, J. W.; Anderson, J. T.;
Schultz, P. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 11782-11783.
(10) Davis, B. G. Chem. ReV. 2002, 102, 579-601.
(11) Grogan, M. J.; Pratt, M. R.; Marcaurelle, L. A.; Bertozzi, C. R. Annu. ReV.
Biochem. 2002, 71, 593-634.
(12) Solenberg, P. J.; Matsushima, P.; Stack, D. R.; Wilkie, S. C.; Thompson,
R. C.; Baltz, R. H. Chem. Biol. 1997, 4, 195-202.
(13) Thompson, C.; Ge, M.; Kahne, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 1237-
1244.
(14) Nicolaou, K. C.; Cho, S. Y.; Hughes, R.; Winssinger, N.; Smethurst, C.;
Labischinski, H.; Endermann, R. Chem. Eur. J. 2001, 7, 3798-3823.
(15) Losey, H.; Peczuh, M.; Chen, Z.; Eggert, U.; Dong, S.; Pelczer, I.; Kahne,
D.; Walsh, C. Biochemistry 2001, 40, 4745-4755.
(16) Sun, B.; Chen, Z.; Eggert, U. S.; Shaw, S. J.; LaTour, J. V.; Kahne, D. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 12722-12723.
(17) Dong, S. D.; Oberthur, M.; Losey, H. C.; Anderson, J. W.; Eggert, U. S.;
Peczuh, M. W.; Walsh, C. T.; Kahne, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124,
9064-9065.
(1) Ge, M.; Chen, Z.; Onishi, H. R.; Kohler, J.; Silver, L. L.; Kerns, R.;
Fukuzawa, S.; Thompson, C.; Kahne, D. Science 1999, 284, 507-511.
(2) Trauger, J. W.; Kohli, R. M.; Mootz, H. D.; Marahiel, M. A.; Walsh, C. T.
Nature 2000, 407, 215-218.
(18) Ritter, T. K.; Mong, K.-K. T.; Liu, H.; Nakatni, T.; Wong, C.-H. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2003, 42, 4657-4660.
(19) Fu, X.; Albermann, C.; Jiang, J.; Liao, J.; Zhang, C.; Thorson, J. S. Nat.
Biotechnol. 2003, 21, 1467-1469.
(3) Kohli, R. M.; Walsh, C. T.; Burkart, M. D. Nature 2002, 418, 658-661.
9
13998
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. 2004, 126, 13998-14003
10.1021/ja045147v CCC: $27.50 © 2004 American Chemical Society