Next Article in Journal
Gel-Free Tools for Quick and Simple Screening of Anti-Topoisomerase 1 Compounds
Previous Article in Journal
Investigation on the Biological Safety and Activity of a Gluconolactone-Based Lotion for Dermocosmetic Application
Previous Article in Special Issue
Association between Migraines and Prior Proton Pump Inhibitor Use: A Nested Case-Control Study Using a National Health Screening Cohort
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

5-Chloro-2-Guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI) Is a Non-Selective Inhibitor of the Human HV1 Channel

1
Department of Biophysics & Cell Biology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary
2
ELKH-DE Cell Biology and Signaling Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary
3
Department of Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Pharmaceuticals 2023, 16(5), 656; https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16050656
Submission received: 22 March 2023 / Revised: 13 April 2023 / Accepted: 24 April 2023 / Published: 27 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Effects of Drugs on Ion Channels)

Abstract

:
5-chloro-2-guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI), a small-molecule guanidine derivative, is a known effective inhibitor of the voltage-gated proton (H+) channel (HV1, Kd ≈ 26 μM) and is widely used both in ion channel research and functional biological assays. However, a comprehensive study of its ion channel selectivity determined by electrophysiological methods has not been published yet. The lack of selectivity may lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the role of hHv1 in physiological or pathophysiological responses in vitro and in vivo. We have found that ClGBI inhibits the proliferation of lymphocytes, which absolutely requires the functioning of the KV1.3 channel. We, therefore, tested ClGBI directly on hKV1.3 using a whole-cell patch clamp and found an inhibitory effect similar in magnitude to that seen on hHV1 (Kd ≈ 72 μM). We then further investigated ClGBI selectivity on the hKV1.1, hKV1.4-IR, hKV1.5, hKV10.1, hKV11.1, hKCa3.1, hNaV1.4, and hNaV1.5 channels. Our results show that, besides HV1 and KV1.3, all other off-target channels were inhibited by ClGBI, with Kd values ranging from 12 to 894 μM. Based on our comprehensive data, ClGBI has to be considered a non-selective hHV1 inhibitor; thus, experiments aiming at elucidating the significance of these channels in physiological responses have to be carefully evaluated.

1. Introduction

The voltage-gated proton channel (HV1) is a relatively recently identified ion channel that considerably differs from other voltage-gated ion channels due to the lack of a pore domain [1]. Accordingly, the voltage-sensing domain (VSD) of HV1 has the dual role of voltage sensing and establishing proton permeation. The crystal structure of mouse HV1 has been presented in the resting state, providing a detailed view for understanding the general principles of voltage sensing and proton permeation [2]. HV1 is expressed in a wide variety of tissues and consequently has been linked to various cellular functions, such as pH regulation [3,4], proliferation [5], migration [6,7], and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production [8]. It was also found that HV1-deficient B cells had impaired antibody responses in vivo; thus, HV1 plays a role in the humoral immune response, as well [9]. In addition, HV1 has been implicated in the development of diseases related to excessive ROS production [9,10] and various tumors [5,9,11,12,13,14]. These findings suggest a potential therapeutic use of HV1-modulating compounds. Consequently, a number of studies have emerged for finding prospective proton channel inhibitors [15,16,17]. One of the first families of HV1 inhibitors was benzimidazoles, which are often prescribed as proton pump inhibitors [18], and their guanidine derivatives [19]. Multiple derivatives of the molecule 2-guanidinobenzimidazole (2GBI) were found to effectively block HV1 from the intracellular side; however, it was 5-chloro-2-guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI) that raised the greatest interest as a research tool due to its highest affinity and much-improved ability to cross the membrane, thereby offering the possibility of extracellular applications [20]. Although several other blockers of HV1 have been reported since then [15,16,17,21], ClGBI seems to remain the most frequently used tool to suppress HV1 currents.
Recently, the expression of HV1 channels in myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) and their essential role in the inhibition of T cell proliferation by MDSCs have been reported [22]. Pretreatment of MDSCs with ClGBI reduced their suppressive effect on T cell proliferation, suggesting the potential therapeutic use of HV1 inhibitors in immunoregulation. However, the presence and possible functional roles of voltage-gated proton currents have also been described in Jurkat T cells, as well as murine and human peripheral T cells [23] and recently in activated T cells [24]. Thus, the application of ClGBI in the presence of both MDSCs and T cells may also directly affect the function of the latter cell type, as well. We, therefore, tested the effect of ClGBI treatment on the proliferation of peripheral blood lymphocytes, the majority of which are T cells, and found a significant suppression by a 200 μM concentration of the drug. As the KV1.3 voltage-gated potassium channel is a crucial regulator of the membrane potential both in quiescent and activated/proliferating T cells [25], we hypothesized that the effect of ClGBI may occur at least in part via KV1.3 inhibition. Therefore, we first assessed its effect directly on hKV1.3 using electrophysiological methods and observed current inhibition in a concentration range comparable to the inhibition of HV1. Although ClGBI is widely used in the field of ion channel research as a potent HV1 blocker [7,17,22], a comprehensive study of its selectivity with electrophysiological methods has not been published yet. Since the suppression of proliferation and KV1.3 blockade suggested that ClGBI may be a non-selective inhibitor, it motivated us to conduct further patch clamp experiments to perform a selectivity screening of ClGBI beyond KV1.3. Measurements were carried out on hKV1.1, hKV1.4-IR, hKV1.5, hKV10.1, hKV11.1 (hERG), hKCa3.1, hNaV1.4, and hNaV1.5. ion channels. All the tested channels were inhibited to some extent by 200 μM ClGBI, so our results clearly indicate that ClGBI is not a highly selective inhibitor of HV1 channels, as had been assumed in several previous studies.

2. Results

2.1. ClGBI Inhibits the Human HV1 Channel Expressed in CHO Cells

It has been shown that the 2-guanidinobenzimidazole (2GBI) derivative ClGBI inhibits HV1 proton channels expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes by binding to the VSD intracellularly as well as by blocking when applied extracellularly due to its ability to cross the membrane [20]. First, we aimed to confirm the effects of ClGBI on the hHV1 channel in our system. The macroscopic currents were measured in transiently transfected CHO cells (see Section 4 for details). Figure 1A shows representative whole-cell current traces evoked by 1 s voltage ramps to +60 mV from a holding potential of –60 mV with an intersweep interval of 10 s. Voltage ramps allow the simultaneous measurement of current amplitude at a given membrane potential and activation threshold voltage of the channels. ClGBI was applied to the bath solution, and the amplitudes of the currents were measured at the end of the 1-s-long voltage pulses. A robust inhibition was observed: at the equilibrium block, 200 μM ClGBI caused a major reduction in current amplitude, and the remaining current fraction (RCF) was 0.13 ± 0.01, n = 7 (Figure 1A, red). The proper operation of the perfusion apparatus was confirmed using ECS at a pH of 6.4, which significantly shifts the opening threshold of the channel in the positive direction as the gating of HV1 depends on the transmembrane pH gradient.
The time course of the inhibition of HV1 currents at 200 μM ClGBI is shown in Figure 1B. Normalized peak currents as RCF were plotted as a function of time. The equilibrium block was reached in ~100 s at this concentration. In contrast to the relatively fast association kinetics of ClGBI, the dissociation rate was extremely slow; accordingly, recovery up to ~10% of the control current took several minutes. This observation is in agreement with the slow washout kinetics also seen in outside-out patch recordings [20].
Figure 1C shows the concentration–response experiments performed for testing the concentration-dependent inhibition of HV1 by ClGBI. Different concentrations of ClGBI were applied to the cells for an adequate duration to reach the equilibrium block, considering the slower blocking kinetics at lower ClGBI concentrations. The RCFs were calculated at each ClGBI concentration and plotted as a function of ClGBI. Fitting the data points yielded Kd = 15.9 ± 2.0 µM and an nH of 1.0 ± 0.1 (n = 4).

2.2. ClGBI Also Inhibits the KV1.3 Channel of Lymphocytes

Recently, the increased expression of HV1 has been shown in activated T cells, suggesting a link to proliferation [24]. We have, therefore, investigated the effect of ClGBI on lymphocyte proliferation induced by PHA activation using a CFSE assay. In this method, following the loading of cells with CFSE dye, each round of cell division is apparent by the reduced dye content and consequent lower fluorescence intensity of the daughter cells. Successful activation and the resulting proliferation of the cells were demonstrated by the shift of the fluorescence histogram toward lower values and the appearance of multiple peaks (Figure 2). The application of 200 μM of ClGBI completely blocked the proliferation of the cells, as shown by the single peak fluorescence histogram in the presence of the drug overlapping with the main peak of the non-activated cells. The inhibitory effect on proliferation was much weaker in the presence of 20 μM ClGBI and completely absent at 2 μM (Figure 2).
The essential role of voltage-gated KV1.3 channels in T cell activation and proliferation is well-documented [26,27,28], so we tested whether the proliferation was suppressed in part via a KV1.3 blockade. Although we did not separate T cells, they make up most of the mixed lymphocyte population, and the proliferation of B cells also relies on the activity of the KV1.3 potassium channel [29]. The inhibitory effect of ClGBI on these channels was assessed by patch clamp. hKV1.3 currents were evoked in human lymphocytes by a series of 15-ms-long depolarization pulses to +50 mV from a holding potential of −120 mV (Figure 3A). The open probability of the channel at +50 mV is maximal, and the relatively short duration of the depolarizing periods prevented inactivation. The time between voltage pulses was set to 15 s to avoid the cumulative inactivation of hKV1.3 channels. Under the given experimental conditions (i.e., the voltage protocol used and the lack of Ca2+ in the pipette solution), the whole-cell currents were conducted exclusively by hKV1.3 channels. Figure 3A shows macroscopic K+ currents through hKV1.3 channels were recorded sequentially in the same cell in the absence (control, black) and presence of 200 μM ClGBI (red) dissolved freshly in the ECS. At the equilibrium block, 200 μM ClGBI caused a ~75% reduction in current amplitude (RCF was 0.25 ± 0.01, n = 9). ECS containing 10 mM tetraethylammonium (TEA+) was used to verify the identity of the ion channel and the proper operation of the perfusion system (10 mM TEA+, blue).
The kinetics of the development of the inhibition of KV1.3 current by 200 μM ClGBI is shown in Figure 3B. The KV1.3 current is progressively blocked by ClGBI, demonstrated by the decrease in the normalized peak currents as a function of time, and the origin (t = 0) corresponds to the start of the perfusion with ClGBI dissolved in ECS. The kinetics of the block followed a single exponential time course, indicating a simple bimolecular interaction between ClGBI and the channel yielding τon = 22.1 ± 2.7 s (n = 3). Figure 3B also shows that the inhibition of the KV1.3 current is reversible; after the equilibration block was reached, the perfusion was switched to control ECS (washout), resulting in complete recovery from current inhibition.
We also performed a concentration–response experiment series for hKV1.3 channels by ClGBI. Different concentrations of ClGBI were added to the cells until a complete equilibrium block was reached and RCF values were determined. Data points on the dose–response curve represent the mean of 4–5 individual measurements and are fitted with a two-parameter inhibitor vs. response model (see Materials and Methods for details) to obtain the dissociation constant (Kd) and Hill coefficient (nH), which were Kd = 72.4 ± 4.0 µM and nH = 1.1 ± 0.07, respectively. The comparison of Figure 1B and Figure 3B clearly indicates that although ClGBI has a slightly higher affinity for HV1 than KV1.3, the two channels are inhibited in the same concentration range. Therefore, when ClGBI is applied in systems expressing both channels, their simultaneous inhibition must be considered.

2.3. ClGBI Is not Selective for hHv1 as It Inhibits a Wide Range of Other Channels

Prompted by the discovery that KV1.3 is inhibited by ClGBI, we tested the effect of the compound on eight other channels, including different voltage-gated K+ and Na+ channels and the intermediate conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channel, to assess its selectivity. Whole-cell patch clamp currents recorded in the absence and presence of 200 μM ClGBI are shown in Figure 4 for hKV1.1 (Figure 4A), hKV1.4ΔN (fast inactivation-removed hKV1.4, Figure 4B), hKV1.5 (Figure 4C), KV10.1 (Figure 4D), hKV11.1 (Figure 4E), hKCa3.1 (Figure 4F), hNaV1.4 (Figure 4G), and hNaV1.5 (Figure 4H). For voltage protocols and the composition of ECS and ICS, see Materials and Methods. The RCF values, measured at equilibrium inhibition, are summarized in Figure 4I. All the investigated channels were blocked significantly by ClGBI at 200 μM. Similar to KV1.3, the inhibition was almost fully reversible for most channels. Due to the low-affinity inhibition of the channels, a complete dose–response curve would have required very large quantities of ClGBI (and concomitant high DMSO concentrations); thus, we could only determine an estimated Kd value for the investigated channels from a single concentration, assuming a bimolecular interaction between ClGBI and the ion channels. These were (in μM) 323.8 ± 13.1 for KV1.1 (n = 5), 188.4 ± 38 for KV1.4 (n = 6), 310.2 ± 43.6 for KV1.5 (n = 4), 77.5 ± 14.2 for KV10.1 (n = 5), 12.0 ± 2.1 for KV11.1 (n = 5), 893.9 ± 133.5 for KCa3.1 (n = 5), 590.7 ± 122.7 for NaV1.4 (n = 4), and 186.7 ± 35.7 (n = 6) for NaV1.5.

3. Discussion

Although voltage-gated proton currents were first described more than three decades ago [30], the gene of HV1 was only identified in 2006 [1]. Since then, HV1 has been found in numerous species and a wide variety of cell types and associated with various cellular functions [3,6,31,32,33,34], of which its contribution to ROS production by immune cells may be the best known [10]. The excessive function or overexpression of HV1 has been linked to various disease conditions associated with pathologically excessive ROS generation and cancer development [35]. This potential involvement of HV1 in disease conditions promoted it to become a prospective drug target, which initiated a search for blocking compounds of high affinity and selectivity. Although several publications have reported the discovery of small molecule or peptide toxin blockers of HV1 [15,16,17,36], their effectiveness has not been confirmed in functional tests by other groups, so ClGBI remains the most generally used blocker for research purposes [22,37]. It has been used to identify the channel and demonstrate the functional role of HV1 in various biological systems suppressing viability, migration, and proliferation [7,37,38,39]. However, the ion channel selectivity of ClGBI has not been comprehensively verified, raising the possibility that in several studies, the observed effects occurred at least in part via the inhibition of other off-target ion channels.
For this reason, we aimed to screen the effect of ClGBI on several different ion channels using mammalian expression systems to obtain a reliable comparison. First, we tested the CHO cells for the presence of endogenous currents reported earlier [40] since these non-specific currents may interfere with the interpretation of pharmacological studies designed to characterize the effect of ClGBI on heterologously expressed ion channels. Thus, we recorded whole-cell outward currents evoked by short depolarizing pulses on native CHO cells; however, the measured current was negligible (on average, the peak amplitude was ~10 pA at +50 mV, data not shown). Thus, the overexpression of the heterologously expressed channels completely eliminates the contribution of the endogenous background current to the whole cell current by minimizing potential errors in the pharmacological data.
Guanidine derivatives, including ClGBI, were shown to inhibit HV1 activity in the μM range [19,20]. We confirmed these results using a mammalian expression system: the apparent Kd and Hill coefficient for ClGBI were 15.9 ± 2.0 μM and 1.0 ± 0.1, respectively, which are in good agreement with the previously determined parameters measured using an amphibian expression system [20]. The slight difference in the observed Kd values may be due to the different expression systems and/or the different availability of possible interacting partners of the channel in CHO cells and Xenopus laevis oocytes. Due to the relatively low affinity of ClGBI for HV1, higher concentrations of the compound would have required DMSO concentrations high enough to risk possible permeabilization of the membrane or other non-specific solvent effects.
In vivo studies of KV1.3 blocker peptide toxins have clearly shown their potential in suppressing T-cell-mediated inflammatory reactions, and KV1.3 inhibitors, in general, have long been known to suppress T cell activation and proliferation [26,27]. When performing functional HV1 assays on peripheral lymphocytes (mostly T cells), we observed progressively reduced proliferation after 6 days of treating the cells with increasing ClGBI concentrations, which led us to the hypothesis that ClGBI inhibits KV1.3 as well. We directly tested this by the patch clamp, and 200 μM ClGBI blocked ~80% of the KV1.3 current in a reversible manner, confirming the comparable affinities of ClGBI for HV1 and KV1.3. The current block developed at comparable rates for HV1 and KV1.3, requiring 50–100 s to reach block saturation at 200 μM, implying similar association rates (Figure 1B and Figure 3B). A major rate-limiting factor may be diffusion through the membrane, as the ClGBI block developed much more rapidly in inside-out patches than outside-out patches [20]. However, dissociation of ClGBI was significantly slower from HV1 than KV1.3, suggesting different interactions of the drug with the two channels. Structurally, KV1.3 has four VSDs, similar to HV1, but it also differs in that it has a “real” pore domain responsible for ion permeation, so the binding site of ClGBI on the two channels may not necessarily be at homologous locations [41,42].
Due to high structural similarity, small-molecule blockers often have similar affinities for different members within the same ion channel family, such as tetrodotoxin (TTX) blocking NaV channels or tetraethylammonium blocking K+ channels [43]. This prompted us to test the effect of ClGBI on other members of the Shaker (KV1.x) family and then expand the assessment to the KV channels of other families and then even further to a few non-KV channels. As KV1 channels share high sequence homology and tend to form functional heterotetrameric structures in different tissues, we first tested the effect of 200 μM of ClGBI on channels closely related to KV1.3: KV1.1, KV1.4-IR, and KV1.5. For KV1 channels, the voltage sensor of a given subunit couples to the pore domain of the adjacent subunit, leading to domain-swapped architecture [44,45,46]. In contrast, for members of the KV10 (EAG) and KV11 (ERG) families [47,48], as opposed to the “classic” arrangement, the voltage sensor is not domain-swapped, i.e., the voltage sensor of a given subunit is coupled to the pore domain of the same subunit. Since the non-swapped voltage sensors should work to transmit force and regulate the gate in a way that is different from the lever mechanism proposed for Shaker-like KV channels, we decided to test the effect of ClGBI on KV10.1 and KV11.1 channels, as well. Our patch clamp experiments revealed that all these KV off-target channels were also inhibited by 200 µM of ClGBI without major changes to gating kinetics.
We also tested the effect of ClGBI on the intermediate-conductance calcium-activated K+ channel, KCa3.1 (also known as IKCa1 or SK4), which has high biological relevance, as it regulates membrane potential and calcium signaling in a wide variety of cell types, such as erythrocytes, activated T and B cells, macrophages, microglia, vascular endothelial cells, epithelial cells, and vascular smooth muscle cells [49,50]. Consequently, KCa3.1 is suggested as a potential therapeutic target in diseases, such as anemia, atherosclerosis, and autoimmunity. KCa3.1 differs from the other off-target channels since it is only gated by intracellular Ca2+ and lacks functional VSDs. Based on this, we considered KCa3.1 worth including as a potential off-target channel, as well. Although 200 μM ClGBI inhibited KCa3.1 to a small extent, its affinity for the channel was very low, most likely ruling out off-target effects in functional studies.
Voltage-gated sodium channels share a similar general structure with KV channels containing four VSDs per channel. However, the functioning of these VSDs is less symmetrical than in KV channels, and the pore domain is also different. This motivated us to investigate the effect of ClGBI on NaV channels, which are molecular targets for a broad range of small molecules and peptides isolated from the venoms of scorpions, spiders, sea anemones, and cone snails with binding sites at varying locations on the VSDs or the pore domain [51]. We tested the effect of ClGBI on hNaV1.4 and hNaV1.5 channels, which are responsible for the generation and propagation of action potentials triggering muscle contraction in skeletal muscles and mediating the rising phase of the cardiac action potential, respectively [52]. They represent the two major classes of NaV channels: NaV1.4 is blocked by low nanomolar concentrations of the guanidine-based neurotoxin TTX, a toxin isolated from puffer fish; thus, it is classified as a TTX-sensitive channel, whereas NaV1.5 is considered TTX-resistant, as it is inhibited by only high micromolar TTX concentrations. We have found that 200 μM ClGBI inhibited both channels, albeit with quite a low affinity, without altering gating kinetics. Its affinity was higher for the cardiac NaV1.5 channel, which should be considered when studying the role of HV1 in cardiac myocytes [38]. More importantly, the KV11.1 channel, crucial for the repolarization phase of the cardiac action potential, was blocked with approximately the same affinity as HV1.
In summary, we have tested the effect of ClGBI on the following ion channels: hKV1.1, hKV1.4-IR, hKV1.5, hKV10.1, hKV11.1, hKCa3.1, hNaV1.4, and hNaV1.5. We have found a significant inhibitory effect of 200 μM ClGBI on all the investigated channels, although the Kd values covered a wide concentration range (Kd = 12–894 μM). The cardiac hERG channel, KV11.1, which is known to be blocked by numerous small molecules, thereby eliminating many of them as potential drug candidates, showed the highest affinity for ClGBI, equaling that of HV1. The affinity sequence was the following: HV1 » KV11.1 > KV1.3 » KV10.1 > KV1.4 » NaV1.5 > KV1.5 » KV1.1 > NaV1.4 > KCa3.1.
For prospective ion channel inhibitor drug candidates, a molecule is generally expected to show at least 100 times greater affinity for the target channel than for available off-target channels. In functional studies, such as cell viability, proliferation, or migration, a similarly strict criterion would be preferable to clearly isolate the role of a given channel in the cellular function. The 200 μM ClGBI concentration used in our study blocked at least 20–25% of the current in all tested channels. Since this is identical to the concentration that was used in several functional assays [7,22], and most native cells express a wide variety of ion channels, the unequivocal identification of HV1 using ClGBI as the channel responsible for a given function is questionable.
Since HV1 lacks a pore domain, ClGBI must necessarily bind to the VSD. Yet, it blocks the proton permeation pathway within the VSD, similarly to classical pore blockers of other channels, rather than modifying VSD movement as gating modifiers do [20]. The residues responsible for binding have been identified by mutant cycle analysis. As the VSDs of KV and NaV channels do not normally have ion permeation pathways in them, it is unlikely that the ClGBI binding site is at a homologous location in these channels.
We have scanned the affinity of ClGBI on various voltage-gated ion channel targets (HV, KV, NaV) with various gating mechanisms (e.g., intracellular Ca2+ or voltage-gated channels) and various coupling mechanisms between the voltage sensor and the pore domain (e.g., domain-swapped and non-domain-swapped channels). Although we have not performed a detailed kinetic analysis of the currents, we observed no significant changes in gating kinetics upon ClGBI inhibition for any of the channels. This implies that ClGBI likely interacts with the pore domain of these ion channels by fully or partially plugging it rather than affecting VSD movement.
Our results clearly demonstrate that ClGBI inhibits a wide variety of ion channels with low affinity, some of them with an affinity comparable to HV1. Consequently, if any of these ion channels are suspected or proven to be expressed in the investigated cells or tissues, the use of ClGBI in such experiments as proof of HV1 function must be reconsidered. This fact underlines the great need for blockers of HV1 with much higher selectivity than ClGBI that could be used as more reliable research tools and potentially drug lead molecules.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Lymphocyte Proliferation

Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from the heparinized blood of healthy donors (n = 3) using the Ficoll–Hypaque separation method. A CD14 population obtained by negative selection with CD14 bead (cat. #130-050-201, Miltenyi Biotec B.V & CO. KG, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany)) PBMCs was incubated with carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester (CFSE; Sigma Aldrich/Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) at the final concentration of 1 µM in PBS for 15 min at 37 °C in the dark. After removing the unbound dye, 7.5 × 105/mL cells were seeded in a 48-well plate in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% FBS, 1% GlutaMAX, and 1% penicillin–streptomycin and stimulated with phytohaemagglutinin (PHA, 5 μg/mL, Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA). The cells were grown in a humidified chamber at 37 °C and 5% CO2 for 6 days. As a negative control, unstimulated CFSE-labeled PBMCs were cultured in the same condition. ClGBI was added to the cells in concentrations of 200, 20 and 2 µM from day 0 of the proliferation. After 6 days of proliferation, the CFSE-labeled cells were collected and analyzed by flow cytometry in an ACEA NovoCyte 2000R cytometer (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA).

4.2. Cells for Patch Clamp Recordings

Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM, Gibco, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA, Cat# 11965084)) containing 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS, Sigma-Aldrich), 2 mM L-glutamine, 100 µg/mL streptomycin, and 100 U/mL penicillin-g (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) at 37 °C in a 5% CO2 and 95% air humidified atmosphere. Cells were passaged twice per week following a 2–3 min incubation in PBS containing 0.2 g EDTA/L (Invitrogen, Waltham, MA, USA).
Human peripheral blood monocytes (PBMCs) were isolated from venous blood obtained from anonymized healthy donors. The peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated by Histopaque1077 (Sigma-Aldrich Hungary, Budapest, Hungary) density gradient centrifugation. The cells obtained were resuspended in Roswell Park Memorial Institute (RPMI) 1640 medium (Gibco, Cat# 11875085) containing 10% fetal calf serum (FCS, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA), 100 μg/mL penicillin, 100 μg/mL streptomycin, and 2 mM L-glutamine, seeded in a 24-well culture plate at a density of 5–6 × 105 cells/mL, and grown in a 5% CO2 incubator at 37 °C for 3–5 days. Phytohemagglutinin A (PHA, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) was also added at a concentration of 8–12 μg/mL to the medium to amplify the expression level of KV1.3. CHO cells and PBMCs were gently washed twice with 2 mL of ECS (see below) for the patch clamp experiments. hKV1.3 currents were recorded on activated lymphocytes 3 to 4 days after activation.
CHO cells were transiently transfected using a Lipofectamine 2000 kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) as per the manufacturer’s protocol with the following ion channel coding vectors: hHv1 (hVCN1, GenBank accession no. BC007277.1, a kind gift from Kenton Swartz, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA), hKV1.1 (hKCNA1 gene) in pCMV6-AC-GFP plasmid (Cat# RG211000, OriGene Technologies, Rockville, MD, USA), hKV1.4 (hKV1.4-IR, the inactivation ball deletion mutant of KV1.4; a kind gift from D. Fedida, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada), hKV1.5 in pEYFP plasmid (a kind gift from A. Felipe, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain), hKV10.1 (hKCNH1 gene) in pCMV6-XL plasmid (Cat# SC303154, OriGene Technologies, Rockville, MD, USA), hKCa3.1 (hKCNN4 gene) in pEGFP-C1 vector (a kind gift from H. Wulff, University of California, Davis, CA, USA), and hNaV1.5 (hSCN5A, a kind gift from H. Abriel, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland). The hHV1, hKV1.4-IR, and hKV10.1 channel plasmids were transiently co-transfected with a plasmid encoding the green fluorescent protein (GFP) at a molar ratio of 10:1, respectively. Transfected cells were washed twice with 2 mL of ECS (see below) and replated onto 35 mm polystyrene cell culture dishes (Cellstar, Greiner Bio-One, Kremsmünster, Austria). GFP-positive transfectants were identified with a Nikon Eclipse TS100 fluorescence microscope (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) using bandpass filters of 455–495 nm and 515–555 nm for excitation and emission, respectively, and were used for current recordings (>70% success rate for co-transfection). Human embryonic kidney (HEK) 293 cells stably expressing hKV11.1 (hERG, hKCNH2 gene, a kind gift from H. Wulff, University of California, Davis, CA, USA) and hNaV1.4 (hSCN4A gene, a kind gift from P. Lukács, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary) were also used. In general, ionic currents were recorded 24 to 36 h after transfection.

4.3. Electrophysiology

The standard whole-cell patch clamp method [53] was used to record ionic currents. Micropipettes were pulled in four stages using a Flaming Brown automatic pipette puller (Sutter Instruments, San Rafael, CA, USA) from GC 150F-15 borosilicate glass capillaries (Harvard Apparatus Co., Holliston, MA, USA) with tip diameters between 0.5 and 1 μm and heat-polished to a tip resistance ranging typically between 2 and 8 MΩ. All measurements were carried out using Axopatch 200B amplifiers connected to personal computers using Digidata 1550A data acquisition hardware (Molecular Devices Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). In general, the holding potential was −120 mV. Records were discarded when a leak at the holding potential was more than 10% of the peak current at the given test potential. Experiments were conducted at room temperature, which ranged between 20 and 24 °C.

4.4. Solutions

For hKV1.1, hKV1.3, hKV1.4-IR, hKV1.5, hKV10.1, hNaV1.4, and hNaV1.5, the extracellular (bath) solution (ECS) contained 145 mM NaCl, 5 mM KCl, 2.5 mM CaCl2, 1 mM MgCl2, 10 mM Hepes, and 5.5 mM glucose (pH = 7.35 titrated with NaOH), and the intracellular (pipette) solution (ICS) contained 140 mM KF, 2 mM MgCl2, 1 mM CaCl2, 11 mM EGTA, and 10 mM Hepes (pH = 7.2 with KOH). For NaV current recordings, Cs+-based ICS was used to avoid the recordings of endogenous K+ currents; thus, the ICS consisted of (in mM) 10 NaCl, 105 CsF, 10 HEPES, and 10 EGTA (pH = 7.2 titrated with CsOH). For hKV11.1, the ECS and ICS consisted of (in mM) 140 Choline-Cl, 5 KCl, 2 MgCl2, 2 CaCl2, 10 HEPES, 20 glucose, and 0.1 CdCl2 (pH = 7.35) and 140 KCl, 2 MgCl2, 10 HEPES, and 10 EGTA (pH = 7.3), respectively. For hKCa3.1, the ECS contained 145 mM L-aspartic acid with Na, 5 mM KCl, 2.5 mM CaCl2, 1 mM MgCl2, 10 mM Hepes, and 5.5 mM glucose (pH = 7.4 with NaOH), and the ICS contained 145 mM K-Asp, 2 mM MgCl2, 8.5 mM CaCl2, 10 mM EGTA, and 10 mM Hepes (pH = 7.2 with KOH), giving ~2 µM free Ca2+ to fully activate the hKCa3.1 current [54]. For hHV1, the ECS contained (in mM) 75 N-methyl D-glucamine (NMDG), 180 HEPES, 15 glucose, 3 MgCl2, and 1 EGTA (pH = 7.4 with CsOH), and the ICS contained (in mM) 75 NMDG, 180 MES, 3 MgCl2, 15 glucose, and 1 EGTA (pH = 6.4 with CsOH). The osmolarities of ECS and ICS were between 302 and 308 mOsm/L and ~295 mOsm/L, respectively.
Bath perfusion around the measured cell with different extracellular solutions was achieved using a gravity flow microperfusion system at a rate of 200 μL/min. Excess fluid was removed continuously. 5-chloro-2-guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI, (Sigma-Aldrich Hungary) solutions were made fresh in ECS from 100 mM stored at −20 °C. Stock solutions were prepared from powder dissolved in water-free DMSO (Sigma-Aldrich Hungary). ECS was supplemented with 0.2% DMSO. Positive controls were applied at a concentration equivalent to their Kd values (0.3 mM and 10 mM TEA+ for KV1.1 and KV1.3, respectively, and 20 nM TRAM-34 for KCa3.1). For hKV1.4, hKV1.5, and hKV11.1, high K+-based ECS was used as an indicator of the perfusion exchange, whose composition was identical to standard ECS except that it contained 150 mM KCl and 0 mM NaCl. For NaV channels, a choline-based ECS was used as control, whose composition was (in mM) 145 choline-Cl, 5 KCl, 10 HEPES, 5.5 glucose, 2.5 CaCl2, and 1 MgCl2. For hHV1, ECS at pH 6.5 was used as control. The approximate 50% reduction in the current amplitude in the presence of these compounds or the prominent change in the current kinetics were an indicator of both the ion channel and the proper operation of the perfusion system.
We tested the effect of 0.2% DMSO, the maximum concentration that was applied to the cells at the highest ClGBI concentration, as it may affect not only the conductance of the channels but also the viability of cells [55,56,57]. We did not observe any changes either in the peak amplitude or the kinetics of the current when the cells were perfused with an ECS containing 0.2% DMSO (data not shown). Similar observations were found by others when the effect of DMSO was tested on different ion channels [58,59].

4.5. Voltage Protocols

In general, the holding potential (Vh) was –120 mV, and the depolarizing pulses were delivered every 15 s, except when indicated. Depolarizing pulses to +50 mV ranging from 15 to 1500 ms were applied to record the currents of the KV1.1, KV1.3, fast inactivation-removed hKV1.4 (KV1.4ΔN), KV1.5, and KV10.1 channels. KV11.1 currents were evoked by a voltage step to +20 mV for 1.25 s from a Vh of –80 mV followed by a step to –40 mV for 2 s every 30 s, and the peak (tail) currents were recorded during the latter step. For KCa3.1 currents, a 200-ms-long voltage ramp to +50 mV from –120 mV was applied every 10 s. For hKCa3.1, the reversal potential for K+ was determined, and only those currents were analyzed for which the reversal potential fell into the range of the theoretical reversal potential ± 5 mV (–86.5 ± 5 mV). The current through the human proton channel (hHV1) was elicited by applying a 1.0-s-long voltage ramp to +60 mV from a Vh of –60 mV every 10 s. For sodium currents through NaV1.4 and NaV1.5, 10-ms-long voltage steps to 0 mV were applied every 10 s.

4.6. Patch Clamp Data Analysis

The pClamp 10.7 software package (Molecular Devices Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and GraphPad Prism 8 (Graphpad, CA, USA) were used for data acquisition and analysis. In general, currents were lowpass-filtered using the built-in analog four-pole Bessel filters of the amplifiers and were sampled (2–50 kHz) at least twice the filter cut-off frequency. Before analysis, current traces were digitally filtered with a 3-point boxcar filter and were corrected for ohmic leakage when needed.
The HV1 current recordings were evaluated as follows. First, the traces were filtered (lowpass boxcar, 3 smoothing points), and off-line leaks were corrected. As leaks are an ohmic current (i.e., the voltage–current relationship is linear), we defined a region where the opening probability of the HV1 channels is approximately zero. Thus, a linear regression line was fit to the data points between 16 ms to 80 ms, corresponding to −60 mV and −53 mV, and the fitted parameters were used to subtract non-specific leaks. The leak-corrected currents between +59 mV and +60 mV were extracted, averaged, and considered the peak current. The average currents of two or three stable traces at a given pHec condition defined one data point.
The inhibitory effect of ClGBI at a given concentration was calculated as the remaining current fraction (RCF = I/I0, where I0 is the peak current in the absence of ClGBI, and I is the peak current at equilibrium block at a given concentration of ClGBI). The data points (average of 3–5 individual records) in the dose–response curve was fitted with a two-parameter inhibitor vs. response model using
R C F = K d n H K d n H + C l G B I n H
where [ClGBI] is the molar concentration of ClGBI, Kd is the dissociation constant, and nH is the Hill coefficient. All data are presented as means ± SEM.
To examine the binding kinetics, RCF was plotted as a function of time. The association time constant (τon) was determined by fitting the data points with a single exponential function,
R C F = R C F 0 × e t / τ o n + C
where RCF0 is the RCF value before the addition of the drug, and C is a constant term.

Author Contributions

Z.V. and G.P. conceived the study, which was further developed with the help of T.G.S., A.F. and E.K. Patch clamp measurements were performed by T.G.S., A.F., B.M. and K.O. CFSE assays were carried out by E.K., A.G. and J.K. Statistical analysis was performed by T.G.S., E.K. and A.F. The manuscript and figures were prepared by T.G.S., Z.V., E.K. and Á.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the following grants: National Research Development and Innovation Office, Hungary, grants OTKA K132906 and 2019-2.1.11-TÉT-2019-00059 (Z.V.), OTKA K131708 (Á.L.) and OTKA K143071 (G.P). A.F. was supported by the ÚNKP-22-3-II-DE-38 New National Excellence Program of the Ministry for Culture and Innovation from the source of the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund. E.K. was supported by ELKH-DE Cell Biology and Signal Transduction (11-012).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The present study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Hungarian Medical Research Council (36255-6/2017/EKU). The ethical approval is dated on 20 September 2017. The investigation conforms to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data is available within the article.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Cecilia Nagy and Adrienn Bagosi for their excellent technical support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ramsey, I.S.; Moran, M.M.; Chong, J.A.; Clapham, D.E. A voltage-gated proton-selective channel lacking the pore domain. Nature 2006, 440, 1213–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Takeshita, K.; Sakata, S.; Yamashita, E.; Fujiwara, Y.; Kawanabe, A.; Kurokawa, T.; Okochi, Y.; Matsuda, M.; Narita, H.; Okamura, Y.; et al. X-ray crystal structure of voltage-gated proton channel. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2014, 21, 352–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. DeCoursey, T.E. Voltage-gated proton channels: Molecular biology, physiology, and pathophysiology of the HV family. Physiol. Rev. 2013, 93, 599–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ribeiro-Silva, L.; Queiroz, F.O.; da Silva, A.M.; Hirata, A.E.; Arcisio-Miranda, M. Voltage-Gated Proton Channel in Human Glioblastoma Multiforme Cells. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2016, 7, 864–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wang, Y.; Li, S.J.; Wu, X.; Che, Y.; Li, Q. Clinicopathological and biological significance of human voltage-gated proton channel Hv1 protein overexpression in breast cancer. J. Biol. Chem. 2012, 287, 13877–13888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. El Chemaly, A.; Okochi, Y.; Sasaki, M.; Arnaudeau, S.; Okamura, Y.; Demaurex, N. VSOP/Hv1 proton channels sustain calcium entry, neutrophil migration, and superoxide production by limiting cell depolarization and acidification. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207, 129–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mészáros, B.; Papp, F.; Mocsár, G.; Kókai, E.; Kovács, K.; Tajti, G.; Panyi, G. The voltage-gated proton channel hHv1 is functionally expressed in human chorion-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 7100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yu, Y.; Yu, Z.; Xie, M.; Wang, W.; Luo, X. Hv1 proton channel facilitates production of ROS and pro-inflammatory cytokines in microglia and enhances oligodendrocyte progenitor cells damage from oxygen-glucose deprivation in vitro. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2018, 498, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Capasso, M.; Bhamrah, M.K.; Henley, T.; Boyd, R.S.; Langlais, C.; Cain, K.; Dinsdale, D.; Pulford, K.; Khan, M.; Musset, B.; et al. HVCN1 modulates BCR signal strength via regulation of BCR-dependent generation of reactive oxygen species. Nat. Immunol. 2010, 11, 265–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Capasso, M. Regulation of immune responses by proton channels. Immunology 2014, 143, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, Y.; Wu, X.; Li, Q.; Zhang, S.; Li, S.J. Human voltage-gated proton channel hv1: A new potential biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e70550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Eder, C.; DeCoursey, T.E. Voltage-gated proton channels in microglia. Prog. Neurobiol. 2001, 64, 277–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Decoursey, T.E.; Ligeti, E. Regulation and termination of NADPH oxidase activity. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. CMLS 2005, 62, 2173–2193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bare, D.J.; Cherny, V.V.; DeCoursey, T.E.; Abukhdeir, A.M.; Morgan, D. Expression and function of voltage gated proton channels (Hv1) in MDA-MB-231 cells. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0227522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Zhang, Q.; Ren, Y.; Mo, Y.; Guo, P.; Liao, P.; Luo, Y.; Mu, J.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Li, Y.; et al. Inhibiting Hv1 channel in peripheral sensory neurons attenuates chronic inflammatory pain and opioid side effects. Cell Res. 2022, 32, 461–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Zhao, C.; Hong, L.; Riahi, S.; Lim, V.T.; Tobias, D.J.; Tombola, F. A novel Hv1 inhibitor reveals a new mechanism of inhibition of a voltage-sensing domain. J. Gen. Physiol. 2021, 153, e202012833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zhao, R.; Shen, R.; Dai, H.; Perozo, E.; Goldstein, S.A.N. Molecular determinants of inhibition of the human proton channel hHv1 by the designer peptide C6 and a bivalent derivative. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2120750119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Iwahi, T.; Satoh, H.; Nakao, M.; Iwasaki, T.; Yamazaki, T.; Kubo, K.; Tamura, T.; Imada, A. Lansoprazole, a novel benzimidazole proton pump inhibitor, and its related compounds have selective activity against Helicobacter pylori. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1991, 35, 490–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Hong, L.; Pathak, M.M.; Kim, I.H.; Ta, D.; Tombola, F. Voltage-sensing domain of voltage-gated proton channel Hv1 shares mechanism of block with pore domains. Neuron 2013, 77, 274–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hong, L.; Kim, I.H.; Tombola, F. Molecular determinants of Hv1 proton channel inhibition by guanidine derivatives. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 9971–9976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. El Chemaly, A.; Jaquet, V.; Cambet, Y.; Caillon, A.; Cherpin, O.; Balafa, A.; Krause, K.H.; Demaurex, N. Discovery and validation of new Hv1 proton channel inhibitors with onco-therapeutic potential. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Mol. Cell Res. 2023, 1870, 119415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Alvear-Arias, J.J.; Carrillo, C.; Villar, J.P.; Garcia-Betancourt, R.; Pena-Pichicoi, A.; Fernandez, A.; Fernandez, M.; Carmona, E.M.; Pupo, A.; Neely, A.; et al. Expression of Hv1 proton channels in myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) and its potential role in T cell regulation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2104453119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Sasaki, M.; Tojo, A.; Okochi, Y.; Miyawaki, N.; Kamimura, D.; Yamaguchi, A.; Murakami, M.; Okamura, Y. Autoimmune disorder phenotypes in Hvcn1-deficient mice. Biochem. J. 2013, 450, 295–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Coe, D.; Poobalasingam, T.; Fu, H.; Bonacina, F.; Wang, G.; Morales, V.; Moregola, A.; Mitro, N.; Cheung, K.C.; Ward, E.J.; et al. Loss of voltage-gated hydrogen channel 1 expression reveals heterogeneous metabolic adaptation to intracellular acidification by T cells. JCI Insight 2022, 7, e147814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wulff, H.; Calabresi, P.A.; Allie, R.; Yun, S.; Pennington, M.; Beeton, C.; Chandy, K.G. The voltage-gated Kv1.3 K+ channel in effector memory T cells as new target for MS. J. Clin. Investig. 2003, 111, 1703–1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Varga, Z.; Gurrola-Briones, G.; Papp, F.; Rodriguez de la Vega, R.C.; Pedraza-Alva, G.; Tajhya, R.B.; Gaspar, R.; Cardenas, L.; Rosenstein, Y.; Beeton, C.; et al. Vm24, a natural immunosuppressive peptide, potently and selectively blocks Kv1.3 potassium channels of human T cells. Mol. Pharmacol. 2012, 82, 372–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Veytia-Bucheli, J.I.; Jimenez-Vargas, J.M.; Melchy-Perez, E.I.; Sandoval-Hernandez, M.A.; Possani, L.D.; Rosenstein, Y. Kv1.3 channel blockade with the Vm24 scorpion toxin attenuates the CD4+ effector memory T cell response to TCR stimulation. Cell. Commun. Signal. 2018, 16, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. DeCoursey, T.E.; Chandy, K.G.; Gupta, S.; Cahalan, M.D. Voltage-gated K+ channels in human T lymphocytes: A role in mitogenesis? Nature 1984, 307, 465–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wulff, H.; Knaus, H.G.; Pennington, M.; Chandy, K.G. K+ channel expression during B cell differentiation: Implications for immunomodulation and autoimmunity. J. Immunol. 2004, 173, 776–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Thomas, R.C.; Meech, R.W. Hydrogen ion currents and intracellular pH in depolarized voltage-clamped snail neurones. Nature 1982, 299, 826–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. DeCoursey, T.E.; Morgan, D.; Cherny, V.V. The voltage dependence of NADPH oxidase reveals why phagocytes need proton channels. Nature 2003, 422, 531–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Ramsey, I.S.; Ruchti, E.; Kaczmarek, J.S.; Clapham, D.E. Hv1 proton channels are required for high-level NADPH oxidase-dependent superoxide production during the phagocyte respiratory burst. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 7642–7647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. DeCoursey, T.E. Voltage and pH sensing by the voltage-gated proton channel, HV1. J. R. Soc. Interface 2018, 15, 20180108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Musset, B.; Morgan, D.; Cherny, V.V.; MacGlashan, D.W., Jr.; Thomas, L.L.; Ríos, E.; DeCoursey, T.E. A pH-stabilizing role of voltage-gated proton channels in IgE-mediated activation of human basophils. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 11020–11025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Fernandez, A.; Pupo, A.; Mena-Ulecia, K.; Gonzalez, C. Pharmacological Modulation of Proton Channel Hv1 in Cancer Therapy: Future Perspectives. Mol. Pharmacol. 2016, 90, 385–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhao, C.; Hong, L.; Galpin, J.D.; Riahi, S.; Lim, V.T.; Webster, P.D.; Tobias, D.J.; Ahern, C.A.; Tombola, F. HIFs: New arginine mimic inhibitors of the Hv1 channel with improved VSD-ligand interactions. J. Gen. Physiol. 2021, 153, e202012832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Asuaje, A.; Smaldini, P.; Martin, P.; Enrique, N.; Orlowski, A.; Aiello, E.A.; Gonzalez Leon, C.; Docena, G.; Milesi, V. The inhibition of voltage-gated H+ channel (HVCN1) induces acidification of leukemic Jurkat T cells promoting cell death by apoptosis. Pflug. Arch. 2017, 469, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ma, J.; Gao, X.; Li, Y.; DeCoursey, T.E.; Shull, G.E.; Wang, H.S. The HVCN1 voltage-gated proton channel contributes to pH regulation in canine ventricular myocytes. J. Physiol. 2022, 600, 2089–2103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gattas, M.V.; Jaffe, A.; Barahona, J.; Conner, G.E. Proton channel blockers inhibit Duox activity independent of Hv1 effects. Redox Biol. 2020, 28, 101346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Cherny, V.V.; Henderson, L.M.; DeCoursey, T.E. Proton and chloride currents in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Membr. Cell Biol. 1997, 11, 337–347. [Google Scholar]
  41. Doyle, D.A.; Morais Cabral, J.; Pfuetzner, R.A.; Kuo, A.; Gulbis, J.M.; Cohen, S.L.; Chait, B.T.; MacKinnon, R. The structure of the potassium channel: Molecular basis of K+ conduction and selectivity. Science 1998, 280, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Liu, Y.; Holmgren, M.; Jurman, M.E.; Yellen, G. Gated access to the pore of a voltage-dependent K+ channel. Neuron 1997, 19, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Alexander, S.P.; Mathie, A.; Peters, J.A.; Veale, E.L.; Striessnig, J.; Kelly, E.; Armstrong, J.F.; Faccenda, E.; Harding, S.D.; Pawson, A.J.; et al. The Concise Guide to Pharmacology 2021/22: Ion channels. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2021, 178 (Suppl. S1), S157–S245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Long, S.B.; Campbell, E.B.; Mackinnon, R. Voltage sensor of Kv1.2: Structural basis of electromechanical coupling. Science 2005, 309, 903–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Long, S.B.; Campbell, E.B.; Mackinnon, R. Crystal structure of a mammalian voltage-dependent Shaker family K+ channel. Science 2005, 309, 897–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Long, S.B.; Tao, X.; Campbell, E.B.; MacKinnon, R. Atomic structure of a voltage-dependent K+ channel in a lipid membrane-like environment. Nature 2007, 450, 376–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Barros, F.; de la Pena, P.; Dominguez, P.; Sierra, L.M.; Pardo, L.A. The EAG Voltage-Dependent K+ Channel Subfamily: Similarities and Differences in Structural Organization and Gating. Front. Pharmacol. 2020, 11, 411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wang, W.; MacKinnon, R. Cryo-EM Structure of the Open Human Ether-a-go-go-Related K+ Channel hERG. Cell 2017, 169, 422–430.e10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wulff, H.; Castle, N.A. Therapeutic potential of KCa3.1 blockers: Recent advances and promising trends. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 2010, 3, 385–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sforna, L.; Megaro, A.; Pessia, M.; Franciolini, F.; Catacuzzeno, L. Structure, Gating and Basic Functions of the Ca2+-activated K Channel of Intermediate Conductance. Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2018, 16, 608–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ahern, C.A.; Payandeh, J.; Bosmans, F.; Chanda, B. The hitchhiker’s guide to the voltage-gated sodium channel galaxy. J. Gen. Physiol. 2016, 147, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. De Lera Ruiz, M.; Kraus, R.L. Voltage-Gated Sodium Channels: Structure, Function, Pharmacology, and Clinical Indications. J. Med. Chem. 2015, 58, 7093–7118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Hamill, O.P.; Marty, A.; Neher, E.; Sakmann, B.; Sigworth, F.J. Improved patch-clamp techniques for high-resolution current recording from cells and cell-free membrane patches. Pflug. Arch. 1981, 391, 85–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Grissmer, S.; Nguyen, A.N.; Cahalan, M.D. Calcium-activated potassium channels in resting and activated human T lymphocytes. Expression levels, calcium dependence, ion selectivity, and pharmacology. J. Gen. Physiol. 1993, 102, 601–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. De Abreu Costa, L.; Henrique Fernandes Ottoni, M.; Dos Santos, M.G.; Meireles, A.B.; Gomes de Almeida, V.; de Fatima Pereira, W.; Alves de Avelar-Freitas, B.; Eustaquio Alvim Brito-Melo, G. Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) Decreases Cell Proliferation and TNF-alpha, IFN-gamma, and IL-2 Cytokines Production in Cultures of Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes. Molecules 2017, 22, 1789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Dludla, P.V.; Jack, B.; Viraragavan, A.; Pheiffer, C.; Johnson, R.; Louw, J.; Muller, C.J.F. A dose-dependent effect of dimethyl sulfoxide on lipid content, cell viability and oxidative stress in 3T3-L1 adipocytes. Toxicol. Rep. 2018, 5, 1014–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Pal, R.; Mamidi, M.K.; Das, A.K.; Bhonde, R. Diverse effects of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) on the differentiation potential of human embryonic stem cells. Arch. Toxicol. 2012, 86, 651–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Du, X.; Lu, D.; Daharsh, E.D.; Yao, A.; Dewoody, R.; Yao, J.A. Dimethyl sulfoxide effects on hERG channels expressed in HEK293 cells. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 2006, 54, 164–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Larsen, J.; Gasser, K.; Hahin, R. An analysis of dimethylsulfoxide-induced action potential block: A comparative study of DMSO and other aliphatic water soluble solutes. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 1996, 140, 296–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Inhibition of hHV1 currents by ClGBI. Peak currents were determined using protocols and experimental conditions as described in Materials and Methods. (A) Whole-cell currents were recorded on CHO cells expressing HV1 in response to slow voltage ramps (0.12 mV/ms) from −60 to +60 mV in the absence (pHec = 7.4, black) and presence of 200 μM ClGBI (ClGBI, red). ECS at a pH of 6.4 was used as an indicator of both the ion channel and the proper operation of the perfusion system (pHec = 6.4, blue). (B) The effect of ClGBI at 200 μM was determined as remaining current fraction (RCF, see Materials and Methods) and plotted as a function of time as 200 μM ClGBI was applied to the bath solution. Pulses were delivered every 10 s. (C) Concentration-dependent inhibition of the HV1 channel by ClGBI. Points on the dose–response curves represent the mean of 4–5 independent measurements. Data points were fitted with a two-parameter Hill equation (see Materials and Methods). The best fit yielded Kd of 15.9 ± 2.0 μM and nH of 1.0 ± 0.1. Error bars represent SEM.
Figure 1. Inhibition of hHV1 currents by ClGBI. Peak currents were determined using protocols and experimental conditions as described in Materials and Methods. (A) Whole-cell currents were recorded on CHO cells expressing HV1 in response to slow voltage ramps (0.12 mV/ms) from −60 to +60 mV in the absence (pHec = 7.4, black) and presence of 200 μM ClGBI (ClGBI, red). ECS at a pH of 6.4 was used as an indicator of both the ion channel and the proper operation of the perfusion system (pHec = 6.4, blue). (B) The effect of ClGBI at 200 μM was determined as remaining current fraction (RCF, see Materials and Methods) and plotted as a function of time as 200 μM ClGBI was applied to the bath solution. Pulses were delivered every 10 s. (C) Concentration-dependent inhibition of the HV1 channel by ClGBI. Points on the dose–response curves represent the mean of 4–5 independent measurements. Data points were fitted with a two-parameter Hill equation (see Materials and Methods). The best fit yielded Kd of 15.9 ± 2.0 μM and nH of 1.0 ± 0.1. Error bars represent SEM.
Pharmaceuticals 16 00656 g001
Figure 2. The effect of ClGBI on human lymphocyte proliferation. (A) Representative flow cytometry histograms of CFSE-labeled lymphocytes in the absence and presence of ClGBI (200 μM, 20 μM, and 2 μM). (B) Histogram overlays of samples presented in (A) showing the percentage of proliferating cells by CFSE dilution.
Figure 2. The effect of ClGBI on human lymphocyte proliferation. (A) Representative flow cytometry histograms of CFSE-labeled lymphocytes in the absence and presence of ClGBI (200 μM, 20 μM, and 2 μM). (B) Histogram overlays of samples presented in (A) showing the percentage of proliferating cells by CFSE dilution.
Pharmaceuticals 16 00656 g002
Figure 3. Block of KV1.3 channels by ClGBI. (A) Whole-cell potassium currents through hKV1.3 channels evoked from a human T cell by depolarizing pulses to +50 mV every 15 s. Traces indicate K+ current in the absence (control, black) and presence of 200 µM ClGBI at equilibrium block (ClGBI, red), with 10 mM TEA+ (blue) used as a positive control. (B) Kinetics of the block. Normalized peak currents as remaining current fraction (RCF) are plotted as a function of time. The boxes indicate the application of the control ECS and ClGBI-containing ECS, respectively. Solid line indicates the fitting of a single-exponential decaying function to the data points. Perfusion with ClGBI-free ECS resulted in complete recovery from block. Data points were recorded every 15 s. (C) Dose–response relationship for ClGBI on KV1.3. The dose response was obtained by plotting the remaining current fraction as a function of ClGBI concentration and fitting it with a two-parameter Hill equation (see Materials and Methods). Error bars indicate SEM throughout the figure.
Figure 3. Block of KV1.3 channels by ClGBI. (A) Whole-cell potassium currents through hKV1.3 channels evoked from a human T cell by depolarizing pulses to +50 mV every 15 s. Traces indicate K+ current in the absence (control, black) and presence of 200 µM ClGBI at equilibrium block (ClGBI, red), with 10 mM TEA+ (blue) used as a positive control. (B) Kinetics of the block. Normalized peak currents as remaining current fraction (RCF) are plotted as a function of time. The boxes indicate the application of the control ECS and ClGBI-containing ECS, respectively. Solid line indicates the fitting of a single-exponential decaying function to the data points. Perfusion with ClGBI-free ECS resulted in complete recovery from block. Data points were recorded every 15 s. (C) Dose–response relationship for ClGBI on KV1.3. The dose response was obtained by plotting the remaining current fraction as a function of ClGBI concentration and fitting it with a two-parameter Hill equation (see Materials and Methods). Error bars indicate SEM throughout the figure.
Pharmaceuticals 16 00656 g003
Figure 4. Selectivity profile of ClGBI. Effect of 200 μM ClGBI was assayed in CHO cells transfected with different ion channel genes or using HEK293 cell line stably expressing hKV11.1 and hNaV1.4 channels. The representative current traces shown here were measured before the application of ClGBI (control, black) and after reaching equilibrium block upon application of 200 μM ClGBI (red). (AD) Currents were evoked from holding potentials of –100 mV by depolarizations to +50 mV for the time interval indicated on the panels. The time between depolarizing pulses was 15 s or 30 s (for KV10.1). (E) hKV11.1 currents were measured with a voltage step from a holding potential of –80 mV to +20 mV, followed by a step to –40 mV, during which the peak current was measured. Pulses were delivered every 30 s. (F) hKCa3.1 currents were elicited every 15 s with voltage ramps to +50 mV from a holding potential of −120 mV at a rate of 0.85 mV/ms. (G,H) hNaV1.4 and hNaV1.5 currents were measured by applying depolarizing pulses to 0 mV from a holding potential of –120 mV every 15 s. (I) The effect of 200 μM ClGBI on the peak currents was reported as the remaining current fraction (RCF = I/I0, where I0 and I are the peak currents in the absence and presence of 200 μM ClGBI at equilibrium block, respectively). Red dashed line indicates no effect. Bars represent the mean of 3–8 independent measurements; error bars indicate the SEM.
Figure 4. Selectivity profile of ClGBI. Effect of 200 μM ClGBI was assayed in CHO cells transfected with different ion channel genes or using HEK293 cell line stably expressing hKV11.1 and hNaV1.4 channels. The representative current traces shown here were measured before the application of ClGBI (control, black) and after reaching equilibrium block upon application of 200 μM ClGBI (red). (AD) Currents were evoked from holding potentials of –100 mV by depolarizations to +50 mV for the time interval indicated on the panels. The time between depolarizing pulses was 15 s or 30 s (for KV10.1). (E) hKV11.1 currents were measured with a voltage step from a holding potential of –80 mV to +20 mV, followed by a step to –40 mV, during which the peak current was measured. Pulses were delivered every 30 s. (F) hKCa3.1 currents were elicited every 15 s with voltage ramps to +50 mV from a holding potential of −120 mV at a rate of 0.85 mV/ms. (G,H) hNaV1.4 and hNaV1.5 currents were measured by applying depolarizing pulses to 0 mV from a holding potential of –120 mV every 15 s. (I) The effect of 200 μM ClGBI on the peak currents was reported as the remaining current fraction (RCF = I/I0, where I0 and I are the peak currents in the absence and presence of 200 μM ClGBI at equilibrium block, respectively). Red dashed line indicates no effect. Bars represent the mean of 3–8 independent measurements; error bars indicate the SEM.
Pharmaceuticals 16 00656 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Szanto, T.G.; Feher, A.; Korpos, E.; Gyöngyösi, A.; Kállai, J.; Mészáros, B.; Ovari, K.; Lányi, Á.; Panyi, G.; Varga, Z. 5-Chloro-2-Guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI) Is a Non-Selective Inhibitor of the Human HV1 Channel. Pharmaceuticals 2023, 16, 656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16050656

AMA Style

Szanto TG, Feher A, Korpos E, Gyöngyösi A, Kállai J, Mészáros B, Ovari K, Lányi Á, Panyi G, Varga Z. 5-Chloro-2-Guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI) Is a Non-Selective Inhibitor of the Human HV1 Channel. Pharmaceuticals. 2023; 16(5):656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16050656

Chicago/Turabian Style

Szanto, Tibor G., Adam Feher, Eva Korpos, Adrienn Gyöngyösi, Judit Kállai, Beáta Mészáros, Krisztian Ovari, Árpád Lányi, Gyorgy Panyi, and Zoltan Varga. 2023. "5-Chloro-2-Guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI) Is a Non-Selective Inhibitor of the Human HV1 Channel" Pharmaceuticals 16, no. 5: 656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16050656

APA Style

Szanto, T. G., Feher, A., Korpos, E., Gyöngyösi, A., Kállai, J., Mészáros, B., Ovari, K., Lányi, Á., Panyi, G., & Varga, Z. (2023). 5-Chloro-2-Guanidinobenzimidazole (ClGBI) Is a Non-Selective Inhibitor of the Human HV1 Channel. Pharmaceuticals, 16(5), 656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16050656

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop