Literature DB >> 27536408

Crystal structure of glycidamide: the mutagenic and genotoxic metabolite of acryl-amide.

Melanie N Hemgesberg1, Thorsten Bonck2, Karl-Heinz Merz1, Yu Sun3, Dieter Schrenk1.   

Abstract

The title compound, glycidamide (systematic name: n class="Chemical">oxirane-2-carboxamide), C3H5NO2, is the mutagenic and genotoxic metabolite of acryl-amide, a food contaminant and industrial chemical that has been classified as being probably carcinogenic to humans. Synthesized via the reaction of acrylo-nitrile and hydrogen peroxide, it crystallizes with both enanti-omers occurring as two crystallographically independent mol-ecules (A and B) in the asymmetric unit. They have similar conformations with an r.m.s. deviation of 0.0809 Å for mol-ecule B inverted on mol-ecule A. In the crystal, mol-ecules are linked by N-H⋯O hydrogen bonds, which lead to the formation of β-sheet structures enclosing R 2 (2)(8) and R 4 (2)(8) loops. The β-sheets are linked by weaker C-H⋯O hydrogen bonds, forming a supra-molecular three-dimensional structure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acryl­amide; crystal structure; genotoxic metabolite; glycidamide; hydrogen bonding; mutagenic; β-sheet

Year:  2016        PMID: 27536408      PMCID: PMC4971867          DOI: 10.1107/S2056989016010859

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Crystallogr E Crystallogr Commun


Chemical context

The formation of glycidamide (n class="Chemical">GA) is considered to cause the carcinogenicity of acryl­amide (AA; Udovenko & Kolzunova, 2008 ▸), which is a widely used chemical in industry (EPA, 1994 ▸). Typical applications include the production of copolymers, flocculation agents and carrier material for gel electrophoresis. Moreover, it is formed if certain foods are heated to temperatures above 393 K at low moisture. AA was found at the highest levels in solid coffee substitutes, fried potato products and gingerbread, thus contributing to human exposure (EFSA, 2015 ▸). AA forms predominantly from asparagine in the presence of reducing sugars during the Maillard reaction via a Strecker-type degradation (Mottram et al., 2002 ▸; Stadler et al., 2002 ▸; Tareke et al., 2002 ▸; Yaylayan et al., 2003 ▸). Besides being a food contaminant, AA is also a component of tobacco smoke (Papoušek et al., 2014 ▸). It has also been classified as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A)’ by the Inter­national Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC, 1994 ▸). It has not been found to be mutagenic or genotoxic without metabolic activation to GA at biologically relevant concentrations (Watzek et al., 2012 ▸). GA is a genotoxic and mutagenic compound formed in vivo metabolically from AA, mainly in the liver by n class="Gene">cytochrome P450 2E1 (Baum et al., 2005 ▸). As a reactive epoxide, GA is able to react with nucleophilic centers of proteins and DNA, thus forming DNA adducts and hemoglobin conjugates (Ghanayem et al., 2005 ▸). As a consequence, mutations may occur, which represent stages of chemical mutagenesis and carcinogenesis (Gamboa da Costa et al., 2003 ▸). We synthesized GA via the reaction of acrylo­nitrile and hydrogen peroxide.

Structural commentary

Owing to its size, GA shows few structural features. Both enanti­omers occur as two crystallographically independent mol­ecules (A and B) in the asymmetric unit (Fig. 1 ▸). They have similar conformations with an r.m.s. deviation of 0.0809 Å for mol­ecule B inverted on mol­ecule A. The n class="Chemical">amide group is inclined to the epoxide plane by 77.9 (2)° in mol­ecule A (N1/C1/O1 vs O2/C2/C3), and by 72.6 (2)° in mol­ecule B (N11/C11/O11 vs O12/C12/C13).
Figure 1

The mol­ecular structure of the two independent mol­ecules (A and B) of the title compound, glycidamide (GA), with atom labelling. Displacement ellipsoids are drawn at the 50% probability level.

Of inter­est are the CC as well as the C—O bond lengths in the epoxide fragment (Table 1 ▸). The values of bond lengths in the n class="Chemical">epoxide fragments of both enanti­omers are compared to the mean values and their standard deviation of a selection of 149 similarly substituted compounds featuring an epoxide fragment (Table 1 ▸), which were reported to the Cambridge Structural Database (CSD, Version 5.37, Update 2 Feb 2016; Groom et al., 2016 ▸). While the epoxide C—O bonds in GA match the mean values quite well, the C—C bond is more at the upper end for bond lengths. Nevertheless, the C—C bond length is still in the range of one standard deviation to the mean value of the database entries. Omitting oxirane itself, GA is the smallest example of an epoxide crystal structure reported in the CSD. Summing up, the epoxide fragment in GA seems to be representative for this class of epoxides.
Table 1

Experimental bond lengths (Å) compared to a database survey of 149 compounds featuring epoxide fragments

 BondMol­ecule A BondMol­ecule B Database survey
C—CC2—C31.463 (2)C12—C131.458 (2)1.442±0.028
CH2—OC3—O21.436 (2)C13—O121.433 (2)1.431±0.026
XCH—OC2—O21.429 (2)C12—O121.424 (2)1.432±0.026

Supra­molecular features

In the crystal, there are as expected, hydrogen bonds dominating the solid-state structure. The protons of the amino moiety undergo strong n class="Chemical">N—H⋯O hydrogen bonding to the carbonyl groups of adjacent GA mol­ecules (Table 2 ▸, Fig. 2 ▸). This results in the formation of a β-sheet structure, which is parallel to the crystallographic b axis and encloses (8) and (8) loops. The β-sheets are also oriented parallel to each other (Fig. 3 ▸). They are further inter­linked by additional but weaker C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds (Table 2 ▸), between the protons ot the –CH2– units with the carbonyl group and the ep­oxy function from the neighbouring β-sheets, which leads to the formation of a supra­molecular three-dimensional structure (Fig. 4 ▸).
Table 2

Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, °)

D—H⋯A D—HH⋯A DA D—H⋯A
N1—H1B⋯O20.86 (2)2.45 (2)2.7770 (17)103 (1)
N11—H11B⋯O120.87 (2)2.39 (2)2.7408 (17)105 (1)
N1—H1A⋯O11i 0.86 (2)2.12 (2)2.9651 (16)167 (2)
N1—H1B⋯O1ii 0.86 (2)2.12 (2)2.8482 (14)142 (2)
N11—H11A⋯O1iii 0.87 (2)2.08 (2)2.9447 (16)173 (2)
N11—H11B⋯O11ii 0.87 (2)2.11 (2)2.8495 (14)144 (2)
C3—H3A⋯O11ii 0.992.593.5839 (19)179
C3—H3B⋯O2iv 0.992.593.4470 (18)144
C13—H13A⋯O12v 0.992.443.3991 (19)163

Symmetry codes: (i) ; (ii) ; (iii) ; (iv) ; (v) .

Figure 2

A partial view of the crystal packing of the title compound, showing the β-sheet arrangement, formed through strong N—H⋯O hydrogen bonds (dashed lines; see Table 2 ▸ for details), propagating along the b-axis direction.

Figure 3

A view along the b axis of the crystal packing of the title compound, showing the β-sheet arrangement formed through strong N—H⋯O hydrogen bonds (dashed lines; see Table 2 ▸ for details). The C-bound H atoms have been omitted for clarity (A mol­ecules = black; B mol­ecules = red).

Figure 4

A view along the b axis of the crystal packing of the title compound. The N—H⋯O and C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds are shown as dashed lines (see Table 2 ▸ for details). H atoms not involved in these inter­actions have been omitted for clarity (A mol­ecules = black; B mol­ecules = red).

Database survey

As noted in Section 2, a search of the Cambridge Structural Database (Groom et al., 2016 ▸) revealed the presence of 149 similarly substituted compounds featuring an epoxide fragment. However, up to now there has been no report of the structure of the title compound (n class="Chemical">GA).

Synthesis and crystallization

The synthesis of the title compound (GA) was performed according to a published method with modifications (Payne & Williams, 1961 ▸). The conventional literature procedure by controlled pH and temperature resulted in an unfavorable decomposition of n class="Chemical">hydrogen peroxide. GA was synthesized by dropwise addition of 1 M NaOH (60 ml) to acrylo­nitrile (80.1 g, 1.22 mol) in water (500 ml) and 30% H2O2 (102 ml, 1 mol). The pH was kept at 7.3–7.5 and the temperature was maintained at 308–310 K. After the reaction was completed (about 12 h), the mixture was treated with 5% palladium on charcoal, stored overnight in a refrigerator and then filtered. The solvent was evaporated and the crude product (yield: 55 g; 63%) was recrystallized from dry acetone at low temperature. Colourless crystals formed after 3–5 days at 243 K. GA is very hygroscopic, so purification of the raw product was carried out in an inert atmosphere. The compound was stored in dry argon at 243 K. Identity and purity were checked by NMR spectroscopic methods and elemental analysis. 1H-NMR (600.13 MHz, 295.15 K, p.p.m., D2O): δ 3,49 (dd, 2 J HH = 4.08 Hz, 3 J HH = 2.58 Hz,1H); 3,02 (t, 5.16 Hz, 1H); 2,87 (dd, 2 J HH = 5.52 Hz, 3 J HH = 2.58 Hz, 1H). 13C-{1H}-NMR (100.66 MHz, 294.05 K, p.p.m., DMSO-d 6): δ 170.1 (C1), 48.5 (C2), 45.6 (C3). Elemental analysis for C3H5NO2. Required: C 41.36%; H 5.79%; N 16.09%; found: C 41.41%; H 5.47%; N 16.27%.

Refinement

Crystal data, data collection and structure refinement details are summarized in Table 3 ▸. The H atoms bound to the nitro­gen atoms, n class="Chemical">N1 and N11, were located in a difference Fourier map, and refined with a distance restraint: N—H = 0.86 (2) Å with U iso(H) = 1.2U eq(N). The C-bound H were placed in calculated positions and refined using a riding model: C—H = 0.99–1.00 Å with U iso(H) = 1.2U eq(C).
Table 3

Experimental details

Crystal data
Chemical formulaC3H5NO2
M r 87.08
Crystal system, space groupMonoclinic, P21/c
Temperature (K)150
a, b, c (Å)15.5186 (7), 5.1007 (2), 10.9250 (5)
β (°)107.651 (5)
V3)824.06 (7)
Z 8
Radiation typeCu Kα
μ (mm−1)1.02
Crystal size (mm)0.22 × 0.16 × 0.16
 
Data collection
DiffractometerRigaku Xcalibur (Sapphire3, Gemini ultra)
Absorption correctionMulti-scan (CrysAlis PRO; Rigaku Oxford Diffraction, 2015)
T min, T max 0.837, 1.000
No. of measured, independent and observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections4485, 1310, 1207
R int 0.022
(sin θ/λ)max−1)0.577
 
Refinement
R[F 2 > 2σ(F 2)], wR(F 2), S 0.035, 0.093, 1.10
No. of reflections1310
No. of parameters121
No. of restraints4
H-atom treatmentH atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å−3)0.34, −0.17

Computer programs: CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku Oxford Diffraction, 2015 ▸), SIR2014 (Burla et al., 2015 ▸), SHELXL2014 (Sheldrick, 2015 ▸), Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008 ▸) and PLATON (Spek, 2009 ▸).

Crystal structure: contains datablock(s) I, Global. DOI: 10.1107/S2056989016010859/su5309sup1.cif Structure factors: contains datablock(s) I. DOI: 10.1107/S2056989016010859/su5309Isup2.hkl Click here for additional data file. Supporting information file. DOI: 10.1107/S2056989016010859/su5309Isup3.cml CCDC reference: 1490160 Additional supporting information: crystallographic information; 3D view; checkCIF report
C3H5NO2F(000) = 368
Mr = 87.08Dx = 1.404 Mg m3
Monoclinic, P21/cCu Kα radiation, λ = 1.54184 Å
a = 15.5186 (7) ÅCell parameters from 2255 reflections
b = 5.1007 (2) Åθ = 6.0–62.6°
c = 10.9250 (5) ŵ = 1.02 mm1
β = 107.651 (5)°T = 150 K
V = 824.06 (7) Å3Transparent prism, colorless
Z = 80.22 × 0.16 × 0.16 mm
Rigaku Xcalibur (Sapphire3, Gemini ultra) diffractometer1310 independent reflections
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed X-ray tube1207 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Detector resolution: 16.1399 pixels mm-1Rint = 0.022
ω scansθmax = 62.8°, θmin = 6.0°
Absorption correction: multi-scan (CrysAlis PRO; Rigaku Oxford Diffraction, 2015)h = −17→14
Tmin = 0.837, Tmax = 1.000k = −5→5
4485 measured reflectionsl = −8→12
Refinement on F2Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods
Least-squares matrix: fullSecondary atom site location: difference Fourier map
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.035Hydrogen site location: difference Fourier map
wR(F2) = 0.093H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
S = 1.10w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0458P)2 + 0.238P] where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
1310 reflections(Δ/σ)max < 0.001
121 parametersΔρmax = 0.34 e Å3
4 restraintsΔρmin = −0.17 e Å3
Geometry. All esds (except the esd in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell esds are taken into account individually in the estimation of esds in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between esds in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell esds is used for estimating esds involving l.s. planes.
xyzUiso*/Ueq
C10.34078 (9)0.3918 (3)0.43936 (13)0.0242 (3)
C20.41336 (9)0.3997 (3)0.56563 (14)0.0292 (4)
H20.45070.23710.59000.035*
C30.40088 (10)0.5531 (3)0.67215 (13)0.0342 (4)
H3A0.34270.64640.65800.041*
H3B0.42850.48610.76040.041*
N10.31052 (9)0.6180 (2)0.38512 (12)0.0303 (3)
H1A0.2683 (11)0.620 (4)0.3127 (15)0.036*
H1B0.3322 (11)0.766 (3)0.4175 (16)0.036*
O10.31121 (7)0.17614 (19)0.39333 (9)0.0300 (3)
O20.46035 (7)0.6420 (2)0.60247 (10)0.0361 (3)
C110.16824 (9)0.1061 (3)0.56672 (13)0.0262 (3)
C120.11401 (10)0.1195 (3)0.42784 (14)0.0320 (4)
H120.1266−0.01950.37090.038*
C130.02176 (11)0.2199 (3)0.39198 (15)0.0392 (4)
H13A−0.02280.14370.31530.047*
H13B−0.00300.27240.46180.047*
N110.18834 (8)0.3303 (2)0.62832 (12)0.0294 (3)
H11A0.2208 (11)0.332 (4)0.7085 (14)0.035*
H11B0.1752 (11)0.480 (3)0.5899 (16)0.035*
O110.18951 (7)−0.11167 (18)0.61662 (9)0.0323 (3)
O120.09383 (8)0.3738 (2)0.37277 (11)0.0441 (3)
U11U22U33U12U13U23
C10.0286 (7)0.0184 (8)0.0250 (7)−0.0003 (5)0.0071 (5)−0.0010 (5)
C20.0280 (7)0.0245 (8)0.0313 (7)−0.0010 (6)0.0032 (6)−0.0015 (6)
C30.0337 (7)0.0403 (9)0.0263 (7)−0.0070 (7)0.0060 (6)−0.0045 (6)
N10.0408 (7)0.0163 (7)0.0266 (6)−0.0025 (5)−0.0004 (5)−0.0008 (5)
O10.0388 (6)0.0157 (5)0.0298 (5)−0.0012 (4)0.0017 (4)−0.0015 (4)
O20.0330 (6)0.0383 (6)0.0358 (6)−0.0118 (4)0.0084 (4)−0.0103 (5)
C110.0281 (7)0.0191 (8)0.0286 (7)−0.0011 (5)0.0044 (6)0.0009 (5)
C120.0384 (8)0.0253 (8)0.0279 (7)−0.0024 (6)0.0035 (6)−0.0002 (5)
C130.0364 (8)0.0361 (9)0.0363 (8)−0.0010 (7)−0.0022 (6)0.0007 (7)
N110.0377 (7)0.0162 (6)0.0265 (6)−0.0004 (5)−0.0022 (5)0.0021 (5)
O110.0411 (6)0.0171 (6)0.0317 (5)0.0005 (4)0.0008 (4)0.0006 (4)
O120.0484 (7)0.0370 (7)0.0364 (6)−0.0047 (5)−0.0027 (5)0.0135 (5)
C1—O11.2383 (17)C11—O111.2373 (17)
C1—N11.3169 (18)C11—N111.3154 (19)
C1—C21.494 (2)C11—C121.497 (2)
C2—O21.4294 (17)C12—O121.4242 (19)
C2—C31.463 (2)C12—C131.458 (2)
C2—H21.0000C12—H121.0000
C3—O21.4362 (19)C13—O121.433 (2)
C3—H3A0.9900C13—H13A0.9900
C3—H3B0.9900C13—H13B0.9900
N1—H1A0.860 (15)N11—H11A0.868 (15)
N1—H1B0.856 (15)N11—H11B0.864 (15)
O1—C1—N1123.91 (12)O11—C11—N11124.39 (12)
O1—C1—C2118.80 (12)O11—C11—C12118.71 (12)
N1—C1—C2117.26 (12)N11—C11—C12116.89 (12)
O2—C2—C359.53 (9)O12—C12—C1359.62 (10)
O2—C2—C1117.44 (12)O12—C12—C11116.98 (12)
C3—C2—C1120.29 (12)C13—C12—C11119.53 (14)
O2—C2—H2115.9O12—C12—H12116.2
C3—C2—H2115.9C13—C12—H12116.2
C1—C2—H2115.9C11—C12—H12116.2
O2—C3—C259.07 (9)O12—C13—C1259.02 (10)
O2—C3—H3A117.9O12—C13—H13A117.9
C2—C3—H3A117.9C12—C13—H13A117.9
O2—C3—H3B117.9O12—C13—H13B117.9
C2—C3—H3B117.9C12—C13—H13B117.9
H3A—C3—H3B115.0H13A—C13—H13B115.0
C1—N1—H1A119.5 (12)C11—N11—H11A119.9 (12)
C1—N1—H1B122.9 (12)C11—N11—H11B122.2 (12)
H1A—N1—H1B117.6 (17)H11A—N11—H11B117.5 (17)
C2—O2—C361.40 (10)C12—O12—C1361.35 (10)
D—H···AD—HH···AD···AD—H···A
N1—H1B···O20.86 (2)2.45 (2)2.7770 (17)103 (1)
N11—H11B···O120.87 (2)2.39 (2)2.7408 (17)105 (1)
N1—H1A···O11i0.86 (2)2.12 (2)2.9651 (16)167 (2)
N1—H1B···O1ii0.86 (2)2.12 (2)2.8482 (14)142 (2)
N11—H11A···O1iii0.87 (2)2.08 (2)2.9447 (16)173 (2)
N11—H11B···O11ii0.87 (2)2.11 (2)2.8495 (14)144 (2)
C3—H3A···O11ii0.992.593.5839 (19)179
C3—H3B···O2iv0.992.593.4470 (18)144
C13—H13A···O12v0.992.443.3991 (19)163
  11 in total

1.  Acrylamide and glycidamide: genotoxic effects in V79-cells and human blood.

Authors:  Matthias Baum; Evelyne Fauth; Silke Fritzen; Armin Herrmann; Peter Mertes; Karlheinz Merz; Melanie Rudolphi; Heinrich Zankl; Gerhard Eisenbrand
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2005-02-07       Impact factor: 2.433

2.  N7-glycidamide-guanine DNA adduct formation by orally ingested acrylamide in rats: a dose-response study encompassing human diet-related exposure levels.

Authors:  Nico Watzek; Nadine Böhm; Julia Feld; Denise Scherbl; Franz Berger; Karl Heinz Merz; Alfonso Lampen; Thorsten Reemtsma; Steven R Tannenbaum; Paul L Skipper; Matthias Baum; Elke Richling; Gerhard Eisenbrand
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 3.739

3.  Role of CYP2E1 in the epoxidation of acrylamide to glycidamide and formation of DNA and hemoglobin adducts.

Authors:  Burhan I Ghanayem; L Patrice McDaniel; Mona I Churchwell; Nathan C Twaddle; Rodney Snyder; Timothy R Fennell; Daniel R Doerge
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Why asparagine needs carbohydrates to generate acrylamide.

Authors:  Varoujan A Yaylayan; Andrzej Wnorowski; Carolina Perez Locas
Journal:  J Agric Food Chem       Date:  2003-03-12       Impact factor: 5.279

5.  Analysis of acrylamide, a carcinogen formed in heated foodstuffs.

Authors:  Eden Tareke; Per Rydberg; Patrik Karlsson; Sune Eriksson; Margareta Törnqvist
Journal:  J Agric Food Chem       Date:  2002-08-14       Impact factor: 5.279

6.  DNA adduct formation from acrylamide via conversion to glycidamide in adult and neonatal mice.

Authors:  Gonçalo Gamboa da Costa; Mona I Churchwell; L Patrice Hamilton; Linda S Von Tungeln; Frederick A Beland; M Matilde Marques; Daniel R Doerge
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.739

7.  Acrylamide from Maillard reaction products.

Authors:  Richard H Stadler; Imre Blank; Natalia Varga; Fabien Robert; Jörg Hau; Philippe A Guy; Marie-Claude Robert; Sonja Riediker
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-10-03       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Crystal structure refinement with SHELXL.

Authors:  George M Sheldrick
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr C Struct Chem       Date:  2015-01-01       Impact factor: 1.172

9.  Structure validation in chemical crystallography.

Authors:  Anthony L Spek
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr       Date:  2009-01-20

10.  The Cambridge Structural Database.

Authors:  Colin R Groom; Ian J Bruno; Matthew P Lightfoot; Suzanna C Ward
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr B Struct Sci Cryst Eng Mater       Date:  2016-04-01
View more
  1 in total

1.  Fragmentation and transferability in Hirshfeld atom refinement.

Authors:  Michał Chodkiewicz; Sylwia Pawlędzio; Magdalena Woińska; Krzysztof Woźniak
Journal:  IUCrJ       Date:  2022-02-26       Impact factor: 4.769

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.