Cryo-EM analysis reveals an asymmetric state of the TMEM16F dimer
A plethora of genetic, biochemical and electrophysiological studies show that binding of phosphatidylinositol 4,5-biphosphate (PIP2) is important for activation of both TMEM16A and TMEM16F (29–31). Combination of lipid nanodisc technology with single particle cryo-EM allows structural analysis of membrane proteins embedded in a lipid bilayer (32, 33), which is critical for TMEM16 proteins and other membrane proteins that are modulated by lipids. However, TMEM16 proteins in nanodiscs present strong preferred orientation in particle distribution, severely limiting the attainable resolution of cryo-EM structures of TMEM16 proteins and hampering the study of these proteins in the context of a lipid bilayer (8, 27). We overcame this limitation by collecting data from tilted specimen and implementing an image processing pipeline that allowed us to systematically determine sub 3.5 Å structures of TMEM16F in lipid nanodiscs in the presence or absence of different ligands (see Materials and Methods, figs. S1, S2, S3, S4 and table S1).
First, we determined multiple structures of TMEM16F in the presence of Ca2+ and PIP2. These structures represent different conformations of TMEM16F in unliganded states. The quality of these reconstructions enables atomic model building of the TM helices, most of the extracellular and intracellular domains, as well as Ca2+ ions and dozens of lipid densities associated with the protein (Fig. 1 and table S1). Whereas all previously reported TMEM16F structures were determined with the assumption of C2 symmetry, we did not impose symmetry and identified 3 distinct states with major differences in the conformation of TM6 and the number of Ca2+ atoms bound in each monomer (fig. S4). In State A, both monomers are bound to 2 Ca2+ ions and present a clear density for an extended TM6 (fig. S4). In State B, one monomer has 2 Ca2+ ions and a straight TM6, whereas the other monomer appears to contain a single Ca2+ ion, as density for the second Ca2+ ion is significantly weaker. In this single Ca2+-bound monomer, TM6 presents a kink at P628 (Fig. 1). Thus, this structure represents an asymmetric state of the dimer (Fig. 1). In State C, both monomers contain only 1 Ca2+ ion and TM6 is bent in both (fig. S4). Comparison between these 3 classes reveals that straightening of TM6 correlates with binding of the second Ca2+ ion, whereas kinking of TM6 is associated with an outward rigid body motion of the intracellular domain that brings it closer to the nanodisc (Fig. 1A and fig. S4). Moreover, bending of TM6 directly correlates with distortion of the nanodisc and significant thinning of the membrane at the kinking position (Fig. 1A and fig. S4). Consistent with our previous study of TMEM16F (8), these observations support the notion that kinking of TM6 at P628 causes membrane distortion.
Our reconstructions also reveal previously unobserved features, including glycans and conserved disulfide bonds in the extracellular region (Fig. 1 and fig. S5, A and B), as well as the presence of a third Ca2+ ion coordinated by E395 on TM2 as well as S854 and D859 on TM10, near the dimer interface in the intracellular region of the protein (fig. S5C). These features are likely present in previous reconstructions but not detected due to limited resolution. In fact, a similar Ca2+-binding site has been recently found in TMEM16F (10) as well as TMEM16K (34), and biochemical studies indicate that an equivalent third Ca2+-binding site allosterically regulates channel activity in TMEM16A (35).
We are also able to unambiguously assign the residues of TM4 and precisely determine the pore-lining residues on TM4 (fig. S5D). These residues form a network of OH-containing side chains along the hydrophilic pore that constitutes an ideal environment for ion conduction across the membrane (Fig. 1C). However, the ion conduction pore is closed in all states resolved in this study and its hydrophilic interior is not accessible to lipids from the surrounding membrane (fig. S5E).
TM1 and TM6 form a hydrophobic groove that can be occupied by lipids
In all three classes, we noticed a trail of densities that appear to correspond to a mixture of multiple lipids extending across the entire lipid bilayer along the membrane-facing surface of each TMEM16F monomer (Fig. 1B). A hydrophobic groove formed between TM1 and TM6 near the extracellular edge of the membrane appears to play a major role in accommodating these lipids. Intriguingly, this area corresponds to the position where membrane thinning occurs. To further investigate these lipid densities, we combined particles from all three States and carried out focused classification around this groove in a single monomer (See Materials and Methods, fig. S1). The particles clustered primarily to 2 classes that each contained approximately 40% of the particles and rendered 3.1 Å resolution structures (figs. S1 and S2). The overall organization of Class 1 and 2 is essentially indistinguishable (Fig. 2). However, Class 1 almost entirely lacks lipid densities in the TM1-TM6 groove, whereas Class 2 has strong density for numerous lipids in this area (Fig. 2, A and B). This indicates that our dataset contains a mixture of monomers in lipid-free and lipid-bound states.
Niclosamide binds the hydrophobic groove formed between TM1 and TM6
Niclosamide is an FDA-approved drug that has recently emerged as a promising drug for treating severe cases of COVID-19 (26) (clinicaltrials.gov), and its propensity to inhibit syncytia formation has been attributed to its ability to inhibit TMEM16F (13). Seeking to determine the binding site of this antagonist, we added 50 mM niclosamide to our biochemical preparation and imaged this sample following identical image processing pipeline as in the apo dataset presented above (figs. S1 and S2). In this case, however, focused classification around the TM1-TM6 groove rendered 3 classes. Like in our control sample, Classes 1 and 2 are distinguished by the absence or presence of lipids in the groove. Meanwhile, Class 3 contains a well-defined density in the TM1-TM6 groove that fits niclosamide well while no trail of lipid densities is found in the hydrophobic pocket (Fig. 2C). The niclosamide-like density contacts F321 on TM1, K370 on the TM1-TM2 loop, T606, T607 and T610 on TM6, and F685 and L687 on the TM7-TM8 loop (Fig. 2C). The resolution of our reconstruction is insufficient to unambiguously determine the precise pose of the molecule within the density. To gain some insight into how niclosamide may be oriented within TMEM16F, the compound was computationally docked using the Glide docking software. Using only the atomic model of TMEM16F (without access to our cryo-EM density map), the software identified this pocket as the most likely binding site and the highest-ranking pose fits our cryo-EM density well (Fig. 2C and fig. S6). Notably, this pose had the lowest binding energy and predicts formation of a hydrogen bond with T610. Taken together, our structural and computational data show that niclosamide binds TMEM16F at the hydrophobic groove formed between TM1 and TM6 and that binding of niclosamide prevents lipids from occupying this pocket.
1PBC is a potent inhibitor of TMEM16F
Niclosamide is known to inhibit both TMEM16F and TMEM16A channels (15). Given the structural similarities between both paralogs, we reasoned that 1PBC, a potent inhibitor of TMEM16A, might also modulate TMEM16F. To test this hypothesis, we first measured Ca2+ influx using Fluo8 as a small molecule Ca2+ reporter dye. Application of 1PBC led to a significant decrease in TMEM16F-dependent Ca2+ influx upon chemical induction (Fig. 3 and fig. S7). This indicates that 1PBC is a potent inhibitor of TMEM16F ion channel activity. Next, we explored whether TMEM16F lipid scramblase activity is also inhibited by 1PBC by imaging PS exposure using pSIVA, a fluorescent annexin derivative. Upon chemical induction, the average onset for PS exposure in vehicle controls was 17.23 min (Fig. 3 and fig. S7). 1PBC robustly delayed the onset of TMEM16F-dependent PS exposure to 32.06 min (Fig. 3). We conclude that, like niclosamide, 1PBC potently inhibits TMEM16F function by reducing both ion conduction and lipid scrambling activity.
1PBC and niclosamide target the same site in TMEM16F
To elucidate the binding site of 1PBC, we supplemented our TMEM16F sample with 100 mM 1PBC. Here too we identified 3 distinct classes that closely resemble the 3 states observed in our drug-free sample. However, lipid densities along the membrane-facing surface of each monomer are absent. Instead, in all three classes we found a strong oval-shaped density in the same hydrophobic groove identified as the drug binding site in our niclosamide-supplemented dataset (Fig. 2D). This density, which is remarkably different from the lipid-like and niclosamide-like densities in our ligand-free and niclosamide-bound structures, fits 1PBC well. Overlay of the 1PBC-bound structure with our control revealed subtle side chain rearrangements of the residues surrounding this density. More specfically, K370 appears to shift from interacting with E366 to establishing a hydrogen bond with the compound (fig. S5F). Consistent with these observations, computational docking using Glide independently predicts formation of a hydrogen bond between K370 and 1PBC and identifies a pose for the ligand that fits our density map well (Fig. 2D and fig. S6). Together, our data show that 1PBC and niclosamide target the same site in TMEM16F and appear to replace bound lipids in the hydrophobic groove formed between TM1 and TM6.
Functional validation of the drug binding site in TMEM16F
We previously showed that chemical induction of giant plasma membrane vesicle formation involves TMEM16F-dependent Ca2+ influx as well as TMEM16F-dependent PS exposure in HEK293 cells (7, 8), so it is a robust assay for evaluating TMEM16F activity. We thus generated stable cell lines expressing wildtype or mutant TMEM16F-mScarlet containing alanine substitutions of the residues surrounding the inhibitor densities: F321 on TM1, K370 and F374 on the TM1-TM2 loop, T606 on TM6, and F685 on the TM7-TM8 loop. Interestingly, mutation of these residues altered the basal activity of TMEM16F. Compared to the wildtype control, F321A shortened the onset of Ca2+ influx by nearly twofold and reduced the onset latency of the PS exposure from 17.23 min to 11.61 min (Fig. 3). In contrast, K370A significantly delayed the onset of PS exposure to 30.16 min. These results indicate that this pocket and its endogenous lipids are critical for scramblase activity of TMEM16F (Fig. 3 and fig. S7). Importantly, in wild type controls, both 1PBC and niclosamide significantly delayed the onset of internal Ca2+ rise and PS exposure (Fig. 3). The inhibitory effect of both antagonists was significantly decreased by all the mutations, confirming that these residues are important for binding these inhibitors (Fig. 3). In fact, the F321A mutation almost completely obliterated the inhibitory effect on the onset of both Ca2+ rise and PS exposure (Fig. 3). In summary, we show that residues in the TM1-TM6 groove are important for niclosamide- and 1PBC-mediated inhibition of TMEM16F and this area is critical for scramblase activity.
Functional and computational validation of the niclosamide and 1PBC binding site in TMEM16A
Niclosamide and 1PBC are potent inhibitors of both TMEM16A and TMEM16F (15). Since the binding pocket we identify in TMEM16F presents a high degree of conservation in TMEM16A, we reasoned that both inhibitors may bind equivalent sites in TMEM16A and TMEM16F. To investigate this hypothesis, we tested whether mutations of residues in the putative binding pocket affect 1PBC- or niclosamide-mediated inhibition of TMEM16A (Fig. 4). We used whole cell patch clamp electrophysiology to measure Ca2+-activated Cl− currents from HEK293 cells expressing either wildtype or mutant TMEM16A and tested the effects of alanine substitutions of F353 on TM1, R399 and F404 on the TM1-TM2 loop or F720 on the TM7-TM8 loop. In the absence of antagonists, these mutations did not alter the Cl− current induced by Ca2+ activation of TMEM16A. R399A and F720A significantly reduced the inhibitory effects of both 1PBC and niclosamide while F353A affected the inhibitory effects of niclosamide but not 1PBC, confirming that these residues are important for the interaction of these drugs with TMEM16A (Fig. 4, A to D). Notably, F404A did not alter the efficiency of either of the inhibitors, whereas the equivalent mutation in TMEM16F, F374A, decreased inhibition (Fig. 3). It thus appears that the functional relevance of the specific residues within the binding site might vary between TMEM16A and TMEM16F.
We further used Glide to computationally dock niclosamide and 1PBC into the Ca2+-bound TMEM16A structure following identical procedures as in TMEM16F, for docking into a cube of 30 Å length on each side. In both cases, the software found binding in this pocket to be most energetically favorable (fig. S6). Taken together, our data indicate that 1PBC and niclosamide bind the same binding pocket in a hydrophobic groove formed between TM1 and TM6 in both TMEM16A and TMEM16F.