Modelling of C-terminal tail of human STING and its interaction with tank-binding kinase 1

Modelling of C-terminal tail of human STING and its interaction with tank-binding kinase 1

Stimulator of interferon genes (STING) plays a significant role in a cell’s intracellular defense against pathogens or selfDNA by inducing inflammation or apoptosis through a pathway known as cGAS-cGAMP-STING. STING uses one of its domains, the C-terminal tail (CTT) to recruit the members of the pathway. However, the structure of this domain has not been solved experimentally. STING conformation is open and more flexible when inactive. When STING gets activated by cGAMP, its conformation changes to a closed state covered by 4 beta-sheets over the binding site. This conformational change leads to its binding to Tank-binding kinase 1 (TBK1). TBK1 then phosphorylates STING aiding its entry to the cell’s nucleus. In this study, we focused on the loop modeling of the CTT domain in both the active and inactive STING conformations. After the modeling step, the active and inactive STING structures were docked to one of the cGAS-cGAMP-STING pathway members, TBK1, to observe the differences of binding modes. CTT loop stayed higher in the active structure, while all the best-scored models, active or inactive, ended up around the same position with respect to TBK1. However, when the STING poses are compared with the cryo-EM image of the complex structure, the models in the active structure chain B displayed closer results to the complex structure.

___

  • Bai J, F Liu (2019). The cGAS-cGAMP-STING pathway: A molecular link between immunity and metabolism. Diabetes 68 (6): 1099–1108.
  • Barber GN (2015). STING: Infection, inflammation and cancer. Nature Reviews Immunology 15 (12): 760–770.
  • Dominguez C, Boelens R, Bonvin AMJJ (2003). HADDOCK: A protein-protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. Journal of the American Chemical Society 125 (7): 1731–1737.
  • Feig M (2017). Computational protein structure refinement: almost there, yet still so far to go. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science 7 (3): e1307.
  • Fiser A, Do RK, Sali A (2000). Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Science 9 (9): 1753–1773.
  • Gao P, Ascano M, Zillinger T, Wang W, Dai P et al. (2013). XStructurefunction analysis of STING activation by c[G(2′,5′) pA(3′,5′)p] and targeting by antiviral DMXAA. Cell 154 (4): 748-762. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.07.023
  • Kozakov D, Hall DR, Xia B, Porter KA, Padhorny D et al. (2017). The ClusPro web server for protein-protein docking. Nature Protocols 12 (2): 255–278.
  • Lee GR, Heo L, Seok C (2016). Effective protein model structure refinement by loop modeling and overall relaxation. Proteins 84 (S1): 293–301.
  • Li Y, Wilson HL, Kiss-Toth E (2017). Regulating STING in health and disease. Journal of Inflammation 7 (14): 11. doi: 10.1186/ s12950-017-0159-2
  • Shu C, Yi G, Watts T, Kao CC, Li P (2012). Structure of STING bound to cyclic di-GMP reveals the mechanism of cyclic dinucleotide recognition by the immune system. Nature Structural and Molecular Biology 19 (7): 722–724.
  • Tsuchiya Y, Jounai N, Takeshita F, Ishii KJ, Mizuguchi K (2016). Ligand-induced Ordering of the C-terminal Tail Primes STING for Phosphorylation by TBK1. EBioMedicine 9: 87–96.
  • Unterholzner L, Dunphy G (2019). cGAS-independent STING activation in response to DNA damage. Molecular and Cellular Oncology 6 (4): 1558682.
  • Webb B, A Sali (2016). Comparative protein structure modeling using MODELLER. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics 54: 5.6.1–5.6.37. doi: 10.1002/cpbi.3
  • Zhang C, Shang G, Gui X, Xuewu Z, Xiao-chen B et al. (2019). Structural basis of STING binding with and phosphorylation by TBK1. Nature 567: 394–398.
  • Zhao B, Du F, Xu P, Shu C, Sankaran B et al. (2019). A conserved PLPLRT/SD motif of STING mediates the recruitment and activation of TBK1. Nature 569: 718–722.