High yield expression of non-phosphorylated protein tyrosine kinases in insect cells

High yield expression of non-phosphorylated protein tyrosine kinases in insect cells

Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Protein Expression and Purification j o u r n a l h ...

1MB Sizes 0 Downloads 64 Views

Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Protein Expression and Purification j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / y p r e p

High yield expression of non-phosphorylated protein tyrosine kinases in insect cells Leyu Wang *, Meta Foster, Yan Zhang, William R. Tschantz, Lily Yang, Joe Worrall, Christine Loh, Xu Xu Research Tech­nol­ogy Cen­ter, Pfiz­er Cam­bridge Lab­o­ra­to­ries, 620 Memo­rial Drive, Cam­bridge, MA 02139, USA

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 23 April 2008 and in revised form 28 May 2008 Available online 5 June 2008  Key­words: Kinase Phos­pha­tase Phos­phor­y­la­tion Bac­u­lo­vi­rus Insect cells Coex­pres­sion BTK JAK3 EphA2 YopH

a b s t r a c t The key role of kinases in sig­nal trans­duc­tion and cell growth reg­u­la­tion has been a long stand­ing inter­est among aca­dem­ics and the phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal indus­try. Recombinant enzymes have been used to under­stand the mech­a­nism of action as well as to screen for chem­i­cal inhib­i­tors. The ba­cu­lo-insect sys­tem has been the primary method used to obtain sol­u­ble and active kinases, usu­ally pro­duc­ing a mix­ture of the kinase in var­i­ous phos­phor­y­la­tion states in dif­fer­ent con­for­ma­tions. To obtain a homog­e­nous prep­a­ra­tion of non-phos­phor­y­lated kinases is crit­i­cal for bio­chem­i­cal, bio­phys­i­cal and kinetic stud­ies aimed at under­ stand­ing the mech­a­nism of kinase acti­va­tion. Tak­ing advan­tage of the eukary­otic expres­sion prop­erty of insect cells, we were able to obtain high yield expres­sion of non-phos­phor­y­lated pro­tein tyro­sine kinases BTK, JAK3 and Eph2A through coex­pres­sion with the tyro­sine phos­pha­tase YopH, which sug­gests that this method can be applied to pro­tein tyro­sine kinases in gen­eral. We have dem­on­strated that the fully nonphos­phor­y­lated BTK obtained with this method is suit­able for var­i­ous bio­chem­i­cal and kinetic stud­ies. © 2008 Else­vier Inc. All rights reserved.

Intro­duc­tion Pro­tein kinases play a key role in cel­lu­lar sig­nal­ing and cell growth reg­u­la­tion. The research effort ded­i­cated to kinases has increased expo­nen­tially over the past two decades due to advances in molec­u­lar and cel­lu­lar biol­ogy. It is now well known that there is a close cor­re­la­tion between increased activ­ity of many kinases and a wide range of dis­eases, espe­cially can­cers. For this reason, pro­tein kinases have become a major gene fam­ily as ther­a­peu­tic tar­gets [1,2]. Many kinases are acti­vated by phos­phor­y­la­tion on cer­tain amino acids (Ser, Thr or Tyr) within their acti­va­tion loops, accom­pa­nied by a con­for­ma­tion change [3,4]. Kinase inhib­i­tors have been shown to have pref­er­en­tial affin­ity to one con­for­ma­tion over the other [5,6]. Iso­la­tion of homog­e­nous prep­a­ra­tions of phos­ phor­y­lated and non-phos­phor­y­lated ver­sions of a kinase is crit­i­cal for bet­ter under­stand­ing ligand–pro­tein inter­ac­tions. Cur­rently there are two major recombinant approaches to gen­er­ ate non-phos­phor­y­lated pro­tein kinases, tak­ing advan­tage of either pro­kary­otic or eukary­otic expres­sion host cells. One approach is to express kinases in Esch­e­richia coli expres­sion sys­tems. The advan­ tage of this sys­tem is that E. coli cells lack post-trans­la­tional mod­ i­fi­ca­tion; there­fore the kinases expressed, in prin­ci­ple, should be in the non-phos­phor­y­lated form if the pro­tein kinase has no auto-

* Cor­re­spond­ing author. Fax: +1 617 551 3178. E-mail address: Leyu.Wang@pfiz­er.com (L. Wang). 1046-5928/$ - see front matter © 2008 Else­vier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pep.2008.05.017

phos­phor­y­la­tion activ­ity (Fig. 1A). In addi­tion, the E. coli expres­sion sys­tem has a rel­a­tively short gene to pro­tein turn-around time. How­ever, the poor expres­sion and low sol­u­bil­ity of human kinases is an intrin­sic prob­lem of the E. coli expres­sion sys­tem [7]. Some kinases can­not even be directly expressed in E. coli due to their tox­ ic­ity to the host cells. Efforts have been made to over­come the sol­ u­bil­ity and tox­ic­ity issues [8], but pre­vi­ous suc­cess is lim­ited and kinase depen­dent. Addi­tion­ally, even if sol­u­ble kinase is expressed in E. coli, multiple phos­phor­y­lated forms may still be observed due to the auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion activ­ity of the kinase [9]. The other alter­na­tive approach is to express recombinant kinases in insect cells and treat them with phos­pha­tases dur­ing or after puri­fi­ca­tion [6,10–12] (Fig. 1B). Our group had direct suc­cess­ful expe­ri­ence with this approach and pro­duced large amount of non-phos­phor­y­lated S6K for struc­tural biol­ogy study. The host cells in this expres­sion sys­tem are eukary­otic cells and have an excel­lent track record for pro­duc­ing func­tional kinases; how­ever the recombinant kinases pro­duced are usu­ally a mix­ture of the kinase in var­i­ous phos­phor­y­ lated forms, as results of post-trans­la­tional mod­i­fi­ca­tion from host cells and auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion activ­ity of the kinases them­selves. Phos­pha­tase treat­ment can be used dur­ing or after puri­fi­ca­tion to gen­er­ate non-phos­phor­y­lated kinases. Unfor­tu­nately, the pro­cess is com­plex and requires subsequent puri­fi­ca­tion steps, and often results in incom­plete dephos­pho­ryl­a­tion or low yield due to pro­tein aggre­ga­tion. A sys­tem­atic method to gen­er­ate fully non-phos­phor­ y­lated kinases is needed for bio­chem­i­cal, bio­phys­i­cal and kinetic stud­ies to gain a bet­ter under­stand­ing of kinase reg­u­la­tion.



L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

205

Chap­er­one expres­sion plas­mid set, includ­ing pG-KJE8 (chap­er­ one expressed dnaK-dnaJ-grpE-groES-groEL), pGro7 (chap­er­one expressed groES-GroEL), pKJE7 (chap­er­one expressed dnaK-dnaJgrpE), pG-Tf2 (chap­er­one expressed groES-groEL-tig) and pTf16 (chap­er­one expressed tig), was pur­chased from Ta­Ka­Ra (Japan). For coex­pres­sion, YopH with the same ORF as insect expres­sion sequence was con­structed into pCDF-Duet-1 Vec­tor (Nova­gen). Wild-type BTK and codon opti­mized BTK for E. coli sys­tem (nucleic sequence undis­closed) express­ing the exact same amino acid sequence as insect expres­sion described above were cloned into a pET vec­tor (Nova­gen). Expres­sion of BTK in E. coli cells and sol­u­bil­ity assess­ment

Fig. 1. Com­par­i­son of strat­e­gies to obtain puri­fied non-phos­phor­y­lated kinases. (A) Express and purify kinases directly from E. coli cells with or with­out phos­pha­tase coex­pres­sion. (B) Treat insect cell expressed kinases with phos­pha­tases. (C) Express and purify kinases directly from insect cells with phos­pha­tase coex­pres­sion.

Recently, the expres­sion of 62 human kinases was com­pared side-by-side in E. coli and insect cells, show­ing pro­tein tyro­sine kinases (PTKs) to be the group of kinases most dif­fi­cult to express in sol­u­ble form in E. coli [7]. The tyro­sine spe­cific phos­pha­tase YopH [13,14] was shown to be able to increase the sol­u­bil­ity of pro­tein tyro­sine kinases c-Abl and c-Src in E. coli cells [15]. In the stud­ies described in this paper, we have dem­on­strated that we can pro­duce sol­u­ble non-phos­phor­y­lated pro­tein tyro­sine kinases (npPTKs) in a sys­tem­atic approach by coex­press­ing PTKs with YopH in insect cells (Fig. 1C). Our results sug­gest that using this method, we could achieve high yield npPTK expres­sion of sev­eral human tyro­sine kinases, includ­ing non-recep­tor kinase BTK [16], JAK3 [17], as well as recep­tor kinase EphA2 [18]. We pro­pose that this approach could be used to pro­duce sol­u­ble npPTKs in gen­eral. Mate­ri­als and meth­ods Mate­ri­als Gen­eral chem­i­cals, includ­ing glyc­erol, BSA, TCEP, DMSO, and reduced glu­ta­thi­one were pur­chased from Sigma–Aldrich. Tris buffer (1 M) at dif­fer­ent pH and 5 M NaCl stock solu­tion were pur­ chased from Brand­Nu Lab­o­rat­roy. Ni–NTA col­umn Hi­sTrap HP (Cat No. 17-5248-02), SP col­umn Hi­Trap SP HP (Cat No. 17-1152-01) and Hep­a­rin col­umn Hi­Trap Hep­a­rin HP (Cat No. 17-0407-01) were pur­ chased from GE Life­science. Ultra pure imid­az­ole was pur­chased from EMD Bio­sci­ence. Cell cul­ture mate­ri­als, anti­bi­otic–anti­my­ cotic solu­tion, 10 mg/ml gen­ta­mi­cin solu­tion, FBS and insect cell growth medium SF-900-II SFM, were pur­chased from Invit­ro­gen. Anti­bod­ies were pur­chased from Cell Sig­nal­ing (anti-pTyr), Ab­cam (Anti-pY223 BTK), Pharm­in­gen (Anti-pY551 BTK), and Promega (anti-His6 and AP-con­ju­gated sec­ond­ary anti­body). Con­structs and bac­u­lo­vi­rus gen­er­a­tion Bac­ulo­vi­ruses were gen­er­ated using the Bac-to-Bac sys­tem (Invit­ro­gen). The tyro­sine phos­pha­tase YopH (NP-052424, full length) from Yer­sinia was engi­neered to express the full length pro­ tein with N-ter­mi­nal Flag tag for detec­tion pur­pose. Kinases used as exam­ples were full length BTK (NP_000052, full length) with Cter­mi­nal His-tag, JAK3 cat­a­lytic domain (NP_000206, amino acids 813–1104) and EphA2 cat­a­lytic domain with N-ter­mi­nal GST tags (NP_004422, amino acids 560–976).

1 Abbre­vi­a­tions used: PTKs, pro­tein tyro­sine kinases; npPTKs, non-phos­phor­y­lated pro­tein tyro­sine kinases; TIPS, Ti­ter­less Infected-cells Pres­er­va­tion and Scale-up.

Bac­te­ria strain BL21-AI (Invit­ro­gen) was used in all exper­i­ments. Over­night cul­tured cells were diluted 1:50 into fresh LB medium with anti­bi­ot­ics and grown at 37 °C until OD600 to 0.6 in shak­ing flasks. Then expres­sion was induced by add­ing 0.5 mM IPTG and 0.2% l-arab­i­nose (addi­tional 10 ng/ml tet­ra­cy­clin hydro­chlo­ride for cells with pG-KJE8 and pG-tf2) for 4 h. Cells were col­lected with cen­tri­fu­ga­tion. Cells from 1 ml cul­ture were sus­pended in 0.5 ml buffer con­tain­ ing 50 mM Tris pH 7.6, 150 mM NaCl and 5 mM TCEP, lysed using a so­ni­ca­tor (Vir­Son­ic 100, Vir­Tis) with 10 pulses 1 s/pulse. The insol­ u­ble pro­tein and cell debris were sed­i­mented through a 30 min cen­tri­fu­ga­tion at 14,000 rpm in a desk­top cen­tri­fuge machine (Cen­ tri­fuge 5417C, Ep­pen­dorf) at 4 °C. The super­na­tants were used as sol­u­ble frac­tions. Prep­a­ra­tion of bac­u­lo­vi­rus infected insect cells (BIIC) stocks The Ti­ter­less Infected-cells Pres­er­va­tion and Scale-up (TIPS) method [19] was used for pro­tein expres­sion and coex­pres­sion. The key fea­ture of the TIPS method is the prep­a­ra­tion of bac­u­lo­ vi­rus infected insect cells (BIIC). Briefly, Sf9 cells were grown in SF-900-II SFM con­tain­ing 10% FBS, 10 mg/L gen­ta­mi­cin and 10 ml/ L anti­bi­otic-anti­my­cotic. Cells were infected with bac­ulo­vi­ruses when the cell den­sity was »0.8 £ 106 cells/ml. The growth curve of infected cells was mon­i­tored with a Ce­dex (In­no­va­tis). Cells were har­vested with cen­tri­fu­ga­tion at 1000g for 10 min once the diam­e­ ter of the cells had increased by 3–4 lm with via­bil­ity greater than 90%. Then the cell pel­lets were resus­pended to 1 £ 107 cells/ml in cryo­pres­er­va­tion media con­tain­ing 90% (v/v) SF-900-II SFM, 10% (v/v) DMSO and 1% (w/v) BSA. Pro­tein expres­sion and puri­fi­ca­tion in insect cells Kinases were expressed in Sf21 cells with and with­out the phos­ pha­tase YopH. Sf21 cells were grown in sus­pen­sion at 27 °C in SF900 SFM II. At a den­sity of 0.8 £ 106 cells/ml, cells were infected with kinases alone or in com­bi­na­tion with YopH. 1 BIIC was used to infect 5 L of cells. In the case of coex­pres­sion, 1 BIIC of kinase com­bined with 1BIIC of YopH was used to infect 10 L of cells. The cells were mon­i­tored daily with respect to their den­sity, via­bil­ity, aggre­ga­tion sta­tus and size. Cells were har­vested with cen­tri­fu­ga­ tion at 1000g for 10 min when the via­bil­ity of the cells was »90% and their size had increased sig­nif­i­cantly, typ­i­cally occur­ring 72 h after BIIC inoc­u­la­tion. His-tagged BTK was puri­fied using metal affin­ity chro­ma­tog­ra­ phy fol­lowed by ion-exchange chro­ma­tog­ra­phy. Cells (1 L) were sus­pended in 100 ml lysis buffer (Buffer NA) con­tain­ing 50 mM Tris pH 7.6, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM TCEP and pro­te­ase inhib­i­tors. The cells were lysed with a mi­cro­flu­i­diz­er (Watts Flui­dair). The insol­u­ble pro­tein and cell debris were sed­i­mented through a 2 h cen­tri­fu­ga­ tion at 40,000g at 4 °C. The super­na­tant was fil­tered and loaded with 5 mM imid­az­ole onto a Hi­sTrap HP col­umn equil­i­brated with

206

L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

0.5% buffer NB (buffer NA con­ta­inng 1 M imid­az­ole). The col­umn was step-washed with 0.5, 2.5, 5 and 10% buffer NB before the pro­ tein was eluted using 25% buffer NB. The 25% buffer elu­tion was dia­lyzed against dial­y­sis buffer (Buffer SPA): 50 mM Tris pH 7.6, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.02% Tri­ton X-100 and 2.5 mM DTT over­ night at 4 °C. The dia­lyzed pro­tein was loaded onto an ion exchange col­umn Hi­Trap SP FF, equil­i­brated with buffer SPA. Pro­teins were eluted with a lin­ear gra­di­ent of 0–80% buffer SPB (buffer SPA con­ tain­ing 1 M NaCl) and dia­lyzed against buffer SPA con­tain­ing 10% glyc­erol over­night at 4 °C. GST-tagged JAK3 and Eph2A were puri­fied with GST affin­ity chro­ma­tog­ra­phy fol­lowed by Hep­a­rin chro­ma­tog­ra­phy. 1 L of cells was then lysed and cen­tri­fuged sim­i­larly to the BTK puri­fi­ca­tion in 50 ml lysis buffer GL con­tain­ing 50 mM Tris pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 10% glyc­erol and 5 mM DTT. The super­na­tant was rocked with 5 ml Glu­ta­thi­one FF resin over­night at 4 °C. The resin was washed with buffer GL and buffer HA con­tain­ing 50 mM Tris pH 7.4 and 2 mM DTT before the pro­teins were eluted using 50 mM Tris pH 8.0, 2 mM DTT and 20 mM glu­ta­thi­one (reduced). Then the eluted pro­tein was loaded onto a Hep­a­rin HP col­umn equil­i­brated with buffer HA. Pro­ teins were eluted with a lin­ear gra­di­ent 0–100% buffer HB (HA con­ tain­ing 0.75 M NaCl). Elu­tion peaks were ana­lyzed with SDS–PAGE, and dia­lyzed against stor­age buffer con­tain­ing 50 mM Tris pH 8.0, 50 mM NaCl, 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM DTT and 25% glyc­erol. Con­cen­tra­tion of the pro­teins was deter­mined with Brad­ford assay (Bio-Rad). All pro­teins were flash-fro­zen in liquid nitro­gen fol­low­ing final dial­y­sis and stored at ¡80 °C. BTK auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion and phos­phor­y­la­tion with Syk BTK auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion and phos­phor­y­la­tion by Syk (Invit­ro­ gen) were mon­i­tored with Western blots and mass spec­tros­copy

anal­y­sis. Puri­fied BTK was diluted to the final con­cen­tra­tion of 0.1 mg/ml in 50 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 0.01% BRIJ-35, 10 mM MgCl2, 1 mM EGTA with and with­out Syk (mole ratio of BTK and Syk is 20:1), and the reac­tions were ini­ti­ated by add­ing 0.5 mM ATP at room tem­per­a­ture. Sam­ples were taken out as the reac­tion pro­ ceeded, and the reac­tions were stopped with EDTA to a final con­ cen­tra­tion of 100 mM. The sam­ples were ana­lyzed by SDS–PAGE/ Western blot­ing and sub­mit­ted for mass spec­tros­copy anal­y­sis. Mass spec­tros­copy The pro­tein mass was deter­mined on a Ther­mo­Finn­i­gan LTQ mass spec­trom­e­ter cou­pled with an Ag­i­lent Tech­nol­o­gies 1100 HPLC sys­tem. Buffer A (water with 0.2% for­mic acid) and buffer B (acto­nit­ri­le with 0.2% for­mic acid) were used as mobile phases for the HPLC sys­tems. Pro­tein sam­ples were loaded onto a Mi­cro­trap pro­tein col­umn (Mi­chrom Bio­re­sources Inc prod­uct 0001309) preequil­i­brated with 2% buffer B with a flow rate of 0.2 ml/min, and eluted with a gra­di­ent scheme: a lin­ear increase to 70% buffer B in 8 min, then another lin­ear increase to 98% buffer B in 2 min. The MS data were col­lected in positive ion mode by full MS scan from m/z 300 to 2000. The pro­tein molec­u­lar weight was cal­cu­lated by de­con­vo­lut­ing the mass spec­trum with Pro­Mass soft­ware. SDS–PAGE and Western blot All SDS–PAGE anal­y­sis was per­formed using Nu­PAGE 4–12% Bis–Tris Gels with the MES run­ning buffer sys­tem (Invit­ro­gen). Gels were either stained with Coomassie Blue or transb­lot­ted to PVDF mem­brane using the iBlot sys­tem (Invit­ro­gen) for Western anal­y­sis. The Western blot was devel­oped with Promega Western Blue method. Briefly, the PVDF mem­brane was incu­bated with the

Fig. 2. Expres­sion strat­e­gies to improve BTK sol­u­bil­ity and yield in E. coli cells. (A) Coex­pres­sion of chap­er­ones affects sol­u­ble BTK level. Sol­u­ble frac­tions and total lysates are labeled as S and T, respec­tively. Sam­ples loaded are equiv­a­lent to 20 ll cul­ture. BTK alone (Lane 1) and coex­pres­sed with chap­er­one groES-groEL-tig (Lane 2), Tig (Lane 3), groES-groEL (Lane 4), dnaK-dnaJ-grpE-groES-groEL (Lane 5) and dnaK-dnaJ-grpE (Lane 6). (B) Coex­pres­sion of YopH improves sol­u­ble BTK level by about one­fold. Lane 1: sol­u­ble frac­tion from 2.5 ll BTK express­ing sf21 cells; lane 2: sol­u­ble frac­tion from 20 ll E. coli cul­ture with BTK expres­sion alone; lane 3: sol­u­ble frac­tion from 20 ll E. coli cul­ture with BTK and YopH coex­pres­sion. (C) Expres­sion of BTK with­out codon opti­mi­za­tion. Lane 1: total lysate from 20 ll wildt-type BTK express­ing E. coli cul­ture; lane 2: sol­u­ble frac­tion from 20 ll wild-type BTK express­ing E. coli cul­ture. (D) Expres­sion of one codon opti­mized BTK. Lane 1: total lysate from 20 ll a codon opti­mized BTK express­ing E. coli cul­ture; lane 2: sol­u­ble frac­tion from 20 ll the codon opti­mized BTK express­ing E. coli cul­ture. (A and B) Western blot­ting results with anti-His6 anti­body, (C and D) Coomassie Blue stained SDS–PAGE.



L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

primary anti­body (all primary anti­bod­ies in this work were used in 1:1000 dilu­tion in 5% Car­na­tion non­fat milk in TBST buffer) after it was blot­ted with 5% Car­na­tion non­fat milk in TBST buffer for 30 min. The mem­brane was washed three times with TBST (10 min/ wash). Then the mem­brane was probed with Promega AP-con­ju­ gated sec­ond­ary anti­body in TBST for 30 min. Then the mem­brane was devel­oped with 5 ml Western Blue Sta­bi­lized Sub­strate for Alka­line Phos­pha­tase (Promega) after being washed three times with TBST (10 min/wash). Results and dis­cus­sion We con­structed the idea to develop a method to obtain npPTKs while study­ing the acti­va­tion mech­a­nism of BTK in vitro. BTK is one of many PTKs shown to be acti­vated by its tyro­sine phos­phor­y­la­ tion [20–22]. To under­stand the role of phos­phor­y­la­tion in human BTK kinase acti­va­tion and its impact on small mol­e­cule inhib­i­ tor dis­cov­ery, we needed to develop expres­sion and puri­fi­ca­tion approaches which would allow us to obtain sig­nif­i­cant amounts of human full length BTK pro­tein in the fully non-phos­phor­y­lated state (npBTK). An E. coli expres­sion sys­tem was tried for its known lack of post-trans­la­tional mod­i­fi­ca­tion and lit­er­a­ture pre­ce­dence [23]. Unfor­tu­nately, we only obtained a low expres­sion level in E. coli using the wild-type human BTK gene sequence, the major­ ity of which accu­mu­lated in inclu­sion bodies. Coex­press­ing with chap­er­one groES-groEL had increased sol­u­ble BTK in the lysate (Fig. 2A), but had no sig­nif­i­cant impact on the BTK yield after puri­ fi­ca­tion due to extra steps to elim­i­nate co-puri­fied chap­er­ones. To address the prob­lem of sol­u­bil­ity, we attempted phos­pha­tase coex­

207

pres­sion. Tyro­sine phos­pha­tase YopH has been shown to increase the sol­u­bil­ity of pro­tein tyro­sine kinases Abl and Src in E. coli [15]. Using a sim­i­lar method, we found that YOP coex­pres­sion only mar­ gin­ally increased BTK sol­u­bil­ity with a low yield not sus­tain­able for bio­chem­i­cal or struc­tural biol­ogy stud­ies (Fig. 2B). We were able to increase the BTK expres­sion level more than ten­fold with gene opti­mi­za­tion (Fig. 2C and D); how­ever the sol­u­ble BTK level remained low. Insect cell expres­sion and post-expres­sion phos­pha­tase treat­ ment approaches were explored in par­al­lel (Fig. 1B). As eukary­otic host cells, insect cells have been shown to be bet­ter host cells for human pro­tein expres­sion [7,24]. Bac­u­lo­vi­rus encod­ing hexa-His­ tine tagged full length human BTK was pro­duced and infec­tion of sf21 insect cells was per­formed using the Ti­ter­less Infected-cells Pres­er­va­tion and Scale-up (TIPS) method described pre­vi­ously [19]. Pro­tein expres­sion anal­y­sis sug­gested that human BTK pro­tein expressed well in insect cells and the major­ity of the pro­tein was in the sol­u­ble frac­tion. After metal affin­ity puri­fi­ca­tion fol­lowed by ion-exchange chro­ma­tog­ra­phy (see Mate­ri­als and meth­ods for detail), we were able to obtain »4 mg BTK pro­tein with more than 90% purity from 1 L sf21 cells at a den­sity of 1.2 £ 106 cells/ml (Fig. 3A). When exam­ined by Western anal­y­sis using pY anti­body and mass spec­tros­copy, BTK obtained this way was found to be in a mix­ ture of highly het­er­o­ge­neous phos­phor­y­lated states (Fig. 3B and D). We next tried to gen­er­ate npBTK by treat­ing puri­fied BTK from the insect cells with a vari­ety of phos­pha­tases (k-PPase, YOP, TC PTP and CIP from New England Bio­Labs) fol­lowed by rep­u­ri­fi­ca­tion. This approach turned out to be labor inten­sive and inef­fi­cient, with BTK often pre­cip­i­tat­ing out of the solu­tion.

Fig. 3. BTK from insect cells with or with­out coex­pres­sion with YopH. (A) Equal amount of puri­fied BTK was ana­lyzed on SDS–PAGE, stained with Coomassie Blue. Lane 1: 5 lg puri­fied BTK with­out YopH coex­pres­sion; lane 2: 5 lg puri­fied BTK with YopH coex­pres­sion. (B) Equal amount of puri­fied BTK was ana­lyzed on SDS–PAGE and Western-blot­ ted with pY anti­body from Cell Sig­nal­ing. Lane 1: 200 ng puri­fied BTK with­out YopH coex­pres­sion; lane 2: 200 ng puri­fied BTK with YopH coex­pres­sion. (C) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis of puri­fied BTK from insect cells with YopH coex­pres­sion. (D) Mass spec­trum anal­y­sis of puri­fied BTK from insect cells. The the­o­ret­i­cal molec­u­lar weight of this con­struct is 81, 244 Da. BTK from insect cells with­out YopH coex­pres­sion is a mix­ture of pro­tein at var­i­ous phos­phor­y­la­tion stages with an aver­age of two phos­phor­y­la­tion sites. “P” stands for one phos­phor­y­la­tion mod­i­fi­ca­tion.

208

L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

Given the poor results of the post-expres­sion treat­ment with phos­pha­tases and the E. coli expres­sion, we explored the coex­ pres­sion of BTK with the tyro­sine phos­pha­tase YopH in insect cells for the fol­low­ing rea­sons: (1) insect cells are bet­ter hosts to express sol­u­ble kinases com­pared to E. coli cells [7]; (2) BTK is a pro­tein tyro­sine kinase and is known to be acti­vated by its tyro­ sine phos­phor­y­la­tion (Y551 and Y223); (3) YopH is a phos­pha­ tase highly spe­cific for phos­pho­ty­ro­sine [14]. To test this idea, we gen­er­ated bac­u­lo­vi­rus encod­ing full length YopH with an Nter­mi­nal FLAG tag for coex­pres­sion. With our coex­pres­sion and puri­fi­ca­tion pro­ce­dure (see Mate­ri­als and meth­ods for detail), we rou­tinely obtained »4 mg pro­tein with >90% purity from 1 L sf21 cells (Fig. 3A), com­pa­ra­ble to BTK yield with­out YopH coex­ pres­sion. Data from Western-blot and mass spec­trum anal­y­sis sug­gested that tyro­sine res­i­dues in BTK from the insect cells with YopH coex­pres­sion were not phos­phor­y­lated (Fig. 3B and C). The observed molec­u­lar weight of the BTK pro­tein from mass spec­tros­copy cor­re­sponded to the fully non-phos­phor­y­lated

full length BTK pro­tein. The recombinant npBTK pro­duced this way was shown to retain its bio­log­i­cal func­tion. It can undergo auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion reac­tion on multiple res­i­dues upon incu­ ba­tion with ATP and Mg2+ in a time depen­dent fash­ion (Fig. 4A). Addi­tion­ally the BTK upstream kinase Syk can fur­ther accel­er­ate phos­phor­y­la­tion mod­i­fi­ca­tion on the recombinant BTK (Fig. 4B). We have also exam­ined the phos­phor­y­la­tion sta­tus on Y223 and Y551 res­i­dues, phos­phor­y­la­tion of which has been sug­gested to be essen­tial for BTK to be fully active [20–22]. Western anal­y­ sis of the BTK auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion reac­tion using pY551 and pY223 spe­cific anti­bod­ies sug­gested that both tyro­sine res­i­ dues can be phos­phor­y­lated in a time depen­dent man­ner and the phos­phor­y­la­tion on the Y551 res­i­due appeared faster than the phos­phor­y­la­tion on Y223 res­i­due (Fig. 4C and D). Using this approach and com­bined with site-directed muta­gen­e­sis, we have per­formed var­i­ous kinetic and mech­a­nism stud­ies to explore the role of Y223 and Y551 phos­phor­y­la­tion in BTK activ­ity reg­u­la­tion (results will be described in a sep­a­rate man­u­script).

Fig. 4. Acti­va­tion anal­y­sis of puri­fied npBTK. (A) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis on the auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion of npBTK. npBTK was incu­bated with ATP/Mg2+ at room tem­per­a­ture, and sam­ples were with­drawn at cer­tain time points and ana­lyzed with a mass spec­trom­e­ter. (B) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis on the phos­phor­y­la­tion of npBTK by upstream kinase Syk. npBTK was incu­bated with Syk and ATP/Mg2+ at room tem­per­a­ture, and sam­ples were with­drawn at cer­tain time points and ana­lyzed with a mass spec­trom­e­ter. (C and D) Western anal­y­sis on npBTK auto-phos­phor­y­la­tion with BTK pY551 and pY223 anti­bod­ies, respec­tively. Lanes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are reac­tions at 0, 5, 10, 15 and 30 min, respec­tively. BTK (200 ng) was loaded in each lane. The details of the exper­i­ment are described in Mate­ri­als and meth­ods.



L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

PTKs have been shown to be the most dif­fi­cult kinases to express in sol­u­ble form using E. coli [7]. Given our suc­cess with pro­duc­ing BTK using YopH insect cell coex­pres­sion method, we decided to test our insect cell YopH coex­pres­sion approach with other PTKs. We applied the method on addi­tional human PTKs includ­ing cyto­ plas­mic kinase JAK3 and recep­tor kinase EphA2. What is sig­nif­i­ cant is that this method worked equally well on these addi­tional unre­lated PTKs. The JAK3 kinase domain (JH1 domain, amino acid 813–1104) and the EphA2 intra­cel­lu­lar cat­a­lytic domain (amino acid 560–976) were GST-tagged. Both pro­teins were puri­fied with GST affin­ity chro­ma­tog­ra­phy fol­lowed by Hep­a­rin chro­ma­tog­ra­phy (see Mate­ri­als and meth­ods for detail), and ana­lyzed with Western and mass spec­tros­copy. As shown in Fig. 5, expres­sion of JAK3 alone resulted in het­er­o­ge­neous phos­phor­y­la­tion on the pro­tein (Fig. 5A and D), while coex­pres­sion with YopH phos­pha­tase pro­ duced a com­pletely de-phos­phor­y­lated JAK3 (Fig. 5B and C). The molec­u­lar weight of the major peak agreed well with the cal­cu­ lated non-phos­phor­y­lated JAK3 with N-Met removal, the molec­u­ lar weight of the minor peak was equal to the the­o­ret­i­cal molec­u­ lar weight of acet­y­lated JAK3. Sim­i­lar results were observed with EphA2 recombinant pro­tein (Fig. 6). There were two more minor peaks (MW 74, 822 and 74, 906) other than the major non-phos­ phor­y­lated EphA2 peak (MW 74, 739) in the mass spec­tros­copy (Fig. 6C) of YopH coex­pres­sion prod­uct. Fur­ther stud­ies are needed to under­stand whether these are Ser/Thr phos­phor­y­la­tion states of the EphA2 pro­tein when expressed in insect cells. Com­pared with the enzy­matic post-expres­sion treat­ment (Fig. 1B), the bac­u­lo­vi­rus med­i­ated coex­pres­sion (Fig. 1C) has sev­eral

209

advan­ta­ges besides cost. First, it greatly sim­pli­fies the over­all pro­ cess which is evi­dent in Fig. 1, and does not require enzy­matic treat­ment and re-puri­fi­ca­tion. Sec­ond, post-expres­sion enzy­matic treat­ment is an opti­mi­za­tion pro­cess like any assay devel­op­ment. It needs a lot of work to iden­tify the opti­mal con­di­tion. Third, post-expres­sion enzy­matic treat­ment requires pro­long incu­ba­tion of puri­fied pro­tein on ice or room tem­per­a­ture. The pro­tein sta­bil­ ity will limit this approach. Fourth, some­times there is no easy trans­la­tion from small scale test to scale-up for post-expres­sion treat­ment. This actu­ally was the bot­tle neck when we treated BTK with phos­pha­tases. With the bac­u­lo­vi­rus med­i­ated coex­pres­sion, cer­tain phos­pha­tases might also affect the expres­sion and fold­ing abil­ity of insect cells there­fore caus­ing some unde­sired results. For­tu­nately it is not the case for YopH phos­pha­tase. With all PTKs tested, the yield for npPTKs stays the same if not bet­ter. An alter­na­tive option to coex­pres­sion is to use virus gen­er­ated from a sin­gle plas­mid car­ry­ing both PTKs and YopH using duel vec­ tors (pFast­Bac DUAL etc). In prin­ci­ple, it should pro­duce npPTKs. The down­sides are (1) it only pro­duces npPTKs; (2) for every PTK, one dual expres­sion con­struct needs to be made; (3) one will lose the flex­i­bil­ity to adjust kinase-phos­pha­tase ratio nec­es­sary to achieve opti­mal expres­sion con­di­tion. On the other hand, our strat­egy will pro­vide the flex­i­bil­ity to adjust kinase:phos­pha­tase ratio to achieve opti­mal npPTK yield, to pro­duce PTK or npPTK with only one YopH con­struct. There­fore it pro­vides flex­i­bil­ity as well as cost effi­ciency. In sum­mary, we report a method to obtain high yield expres­sion of npPTKs from insect cells with YopH coex­pres­sion. Coex­pres­sion of kinase and phos­pha­tase in mam­ma­lian cells has long been used

Fig. 5. JAK3 from insect cells with or with­out coex­pres­sion with YopH. (A) Equal amount of puri­fied JAK3 was ana­lyzed on SDS–PAGE, stained with Coomassie Blue. Lane 1: 5 lg puri­fied JAK3 with­out YopH coex­pres­sion; lane 2: 5 lg puri­fied JAK3 with YopH coex­pres­sion. (B) Equal amount of puri­fied JAK3 was ana­lyzed on SDS–PAGE and Western-blot­ted with pY anti­body from Cell Sig­nal­ing. Lane 1: 200 ng puri­fied JAK3 with­out YopH coex­pres­sion; lane 2: 200 ng puri­fied JAK3 with YopH coex­pres­sion. (C) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis of puri­fied JAK3 with YopH coex­pres­sion. (D) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis of puri­fied JAK3 from insect cells with­out YopH coex­pres­sion. The the­o­ret­i­cal molec­u­lar weight of this con­struct is 59, 642 Da or 59, 511 Da (N-ter­mi­nal Met removal).

210

L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

Fig. 6. EphA2 from insect cells with or with­out coex­pres­sion with YopH. (A) Equal amount of puri­fied EphA2 was ana­lyzed on SDS–PAGE, stained with Coomassie. Lane 1: 5 lg puri­fied EphA2 with­out YopH coex­pres­sion; lane 2: 5 lg puri­fied EphA2 with YopH coex­pres­sion. (B) Equal amount of puri­fied EphA2 was ana­lyzed on SDS–PAGE and Western-blot­ted with pY anti­body from Cell Sig­nal­ing. Lane 1: 200 ng puri­fied EphA2 with­out YopH coex­pres­sion; lane 2: 200 ng puri­fied EphA2 with YopH coex­pres­sion. (C) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis of puri­fied EphA2 from insect cells with YopH coex­pres­sion. (D) Mass Spec­trum anal­y­sis of puri­fied EphA2 from insect cells with­out YopH coex­ pres­sion. The the­o­ret­i­cal molec­u­lar weight of this con­struct is 74, 906 Da. The molec­u­lar weight of unphos­phor­y­lated peaks (74, 739 Da in C and 74, 742 Da in D) »165 Da less than the the­o­ret­i­cal molec­u­lar weight may be due to other mod­i­fi­ca­tions and have no sim­ple expla­na­tion.

to study the kinase acti­va­tion mech­a­nism and elu­ci­date its bio­log­ i­cal func­tion. It has also been used in E. coli expres­sion sys­tems to gen­er­ate non-phos­phor­y­lated kinases or improve kinase yield [8,15,25,26]. To our knowl­edge, this is the first report to employ kinase/phos­pha­tase coex­pres­sion strat­egy from insect cells to pro­duce npPTKs. Tak­ing advan­tage of the insect cell’s eukary­otic expres­sion sys­tem, which has an excel­lent track record for gen­er­ at­ing human kinases, we were able to pro­duce func­tional and sol­ u­ble npPTKs through coex­pres­sion with the tyro­sine phos­pha­tase YopH. This method was tested against cyto­plas­mic tyro­sine kinases as well as recep­tor tyro­sine kinase, and achieved equally positive results. These results sug­gest that the insect cell YopH coex­pres­sion method can be gen­er­ally applied to other tyro­sine kinases. It greatly sim­pli­fies the pro­cess to gen­er­ate npPTKs, and will con­trib­ute to bet­ ter under­stand­ing the mech­a­nism of the tyro­sine kinase acti­va­tion pro­cess and the dis­cov­ery of kinase inhib­i­tors with novel inhi­bi­tion mech­a­nisms. It is rea­son­able to believe that a sim­i­lar pro­cess can be applied to gen­er­ate non-phos­phor­y­lated Ser/Thr kinases in insect cells by coex­press­ing them with a Ser/Thr phos­pha­tase. Acknowl­edg­ments We thank Alexis C. Meng for her help in pre­par­ing of the man­u­ script, Rob­ert Stan­ton for his help­ful inputs. Ref­er­ences [1] M.E. Noble, J.A. Endi­cott, L.N. John­son, Pro­tein kinase inhib­i­tors: insights into drug design from struc­ture, Sci­ence 303 (2004) 1800–1805.

[2] J.S. Se­bolt-Leo­pold, J.M. English, Mech­a­nisms of drug inhi­bi­tion of sig­nal­ing mol­e­cules, Nature 441 (2006) 457–462. [3] S.R. Hub­bard, L. Wei, L. Ellis, W.A. Hend­rick­son, Crys­tal struc­ture of the tyro­sine kinase domain of the human insu­lin recep­tor, Nature 372 (1994) 746–754. [4] S.R. Hub­bard, Crys­tal struc­ture of the acti­vated insu­lin recep­tor tyro­sine kinase in com­plex with pep­tide sub­strate and ATP ana­log, EMBO J. 16 (1997) 5572–5581. [5] S.R. Hub­bard, Pro­tein tyro­sine kinases: auto­reg­u­la­tion and small-mol­e­cule inhi­bi­tion, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12 (2002) 735–741. [6] T. Schin­dler, W. Born­mann, P. Pel­lic­e­na, W.T. Miller, B. Clark­son, J. Kuri­yan, Struc­tural mech­a­nism for STI-571 inhi­bi­tion of Abelson tyro­sine kinase, Sci­ ence 289 (2000) 1938–1942. [7] S.P. Cham­bers, D.A. Aus­ten, J.R. Ful­ghum, W.M. Kim, High-through­put screen­ ing for sol­u­ble recombinant expressed kinases in Esch­e­richia coli and insect cells, Pro­tein Expr. Purif. 36 (2004) 40–47. [8] R.A. Elling, B.T. Tan­go­nan, D.M. Penny, J.T. Smith, D.E. Vin­cent, S.K. Han­sen, T. O’Brien, M.J. Ro­ma­now­ski, Mouse Aurora A: expres­sion in Esch­e­richia coli and puri­fi­ca­tion, Pro­tein Expr. Purif. 54 (2007) 139–146. [9] P. Du, P. Lo­u­la­kis, C. Luo, A. Mist­ry, S.P. Si­mons, P.K. LeM­otte, F. Raj­amo­han, K. Ra­fid­i, K.G. Cole­man, K.F. Ge­og­he­gan, Z. Xie, Phos­phor­y­la­tion of ser­ine res­ i­dues in his­ti­dine-tag sequences attached to recombinant pro­tein kinases: a cause of het­er­o­ge­ne­ity in mass and com­pli­ca­tions in func­tion, Pro­tein Expr. Purif. 44 (2005) 121–129. [10] C.K. Smith, D. Carr, T.W. May­hood, W. Jin, K. Gray, T.W. Wind­sor, Expres­sion and puri­fi­ca­tion of phos­phor­y­lated and non-phos­phor­y­lated human MEK1, Pro­tein Expr. Purif. 52 (2007) 446–456. [11] P.M. Chan, S. I­lan­gum­a­ran, J. La Rose, A. Cha­krabartty, R. Rot­ta­pel, Auto­in­hi­ bi­tion of the Kit recep­tor tyro­sine kinase by the cyto­solic juxt­a­mem­brane region, Mol. Cell. Biol. 23 (2003) 3067–3078. [12] J.H. Till, M. Bec­er­ra, A. Watty, Y. Lu, Y. Ma, T.A. Neu­bert, S.J. Bur­den, S.R. Hub­ bard, Crys­tal struc­ture of the MuSK tyro­sine kinase insights into recep­tor auto­ reg­u­la­tion, Struc­ture 10 (2002) 1187–1196. [13] K.L. Guan, J.E. Dixon, Pro­tein tyro­sine phos­pha­tase activ­ity of an essen­tial vir­u­ lence deter­mi­nant in Yer­sinia, Sci­ence 249 (1990) 553–556. [14] Z.Y. Zhang, J.C. Clem­ens, H.L. Schu­bert, J.A. Stuc­key, M.W. Fischer, D.M. Hume, M.A. Saper, J.E. Dixon, Expres­sion, puri­fi­ca­tion, and phys­i­co­chem­i­cal char­ac­ter­ iza­tion of a recombinant Yer­sinia pro­tein tyro­sine phos­pha­tase, J. Biol. Chem. 267 (1992) 23759–23766.



L. Wang et al. / Protein Expression and Purification 61 (2008) 204–211

[15] M.A. See­lig­er, M. Young, M.N. Hen­der­son, P. Pel­lic­e­na, D.S. King, A.M. Fa­lick, J. Kuri­yan, High yield bac­te­rial expres­sion of active c-Abl and c-Src tyro­sine kinases, Pro­tein Sci. 14 (2005) 3135–3139. [16] C.I. Smith, B. Ba­skin, P. Hu­mire-Gre­iff, J.N. Zhou, P.G. Ols­son, H.S. Man­iar, P. Kjel­len, J.D. Lam­bris, B. Chris­tens­son, L. Ham­mar­strom, Expres­sion of Bru­ton’s aga­mma­glob­u­lin­emia tyro­sine kinase gene, BTK, is selec­tively down-reg­u­lated in T lym­pho­cytes and plasma cells, J. Im­mu­ol. 152 (1994) 557–565. [17] S.G. Rane, E.P. Red­dy, JAK3: a novel JAK kinase asso­ci­ated with ter­mi­nal dif­fer­ en­ti­a­tion of hema­to­poi­etic cells, Onco­gene 9 (1994) 2415–2423. [18] R.A. Lind­berg, T. Hunter, cDNA clon­ing and char­ac­ter­iza­tion of eck, an epi­ the­lial cell recep­tor pro­tein-tyro­sine kinase in the eph/elk fam­ily of pro­tein kinase, Mol. Cell. Biol. 10 (1990) 6316–6324. [19] D.J. Wa­silko, E. Lee, TIPS: ti­ter­less infected-cells pres­er­va­tion and scale-up, Bio­ Pro­cess­ing J. 5 (3) (2006) 29–32. [20] D.E. Afar, H. Park, B.W. Ho­well, D.J. Raw­lings, J. Coo­per, O.N. Wit­te, Reg­u­la­tion of Btk by Src fam­ily tyro­sine kinases, Mol. Cell. Biol. 16 (1996) 3465–3471.

211

[21] H. Park, M.I. Wahl, D.E. Afar, C.W. Tur­ck, D.J. Raw­lings, C. Tam, A.M. Scha­ren­ berg, J.P. Kinet, O.N. Witt, Reg­u­la­tion of BTK func­tion by a major phos­phor­y­la­ tion site within the SH3 domain, Immu­nity 4 (1996) 515–525. [22] D.J. Raw­lings, A.M. Scha­ren­berg, H. Park, M.I. Wahl, S. Lin, R.M. Kato, A.C. Fluck­ i­ger, O.N. Wit­te, J.P. Kinet, Acti­va­tion of BTK by a phos­phor­y­la­tion mech­a­nism ini­ti­ated by SRC fam­ily kinases, Sci­ence 291 (1996) 822–825. [23] K. Bence, W. Ma, T. Ko­zasa, X.Y. Hu­ang, Direct stim­u­la­tion of Bru­ton’s tyro­sine kinase by Gq-pro­tein a-sub­unit, Nature 389 (1997) 296–299. [24] J.M. Vlak, R.J. Keus, Bac­u­lo­vi­rus expres­sion vec­tor sys­tem for pro­duc­tion of viral vac­cines, Adv. Bio­tech­nol. Pro­cess. 14 (1990) 91–128. [25] T. Mat­sui, K. Tan­i­ha­ra, T. Date, Expres­sion of unphos­phor­y­lated form of human dou­ble-stranded RNA-acti­vated pro­tein kinase in Esch­e­richia coli, Bio­chem. Bio­ phys. Res. Com­mun. 284 (2001) 798–807. [26] W. Wang, A. Ma­rimu­thu, J. Tsai, A. Kumar, H.I. Kru­pka, C. Zhang, B. Pow­ell, Y. Su­zuki, H. Ngu­yen, M. Tab­riz­izad, C. Luu, B.L. West, Struc­tural char­ac­ter­iza­tion of auto­in­hib­it­ed c-Met kinase pro­duced by coex­pres­sion in bac­te­ria with phos­ pha­tase, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103 (2006) 3563–3568.