Reaction hijacking inhibition of Plasmodium falciparum asparagine tRNA synthetase

Malaria poses an enormous threat to human health. With ever increasing resistance to currently deployed drugs, breakthrough compounds with novel mechanisms of action are urgently needed. Here, we explore pyrimidine-based sulfonamides as a new low molecular weight inhibitor class with drug-like physical parameters and a synthetically accessible scaffold. We show that the exemplar, OSM-S-106, has potent activity against parasite cultures, low mammalian cell toxicity and low propensity for resistance development. In vitro evolution of resistance using a slow ramp-up approach pointed to the Plasmodium falciparum cytoplasmic asparaginyl-tRNA synthetase (PfAsnRS) as the target, consistent with our finding that OSM-S-106 inhibits protein translation and activates the amino acid starvation response. Targeted mass spectrometry confirms that OSM-S-106 is a pro-inhibitor and that inhibition of PfAsnRS occurs via enzyme-mediated production of an Asn-OSM-S-106 adduct. Human AsnRS is much less susceptible to this reaction hijacking mechanism. X-ray crystallographic studies of human AsnRS in complex with inhibitor adducts and docking of pro-inhibitors into a model of Asn-tRNA-bound PfAsnRS provide insights into the structure-activity relationship and the selectivity mechanism.


Reporting on sex and gender
Reporting on race, ethnicity, or other socially relevant groupings

Ethics oversight
Note that full information on the approval of the study protocol must also be provided in the manuscript.

Field-specific reporting
Please select the one below that is the best fit for your research.If you are not sure, read the appropriate sections before making your selection.

Life sciences
Behavioural & social sciences Ecological, evolutionary & environmental sciences For a reference copy of the document with all sections, see nature.com/documents/nr-reporting-summary-flat.pdf

Life sciences study design
All studies must disclose on these points even when the disclosure is negative.Please specify the socially constructed or socially relevant categorization variable(s) used in your manuscript and explain why they were used.Please note that such variables should not be used as proxies for other socially constructed/relevant variables (for example, race or ethnicity should not be used as a proxy for socioeconomic status).Provide clear definitions of the relevant terms used, how they were provided (by the participants/respondents, the researchers, or third parties), and the method(s) used to classify people into the different categories (e.g.self-report, census or administrative data, social media data, etc.) Please provide details about how you controlled for confounding variables in your analyses.
Describe the covariate-relevant population characteristics of the human research participants (e.g.age, genotypic information, past and current diagnosis and treatment categories).If you filled out the behavioural & social sciences study design questions and have nothing to add here, write "See above." Describe how participants were recruited.Outline any potential self-selection bias or other biases that may be present and how these are likely to impact results.
Identify the organization(s) that approved the study protocol.
For flow cytometry based cellular assays, infected red blood cells were identified and parasitemia was calculated from 30,000 red blood cells for each condition.The number of experimental replicates is provided for all experiments.N = 3 or more was chosen to allow calculation of Standard Error.
No data was excluded.
All biochemical experiments were repeated independently for at least three times, each repeat was performed with technical duplicates.
All cellular experiments were repeated independently for at least two times, each repeat was performed with technical duplicates.All attempts at replication were successful and results are comparable from each experiment.
No randomisation was used in this study as there are no known input co-variants.All biochemical analysis involved sample prepared in the same way.
No blinding was used in this study.The biochemical samples were all prepared in the same way and replicability of the experiments was high.
The data points represent instrument readouts which are not susceptible to experimenter bias.
Use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms.Indicate if findings apply to only one sex or gender; describe whether sex and gender were considered in study design; whether sex and/or gender was determined based on self-reporting or assigned and methods used.Provide in the source data disaggregated sex and gender data, where this information has been collected, and if consent has been obtained for sharing of individual-level data; provide overall numbers in this Reporting Summary.Please state if this information has not been collected.Report sex-and gender-based analyses where performed, justify reasons for lack of sex-and gender-based analysis.
system or method listed is relevant to your study.If you are not sure if a list item applies to your research, read the appropriate section before selecting a response.