The HD-associated SNP site at position 9,633 of the
Huntingtin mRNA does not fall into the category of SNPs predicted to be readily amenable to selective targeting, because it does not create a purine:purine mismatch between siRNA and mRNA [
12,
20]. However, our analysis of
Huntingtin SNPs in HD patients and controls ( and ) suggests that a practicable RNA silencing therapy for HD requires an siRNA that targets the disease isoform at this site, but spares the normal
Huntingtin mRNA. To this end, we designed siRNAs targeting the U isoform of the position 9,633 SNP. We tested both the efficacy and selectivity of the siRNAs in cultured human HeLa cells co-transfected with the siRNA and luciferase reporters containing in their 3′ UTRs either the U or C isoform of the sequence containing the SNP. In our hands, such luciferase reporter assays are good predictors of the efficacy and selectivity of siRNAs for endogenous mRNA targets.
Figures S1 and S2 present an example using a pair of siRNAs—one fully matched and one bearing a position 10 (P10) mismatch—that targets a SNP site (rs363125) in endogenous
Huntingtin mRNA in HeLa cells. Previous work has shown that such SNP selective siRNAs can reduce mutant Huntingtin levels while leaving normal Huntingtin intact [
24].
siRNAs whose guide strand was fully matched to the U isoform, which is associated with HD, but mismatched at position 10 or position 16 to the C isoform, were functional, but failed to discriminate between U and C reporter mRNAs (
Figure S3A). (siRNAs that bear purine:pyrimidine mismatches to their counter-selected targets generally show poor discrimination [
12].) We also tested single mismatches at positions 2 through 9 (
Table S2), but found that all of these were less specific than the most selective position 10 + seed mismatch. Double-mismatch strategies based on a position 16 mismatch with the counter-selected isoform had very low activity (
Table S2).
Previous work has shown that adding a second mismatch can improve the ability of siRNA to discriminate between alleles [
25]. We reasoned that adding a mismatch in the seed sequence of the siRNA might sufficiently destabilize our siRNA so that the doubly mismatched siRNA would lose its ability to silence the wild-type
Huntingtin mRNA, while pairing at the SNP site would allow the singly mismatched siRNA to retain silencing activity for the disease allele. Therefore, we tested doubly mismatched siRNAs combining a seed mismatch with a position 10 mismatch. We prepared siRNAs predicted to mismatch at position 10 with the normal
Huntingtin mRNA and also bearing an additional mismatch to both normal and disease alleles at one of the six seed positions (2–7). Mismatches at positions 5 or 6, combined with a position 10 mismatch with the counter-selected isoform, resulted in a reduction or loss of silencing of the SNP-mismatched target, while retaining good activity against the SNP-matched target (
Figure S3B).
reports “discrimination ratios”—the ratio of the IC50 of the siRNA for the counter-selected target to the IC50 of the targeted mRNA. The P10 (SNP) + P5 siRNA (IC50
P10 mismatch >20; IC50
P10 match = 0.62 ± 0.43 nM) had a discrimination ratio > 32 and at 20 nM—the highest concentration tested—reduced expression of the counter-selected reporter by only 33%. The P10 + P6 siRNA achieved no appreciable reduction in expression of the mismatched reporter, even at 20 nM (IC50
P10 mismatch > 20 nM), but was less effective against the matched reporter (IC50
P10 match = 1.5 ± 0.31 nM), yielding a lower discrimination ratio. We often observed such a trade-off between the efficacy and the selectivity of SNP-specific siRNAs. We also designed and tested an siRNA targeting the C isoform; while it was less active than the siRNA targeting the U isoform, it selectively targeted the P10-matched allele (IC50
P10 mismatch > 20; IC50
P10 match = 3.2 ± 2.2 nM;
Figure S3C and ).
| Table 2Validation of siRNAs designed to distinguish between matched and mismatched SNP isoforms. IC50 values are given as the average ± standard deviation for at least three independent experiments. The IC50 is reported as > 20 nM for siRNAs (more ...) |
To cover 75% of HD patients requires siRNAs targeting additional SNPs. Because no specific nucleotide isoform of these SNP sites is associated with HD, selective siRNAs are needed for both isoforms. Our long-term strategy would be to screen patients to determine the SNP isoform associated with the expanded CAG repeat
Huntingtin allele [
23] and select the corresponding for therapy. As a first step toward this goal, we tested its ability to target one isoform of the SNP while minimizing silencing of the other isoform. For the SNP site rs363125, which lies at nt 5,304 (exon 39) and occurs as either an A or a C, a single mismatch was sufficient to provide a high degree of selectivity for the fully matched target for both the A (>27-fold discrimination; IC50
mismatch > 20 nM; IC50
match = 0.74 ± 0.40 nM) and C (IC50
mismatch > 20nM; >55-fold discrimination; IC50
match = 0.36 ± 0.24 nM) isoforms (,
Figure S4, and ). For a second SNP, rs362273, which lies at nt 7,942 (exon 57) in the
Huntingtin mRNA and occurs as either an A or a G, the P10 (SNP) + P5 siRNA design targeting the A isoform of the SNP provided ~30-fold selectivity (IC50
P10 mismatch = 0.59 ± 0.08 nM; IC50
P10 match = 0.02 ± 0.003 nM), whereas the siRNA targeting the G isoform (IC50
P10 mismatch = 0.74 ± 0.11 nM; IC50
P10 match = 0.15 ± 0.04 nM) gave ~4.9-fold selectivity (,
Figure S5 and ).