Jump to content

Uncompetitive inhibition: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Mathematical definition: exactly the form of the Michaelis–Menten equation
No edit summary
 
(45 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Distinguish|Non-competitive inhibition}}
{{Distinguish|Non-competitive inhibition}}
'''Uncompetitive inhibition''' (which Laidler and Bunting preferred to call '''anti-competitive inhibition''',<ref>{{cite book| last1 = Laidler | first1 = Keith J. | last2 = Bunting | first2 = Peter S. | title = The Chemical Kinetics of Enzyme Action | publisher = Clarendon Press, Oxford | year = 1973}}</ref> but this term has not been widely adopted) is a type of inhibition in which the apparent values of the Michaelis–Menten parameters <math>V</math> and <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math> are decreased in the same proportion.
[[File:Reaction_scheme_uncompetitive_enzyme_inhibition.svg|alt=|thumb|325x325px|General representation of uncompetitive inhibition]]
'''Uncompetitive inhibition''', also known as '''anti-competitive inhibition''', takes place when an [[enzyme inhibitor]] binds only to the complex formed between the [[enzyme]] and the [[substrate (biochemistry)|substrate]] (the E-S complex). Uncompetitive inhibition typically occurs in reactions with two or more substrates or products.


It can be recognized by two observations: first, it cannot be reversed by increasing the substrate concentration <math>a</math>, and second, linear plots show effects on <math>V</math> and <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math>, seen, for example, in the [[Lineweaver–Burk plot]] as parallel rather than intersecting lines. It is sometimes explained by supposing that the inhibitor can bind to the enzyme-substrate complex but not to the free enzyme. This type of mechanism is rather rare,<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1016/0014-5793(86)81424-7| title = Why is uncompetitive inhibition so rare? A possible explanation, with implications for the design of drugs and pesticides|last= Cornish-Bowden | first = A. | journal = FEBS Lett. | volume = 203 | number = 1 | pages = 3–6 | year = 1986}}</ref> and in practice uncompetitive inhibition is mainly encountered as a limiting case of inhibition in two-substrate reactions in which one substrate concentration is varied and the other is held constant at a saturating level.<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1016/0926-6569(63)90226-8 | journal =Biochim. Biophys. Acta | volume = 67 | number = 2 | pages = 173–187 | title = The kinetics of enzyme-catalyzed reactions with two or more substrates or products: II. Inhibition: Nomenclature and theory | author = Cleland, W. W.}}</ref><ref name=fek>{{cite book | title = Fundamentals of Enzyme Kinetics|last= Cornish-Bowden | first = Athel |edition = 4th | year = 2012 | publisher= Wiley-Blackwell, Weinheim | isbn = 978-3-527-33074-4 | pages = 25–75}}</ref><!--This behavior is found in the inhibition of [[acetylcholinesterase]] by tertiary amines (R<sub>3</sub>N). Such compounds bind to the enzyme in its various forms, but the acyl-intermediate-amine complex cannot break down into enzyme plus product.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Mathews|first1=Christopher K.|last2=van Holde|first2=Kensal E.|last3=Appling|first3=Dean R.|last4=Anthony-Cahill|first4=Spencer J. | name-list-style = vanc |title=Biochemistry|date=February 26, 2012|publisher=Pearson|isbn=978-0138004644|edition=4}}</ref>--><!-- takes place when an [[enzyme inhibitor]] binds only to the complex formed between the [[enzyme]] and the [[substrate (biochemistry)|substrate]] (the E-S complex). Uncompetitive inhibition typically occurs in reactions with two or more substrates or products.-->
While uncompetitive inhibition requires that an enzyme-substrate complex must be formed, [[non-competitive inhibition]] can occur with or without the substrate present.

Uncompetitive inhibition is distinguished from competitive inhibition by two observations: first uncompetitive inhibition cannot be reversed by increasing [S] and second, as shown, the [[Lineweaver–Burk plot]] yields parallel rather than intersecting lines. This behavior is found in the inhibition of [[acetylcholinesterase]] by tertiary amines (R<sub>3</sub>N). Such compounds bind to the enzyme in its various forms, but the acyl-intermediate-amine complex cannot break down into enzyme plus product.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Mathews|first1=Christopher K.|last2=van Holde|first2=Kensal E.|last3=Appling|first3=Dean R.|last4=Anthony-Cahill|first4=Spencer J. | name-list-style = vanc |title=Biochemistry|date=February 26, 2012|publisher=Pearson|isbn=978-0138004644|edition=4}}</ref>

==Mechanism==
As inhibitor binds, the amount of ES complex is reduced. This reduction in the effective concentration of the ES complex can be explained by the fact that having the inhibitor bound to the ES complex essentially converts it to ESI complex, which is considered a separate complex altogether. This reduction in ES complex decreases the maximum enzyme activity (V<sub>max</sub>), as it takes longer for the substrate or product to leave the [[active site]]. The reduction in K<sub>m</sub> - the substrate concentration at which the enzyme can operate at half of its maximal velocity, often used to approximate an enzyme's affinity for a substrate - can also be linked back to the decrease in ES complex. Le Chatelier's principle opposes this decrease and attempts to make up for the loss of ES, so more free enzyme is converted to the ES form, and the amount of ES increases overall. An increase in ES generally indicates that the enzyme has a high degree of affinity for its substrate. K<sub>m</sub> decreases as affinity for a substrate increases, though it is not a perfect predictor of affinity since it accounts for other factors as well; regardless, this increase in affinity will be accompanied by a decrease in K<sub>m</sub>.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|title=Biochemistry Free For All Version 1.2 |last1=Ahern|first1=Kevin|last2=Rajagopal|first2=Indira|last3=Tan|first3=Taralyn | name-list-style = vanc |publisher=Creative Commons|year=2017|location=North Carolina|pages=367–368}}</ref>

In general, uncompetitive inhibition works best when substrate concentration is high. An uncompetitive inhibitor need not resemble the substrate of the reaction it is inhibiting. At no concentration of substrate will the activity of the enzyme be higher when an uncompetitive inhibitor is present, but at low concentrations of substrate the enzyme activity difference will be negligible.<ref name = "Athel_2014">{{Cite book|title=Fundamentals of Enzyme Kinetics |first=Athel|last=Cornish-Bowden | edition = 4th|date=2012|publisher=Wiley-VCH, Weinheim|isbn=978-3527330744}}</ref>


==Mathematical definition==
==Mathematical definition==
[[Image:Uncompetitive inhibition.png|thumb|right|[[Lineweaver–Burk plot]] of uncompetitive enzyme inhibition.]]
[[Image:Uncompetitive inhibition.png|thumb|right|[[Lineweaver–Burk plot]] of uncompetitive enzyme inhibition.]]
According to the equation for the [[Lineweaver–Burk plot]],
:<math>\frac{1}{v}=\frac{K_\mathrm{m}}{Va} + {1 \over V}</math>
Where <math>v</math> is the initial [[reaction rate|reaction velocity]], <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math> is the [[Michaelis–Menten constant]], <math>V</math> is the limiting rate, and <math>a</math> is the [[concentration]] of the substrate.<ref name="Cleland 1963">{{cite journal | last = Cleland | first = W. W. | title = The kinetics of enzyme-catalyzed reactions with two or more substrates or products. II. Inhibition: nomenclature and theory | journal = Biochimica et Biophysica Acta | volume = 67 | number = 2 | pages = 173–187 | year = 1963 | pmid = 14021668 | doi = 10.1016/0926-6569(63)90226-8 }}</ref>

The Lineweaver–Burk plot for an uncompetitive inhibitor produces a line parallel to the original enzyme-substrate plot, but with a higher [[y-intercept|intercept on the ordinate]], caused by the presence of an inhibition term <math>1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu}</math>:
:<math>\frac{1}{v}=\frac{K_\mathrm{m}}{Va} +\frac{1+i/K_\mathrm{iu}}{V}</math>
Where <math>i</math> is the concentration of the inhibitor and <math>K_\mathrm{iu}</math> is the uncompetitive inhibition constant.<ref>{{cite web|last=Rhodes|first=David | name-list-style = vanc |title=Enzyme Kinetics - Single Substrate, Uncompetitive Inhibition, Lineweaver-Burk Plot |url= http://www.hort.purdue.edu/rhodcv/hort640c/enzkin1/enzkin1.htm |publisher=Purdue University|access-date=31 August 2013}}</ref><ref name="Cornish-Bowden 1974">{{cite journal |author-link1=Athel Cornish-Bowden| vauthors = Cornish-Bowden A | title = A simple graphical method for determining the inhibition constants of mixed, uncompetitive and non-competitive inhibitors | journal = The Biochemical Journal | volume = 137 | issue = 1 | pages = 143–4 | date = January 1974 | pmid = 4206907 | pmc = 1166095 | doi = 10.1042/bj1370143 }}</ref>


In uncompetitive inhibition at an inhibitor concentration of <math>i</math> the Michaelis–Menten equation takes the following form:
In uncompetitive inhibition at an inhibitor concentration of <math>i</math> the Michaelis–Menten equation takes the following form:<ref name = fek />
:<math> v=\frac{Va}{K_\mathrm{m} +a(1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu})}</math>
:<math> v=\frac{Va}{K_\mathrm{m} +a(1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu})}</math>
in which <math>v</math> is the rate at concentrations <math>a</math> of substrate and <math>i</math> of inhibitor, for limiting rate <math>V</math>, Michaelis constant <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math> and uncompetitive inhibition constant <math>K_\mathrm{iu}</math>.
in which <math>v</math> is the rate at concentrations <math>a</math> of substrate and <math>i</math> of inhibitor, for limiting rate <math>V</math>, Michaelis constant <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math> and uncompetitive inhibition constant <math>K_\mathrm{iu}</math>.


This has exactly the form of the Michaelis–Menten equation, as may be sen by writing it in terms of ''apparent'' kinetic constants:
This has exactly the form of the Michaelis–Menten equation, as may be seen by writing it in terms of ''apparent'' kinetic constants:
:<math> v=\frac{V^\mathrm{app}a}{K_\mathrm{m}^\mathrm{app} +a}</math>
:<math> v=\frac{V^\mathrm{app}a}{K_\mathrm{m}^\mathrm{app} +a}</math>


in which <math>V^\mathrm{app} = \frac{V}{1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu}}\text{ and }K_\mathrm{m}^\mathrm{app} = \frac{K_\mathrm{m}}{1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu}}</math>
in which <math>V^\mathrm{app} = \frac{V}{1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu}}\text{ and }K_\mathrm{m}^\mathrm{app} = \frac{K_\mathrm{m}}{1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu}}</math>


It is important to note that <math>V^\mathrm{app}</math> and <math>K_\mathrm{m}^\mathrm{app}</math> decrease in the same proportions as a result of the inhibition.


At high concentrations of substrate, <math>v</math> approaches <math>\frac{V}{1 + i/K_\mathrm{iu}}</math>. Thus uncompetitive inhibition lowers the apparent value of <math>V</math>, and the apparent value of <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math> by the same factor, leaving the ratio <math>V/K_\mathrm{m}</math> unchanged.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Nelson|first1=David L.|last2=Cox|first2=Michael M. | name-list-style = vanc |title=Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry|date=November 21, 2012|publisher=W.H. Freeman|isbn=978-1429234146|edition=6}}</ref> It is important to note that V<sub>''max''</sub> and K<sub>''m''</sub> decrease at the same rate as a result of the inhibitor.<ref name = "Athel_2014" /> This is apparent when viewing a Lineweaver-Burk plot of uncompetitive enzyme inhibition: the ratio between V and K<sub>''m''</sub> remains the same with or without an inhibitor present.
This is apparent when viewing a Lineweaver-Burk plot of uncompetitive enzyme inhibition: the ratio between V and K<sub>''m''</sub> remains the same with or without an inhibitor present.

This may be seen in any of the common ways of plotting Michaelis–Menten data, such as the [[Lineweaver–Burk plot]], for which for uncompetitive inhibition produces a line parallel to the original enzyme-substrate plot, but with a higher [[y-intercept|intercept on the ordinate]]:<ref>{{cite web|last=Rhodes|first=David | name-list-style = vanc |title=Enzyme Kinetics - Single Substrate, Uncompetitive Inhibition, Lineweaver-Burk Plot |url= http://www.hort.purdue.edu/rhodcv/hort640c/enzkin1/enzkin1.htm |publisher=Purdue University|access-date=31 August 2013}}</ref><ref name="Cornish-Bowden 1974">{{cite journal |author-link1=Athel Cornish-Bowden| vauthors = Cornish-Bowden A | title = A simple graphical method for determining the inhibition constants of mixed, uncompetitive and non-competitive inhibitors | journal = The Biochemical Journal | volume = 137 | issue = 1 | pages = 143–4 | date = January 1974 | pmid = 4206907 | pmc = 1166095 | doi = 10.1042/bj1370143 }}</ref>
:<math>\frac{1}{v}=\frac{K_\mathrm{m}}{Va} +\frac{1+i/K_\mathrm{iu}}{V}</math>


== Implications and uses in biological systems ==
== Implications and uses in biological systems ==
Line 38: Line 27:


=== Involvement in cancer mechanisms ===
=== Involvement in cancer mechanisms ===
Uncompetitive mechanisms are involved with certain types of cancer. Human [[alkaline phosphatase]]s such as CGAP have been found to be over-expressed in certain types of cancers, and those phosphatases often operate via uncompetitive inhibition. It has also been found that a number of the genes that code for human alkaline phosphatases (TSAPs) are inhibited uncompetitively by amino acids such as [[leucine]] and [[phenylalanine]].<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Millán JL | title = Alkaline phosphatase as a reporter of cancerous transformation | journal = Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry | volume = 209 | issue = 1–2 | pages = 123–9 | date = July 1992 | pmid = 1395034 | doi = 10.1016/0009-8981(92)90343-O }}</ref> Studies of the involved amino acid residues have been undertaken in attempts to regulate alkaline phosphatase activity and learn more about said activity's relevance to cancer.<ref name=":1">{{cite journal | vauthors = Millán JL, Fishman WH | title = Biology of human alkaline phosphatases with special reference to cancer | journal = Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences | volume = 32 | issue = 1 | pages = 1–39 | date = 1995 | pmid = 7748466 | doi = 10.3109/10408369509084680 }}</ref>
Uncompetitive mechanisms are involved with certain types of cancer. Some human [[alkaline phosphatase]]s have been found to be over-expressed in certain types of cancers, and those phosphatases often operate via uncompetitive inhibition. It has also been found that a number of the genes that code for human alkaline phosphatases are inhibited uncompetitively by amino acids such as [[leucine]] and [[phenylalanine]].<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Millán JL | title = Alkaline phosphatase as a reporter of cancerous transformation | journal = Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry | volume = 209 | issue = 1–2 | pages = 123–9 | date = July 1992 | pmid = 1395034 | doi = 10.1016/0009-8981(92)90343-O }}</ref> Studies of the involved amino acid residues have been undertaken in attempts to regulate alkaline phosphatase activity and learn more about said activity's relevance to cancer.<ref name=":1">{{cite journal | vauthors = Millán JL, Fishman WH | title = Biology of human alkaline phosphatases with special reference to cancer | journal = Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences | volume = 32 | issue = 1 | pages = 1–39 | date = 1995 | pmid = 7748466 | doi = 10.3109/10408369509084680}}</ref>


Additionally, uncompetitive inhibition works alongside [[P53|TP53]] to help repress the activity of cancer cells and prevent tumorigenesis in certain forms of the illness, as it inhibits [[Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase|G6PD]] (glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase, an enzyme primarily involved in certain metabolic pathways). One of the side roles G6PD is responsible for is helping to regulate is the control of reactive oxygen levels, as reactive oxygen species must be kept at appropriate levels to allow cells to survive. When G6PD's substrate concentration is high, uncompetitive inhibition of the enzyme becomes far more effective.<ref name=":2">{{cite journal | vauthors = Nyce JW | title = Detection of a novel, primate-specific 'kill switch' tumor suppression mechanism that may fundamentally control cancer risk in humans: an unexpected twist in the basic biology of TP53 | journal = Endocrine-Related Cancer | volume = 25 | issue = 11 | pages = R497–R517 | date = November 2018 | pmid = 29941676 | pmc = 6106910 | doi = 10.1530/ERC-18-0241 }}</ref> As substrate concentration increases, the amount of ES complex increases as well, and with more ES complex to bind, uncompetitive inhibitors become far more active. This inhibition works such that the higher the concentration of substrate is in the system initially, the harder it is to reach the maximum velocity of the reaction. At low initial substrate concentrations, increasing the concentration of substrate is sometimes enough to entirely or even fully restore the enzyme's function, but as soon as initial concentration increases past a certain point, reaching the maximal enzyme velocity is all but impossible.<ref name=":32"/> This extreme sensitivity to substrate concentration within the cancer mechanism implicates uncompetitive inhibition rather than mixed inhibition, which displays similar traits but is often less sensitive to substrate concentration due to some inhibitor binding to free enzymes regardless of the substrate's presence.<ref name=":32" /> As such, the extreme strength of uncompetitive inhibitors at high substrate concentrations and the overall sensitivity to substrate amount indicates that only uncompetitive inhibition can make this type of process possible.
Additionally, uncompetitive inhibition works alongside [[P53|transformation-related protein 53]] to help repress the activity of cancer cells and prevent tumorigenesis in certain forms of the illness, as it inhibits [[glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase]], an enzyme of the [[pentose phosphate pathway]]). One of the side roles this enzyme is responsible for is helping to regulate is the control of reactive oxygen levels, as reactive oxygen species must be kept at appropriate levels to allow cells to survive. When concentration of [[glucose 6-phosphate]], the substrate of the enzyme, is high, uncompetitive inhibition of the enzyme becomes far more effective.<ref name=":2">{{cite journal | vauthors = Nyce JW | title = Detection of a novel, primate-specific 'kill switch' tumor suppression mechanism that may fundamentally control cancer risk in humans: an unexpected twist in the basic biology of TP53 | journal = Endocrine-Related Cancer | volume = 25 | issue = 11 | pages = R497–R517 | date = November 2018 | pmid = 29941676 | pmc = 6106910 | doi = 10.1530/ERC-18-0241 }}</ref> This extreme sensitivity to substrate concentration within the cancer mechanism implicates uncompetitive inhibition rather than mixed inhibition, which displays similar traits but is often less sensitive to substrate concentration due to some inhibitor binding to free enzymes regardless of the substrate's presence.<ref name=":32" /> As such, the extreme strength of uncompetitive inhibitors at high substrate concentrations and the overall sensitivity to substrate amount indicates that only uncompetitive inhibition can make this type of process possible.


=== Importance in cell and organelle membranes ===
=== Importance in cell and organelle membranes ===
Although this form of inhibition is present in various diseases within biological systems, it does not necessarily only relate to pathologies. It can be involved in typical bodily functions. For example, active sites capable of uncompetitive inhibition appear to be present in membranes, as removing lipids from cell membranes and making active sites more accessible through conformational changes has been shown to invoke elements resembling the effects of uncompetitive inhibition (i.e. both K<sub>M</sub> and V<sub>Max</sub> decrease). In mitochondrial membrane lipids specifically, removing lipids decreases the alpha-helix content in mitochondria and leads to changes in [[ATPase]] resembling uncompetitive inhibition.<ref name=":4">{{cite journal | vauthors = Lenaz G, Curatola G, Mazzanti L, Parenti-Castelli G | title = Biophysical studies on agents affecting the state of membrane lipids: biochemical and pharmacological implications | journal = Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry | volume = 22 | issue = 1 | pages = 3–32 | date = November 1978 | pmid = 154058 | doi=10.1007/bf00241467| s2cid = 28599836 }}</ref>
Although uncompetitive inhibition is present in various diseases within biological systems, it does not necessarily only relate to pathologies. It can be involved in typical bodily functions. For example, active sites capable of uncompetitive inhibition appear to be present in membranes, as removing lipids from cell membranes and making active sites more accessible through conformational changes has been shown to invoke elements resembling the effects of uncompetitive inhibition (i.e. both <math>V</math> and <math>K_\mathrm{m}</math> decrease). In mitochondrial membrane lipids specifically, removing lipids decreases the [[alpha-helix|α-helix]] content in mitochondria and leads to changes in [[ATPase]] resembling uncompetitive inhibition.<ref name=":4">{{cite journal | vauthors = Lenaz G, Curatola G, Mazzanti L, Parenti-Castelli G | title = Biophysical studies on agents affecting the state of membrane lipids: biochemical and pharmacological implications | journal = Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry | volume = 22 | issue = 1 | pages = 3–32 | date = November 1978 | pmid = 154058 | doi=10.1007/bf00241467| s2cid = 28599836}}</ref>


This presence of uncompetitive enzymes in membranes has also been supported in a number of other studies. A type of protein called an [[ADP ribosylation factor|Arf protein]] involved in regulating membrane activity was being studied, and it was found that an inhibitor called [[Brefeldin A|BFA]] trapped one of Arf's intermediates via uncompetitive inhibition. This made it clear that this type of inhibition exists within various types of cells and organelles as opposed to just in pathological cells. In fact, BFA was found to relate to the activity of the Golgi apparatus and its role in regulating movement across the cell membrane.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Zeghouf M, Guibert B, Zeeh JC, Cherfils J | title = Arf, Sec7 and Brefeldin A: a model towards the therapeutic inhibition of guanine nucleotide-exchange factors | journal = Biochemical Society Transactions | volume = 33 | issue = Pt 6 | pages = 1265–8 | date = December 2005 | pmid = 16246094 | doi = 10.1042/BST20051265 }}</ref>
This presence of uncompetitive enzymes in membranes has also been supported in a number of other studies. For example, in studies of the protein [[ADP ribosylation factor]], which is involved in regulating membrane activity, it was found that [[brefeldin A]], a lactone antiviral trapped one of the protein's intermediates via uncompetitive inhibition. This made it clear that this type of inhibition exists within various types of cells and organelles as opposed to just in pathological cells. In fact, brefeldin A was found to relate to the activity of the Golgi apparatus and its role in regulating movement across the cell membrane.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Zeghouf M, Guibert B, Zeeh JC, Cherfils J | title = Arf, Sec7 and Brefeldin A: a model towards the therapeutic inhibition of guanine nucleotide-exchange factors | journal = Biochemical Society Transactions | volume = 33 | issue = Pt 6 | pages = 1265–8 | date = December 2005 | pmid = 16246094 | doi = 10.1042/BST20051265}}</ref>


=== Presence in the cerebellar granule layer ===
=== Presence in the cerebellar granule layer ===
[[File:Memantine acsv.svg|thumb|NMDA Inhibitor Memantine]]
[[File:Memantine acsv.svg|thumb|upright=0.5|Memantine]]
[[File:NMDA_Inhibited.png|alt=|thumb|138x138px|Inhibited NMDA Receptor. Substrate is bound and the active site is blocked by the (red) inhibitor.|left]]Uncompetitive inhibition can play roles in various other parts of the body as well. It is part of the mechanism by which [[NMDA receptor|NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) glutamate receptors]] are inhibited in the brain, for example. Specifically, this type of inhibition impacts the granule cells that make up a layer of the cerebellum. These cells have the aforementioned NMDA receptors, and the activity of said receptors typically increases as ethanol is consumed. This often leads to withdrawal symptoms if said ethanol is removed. Various uncompetitive blockers act as antagonists at the receptors and modify the process, with one example being an inhibitor called [[memantine]].<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Tabakoff B, Hoffman PL | title = Ethanol, sedative hypnotics, and glutamate receptor function in brain and cultured cells | journal = Behavior Genetics | volume = 23 | issue = 2 | pages = 231–6 | date = March 1993 | pmid = 8390239 | doi = 10.1007/BF01067428 | s2cid = 12640658 }}</ref> In fact, in similar cases (involving over-expression of NMDA, though not necessarily via ethanol), it has been shown that uncompetitive inhibition helps in nullifying the over-expression due to its particular properties. Since uncompetitive inhibitors block high concentrations of substrates very efficiently, their traits alongside the innate characteristics of the receptors themselves lead to very effective blocking of NMDA channels when they are excessively open due to massive amounts of NMDA agonists.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Nakamura T, Lipton SA | title = Emerging roles of S-nitrosylation in protein misfolding and neurodegenerative diseases | journal = Antioxidants & Redox Signaling | volume = 10 | issue = 1 | pages = 87–101 | date = January 2008 | pmid = 17961071 | doi = 10.1089/ars.2007.1858 }}</ref>
[[File:NMDA_Inhibited.png|alt=|thumb|138x138px|Inhibited ''N''-methyl-<small>D</small>-aspartate glutamate receptor. Substrate is bound and the active site is blocked by the (red) inhibitor.|left]]Uncompetitive inhibition can play roles in various other parts of the body as well. It is part of the mechanism by which [[NMDA receptor|''N''-methyl-<small>D</small>-aspartate glutamate receptors]] are inhibited in the brain, for example. Specifically, this type of inhibition impacts the granule cells that make up a layer of the cerebellum. These cells have the receptors mentioned, and their activity typically increases as ethanol is consumed. This often leads to withdrawal symptoms if ethanol is removed. Various uncompetitive blockers act as antagonists at the receptors and modify the process, with one example being the inhibitor [[memantine]].<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Tabakoff B, Hoffman PL | title = Ethanol, sedative hypnotics, and glutamate receptor function in brain and cultured cells | journal = Behavior Genetics | volume = 23 | issue = 2 | pages = 231–6 | date = March 1993 | pmid = 8390239 | doi = 10.1007/BF01067428 | s2cid = 12640658 }}</ref> In fact, in similar cases (involving over-expression of ''N''-methyl-<small>D</small>-aspartate glutamate receptors, though not necessarily via ethanol), uncompetitive inhibition helps in nullifying the over-expression due to its particular properties. Since uncompetitive inhibitors block high concentrations of substrates very efficiently, their traits alongside the innate characteristics of the receptors themselves lead to very effective blocking of ''N''-methyl-<small>D</small>-aspartate glutamate channels when they are excessively open due to massive amounts of agonists.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Nakamura T, Lipton SA | title = Emerging roles of S-nitrosylation in protein misfolding and neurodegenerative diseases | journal = Antioxidants & Redox Signaling | volume = 10 | issue = 1 | pages = 87–101 | date = January 2008 | pmid = 17961071 | doi = 10.1089/ars.2007.1858}}</ref>

== Examples for uncompetitive inhibition ==
Investigations of phenol-based HSD17B13 inhibitors indicate an uncompetitive mode of inhibition against NAD<sup>+</sup>.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Thamm |first=Sven |last2=Willwacher |first2=Marina K. |last3=Aspnes |first3=Gary E. |last4=Bretschneider |first4=Tom |last5=Brown |first5=Nicholas F. |last6=Buschbom-Helmke |first6=Silke |last7=Fox |first7=Thomas |last8=Gargano |first8=Emanuele M. |last9=Grabowski |first9=Daniel |last10=Hoenke |first10=Christoph |last11=Matera |first11=Damian |last12=Mueck |first12=Katja |last13=Peters |first13=Stefan |last14=Reindl |first14=Sophia |last15=Riether |first15=Doris |date=2023-02-23 |title=Discovery of a Novel Potent and Selective HSD17B13 Inhibitor, BI-3231, a Well-Characterized Chemical Probe Available for Open Science |url=https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.2c01884 |journal=Journal of Medicinal Chemistry |language=en |volume=66 |issue=4 |pages=2832–2850 |doi=10.1021/acs.jmedchem.2c01884 |issn=0022-2623 |pmc=9969402 |pmid=36727857}}</ref>


== References ==
== References ==
Line 56: Line 48:
{{Enzyme inhibition}}
{{Enzyme inhibition}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Uncompetitive Inhibitor}}
[[Category:Enzyme kinetics]]
[[Category:Enzyme kinetics]]
[[Category:Enzyme inhibitors]]
[[Category:Enzyme inhibitors]]

Latest revision as of 11:05, 1 July 2024

Uncompetitive inhibition (which Laidler and Bunting preferred to call anti-competitive inhibition,[1] but this term has not been widely adopted) is a type of inhibition in which the apparent values of the Michaelis–Menten parameters and are decreased in the same proportion.

It can be recognized by two observations: first, it cannot be reversed by increasing the substrate concentration , and second, linear plots show effects on and , seen, for example, in the Lineweaver–Burk plot as parallel rather than intersecting lines. It is sometimes explained by supposing that the inhibitor can bind to the enzyme-substrate complex but not to the free enzyme. This type of mechanism is rather rare,[2] and in practice uncompetitive inhibition is mainly encountered as a limiting case of inhibition in two-substrate reactions in which one substrate concentration is varied and the other is held constant at a saturating level.[3][4]

Mathematical definition

[edit]
Lineweaver–Burk plot of uncompetitive enzyme inhibition.

In uncompetitive inhibition at an inhibitor concentration of the Michaelis–Menten equation takes the following form:[4]

in which is the rate at concentrations of substrate and of inhibitor, for limiting rate , Michaelis constant and uncompetitive inhibition constant .

This has exactly the form of the Michaelis–Menten equation, as may be seen by writing it in terms of apparent kinetic constants:

in which

It is important to note that and decrease in the same proportions as a result of the inhibition.

This is apparent when viewing a Lineweaver-Burk plot of uncompetitive enzyme inhibition: the ratio between V and Km remains the same with or without an inhibitor present.

This may be seen in any of the common ways of plotting Michaelis–Menten data, such as the Lineweaver–Burk plot, for which for uncompetitive inhibition produces a line parallel to the original enzyme-substrate plot, but with a higher intercept on the ordinate:[5][6]

Implications and uses in biological systems

[edit]

The unique traits of uncompetitive inhibition lead to a variety of implications for the inhibition's effects within biological and biochemical systems. Uncompetitive inhibition is present within biological systems in a number of ways. In fact, it often becomes clear that the traits of inhibition specific to uncompetitive inhibitors, such as their tendency to act at their best at high concentrations of substrate, are essential to some important bodily functions operating properly.[7]

Involvement in cancer mechanisms

[edit]

Uncompetitive mechanisms are involved with certain types of cancer. Some human alkaline phosphatases have been found to be over-expressed in certain types of cancers, and those phosphatases often operate via uncompetitive inhibition. It has also been found that a number of the genes that code for human alkaline phosphatases are inhibited uncompetitively by amino acids such as leucine and phenylalanine.[8] Studies of the involved amino acid residues have been undertaken in attempts to regulate alkaline phosphatase activity and learn more about said activity's relevance to cancer.[9]

Additionally, uncompetitive inhibition works alongside transformation-related protein 53 to help repress the activity of cancer cells and prevent tumorigenesis in certain forms of the illness, as it inhibits glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase, an enzyme of the pentose phosphate pathway). One of the side roles this enzyme is responsible for is helping to regulate is the control of reactive oxygen levels, as reactive oxygen species must be kept at appropriate levels to allow cells to survive. When concentration of glucose 6-phosphate, the substrate of the enzyme, is high, uncompetitive inhibition of the enzyme becomes far more effective.[10] This extreme sensitivity to substrate concentration within the cancer mechanism implicates uncompetitive inhibition rather than mixed inhibition, which displays similar traits but is often less sensitive to substrate concentration due to some inhibitor binding to free enzymes regardless of the substrate's presence.[7] As such, the extreme strength of uncompetitive inhibitors at high substrate concentrations and the overall sensitivity to substrate amount indicates that only uncompetitive inhibition can make this type of process possible.

Importance in cell and organelle membranes

[edit]

Although uncompetitive inhibition is present in various diseases within biological systems, it does not necessarily only relate to pathologies. It can be involved in typical bodily functions. For example, active sites capable of uncompetitive inhibition appear to be present in membranes, as removing lipids from cell membranes and making active sites more accessible through conformational changes has been shown to invoke elements resembling the effects of uncompetitive inhibition (i.e. both and decrease). In mitochondrial membrane lipids specifically, removing lipids decreases the α-helix content in mitochondria and leads to changes in ATPase resembling uncompetitive inhibition.[11]

This presence of uncompetitive enzymes in membranes has also been supported in a number of other studies. For example, in studies of the protein ADP ribosylation factor, which is involved in regulating membrane activity, it was found that brefeldin A, a lactone antiviral trapped one of the protein's intermediates via uncompetitive inhibition. This made it clear that this type of inhibition exists within various types of cells and organelles as opposed to just in pathological cells. In fact, brefeldin A was found to relate to the activity of the Golgi apparatus and its role in regulating movement across the cell membrane.[12]

Presence in the cerebellar granule layer

[edit]
Memantine
Inhibited N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate receptor. Substrate is bound and the active site is blocked by the (red) inhibitor.

Uncompetitive inhibition can play roles in various other parts of the body as well. It is part of the mechanism by which N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate receptors are inhibited in the brain, for example. Specifically, this type of inhibition impacts the granule cells that make up a layer of the cerebellum. These cells have the receptors mentioned, and their activity typically increases as ethanol is consumed. This often leads to withdrawal symptoms if ethanol is removed. Various uncompetitive blockers act as antagonists at the receptors and modify the process, with one example being the inhibitor memantine.[13] In fact, in similar cases (involving over-expression of N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate receptors, though not necessarily via ethanol), uncompetitive inhibition helps in nullifying the over-expression due to its particular properties. Since uncompetitive inhibitors block high concentrations of substrates very efficiently, their traits alongside the innate characteristics of the receptors themselves lead to very effective blocking of N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate channels when they are excessively open due to massive amounts of agonists.[14]

Examples for uncompetitive inhibition

[edit]

Investigations of phenol-based HSD17B13 inhibitors indicate an uncompetitive mode of inhibition against NAD+.[15]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Laidler, Keith J.; Bunting, Peter S. (1973). The Chemical Kinetics of Enzyme Action. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  2. ^ Cornish-Bowden, A. (1986). "Why is uncompetitive inhibition so rare? A possible explanation, with implications for the design of drugs and pesticides". FEBS Lett. 203 (1): 3–6. doi:10.1016/0014-5793(86)81424-7.
  3. ^ Cleland, W. W. "The kinetics of enzyme-catalyzed reactions with two or more substrates or products: II. Inhibition: Nomenclature and theory". Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 67 (2): 173–187. doi:10.1016/0926-6569(63)90226-8.
  4. ^ a b Cornish-Bowden, Athel (2012). Fundamentals of Enzyme Kinetics (4th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell, Weinheim. pp. 25–75. ISBN 978-3-527-33074-4.
  5. ^ Rhodes D. "Enzyme Kinetics - Single Substrate, Uncompetitive Inhibition, Lineweaver-Burk Plot". Purdue University. Retrieved 31 August 2013.
  6. ^ Cornish-Bowden A (January 1974). "A simple graphical method for determining the inhibition constants of mixed, uncompetitive and non-competitive inhibitors". The Biochemical Journal. 137 (1): 143–4. doi:10.1042/bj1370143. PMC 1166095. PMID 4206907.
  7. ^ a b Nahorski SR, Ragan CI, Challiss RA (August 1991). "Lithium and the phosphoinositide cycle: an example of uncompetitive inhibition and its pharmacological consequences". Trends in Pharmacological Sciences. 12 (8): 297–303. doi:10.1016/0165-6147(91)90581-C. PMID 1658998.
  8. ^ Millán JL (July 1992). "Alkaline phosphatase as a reporter of cancerous transformation". Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry. 209 (1–2): 123–9. doi:10.1016/0009-8981(92)90343-O. PMID 1395034.
  9. ^ Millán JL, Fishman WH (1995). "Biology of human alkaline phosphatases with special reference to cancer". Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences. 32 (1): 1–39. doi:10.3109/10408369509084680. PMID 7748466.
  10. ^ Nyce JW (November 2018). "Detection of a novel, primate-specific 'kill switch' tumor suppression mechanism that may fundamentally control cancer risk in humans: an unexpected twist in the basic biology of TP53". Endocrine-Related Cancer. 25 (11): R497–R517. doi:10.1530/ERC-18-0241. PMC 6106910. PMID 29941676.
  11. ^ Lenaz G, Curatola G, Mazzanti L, Parenti-Castelli G (November 1978). "Biophysical studies on agents affecting the state of membrane lipids: biochemical and pharmacological implications". Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry. 22 (1): 3–32. doi:10.1007/bf00241467. PMID 154058. S2CID 28599836.
  12. ^ Zeghouf M, Guibert B, Zeeh JC, Cherfils J (December 2005). "Arf, Sec7 and Brefeldin A: a model towards the therapeutic inhibition of guanine nucleotide-exchange factors". Biochemical Society Transactions. 33 (Pt 6): 1265–8. doi:10.1042/BST20051265. PMID 16246094.
  13. ^ Tabakoff B, Hoffman PL (March 1993). "Ethanol, sedative hypnotics, and glutamate receptor function in brain and cultured cells". Behavior Genetics. 23 (2): 231–6. doi:10.1007/BF01067428. PMID 8390239. S2CID 12640658.
  14. ^ Nakamura T, Lipton SA (January 2008). "Emerging roles of S-nitrosylation in protein misfolding and neurodegenerative diseases". Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. 10 (1): 87–101. doi:10.1089/ars.2007.1858. PMID 17961071.
  15. ^ Thamm, Sven; Willwacher, Marina K.; Aspnes, Gary E.; Bretschneider, Tom; Brown, Nicholas F.; Buschbom-Helmke, Silke; Fox, Thomas; Gargano, Emanuele M.; Grabowski, Daniel; Hoenke, Christoph; Matera, Damian; Mueck, Katja; Peters, Stefan; Reindl, Sophia; Riether, Doris (2023-02-23). "Discovery of a Novel Potent and Selective HSD17B13 Inhibitor, BI-3231, a Well-Characterized Chemical Probe Available for Open Science". Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 66 (4): 2832–2850. doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.2c01884. ISSN 0022-2623. PMC 9969402. PMID 36727857.