| Literature DB >> 25621424 |
Yahia N Mabkhot1, Fahad D Aldawsari2, Salim S Al-Showiman3, Assem Barakat4, Taibi Ben Hadda5, Mohammad S Mubarak6, Sehrish Naz7, Zaheer Ul-Haq8, Abdur Rauf9.
Abstract
Several series of novel substituted thienothiophene derivatives were synthesized by reacting theEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25621424 PMCID: PMC6272574 DOI: 10.3390/molecules20021824
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Scheme 1Synthesis of compounds 1–5.
Scheme 2Synthesis of compounds 6 and 7.
Antibacterial and antifungal activity of synthesized compounds.
| Compd. | Fungi [a] | Gram (+) Bacteria [b] | Gram (−) Bacteria [c] | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17.3 ± 0.4 | 16.9 ± 0.3 | 16.3 ± 0.6 | 18.3 ± 0.3 | NA | NA | |
| 20.2 ± 06 | 19.6 ± 0.3 | 23.8 ± 0.2 | 32.4 ± 0.3 | 17.3 ± 0.1 | 19.9 ± 0.3 | |
| 16.7 ± 0.4 | 15.8 ± 0.5 | 10.8 ± 0.4 | 11.9 ± 0.3 | 10.8 ± 0.4 | 9.7 ± 0.5 | |
| 15.9 ± 0.4 | 15.8 ± 0.5 | 10.8 ± 0.4 | 11.9 ± 0.3 | 10.8 ± 0.4 | 9.7 ± 0.5 | |
| 18.1 ± 0.5 | 14.6 ± 0.5 | 17.9 ± 0.5 | 13.3 ± 0.4 | 11.4 ± 0.4 | 10.7 ± 0.3 | |
| 14.6 ± 0.4 | 15.9 ± 0.5 | 10.2 ± 0.2 | 9.8 ± 0.3 | NA | 11.2 ± 0.3 | |
| 13.9 ± 0.4 | 14.6 ± 0.5 | 16.3 ± 0.5 | 19.6 ± 0.6 | 12.5 ± 0.4 | 12.8 ± 0.4 | |
| 12.8 ± 0.3 | 15.4 ± 0.5 | 14.1 ± 0.5 | 12.7 ± 0.4 | 11.6 ± 0.4 | 9.1 ± 0.4 | |
| 18.1 ± 0.6 | 15.9 ± 0.5 | 12.6 ± 0.5 | 13.7 ± 0.6 | 12.1 ± 0.4 | 10.4 ± 0.2 | |
| 23.7 ± 0.1 | 25.4 ± 0.1 | 23.8 ± 0.2 | 32.4 ± 0.3 | --- | --- | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | 17.3 ± 0.1 | 19.9 ± 0.3 | |
Notes: [a] (A): Aspergillus fumigatus, (B): Candida albicans; [b] (C): Staphylococcus aureus, (D): Bacilils subtilis; [c] (E): Pseudomonas aeruginosa, (F): Escherichia coli; [d] SD-1: Streptomycin for antimicrobial (25 µg/mL); [e] SD-2: Clotrimazole standered drug for fungi (25 µg/mL).
Figure 1(a) Molecular docking interaction model for the most potent anti-fungal compound 4a with C. albicans dihydrofolate reductase protein (PDB ID.4HOF) showing hydrogen bonding, hydrophobic and Van der Waals interactions; (b) ribbon diagram of dihydrofolate reductase (C. albicans) complex with inhibitor 4a.
Figure 2(a) Molecular docking interaction model for the most potent anti-bacterial compound 2b with rhomboid protease of E. coli (PDB ID.3ZMI) showing hydrogen bonding through conserved water molecule & hydrophobic interactions; (b) ribbon diagram of rhomboid protease (E. coli) complex with inhibitor 2b.
Osiris calculations of toxicity risks of compounds 1–7.
| MUT | TUM | IRRIT | REP | cLog | Sol | DL | DS | ||
| 486 | +++ | +++ | ++ | ++ | 3.89 | −8.81 | 3.61 | 0.22 | |
| 424 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 4.75 | −8.72 | 3.15 | 0.27 | |
| 644 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 8.51 | −12.52 | 4.66 | 0.12 | |
| 576 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 7.31 | 11.01 | 4.51 | 0.14 | |
| 881 | +++ | +++ | ++ | ++ | 9.41 | −18.31 | 3.61 | 0.08 | |
| 558 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 7.51 | −12.02 | 1.37 | 0.13 | |
| 784 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 8.39 | −11.60 | −2.32 | 0.07 | |
| 692 | +++ | +++ | ++ | ++ | 7.97 | −10.71 | −15.35 | 0.05 | |
| 528 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 4.16 | −7.01 | 5.79 | 0.27 | |
| 626 | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | 8.24 | −11.54 | 4.63 | 0.12 | |
| 581 | +++ | +++ | --- | +++ | 7.86 | −0.96 | 0.83 | 0.32 | |
| 344 | +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | 5.37 | −7.72 | 0.92 | 0.30 | |
Notes: Higly toxic: (---), Slightly toxic: (+), Not toxic (+++); [a] MUT: Mutagenic, TUM: Tumorigenic, IRRIT: Irritant, REP: Reproductive effective; [b] Sol: Solubility, DL: Drug likeness; [c] SD-1: Streptomycin for antimicrobial (25 µg/mL); [d] SD-2: Clotrimazole standered drug for fungi (25 µg/mL).
Molinspirationcalculations of compounds (1–7).
| TPSA | NONH | NV | VOL | GPCRL | ICM | KI | NRL | PI | EI | |
| 41 | 0 | 1 | 437 | −0.04 | −0.34 | −0.21 | −0.35 | −0.06 | 0.10 | |
| 57 | 2 | 1 | 357 | 0.09 | −0.02 | 0.12 | −0.28 | 0.01 | 0.13 | |
| 36 | 0 | 2 | 527 | −0.08 | −0.64 | −0.38 | −0.51 | −0.10 | −0.29 | |
| 36 | 0 | 2 | 500 | 0.01 | −0.43 | −0.22 | −0.34 | −0.04 | −0.13 | |
| 91 | 1 | 2 | 754 | −2.72 | −3.66 | −3.32 | −3.57 | −2.11 | −2.92 | |
| 60 | 0 | 2 | 491 | 0.08 | −0.35 | −0.10 | −0.20 | −0.03 | −0.04 | |
| 78 | 0 | 2 | 543 | −0.16 | −0.72 | −0.32 | −0.43 | −0.11 | −0.27 | |
| 90 | 0 | 2 | 632 | −0.47 | −1.28 | −0.91 | −0.96 | −0.23 | −0.64 | |
| 86 | 0 | 2 | 429 | −0.01 | −0.37 | 0.07 | −0.53 | −0.10 | −0.05 | |
| 60 | 0 | 2 | 525 | −0.19 | −0.82 | −0.38 | −0.87 | −0.24 | −0.50 | |
| 336 | 16 | 3 | 497 | 0.09 | −0.16 | −0.17 | −0.18 | 0.65 | 0.38 | |
| 18 | 0 | 1 | 310 | 0.17 | 0.30 | 0.14 | −0.21 | −0.13 | 0.42 | |
Notes: [a] TPSA: Total molecular polar surface area; NONH: number of OH---N or O---NH interaction, NV: number of violation of five Lipinsky rules; VOL: volume. [b] GPCRL: GPCR ligand; ICM: Ion channel modulator; KI: Kinase inhibitor; NRL: Nuclear receptor ligand; PI: Protease inhibitor; EI: Enzyme inhibitor. [c] SD-1: Streptomycin for antimicrobial. [d] SD-2: Clotrimazole standered drug for fungi.
Figure 3Identification of explicit and combined antibacterial/antifungal pharmacophoric sites of compound 2a.
Figure 4Identification of steric hindered antibacterial and antifungal pharmacophoric sites of compound 1.