| Literature DB >> 28280303 |
Junie B Billones1, Maria Constancia O Carrillo2, Voltaire G Organo2, Jamie Bernadette A Sy2, Nina Abigail B Clavio2, Stephani Joy Y Macalino2, Inno A Emnacen2, Alexandra P Lee2, Paul Kenny L Ko2, Gisela P Concepcion3.
Abstract
Computer-aided drug discovery and development approaches such as virtual screening, molecular docking, and in silico drug property calculations have been utilized in this effort to discover new lead compounds against tuberculosis. The enzyme 7,8-diaminopelargonic acid aminotransferase (BioA) in Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), primarily involved in the lipid biosynthesis pathway, was chosen as the drug target due to the fact that humans are not capable of synthesizing biotin endogenously. The computational screening of 4.5 million compounds from the Enamine REAL database has ultimately yielded 45 high-scoring, high-affinity compounds with desirable in silico absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity properties. Seventeen of the 45 compounds were subjected to bioactivity validation using the resazurin microtiter assay. Among the 4 actives, compound 7 ((Z)-N-(2-isopropoxyphenyl)-2-oxo-2-((3-(trifluoromethyl)cyclohexyl)amino)acetimidic acid) displayed inhibitory activity up to 83% at 10 μg/mL concentration against the growth of the Mtb H37Ra strain.Entities:
Keywords: ADMET; BioA inhibitor; CADDD; TOPKAT; molecular docking; pharmacophore; resazurin microtiter assay; structure-based pharmacophore
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28280303 PMCID: PMC5338852 DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S119930
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Des Devel Ther ISSN: 1177-8881 Impact factor: 4.162
ADMET descriptor values in DS4.0 and their corresponding interpretations
| Level | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Human intestinal absorption | ||
| 0 | ADMET_Absorption_T2_2D <6.1261 (inside 95%) | Good absorption |
| 1 | 6.1261 ≤ ADMET_Absorption_T2_2D <9.6026 (inside 99%) | Moderate absorption |
| 2 | 9.6026 < ADMET_Absorption_T2_2D (outside 99%) | Low absorption |
| 3 | ADMET_PSA_2D ≥150.0 or ADMET_AlogP98 ≤−2.0 or ADMET_AlogP98 ≥7.0 | Very low absorption |
| Aqueous solubility | ||
| 0 | log (molar solubility) <−8.0 | Extremely low |
| 1 | −8.0 < log (molar solubility) <−6.0 | No, very low, but possible |
| 2 | −6.0 < log (molar solubility) <−4.0 | Yes, low |
| 3 | −4.0 < log (molar solubility) <−2.0 | Yes, good |
| 4 | −2.0 < log (molar solubility) <0.0 | Yes, optimal |
| 5 | 0.0 < log (molar solubility) | No, too soluble |
| 6 | −1,000 | Warning: molecules with 1 or more unknown AlogP98 types |
| Cytochrome P450 2D6 | ||
| 0 | Non-inhibitor | |
| 1 | Inhibitor | |
| Hepatotoxicity | ||
| 0 | Nontoxic | |
| 1 | Toxic | |
| Plasma protein binding | ||
| 0 | Binding is <90% | |
| 1 | Binding is ≥90% | |
| 2 | Binding is ≥95% | |
Notes:
ADMET_Absorption_T2_2D is the Mahalanobis distance for the compound in the ADMET_PSA_2D, ADMET_AlogP98 plane. It is referenced from the center of the region of the chemical space defined by well-absorbed compounds.
The prediction whether a compound is a cytochrome P450 2D6 inhibitor was classified using the cutoff Bayesian score of 0.161 obtained by minimizing the total number of false positives and false negatives.
The prediction whether a compound is hepatotoxic was classified using the cutoff Bayesian score of −4.154 obtained by minimizing the total number of false positives and false negatives.
The prediction whether a compound is highly bound (≥90% bound) to plasma proteins was classified using the cutoff Bayesian score of −2.209 obtained by minimizing the total number of false positives and false negatives.
Abbreviations: ADMET, absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity; DS4.0, Discovery Studio 4.0.
Binding energies, and ADMET predictions of ACM, and Enamine hit compounds
| Compound | Binding energy (kcal/mol) | TOPKAT
| ADMET
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carcinogenicity | Mutagenicity | Developmental toxicity | Absorption | Solubility | Hepatotoxicity | CYP2D6 inhibition | Plasma protein binding | ||
| ACM | −158.92 | 0.62 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Compound | −201.53 | 0 | 0 | 0.03 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −201.48 | 0 | 0 | 0.30 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Compound | −167.63 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −188.97 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −188.84 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Compound | −184.37 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Compound | −180.96 | 0 | 0 | 0.05 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −196.14 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −192.39 | 0.16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −189.08 | 0.06 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Compound | −187.85 | 0 | 0 | 0.95 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Compound | −182.70 | 0 | 0 | 0.94 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −181.15 | 0.01 | 0 | 0.57 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −202.14 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.68 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Compound | −197.20 | – | – | – | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Compound | −199.95 | 0 | 0 | 0.57 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Compound | −190.52 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Notes: TOPKAT values: 0–0.29: low probability; 0.30–0.69: indeterminate; 0.70–1.00: high probability. The optimum prediction space (OPS) is a unique multivariate descriptor space in which the model is applicable. Assessment of this is needed to determine if the chemical structure being examined is within the OPS of a model; thus, the probability results may be accepted with confidence, subject to the results obtained from hypothesis testing.
OPS and OPS limit are false; chemical structure is outside of the OPS limit of a model, and thus, the probability cannot be accepted with confidence.
Abbreviations: ADMET, absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity; ACM, amiclenomycin; CYP2D6, cytochrome P450 2D6.
Figure 1Preparation of 3D structure of Mycobacterium tuberculosis 7,8-diaminopelargonic acid aminotransferase: (A) 3D structure of 7,8-diaminopelargonic acid aminotransferase (BioA) of M. tuberculosis (LdtMt2, PDB ID: 3TFU)27 (3D structure generated using: Protein Data Bank, www.rcsb.org);28 (B) molecular overlay of raw (cyan) and minimized (yellow) crystal structures of BioA (RMSD =0.70 Å).
Abbreviations: 3D, three-dimensional; RMSD, root-mean-square deviation.
Figure 2Structure-based pharmacophore model of BioA. This pharmacophore was modeled based on BioA’s active site, showing 9 hydrophobic (cyan), 9 donor (magenta), and 7 acceptor (green) features.
Figure 3Comparison of the percentages of inhibition of H37Ra growth for 4 Enamine test compounds and rifampicin (positive control) at 10 μg/mL and 0.1 μg/mL. Results are shown as averages of ±SD of 4 independent experiments.
Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; RIF, rifampicin.
Figure 4Chemical structures of bioactive hits.
Figure 5Interaction diagram for BioA–compound 7 complex. Interaction diagram legends include: 1) pink circles = residues involved in hydrogen bond, charge, or polar interactions; 2) green circles = residues involved in van der Waals interactions; 3) blue circles = water molecules; 4) blue dashed arrow directed toward the electron donor = hydrogen bonding with amino acid side chains; and 5) orange line with symbols = pi interactions.
Figure 6Binding mode of compound 7 in BioA active site. Compound 7 (cyan carbon atoms) and the key interacting residues (gray atoms) are shown in sticks. Hydrogen bonds are displayed as green dashed lines, while hydrophobic interactions are displayed as pink dashed lines, and pi-interaction pairs are connected by orange lines.
Two-dimensional structures of the inhibitor ACM, as well as the top 17 Enamine compounds generated from in silico studies
| Compound | 2D structure |
|---|---|
| ACM |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
| Compound |
|
Abbreviations: ACM, amiclenomycin; 2D, two-dimensional.