New Inhibitors Predicted for Plasmodium Falciparum Erythrocyte Membrane Protein1 (PfEMP1)

 Abdul Wahab1, Adnan Shehzad2, Bibi Ayesha3, Hamid Ur Rahman4*

Keywords:

Plasmodium falciparum, PfEMP1 inhibitors, Drug repurposing, Molecular docking, Malaria therapeutics

1Centre for Animal Sciences & Fisheries, University of Swat, Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

2Department of Biotechnology, COMSATS Abbottabad, Abbottabad, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

3Department of Microbiology, Hazara University Mansehra, Mansehra, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

4Department of Zoology, Hazara University Mansehra, Mansehra, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

 *Correspondence

Hamid ur Rahman

Email: hamidhu@hu.edu.pk       

ABSTRACT

Malaria is a mosquito-borne disease caused by several Plasmodium species. It poses a substantial global health burden, infecting approximately 300 million individuals and resulting in over one million mortalities annually. The primary mode of infection occurs through the transmission of sporozoites by infected mosquitoes during blood feeding. Historically, quinine and chloroquine were employed as antimalarial agents during World War II, but the emergence of drug resistance, exacerbated by climate change and irregular treatment adherence, has necessitated the identification of novel therapeutic alternatives. Antimalarial drug resistance has been reported in Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax, with varying degrees in different geographical regions. This study aimed to discover alternative drugs by targeting PfEMP1, a key protein that is involved in cytoadhesion and implicated in malaria pathogenesis. Inhibition of the active sites of this protein would result in the disruption of the parasite’s lifecycle. Through insilico drug analysis, four potential inhibitors of PfEMP1 were identified: vancomycin, ofloxacin, febuxostat, and viomycin. Further experimental validation is required to confirm the efficacy of these compounds as alternative treatments for malaria.

1. INTRODUCTION

Malaria, a debilitating and widespread mosquito-borne disease, continues to pose a significant threat to global health, particularly in under-resourced tropical and subtropical regions [1]. Among the approximately 156 named Plasmodium species that infect reptiles, birds, and mammals, only four—P. falciparum, P. vivax, P. malariae, and P. ovale—are truly parasitic to humans [2]. The prevalence of malaria has been exacerbated by a combination of biological, ecological, and sociopolitical factors[3,4].

The geographic distribution of malaria is largely concentrated in tropical regions, with a high prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa, followed by the Pacific Islands, South Asia, and Central and South America [1,5,6,7]. Globally, an estimated 3.2 billion people—nearly half of the world’s population—are at risk of contracting malaria. According to the World Health Organization's (WHO) malaria report, 249 million cases were recorded in 2022 across 85 malaria-endemic countries, marking a five-million-case increase from the previous year and resulting in approximately 608,000 deaths [8].

Various drugs have been developed and employed to combat malaria, beginning with quinine in the 17th century. While effective, quinine's severe side effects, including cinchonism, hearing impairment, nausea, and headache, limited its long-term use [9]. Chloroquine (CQ), widely used for over five decades due to its rapid action, affordability, safety, and availability, has faced significant resistance due to intense selective pressure. Resistance to CQ was first reported in the 1950s and has since spread globally, leading to increased morbidity and mortality [10,11]. Similarly, mefloquine, another antimalarial drug targeting the blood schizont stage, has become ineffective due to the emergence of resistance [9]. Other drugs, such as primaquine, atovaquone, and artemisinin, have been employed to treat malaria; however, these therapies are often associated with adverse effects, including hemolysis, nausea, vomiting, and dizziness [9,12].Given the emergence of drug resistance, the toxic effects of existing therapies, and their high costs, there is an urgent need to identify safer, cost-effective, and more accessible alternatives.

The Plasmodium falciparum erythrocyte membrane protein 1 (PfEMP1), encoded by the var gene family, plays a crucial role in malaria pathogenesis. This protein is expressed on the surface of infected erythrocytes and is involved in various parasitic functions, including attachment to host erythrocytes, antigenic variation, and survival in the host [13,14].. Malaria infection elicits a variant-specific immune response, leading to the production of antibodies against the specific PfEMP1 variant expressed by the parasite [15]. While this immune response can provide protection against reinfection by parasites expressing similar variants, the antigenic diversity of PfEMP1 enables the parasite to evade immunity by continually expressing new epitopes [16, 17, 18]. Because PfEMP1 facilitates the adherence of infected erythrocytes to host cells, disrupting its function could significantly impede the parasite's sequestration and reduce malaria infection rates [13, 19]. Given the toxicity and resistance issues associated with existing antimalarial drugs, repurposing FDA-approved drugs offers a promising approach. Drug repurposing or repositioning involves evaluating existing or approved drugs for new therapeutic purposes, particularly in the treatment of infectious diseases [20].

This study was designed to identify potential alternative antimalarial drugs by targeting PfEMP1, offering a novel and cost-effective approach to combat malaria.

  1. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Target Protein Acquisition and 3D Structure Configuration

The amino acid sequence of the target protein, Plasmodium falciparum erythrocyte membrane protein 1 (PfEMP1), was retrieved from the UniProt database [21]. Its three-dimensional structure, resolved at 2.4Å, was obtained from the RCSB Protein Data Bank (PDB ID: 3C64) for subsequent molecular docking analysis [22].

2.2 Active Site Analysis and Interaction Profiling

The 3D structure of PfEMP1 was visualized using DS Visualizer, version 3.1, to identify its active sites. The GS Viewer tool was utilized to elucidate the diverse types of interactions between the protein and the docked ligands [23].

2.3 Bioinformatics Tools for Protein-Ligand Docking

The 3D structures of potential drug candidates were retrieved from the ChemSpider database. Molecular docking simulations were performed using the PatchDock server [24] to predict binding interactions between the ligands and PfEMP1. The top-ranked drugs were further analyzed using DS Visualizer (version 3.1) [25] and GS Viewer [23]. Additionally, LigPlot+ (version 2.2) [26] was employed to generate 2D diagrams of ligand-protein interactions and visualize the key molecular bonds.

3. RESULTS

The current study aimed to identify cost-effective alternative drugs to combat malaria by targeting PfEMP1 through in silico docking of 100 FDA-approved drugs. Among these, four drugs—Vancomycin, Febuxostat, Ofloxacin, and Viomycin—emerged as promising candidates based on their strong binding interactions with the target protein.

3.1 Docking Analysis of Vancomycin with PfEMP1

Vancomycin demonstrated robust binding interactions with PfEMP1, forming 15 distinct types of molecular interactions, including covalent, hydrogen, and hydrophobic bonds (Table 1). Key residues, including LYS 141, HIS 151, THR 144, and ALA 127, were involved in covalent bonding, with THR 144 identified as an active site residue. TYR 133, another active site residue, formed hydrogen bonds with the ligand.

Table 1. Types of Interaction between Potential Drugs and PfEMP1

Interaction Type

Vancomycin

Febuxostat

Viomycin

Ofloxacin

Active Site Amino Acids

TRP 25, LYS 92, THR 102, TYR 133, THR 143 and THR 144

TRP 25, LYS 92, THR 102, TYR 133, THR 143 and THR 144

TRP 25, LYS 92, THR 102, TYR 133, THR 143 and THR 144

TRP 25, LYS 92, THR 102, TYR 133, THR 143 and THR 144

Covalent Bond Interactions

LYS 141, HIS 151, THR 144 and ALA 127

THR 144

TRP25, GLN 58, ASP17

 

THR 144, and ARG 26

Hydrophobic Bond Interactions

ASP 142, THR 143, LYS 147, ARG 26, LEU 148, PHE 126, ALA 130, TRP 12, LEU 129 and GLU 140

THR 143, TYR 133, TRP12, LEU 19, VAL 15, and HIS 16

TRP 55, ASP 21, LYS 54, LYS 48, LYS 47, GLY 44, GLU 28, and LYS  24

LEU 19, LYS 147, LEU 148, and HIS 151

Hydrogen Bond Interactions

TYR 133

THR 144

LYS 59, and CYS 51

THR 144

Furthermore, ten hydrophobic interactions were observed, including THR 143 as the active site residue (Figure 1). Collectively, these interactions suggest that Vancomycin could alter the native structure and function of PfEMP1, potentially disrupting P. falciparum’s ability to adhere to host erythrocytes.

3.2 Docking Analysis of Febuxostat with PfEMP1

Febuxostat displayed eight distinct interactions with PfEMP1, including covalent and hydrogen bonds as well as hydrophobic interactions (Table 3.1). Key interactions included three covalent bonds formed by THR 144 and one hydrogen bond with the same residue. Additionally, hydrophobic interactions involved two active site residues, TYR 133 and THR 144 (Figure 2).

3.3 Docking Analysis of Ofloxacin with PfEMP1

Ofloxacin exhibited a diverse range of interactions with PfEMP1, including covalent, hydrogen, and hydrophobic bonds (Table 1).

Figure 1. Schematic representation of 2D interaction of the ligand Vancomycin with PfEMP1 generated by Ligplot

Figure 2 Two-dimension interaction of Febuxostat with PfEMP1 from generated by Ligplot

Figure 3. Ligplot-generated diagram of 2D interactions between Ofloxacin and PfEMP1

Figure 4. 2D illustration of Viomycin's interaction with PfEMP1, produced by Ligplot

Two key residues, THR 144 and ARG 26, formed covalent bonds, with THR 144 serving as the active site residue. Hydrophobic interactions involved four amino acid residues, and THR 144 also contributed to hydrogen bonding (Figure 3).

3.4 Docking of Viomycin with PfEMP1

Viomycin demonstrated a broad interaction profile with PfEMP1, forming covalent, hydrophobic, and hydrogen bonds (Table 3.1). Three residues, TRP25, GLN58, and ASP17, formed covalent bonds, with TRP25 identified as an active site residue. Hydrogen bonding involved CYS51 and LYS59, while eight residues contributed to hydrophobic interactions (Figure 4).

  1. DISCUSSION

Malaria remains one of the most widespread and severe parasitic diseases, contributing significantly to global mortality, particularly in underdeveloped regions. The emergence of drug resistance to nearly all existing antimalarial drugs highlights an urgent need for alternative treatment options. This study aimed to identify cost-effective, FDA-approved drugs for repurposing against malaria by targeting Plasmodium falciparum erythrocyte membrane protein 1 (PfEMP1). PfEMP1 is a multifunctional protein that plays a crucial role in the parasite's survival, including antigenic variation, adherence to erythrocytes, and host immune evasion[]]]. By screening over 100 FDA-approved drugs currently used for various medical conditions, we identified Vancomycin, Febuxostat, Ofloxacin, and Viomycin as promising candidates based on their strong molecular interactions with PfEMP1.

Vancomycin, a tricyclic non-ribosomal glycopeptide antibiotic, functions by binding to bacterial cell walls and disrupting their biosynthesis, leading to cell wall rupture【27】. It is widely used to treat diverse infections, including bloodstream infections, meningitis, endocarditis, and bone and joint infections【27, 28】. Molecular docking revealed that Vancomycin exhibited multiple interactions with PfEMP1, including covalent bonds with four residues, one hydrogen bond, and ten hydrophobic interactions (Table 3.1). Such diverse interactions are known to induce irreversible inhibition of target proteins【29, 30】. By interfering with the parasite's attachment mechanism, Vancomycin could potentially prevent the spread of infection【13】. These findings suggest Vancomycin as a strong candidate for further investigation as an antimalarial agent.

Febuxostat, a non-purine inhibitor of xanthine oxidase, is primarily used to treat hyperuricemia in gout patients in the United States and the United Kingdom【31, 33】. However, it is associated with certain adverse effects, including gastrointestinal disturbances, musculoskeletal symptoms, headaches, elevated liver enzymes, and rashes【31】. Docking analysis revealed that Febuxostat interacts with PfEMP1 through eight distinct types of interactions, including covalent bonds, one hydrogen bond, and several hydrophobic interactions (Table 3.1). These interactions suggest the potential for Febuxostat to induce conformational changes in PfEMP1, potentially disrupting its function.

Ofloxacin, a fluorinated quinolone antibiotic, is known to inhibit choline-binding proteins in Streptococcus pneumoniae, thereby interfering with processes such as cell attachment, nasopharyngeal colonization, and bacterial sepsis【34, 35】. It is widely used to treat chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, pelvic inflammatory disease, prostatitis, and gonorrhea【36】. Ofloxacin also inhibits oxygen-insensitive NADPH nitroreductase in Helicobacter pylori, contributing to its role in combating gastric lymphoma【37】. Molecular docking revealed that Ofloxacin forms covalent, hydrophobic, and hydrogen bonds with PfEMP1 (Table 3.1), indicating its potential to inhibit parasite adherence to host erythrocytes effectively.

Viomycin, a member of the tuberactinomycin family, was historically used to treat tuberculosis before being replaced by less toxic alternatives, such as Capreomycin【38】. Tuberactinomycins disrupt bacterial protein synthesis by targeting RNA and ribosome binding【39】. Docking analysis revealed that Viomycin forms covalent, hydrophobic, and hydrogen bonds with PfEMP1 (Table 3.1). This diverse interaction profile suggests the dual therapeutic utility of Viomycin in treating both malaria and tuberculosis. However, further experimental studies are essential to fully explore and validate its potential.

In conclusion, this study demonstrates the potential of Vancomycin, Febuxostat, Ofloxacin, and Viomycin as alternative drugs for malaria treatment. Their strong molecular interactions with PfEMP1 highlight their promise as repurposed therapeutic agents. Further in vivo and in vitro investigations are needed to validate their efficacy and safety, paving the way for novel and cost-effective antimalarial therapies.

  1. CONCLUSION

The present study aimed to inhibit the erythrocyte membrane protein-1 (PfEMP1) of Plasmodium falciparum by exploring alternative drugs through in silico docking analysis. Docking experiments revealed strong and promising interactions between PfEMP1 and the drugs Ofloxacin, Vancomycin, Febuxostat, and Viomycin. Based on these findings, we conclude that these drugs hold potential as alternative treatment options for malaria. However, further in vivo and in vitro investigations, as well as rigorous laboratory testing, are essential to validate their efficacy and safety for clinical use.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

  1. Fikadu M, Ashenafi E. Malaria: An Overview. Malaria: An overview. 2023;Volume 16(16):3339-3347. https://doi.org/10.2147/idr.s405668
  2. Sintayehu Tsegaye Tseha. Plasmodium Species and Drug Resistance. IntechOpen eBooks. Published online November 10, 2021. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98344
  3. Bailey A, Prist PR. Landscape and Socioeconomic Factors Determine Malaria Incidence in Tropical Forest Countries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2024;21(5):576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21050576
  4. Miguel E, Fournet F, Serge Yerbanga, et al. Optimizing Public Health Strategies in Low-Income Countries: Epidemiology, Ecology and Evolution for the Control of Malaria. Oxford University Press; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789833.003.0016
  5. Patel P, Arti Bagada, Nasir Vadia. Epidemiology and Current Trends in Malaria. In: Rising Contagious Diseases: Basics, Management, and Treatments. ; 2024:261-282. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394188741.ch20
  6. Pollinger J, Schubert-Zsilavecz M. Malaria–distribution, therapy and drugs in the pipeline. PHARMAKON. 2018 May 1;6(3):212-8. https://doi.org/10.1691/pn.20180022.
  7. Caminade C, Kovats S, Rocklov J, et al. Impact of Climate Change on Global Malaria Distribution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014;111(9):3286-3291. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1302089111
  8. World Health Organization. World Malaria Report 2023. www.who.int. Published November 30, 2023.
  9. Gujjari L, Kalani H, Pindiprolu SK, Arakareddy BP, Yadagiri G. Current challenges and nanotechnology-based pharmaceutical strategies for the treatment and control of malaria. Parasite Epidemiology and Control. 2022;17:e00244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. parepi.2022.e00244
  10. Zhou W, Wang H, Yang Y, Chen ZS, Zou C, Zhang J. Chloroquine against malaria, cancers and viral diseases. Drug Discovery Today. 2020;25(11):2012-2022. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.drudis.2020.09.010
  11. Wellems Thomas E, Plowe Christopher V. Chloroquine‐Resistant Malaria. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2001;184(6):770-776. https://doi.org/10.1086/322858
  12. White NJ, Qiao LG, Qi G, Luzzatto L. Rationale for recommending a lower dose of primaquine as a Plasmodium falciparum gametocytocide in populations where G6PD deficiency is common. Malaria Journal. 2012;11(1). https://doi.org/10. 1186/1475-2875-11-418
  13. Hviid L, Jensen ATR. PfEMP1 - A Parasite Protein Family of Key Importance in Plasmodium falciparum Malaria Immunity and Pathogenesis. Advances in Parasitology. 2015;88:51-84. https://doi. org/10.1016/bs.apar.2015.02.004
  14. Walker IS, Rogerson SJ. Pathogenicity and virulence of malaria: Sticky problems and tricky solutions. Virulence. 2023;14(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/21505594.2022.2150456
  15. Muhammad I. Cellular and Molecular Biology of Plasmodium Infectious diseases. Published online December 15, 2023. https://doi.org/ 10.5772/intechopen.113966
  16. Chandley P, Ranjan R, Kumar S, Rohatgi S. Host-parasite interactions during Plasmodium infection: Implications for immunotherapies. Frontiers in Immunology. 2023;13. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1091961
  17. Li SJ, Huang Z, Jiang L. Molecular Basis of Malaria Pathogenesis. Parasitology research monographs. Published online January 1, 2023:211-223. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-031-32902-9_8
  18. Liu T, Zhu F, Tan N, Chen S, Xu W. Plasmodium. Elsevier eBooks. Published online January 1, 2024:3005-3029. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-818619-0.00012-5
  19. Wiser MF. Knobs, Adhesion, and Severe Falciparum Malaria. Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease. 2023;8(7):353-353. https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed8070353
  20. Hamid A, Pascal Mäser, Abdelhalim Babiker Mahmoud. Drug Repurposing in the Chemotherapy of Infectious Diseases. Molecules/Molecules online/Molecules annual. 2024;29(3):635-635. https://doi. org/10.3390/molecules29030635
  21. Consortium U. Reorganizing the protein space at the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt). Nucleic Acids Research. 2011;40(D1):D71-D75. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr981
  22. Deshpande N. The RCSB Protein Data Bank: a redesigned query system and relational database based on the mmCIF schema. Nucleic Acids Research. 2004;33(Database issue):D233-D237. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gki057
  23. Sehnal D, Bittrich S, Deshpande M, et al. Mol* Viewer: modern web app for 3D visualization and analysis of large biomolecular structures. Nucleic Acids Research. 2021;49(W1). https://doi.org/ 10.1093/nar/gkab314
  24. Schneidman-Duhovny D, Inbar Y, Nussinov R, Wolfson HJ. PatchDock and SymmDock: servers for rigid and symmetric docking. Nucleic Acids Research. 2005;33(Web Server):W363-W367. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gki481
  25. Jejurikar BL, Rohane SH. Drug Designing in Discovery Studio. Nucleic Acids Research. 2021;14(2):135-138. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-4150.2021.00025.0
  26. Laskowski RA, Swindells MB. LigPlot+: Multiple Ligand–Protein Interaction Diagrams for Drug Discovery. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. 2011;51(10):2778-2786. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci200227u
  27. Acharya Y, Dhanda G, Sarkar P, Haldar J. Pursuit of next-generation glycopeptides: a journey with vancomycin. Chemical Communications. 2022;58(12):1881-1897. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1cc06635h
  28. Hirano Y, Keito Shinmoto, Okada Y, et al. Machine Learning Approach to Predict Positive Screening of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus During Mechanical Ventilation Using Synthetic Dataset From MIMIC-IV Database. Frontiers in Medicine. 2021;8. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fmed.2021.694520
  29. Muhammed MT, Aki-Yalcin E. Molecular docking: Principles, advances, and its applications in drug discovery. Letters in Drug Design & Discovery. 2022;19. https://doi.org/10.2174/1570180819666220922103109
  30. Oyedele AQK, Ogunlana AT, Boyenle ID, et al. Docking covalent targets for drug discovery: stimulating the computer-aided drug design community of possible pitfalls and erroneous practices. Molecular Diversity. Published online September 4, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11030-022-10523-4
  31. Kamel B, Graham GG, Williams KM, Pile KD, Day RO. Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Febuxostat. Clinical Pharmacokinetics. 2016;56(5):459-475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40262-016-0466-4
  32. Becker MA, Schumacher HR, Espinoza LR, et al. The urate-lowering efficacy and safety of febuxostat in the treatment of the hyperuricemia of gout: the CONFIRMS trial. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2010;12(2):R63. https://doi.org/10.1186/ar2978
  33. Waller A, Jordan KM. Use of febuxostat in the management of gout in the United Kingdom. Therapeutic Advances in Musculoskeletal Disease. 2016;9(2):55-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1759720x16682010
  34. Gadade DD, Pekamwar SS. Pharmaceutical Cocrystals: Regulatory and Strategic Aspects, Design and Development. Advanced Pharmaceutical Bulletin. 2016;6(4):479-494. https://doi.org/10.15171/apb.2016.062
  35. Fernández-Tornero C, García E, Beatriz de Pascual-Teresa, Rubens López, Giménez-Gallego G, Romero AA. Ofloxacin-like Antibiotics Inhibit Pneumococcal Cell Wall-degrading Virulence Factors. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2005;280(20):19948-19957. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m501236200
  36. Ghanem KG, Giles JA, Zenilman JM. Fluoroquinolone-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae: the Inevitable Epidemic. Infectious Disease Clinics of North America. 2005;19(2):351-365.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2005.03.005
  37. Mulimani ND, Udapudi BB, Yaraguppi DA. In-Silico Drug Design Approach for Identification of Antibacterial Drug Leads for Treatment of Gastric Lymphoma. International Journal of Science and Applied Information Technology. 2013;2(1): 1-7.
  38. Lin J, Zhou D, Steitz TA, Polikanov YS, Gagnon MG. Ribosome-Targeting Antibiotics: Modes of Action, Mechanisms of Resistance, and Implications for Drug Design. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 2018;87(1):451-478. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-062917-011942
  39. Nowakowska J, Griesser HJ, Textor M, Landmann R, Khanna N. Antimicrobial properties of 8-hydroxyserrulat-14-en-19-oic acid for treatment of implant-associated infections. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. 2013;57(1):333-342. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01735-12