Current FDA-approved L-asparaginases also possess significant L-glutaminase activity, which correlates with many of the toxic side effects of these drugs. Therefore, L-asparaginases with reduced L-glutaminase activity are predicted to be safer. We exploited our recently described structures of the Erwinia chrysanthemi L-asparaginase (ErA) to inform the design of mutants with diminished ability to hydrolyze L-glutamine. Structural analysis of these variants provides insight into the molecular basis for the increased L-asparagine specificity. A primary role is attributed to the E63Q mutation that acts to hinder the correct positioning of L-glutamine but not L-asparagine. The substitution of Ser-254 with either an asparagine or a glutamine increases the L-asparagine specificity but only when combined with the E63Q mutation. The A31I mutation reduces the substrate K m value; this is a key property to allow the required therapeutic L-asparagine depletion. Significantly, an ultra-low L-glutaminase ErA variant maintained its cell killing ability. By diminishing the L-glutaminase activity of these highly active L-asparaginases, our engineered ErA variants hold promise as L-asparaginases with fewer side effects.L-Asparaginases are amidohydrolases that catalyze the hydrolysis of the amino acid L-asparagine (Asn) 2 to L-aspartate (Asp) and ammonia. Currently, the Food and Drug Administration has approved the L-asparaginase from Escherichia coli (EcA) and Erwinia chrysanthemi (ErA) for treatment of select blood cancers. These enzyme drugs function by depleting Asn from the blood, thereby affecting certain blood cancers that are dependent on exogenous Asn. Sensitivity to L-asparaginase has been attributed to a reduced ability of those cancers to synthesize this amino acid de novo (1). Because the concentration of Asn in human blood is ϳ50 M (2), for an L-asparaginase to be clinically useful, its Asn K m value must be in the low micromolar range. This property is present in EcA (K m ϭ 15 M) and ErAPatients treated with L-asparaginase often confront two types of adverse effects. The first is due to an immune response against the bacterial enzymes. To decrease the immunogenicity, the current standard of care in the United States employs a PEGylated version of EcA (3, 4). If immunogenicity still arises, ErA is used as second line treatment (5).The second source of adverse effects of L-asparaginase treatment relates to the enzyme's ability to hydrolyze the amino acid L-glutamine (Glu). That is, in addition to catalyzing the hydrolysis of Asn (L-asparaginase activity), both EcA and ErA also catalyze the hydrolysis of Gln to L-glutamate (Glu) and ammonia (L-glutaminase activity). L-Glutamine is the most abundant amino acid in the blood with a concentration range of 400 -650 M (2). The L-glutaminase activity of these bacterial L-asparaginases is significant, ϳ2% of the EcA activity and as high as 10% for ErA (3). Of note, the L-glutaminase activity of the clinically used L-asparaginases has been implicated in many of the side effe...