Noncompetitive inhibition reaction rate

Whether an inhibitor acts in a competitive or noncompetitive manner is deduced from a Lineweaver-Burk or direct linear plot using varying concentrations of inhibitor and substrate. In separate assays, two substances will be added to the dopa-tyrosinase reaction mixture, and the effect on enzyme activity will be quantified. The structures of the potential inhibitors, cinnamic acid and thiourea, are shown in Figure E5.9. The inhibition assays must be done immediately following the KM studies. To measure inhibition, reaction rates both with and without inhibitor must be used and the tyrosinase activity must not be significantly different. If it is necessary to do the inhibition studies later, the Ku assay for L-dopa must be repeated with freshly prepared tyrosinase solution. 

If the inhibitor combines irreversibly with the enzyme—for example, by covalent attachment—the kinetic pattern seen is like that of noncompetitive inhibition, because the net effect is a loss of active enzyme. Usually, this type of inhibition can be distinguished from the noncompetitive, reversible inhibition case since the reaction of I with E (and/or ES) is not instantaneous. Instead, there is a time-dependent decrease in enzymatic activity as E + I El proceeds, and the rate of this inactivation can be followed. Also, unlike reversible inhibitions, dilution or dialysis of the enzyme inhibitor solution does not dissociate the El complex and restore enzyme activity. 

Full and partial noncompetitive inhibitory mechanisms, (a) Reaction scheme for full noncompetitive inhibition indicates binding of substrate and inhibitor to two mutually exclusive sites. The presence of inhibitor prevents release of product, (b) Lineweaver-Burk plot for full noncompetitive inhibition reveals a common intercept with the 1/[S] axis and an increase in slope to infinity at infinitely high inhibitor concentrations. In this example, K =3 IulM. (c) Replot of Lineweaver-Burk slopes from (b) is linear, confirming a full inhibitory mechanism, (d) Reaction scheme for partial noncompetitive inhibition indicates binding of substrate and inhibitor to two mutually exclusive sites. The presence of inhibitor alters (reduces) the rate of release of product by a factor p. (e) Lineweaver-Burk plot for partial noncompetitive inhibition reveals a common intercept with the 1/[5] axis and an increase in slope to a finite value at infinitely high inhibitor concentrations. In this example, /Cj= 3 iulM and P = 0.5. (f) Replot of Lineweaver-Burk slopes from (e) is hyperbolic, confirming a partial inhibitory mechanism... 

Therefore, the maximum reaction rate will be decreased by the presence of a noncompetitive inhibitor, while the Michaelis constant Ks will not be affected by the inhibitor. The graphical consequences of noncompetitive inhibition are shown in Figure 2.12. Note that making these plots enables us to distinguish between competitive and noncompetitive inhibition. 

In both competitive and noncompetitive inhibition, the reaction is of order between zero and minus one with respect to the inhibitor. However, there is a kinetic difference between competitive and noncompetitive inhibition. In the former, the action of the inhibitor can be effectively countered by an increase in reactant concentration direct competition by the reactant for a catalyst site can "crowd out" the inhibitor. In noncompetitive inhibition, this is not the case even a large excess of reactant does not impair the inhibitor s access to the cycle member Xj. [Mathematically, in competitive inhibition the new and retarding denominator terms have as factor, the sum of the first matrix row and only row that lacks the coefficient Xq, the only coefficient with CA as co-factor. In contrast, in noncompetitive inhibition the terms have DSI as factor and contain Xqj and thus CA as co-factor the result is that an increase in CA, apart from a direct beneficial effect on the rate, also strengthens the adverse effect of the noncompetitive inhibitor.]... 

The three most common t3q>es of reversible inhibition occurring in enzymatic reactions are competitive, uncompetitive, and noncompetitive. (See Problem P7-12b) The enzyme molecule is analogous to the heterogeneous catalytic surface in that it contains active sites. When competitive Inhibition occurs, the substrate and inhibitor are usually similar molecules that compete for the same site on the enzyme. Uncompetitive inhibition occurs when the inhibitor deactivates the enzyme-substrate complex, usually by attaching itself to both tlie substrate and enzyme molecules of the complex. Noncompetitive inhibition occurs with enzymes containing at least two different types of sites. The inhibitor attaches to only one type of site and the substrate only to the other. Derivation of the rate laws for these three types of inhibition is shown on the CD-ROM. 

Noncompetitive inhibitors interact reversibly with enzymes to form an inactive species, effectively removing active enzyme and thus interfering with the rate of conversion of substrate to product. The inhibitor may interact with free enzyme, or with the enzyme-substrate complex. The key feature of noncompetitive inhibition that distinguishes it from competitive inhibition is that inhibition does not affect the apparent affinity of the enzyme for its substrate (i.e., the apparent Km). For example, a noncompetitive inhibitor may bind in a region remote from the active site to cause a reversible change in enzyme tertiary structure that completely prevents substrate binding and product formation. In this type of inhibition, the quantity of active enzyme appears to decrease as inhibitor concentration increases, so that the apparent Fmax for the reaction decreases. 

For D-xylose inhibition of SXAotatyzed hydrolysis of 4NPX, 1-ml reactions contained varied concentrations (0.2-7 mM) of 4NPX and varied concentrations (0, 20, 60, and 150 mM) of D-xylose in 100 mM succinate-NaOH, pH 5.3 at 25°C. Reactions were initialed by adding enzyme (7 pi SXA in 20 mM sodium phosphate, pH 7.0), and reaction progress was monitored continuously for 0.3 min at 380 nm to determine initial rates (fitted to lines). For determination of steady-state kinetic parameters, initial rates were fitted to Eq. 2 (competitive inhibition) and Eq. 3 (noncompetitive inhibition). 

Figure 6.42. Dependence of the reaction rate on substrate concentration for noncompetitive inhibition.

Inhibition of enzymes can basically be divided into reversible or irreversible. According to inhibition kinetics, it can be divided into three types— competitive, non competitive, and allosteric. Competitive inhibition can be characterized by binding of the inhibitor to the active site of the enzyme (they are structurally similar to substrate) and inhibition can be reversed by substrate access (reversible inhibition). The reaction rate is dependent on the substrate and inhibitor concentrations and their affinity to the enzyme. Noncompetitive inhibition cannot be reversed by substrate access and the inhibitor reacts with other parts of the enzyme rather than the active site, and it is not structurally similar to the substrate. The enzymatic reaction can be irreversible when the affinity of the inhibitor to the enzyme is relatively high. Allosteric ligands (inhibitors or activators) are bound to quite another... 

However, this case is extremely rare in nature. An example is the noncompetitive inhibition of phenyllactate versus an amide substrate for carboxypeptidase. In this case, the initial collision complex of substrate and enzyme has an interaction with the terminal carboxyl and the arginine on the enzyme, as well as with the rest of the polypeptide chain, but the aromatic group of the terminal amino add is not in Ae specificity pocket. For it to seat itself requires twisting of the amide bond, which is the rate limiting and energy requiring step of the reaction. Thus, phenyllactate can slip into this pocket and prevent proper seating of the substrate. With an ester substrate, where rotation of the ester bond is not hindered, the collision complex has the specificity pocket filled, and phenyllactate is a competitive inhibitor (Auld Holmquist, 1974). 

Such is the case in certain reactions catalyzed by enzymes. The type of inhibition considered thus far can be called competitive inhibition the inhibitor competes with the reactant (called substrate S in enzyme kinetics) for the same active centers. But there also exists a different kind of inhibition called noncompetitive inhibition. A noncompetitive inhibitor D is one that combines with the enzyme E at a site which is different from that which combines with the substrate S. The complex ED between enzyme and inhibitor is then still able to combine further with a substrate molecule but the tertiary complex EDS thus formed is unreactive. If the rate-determining step of the reaction is the decomposition of the complex between enzyme E and substrate S, the sequence with noncompetitive inhibition can be represented as ... 

The reaction rate will be slower owing to the removal of enzyme from the system. The El complex will be catalytically inert. The EIS complex may, however, be susceptible to reconversion to ES and make some contribution to catalytic activity. Noncompetitive inhibition cannot be reversed by excess substrate, but it may be reversed by exhaustive dialysis. 

We can generalize the reaction rate equation of competitive and noncompetitive substrate inhibitions by using the following formula ... 

Noncompetitive inhibition occurs when the inhibitor binds to the enzyme at sites other than the active sites, as shown in Eqnation 4.34. This does not prevent snbstrate binding bnt resnlts in [ 57] being inactive and so slows down the reaction rate. The extent of inhibition in this case depends on the inhibitor, not on the snbstrate concentration. This decreases the value of but does not interfere with Kg. Equation 4.35 shows the reaction rate expression. 

Interaction matrix this matrix is suggested to identify the different interactions that can exist between compounds and enzymes in the process. In this case, the reaction structure defined in the previous step is useful to visuahze and classify those relationships that can happen with a higher degree of probabihty. Similar ideas about the interaction between compounds can be found in the scientific literature or from experimental experience in the laboratory. In order to build the matrix, the compounds involved in the process (i.e., substrates, intermediates, by-products, products, etc.) are arranged in rows (i.e.. A, B, C,...), and the enzymes E ) are arranged in columns (for i = 1, 2, 3,...). In this way, the matrix is filled defining the relationship between each compound and enzyme in turn, that is, (S) for substrate, (P) for product, (I) for inhibitor, or (X) when there is no interaction between one compound and one enzyme. This compiled information is extremely useful to make decisions about the relevant terms or kinetic parameters that must be added or removed from the reaction rate expressions and process model. The position of the new term/parameter in the final expression is defined by the enzyme kinetic mechanism which shows how the compound inhibits the enzyme, for example, competitive, uncompetitive, noncompetitive, or mixed inhibition. 

The derivation of the rate law is given in the Summary Notes on the Web and DVD-ROM. Equation (9-42) is in the form of the rate law that is given for an enzymatic reaction exhibiting noncompetitive inhibition. Heavy metal ions. such as Pb, Ag, and as well as inhibitors that react with the enzyme to form chemical derivatives, are typical examples of noncompetitive inhibitors. 

Fig. 6.43 Dependence of the reaction rate on substrate concentration for noncompetitive inhibition. (From http-//cbc.arizona.edu/classes/bioc462/462a/NOTES/ENZYMES/RawnFig7 36Noncompet.gif).

Unlike other enzymes that we have discussed, the completion of a catalytic cycle of primer extension does not result in release of the product (TP(n+1)) and recovery of the free enzyme. Instead, the product remains bound to the enzyme, in the form of a new template-primer complex, and this acts as a new substrate for continued primer extension. Catalysis continues in this way until the entire template sequence has been complemented. The overall rate of reaction is limited by the chemical steps composing cat these include the chemical step of phosphodiester bond formation and requisite conformational changes in the enzyme structure. Hence there are several potential mechanisms for inhibiting the reaction of HIV RT. Competitive inhibitors could be prepared that would block binding of either the dNTPs or the TP. Alternatively, noncompetitive compounds could be prepared that function to block the chemistry of bond formation, that block the required enzyme conformational transition(s) of turnover, or that alter the reaction pathway in a manner that alters the rate-limiting step of turnover. 

Kinetics of O-Methylaiion. The steady state kinetic analysis of these enzymes (41,42) was consistent with a sequential ordered reaction mechanism, in which 5-adenosyl-L-methionine and 5-adenosyl-L-homocysteine were leading reaction partners and included an abortive EQB complex. Furthermore, all the methyltransferases studied exhibited competitive patterns between 5-adenosyl-L-methionine and its product, whereas the other patterns were either noncompetitive or uncompetitive. Whereas the 6-methylating enzyme was severely inhibited by its respective flavonoid substrate at concentrations close to Km, the other enzymes were less affected. The low inhibition constants of 5-adenosyl-L-homocysteine (Table I) suggests that earlier enzymes of the pathway may regulate the rate of synthesis of the final products. 

The pL (L = H or D) dependence of the solvent DIEs associated with progesterone 493 oxidation to 17a-hydroxyprogesterone 494 and 17-0-acetyltestosterone 495 and 17a-hydroxyprogesterone oxidation to androstenedione 496 has been determined in microcosms from pig testes580 (equation 290). The initial rate of oxidation of 493 to 494 has been associated with the pL-independent inverse solvent isotope effect (SIE) (fce/ D = 0.75 — 0.95 in 30% DOD) while the oxidation of 495 has been associated with the pL-independent positive SIE in 30% DOD (ku/ku of about 2), DOD inhibited the formation of 496 from 444 in noncompetitive in pL-dependent manner. Androgens are synthesized from progesterone in a two-step reaction involving the 17a-hydroxylation... 

A binds to free E with a dissociation constant Ka (also called Ku, in the Cleland nomenclature). B binds to free E with a dissociation constant -Kb (or Kn). The binding of one substrate may alter the affinity of the enzyme for the other. Thus, A binds to EB with a dissociation constant ctKa. Since the overall equilibrium constant between A and E must be the same regardless of the path taken, B binds to EA with a dissociation constant aKs. o Ka is the same as Km (the K for A at saturating [B]). ocKb is the same as (the for B at saturating [A]). If the rate-limidng step is the slow conversion of EAB to EPQ, we can derive the velocity equation for the forward reaction in the absence of P and Q in the usual manner. In fact, the only difference between the rapid equilibrium random bireactant system and noncompetitive or linear mixed-type inhibition is that now the ternary complex (EAB) is catalyticaUy active, while ESI was not. 

An inhibition (/) decreases enzymes activity, causing the rate of reaction to decrease competitively or noncompetitively (7). A competitive inhibitor has a strong structural resemblance to the substrate. Therefore, both the inhibitor and substrate compete for the active site of an enzyme as... 

---