| Literature DB >> 25648597 |
Mitko Miliovsky1, Ivan Svinyarov2, Elena Prokopova3, Daniela Batovska4, Simeon Stoyanov5, Milen G Bogdanov6.
Abstract
A series of sixteen polyhydroxylated trans-restricted 2-arylcinnamic acid analogues 3a-p were synthesized through a one-pot reaction between homophthalic anhydrides and various aromatic aldehydes, followed by treatment with BBr3. The structure of the newly synthesized compounds was confirmed by spectroscopic methods and the configuration around the double bond was unequivocally estimated by means of gated decoupling 13C-NMR spectra. It was shown that the trans-cinnamic acid fragment incorporated into the target compounds' structure ensures the cis-configuration of the stilbene backbone and prevents further isomerization along the carbon-carbon double bond. The antioxidant activity of compounds 3a-p was measured against 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH●), hydroxyl (OH●) and superoxide (O2●▬) radicals. The results obtained showed that the tested compounds possess higher activities than natural antioxidants such as protocatechuic acid, caffeic acid and gallic acid. Moreover, it was shown that a combination of two different and independently acting fragments of well-known pharmacological profiles into one covalently bonded hybrid molecule evoke a synergistic effect resulting in higher than expected activity. To rationalize the apparent antioxidant activity and to establish the mechanism of action, a SAR analysis and DFT quantum chemical computations were also performed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25648597 PMCID: PMC6272747 DOI: 10.3390/molecules20022555
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Structure of natural phenolic acids targeted as active fragments for the synthesis of hybrid antioxidants.
Scheme 1One-pot synthesis of polyhydroxylated trans-restricted 2-arylcinnamic acid. Numbering in the general formula 3 is used for NMR spectra description.
Substitution patterns, number of hydroxyl groups, type of phenolic fragments, and antioxidant activity (EC50± SD) of compounds 3a–p and standard antioxidants.
| Comp. | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | R5 | R6 | Total OH | Type of Phenolic Fragments in Rings A/B | Antioxidant Activity a | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH● | O2●▬ (µM) | HO● (µM) | ||||||||||
| EC50 (µM) | TEC50 b (min) | |||||||||||
| H | H | H | H | H | H | 0 | –/– | na c | nd c | na | 201.0 ± 8.0 | |
| H | H | H | H | H | OH | 1 | –/phenol | na | nd | na | 133.7 ± 16.1 | |
| H | H | H | OH | H | H | 1 | –/phenol | na | nd | na | 134.2 ± 5.6 | |
| H | H | H | OH | H | OH | 2 | –/resorcinol | 41.30 ± 0.35 | 32.25 ± 2 | na | 120.9 ± 9.8 | |
| H | H | OH | H | H | OH | 2 | –/hydroQ c | 6.74 ± 0.30 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | na | 122.9 ± 2.0 | |
| H | H | H | H | OH | OH | 2 | –/catechol | 6.26 ± 0.58 | 4 ± 0.1 | 372.9 ± 8.5 | 108.9 ± 14.0 | |
| H | H | H | OH | OH | H | 2 | –/catechol | 5.81 ± 0.29 | 2.75 ± 0.1 | 109.7 ± 5.3 | 59.4 ± 0.4 | |
| H | H | OH | OH | OH | H | 3 | –/pyrogallol | 4.47 ± 0.07 | 3 ± 0.1 | 11.1 ± 0.1 | 100.6 ± 2.1 | |
| OH | OH | H | H | H | H | 2 | catechol/– | 7.62 ± 0.28 | 31.75 ± 1.5 | 233.6 ± 0.9 | 118.7 ± 2.6 | |
| OH | OH | H | H | H | OH | 3 | catechol/phenol | 8.04 ± 0.32 | 26 ± 0.75 | 238.0 ± 5.4 | 79.1 ± 0.6 | |
| OH | OH | H | OH | H | H | 3 | catechol/phenol | 7.34 ± 0.25 | 33 ± 2 | 230.7 ± 4.9 | 64.5 ± 0.8 | |
| OH | OH | H | OH | H | OH | 4 | catechol/resorcinol | 5.43 ± 0.36 | 26.5 ± 0.75 | 269.2 ± 12.8 | 68.9 ± 0.8 | |
| OH | OH | OH | H | H | OH | 4 | catechol/hydroQ c | 3.33 ± 0.04 | 10 ± 0.5 | nd | 58.8 ± 1.1 | |
| OH | OH | H | H | OH | OH | 4 | catechol/catechol | 3.52 ± 0.05 | 13 ± 0.5 | 137.2 ± 3.9 | 84.6 ± 2.3 | |
| OH | OH | H | OH | OH | H | 4 | catechol/catechol | 2.76 ± 0.12 | 6.5 ± 0.25 | 64.9 ± 1.9 | 42.6 ± 1.8 | |
| OH | OH | OH | OH | OH | H | 5 | catechol/pyrogallol | 2.09 ± 0.11 | 9 ± 0.75 | 11.3 ± 0.5 | 58.6 ± 0.9 | |
| Trolox | – | – | – | – | – | – | 1 | phenol | 9.34 ± 0.07 | 5.75 ± 0.25 | na | 109.6 ± 7.8 |
| – | – | H | OH | OH | H | 2 | catechol | 9.48 ± 0.17 | 9 ± 0.75 | 126 ± 10.6 | 73.0 ± 1.8 | |
| OH | OH | – | – | – | – | 2 | catechol | 8.85 ± 0.24 | 28.25 ± 1.25 | 233.5 ± 3.0 | 117.7 ± 1.8 | |
| – | – | – | – | – | – | 3 | pyrogallol | 5.32 ± 0.34 | 10 ± 0.5 | 29.1 ± 1.0 | 146.9 ± 4.0 | |
| CA:PCA | – | – | – | – | – | – | 2 | catechol + catechol | 13.28 ± 0.54 | 10 ± 0.5 | 143.9 ± 5.7 | 135.7 ± 13.1 |
a Results are presented as a mean value of three measurements and the corresponding p-values of all possible pairs of compounds are given as supporting information (Tables S1–S3); b TEC50—the time required for each compound to reach equilibrium at concentration equal to EC50; c “na” refers to “not active”, “nd” refers to “not determined”, “–” refers to “not applicable”, and “hydroQ” refers to hydroquinone.
Figure 2Probable reaction mechanisms of radical scavenging by phenolic compounds.
Figure 3BDEs of compounds 3i, 3k, 3o and 3p for a homolytic dissociation of different bonds. Calculations are performed at IEF-PCM (U)B3LYP/6-31+G(d) level of theory.
IEF-PCM B3LYP/6-311++G** computed enthalpies (kJ·mol−1) of reaction mechanisms (1)–(3).
| Compound | BDE a | IP b | PDE c | PA d | ETE e |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 324.4 | 826.2 | 169.0 | 759.2 | 684.8 | |
| 323.7 | 803.8 | 192.5 | 760.3 | 683.1 | |
| 306.4 | 796.1 | 189.2 | 749.3 | 676.6 | |
| 290.2 | 795.2 | 118.3 | 677.4 | 732.3 |
a Bond Dissociation Energy; b Ionization Potential; c Proton Dissociation Enthalpy; d Proton Affinity; e Electron Transfer Enthalpy.
Distribution of spin densities into radicals of compounds 3i, 3k, 3o and 3p.
| Compound | Mulliken Spin Density | Natural Spin Density | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Radical Centre | Protocatechuic Fragment | Cinnamic Fragment | Radical Centre | Protocatechuic Fragment | Cinnamic Fragment | |
| 0.359 | 0.602 | 0.039 | 0.284 | 0.609 | 0.107 | |
| 0.337 | 0.608 | 0.055 | 0.269 | 0.666 | 0.065 | |
| 0.268 | 0.011 | 0.721 | 0.198 | 0.020 | 0.782 | |
| 0.287 | 0.038 | 0.675 | 0.218 | 0.021 | 0.761 | |