Deciphering the structural and functional impact of Q657L mutation in NLRC4 using computational methods

References

• Krainer J, Siebenhandl S, Weinhäusel A. Systemic autoinflammatory diseases. J Autoimmun. 2020;109:102421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tangye SG, Al-Herz W, Bousfiha A, et al. Human inborn errors of immunity: 2019 update on the classification from the international union of immunological societies expert committee. J Clin Immunol. 2020;40:24–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manthiram K, Zhou Q, Aksentijevich I, et al. The monogenic autoinflammatory diseases define new pathways in human innate immunity and inflammation. Nat Immunol. 2017;18:832–842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fusco WG, Duncan JA. Novel aspects of the assembly and activation of inflammasomes with focus on the NLRC4 inflammasome. Int Immunol. 2018;30:183–193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu Z, Yan C, Liu P, et al. Crystal structure of NLRC4 reveals its autoinhibition mechanism. Science. 2013;341:172–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Chen S, Ruan J, et al. Cryo-EM structure of the activated NAIP2-NLRC4 inflammasome reveals nucleated polymerization. Science. 2015;350:404–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss ES, Girard-Guyonvarc’h C, Holzinger D, et al. Interleukin-18 diagnostically distinguishes and pathogenically promotes human and murine macrophage activation syndrome. Blood. 2018;131:1442–1455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romberg N, Moussawi KA, Nelson-Williams C, et al. Mutation of NLRC4 causes a syndrome of enterocolitis and autoinflammation. Nat Genet. 2014;46:1135–1139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canna SW, Jesus AAD, Gouni S, et al. An activating NLRC4 inflammasome mutation causes autoinflammation with recurrent macrophage activation syndrome. Nat Genet. 2014;46:1140–1146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitamura A, Sasaki Y, Abe T, et al. An inherited mutation in NLRC4 causes autoinflammation in human and mice. J Exp Med. 2014;211:2385–2396.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawasaki Y, Oda H, Ito J, et al. Identification of a high-frequency somatic NLRC4 mutation as a cause of autoinflammation by pluripotent cell-based phenotype dissection. Arthr Rheumatol. 2017;69:447–459.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moghaddas F, Zeng P, Zhang Y, et al. Autoinflammatory mutation in NLRC4 reveals a leucine-rich repeat (LRR)–LRR oligomerization interface. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018;142:1956–1967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chear CT, Nallusamy R, Canna SW, et al. A novel de novo NLRC4 mutation reinforces the likely pathogenicity of specific LRR domain mutation. Clin Immunol. 2020;211:108328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volker-Touw CML, de Koning HD, Giltay JC, et al. Erythematous nodes, urticarial rash and arthralgias in a large pedigree with NLRC4-related autoinflammatory disease, expansion of the phenotype. Br J Dermatol. 2017;176:244–248.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang J, Alfano DN, Squires JE, et al. Novel NLRC4 mutation causes a syndrome of perinatal autoinflammation with hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, hepatosplenomegaly, fetal thrombotic vasculopathy, and congenital anemia and ascites. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2017;20:498–505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeskey J, Parida A, Graven K, et al. Novel gene deletion in NLRC4 expanding the familial cold inflammatory syndrome phenotype. Allergy Rhinol. 2020;11:215265672092806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar R, Bansal A, Shukla R, et al. In silico screening of deleterious single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and molecular dynamics simulation of disease associated mutations in gene responsible for oculocutaneous albinism type 6 (OCA 6) disorder. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2019;37:3513–3523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panchal NK, Bhale A, Verma VK, et al. Computational and molecular dynamics simulation approach to analyze the impact of XPD gene mutation on protein stability and function. Mol Simulat. 2020;46:1200–1219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Essadssi S, Krami AM, Elkhattabi L, et al. Computational analysis of nsSNPs of ADA gene in severe combined immunodeficiency using molecular modeling and dynamics simulation. J Immunol Res. 2019;2019:1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venselaar H, te Beek TA, Kuipers RK, et al. Protein structure analysis of mutations causing inheritable diseases. An e-Science approach with life scientist friendly interfaces. BMC Bioinform. 2010;11:548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayrose I. Comparison of site-specific rate-inference methods for protein sequences: Empirical Bayesian methods are superior. Mol Biol Evol. 2004;21:1781–1791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashkenazy H, Erez E, Martz E, et al. Consurf 2010: calculating evolutionary conservation in sequence and structure of proteins and nucleic acids. Nucl Acid Res. 2010;38:W529–W533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celniker G, Nimrod G, Ashkenazy H, et al. Consurf: using evolutionary data to raise testable hypotheses about protein function. Isr J Chem. 2013;53:199–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashkenazy H, Abadi S, Martz E, et al. Consurf 2016: an improved methodology to estimate and visualize evolutionary conservation in macromolecules. Nucl Acid Res. 2016;44:W344–W350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavtigian SV. Comprehensive statistical study of 452 BRCA1 missense substitutions with classification of eight recurrent substitutions as neutral. J Med Genet. 2005;43:295–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hecht M, Bromberg Y, Rost B. Better prediction of functional effects for sequence variants. BMC Genom. 2015;16:S1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calabrese R, Capriotti E, Fariselli P, et al. Functional annotations improve the predictive score of human disease-related mutations in proteins. Hum Mutat. 2009;30:1237–1244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yue P, Melamud E, Moult J. SNPs3d: Candidate gene and SNP selection for association studies. BMC Bioinform. 2006;7:166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niroula A, Urolagin S. Vihinen M. PON-P2: prediction method for fast and reliable identification of harmful variants. Tosatto SCE, editor. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0117380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bendl J, Stourac J, Salanda O, et al. PredictSNP: robust and accurate consensus classifier for prediction of disease-related mutations. Gardner PP, editor. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014;10:e1003440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laskowski RA, MacArthur MW, Moss DS, et al. PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr. 1993;26:283–291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowie JU, Luthy R, Eisenberg D. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science. 1991;253:164–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colovos C, Yeates TO. Verification of protein structures: patterns of nonbonded atomic interactions. Protein Sci. 1993;2:1511–1519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spoel DVD, Lindahl E, Hess B, et al. GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem. 2005;26:1701–1718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abraham MJ, Murtola T, Schulz R, et al. GROMACS: high performance molecular simulations through multi-level parallelism from laptops to supercomputers. SoftwareX. 2015;1–2:19–25.
   Google Scholar
• Huang J, Rauscher S, Nawrocki G, et al. CHARMM36m: an improved force field for folded and intrinsically disordered proteins. Nat Methods. 2017;14:71–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bussi G, Donadio D, Parrinello M. Canonical sampling through velocity rescaling. J Chem Phys. 2007;126:014101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berendsen HJC, Postma JPM, van Gunsteren WF, et al. Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath. J Chem Phys. 1984;81:3684–3690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess B, Kutzner C, van der Spoel D, et al. GROMACS 4: algorithms for highly efficient, load-balanced, and scalable molecular simulation. J Chem Theory Comput. 2008;4:435–447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darden T, York D, Pedersen L. Particle mesh Ewald: An N ⋅log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems. J Chem Phys. 1993;98:10089–10092.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laskowski RA. PDBsum new things. Nucl Acid Res. 2009;37:D355–D359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daura X, van Gunsteren WF, Mark AE. Folding-unfolding thermodynamics of a β-heptapeptide from equilibrium simulations. Proteins. 1999;34:269–280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amadei A, Linssen ABM, Berendsen HJC. Essential dynamics of proteins. Proteins. 1993;17:412–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian W, Chen C, Lei X, et al. CASTp 3.0: computed atlas of surface topography of proteins. Nucl Acid Res. 2018;46:W363–W367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabsch W, Sander C. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers. 1983;22:2577–2637.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen L, Deng H, Cui H, et al. Inflammatory responses and inflammation-associated diseases in organs. Oncotarget. 2018;9:7204–7218.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Duncan JA, Canna SW. The NLRC4 inflammasome. Immunol Rev. 2018;281:115–123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnappauf O, Aksentijevich I. Current and future advances in genetic testing in systemic autoinflammatory diseases. Rheumatology. 2019;58:vi44–vi55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollingsworth SA, Dror RO. Molecular dynamics simulation for all. Neuron. 2018;99:1129–1143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang J, MacKerell AD. CHARMM36 all-atom additive protein force field: validation based on comparison to NMR data. J Comput Chem. 2013;34:2135–2145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boonstra S, Onck PR, van der Giessen E. CHARMM TIP3P water model suppresses peptide folding by solvating the unfolded state. J Phys Chem B. 2016;120:3692–3698.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineda LI G, Milko LN, He Y. Performance of CHARMM36m with modified water model in simulating intrinsically disordered proteins: a case study. Biophys Rep. 2020;6:80–87.
   Google Scholar
• Li X, Keskin O, Ma B, et al. Protein–protein interactions: Hot spots and structurally conserved residues often locate in complemented pockets that pre-organized in the unbound states: implications for docking. J Mol Biol. 2004;344:781–795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajamani D, Thiel S, Vajda S, et al. Anchor residues in protein-protein interactions. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2004;101:11287–11292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George DCP, Chakraborty C, Haneef SS, et al. Evolution- and structure-based computational strategy reveals the impact of deleterious missense mutations on MODY 2 (maturity-onset diabetes of the young, type 2). Theranostics. 2014;4:366–385.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stank A, Kokh DB, Fuller JC, et al. Protein binding pocket dynamics. Acc Chem Res. 2016;49:809–815.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garton M, MacKinnon SS, Malevanets A, et al. Interplay of self-association and conformational flexibility in regulating protein function. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2018;373:20170190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcos E, Crehuet R, Bahar I. Changes in dynamics upon oligomerization regulate substrate binding and allostery in amino acid kinase family members. Gilson M, editor. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:e1002201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang LQ, Sang P, Tao Y, et al. Protein dynamics and motions in relation to their functions: several case studies and the underlying mechanisms. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2014;32:372–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhaber F, Lijnzaad P, Argos P, et al. The double cubic lattice method: efficient approaches to numerical integration of surface area and volume and to dot surface contouring of molecular assemblies. J Comput Chem. 1995;16:273–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janin J, Bahadur RP, Chakrabarti P. Protein–protein interaction and quaternary structure. Quart Rev Biophys. 2008;41:133–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keskin O, Gursoy A, Ma B, et al. Principles of protein–protein interactions: what are the preferred ways for proteins to interact? Chem Rev. 2008;108:1225–1244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali MH, Imperiali B. Protein oligomerization: How and why. Bioorgan Med Chem. 2005;13:5013–5020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Efimov AV, Brazhnikov EV. Relationship between intramolecular hydrogen bonding and solvent accessibility of side-chain donors and acceptors in proteins. FEBS Lett. 2003;554:389–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard RE, Haider MK. Hydrogen bonds in proteins: role and strength. eLS. 2010:1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Pace CN, Fu H, Fryar K, et al. Contribution of hydrogen bonds to protein stability: hydrogen bonds and protein stability. Protein Sci. 2014;23:652–661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lesieur C. The assembly of protein oligomers: old stories and new perspectives with graph theory. Oligomeriz Chem Biol Compound. 2014:327–364.
   Google Scholar
• Tsai C-J, Xu D, Nussinov R. Protein folding via binding and vice versa. Fold Des. 1998;3:R71–R80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar