| Literature DB >> 28498338 |
Marta Szumilak1, Malgorzata Galdyszynska2, Kamila Dominska3, Irena I Bak-Sypien4, Anna Merecz-Sadowska5, Andrzej Stanczak6, Boleslaw T Karwowski7, Agnieszka W Piastowska-Ciesielska8,9.
Abstract
Polyamine conjugates with bicyclic terminal groups includingEntities:
Keywords: DNA binding studies; anticancer activity; in silico ADMET screening; polyamine conjugates
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28498338 PMCID: PMC6153941 DOI: 10.3390/molecules22050794
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Scheme 1Synthesis of polyamine conjugates with terminal quinazoline moieties. Reagents and conditions: (i) (CH3CO)2O, reflux, 3 h; (ii) H2NZNH2, CH3CN, reflux, 1 h, NaOH aq, r.t., 24 h; (iii) CDI, DMF or CH3CN, r.t., 3 h; (iv) (CH3CO)2O, reflux, 3 h; (v) HCOOH, 100 °C, 4 h, (vi) triethyl orthoformate, CH3COOH anhydrous, reflux, 3 h; (vii) CDI, DMF, 40 °C, 4 h; (viii) oxalyl chloride, toluene, reflux, 6 h.
Scheme 2Synthesis of polyamine conjugates with naphthalene 11, quinoline 12, coumarin 13 and indole 14 as terminal scaffolds. Reagents and conditions: (i) CDI, DMF or CH3CN, rt, 3 h.
Cytotoxicity of polyamine conjugates with bicyclic systems towards prostate cancer cells and breast cancer cells.
| 95.94 ± 2.25 | 98.80 ± 1.39 | 91.90 ± 1.93 | 69.92 ± 3.33 | 63.74 ± 2.85 | 46.91 ± 1.61 | 32.62 ± 1.33 | 21.61 ± 1.32 | 11.08 ± 0.57 | 28.24 | |
| … | 96.10 ± 2.18 | 95.82 ± 1.2 | 73.53 ± 3.9 | 34.14 ± 2.5 | 23.60± 4.4 | 6.16 ± 0.60 | 4.73 ± 0.24 | 3.45 ± 0.14 | 23.30 | |
| 96.69 ± 0.77 | 97.05 ± 0.58 | 58.49 ± 6.00 | 10.70 ± 5.02 | 3.44 ± 0.24 | 3.68 ± 0.22 | 3.50 ± 0.24 | 3.04 ± 0.21 | 2.93 ± 0.21 | 22.57 | |
| 95.31 ± 3.97 | 92.83 ± 1.93 | 81.70 ± 7.40 | 80.66 ± 5.28 | 72.56 ± 5.78 | 65.12 ± 3.77 | 58.44 ± 3.44 | 59.54 ± 5.09 | 48.39 ± 1.96 | 48.08 | |
| 95.62 ± 0.91 | 92.34 ± 3.30 | 89.42 ± 5.22 | 99.90 ± 5.57 | 90.33 ± 4.90 | 47.94 ± 10.29 | 62.48 ± 5.82 | 45.69 ± 4.25 | 9.57 ± 2.74 | 35.72 | |
| 92.66 ± 5.82 | 109.44 ± 4.12 | 113.08 ± 7.15 | 87.05 ± 3.24 | 52.95 ± 1.97 | 38.51 ± 1.58 | 25.82 ± 1.61 | 19.12 ± 0.91 | 5.21 ± 1.41 | 27.59 | |
| 91.23 ± 3.47 | 100.58 ± 3.57 | 93.26 ± 2.16 | 91.12 ± 3.24 | 86.85 ± 1.78 | 78.77 ± 2.71 | 51.02 ± 6.52 | 54.00 ± 2.21 | 28.24 ± 1.85 | 43.63 | |
| 94.90 ± 2.95 | 76.11 ± 4.76 | 35.16 ± 1.53 | 11.99 ± 0.91 | 3.07 ± 0.09 | 3.02 ± 0.16 | 3.16 ± 0.16 | 3.11 ± 0.09 | 3.25 ± 0.14 | 12.96 | |
| 80.23 ± 2.50 | 30.43 ± 1.33 | 4.72 ± 0.10 | 3.45 ± 0.22 | 3.52 ± 0.15 | 3.58 ± 0.13 | 3.63 ± 0.25 | 3.61 ± 0.13 | 3.40 ± 0.20 | 7.63 | |
| 80.81 ± 2.32 | 77.77 ± 1.63 | 73.62 ± 2.78 | 72.97 ± 2.97 | 65.67 ± 2.49 | 59.84 ± 3.21 | 51.32 ± 3.18 | 42.75 ± 3.06 | 33.24 ± 4.39 | 42.63 | |
| 95.04 ± 2.49 | 80.02 ± 1.82 | 60.43 ± 1.77 | 30.57 ± 1.19 | 7.28 ± 0.68 | 4.82 ± 0.38 | 4.19 ± 0.39 | 3.78 ± 0.36 | 3.77 ± 0.39 | 15.86 | |
| 93.25 ± 1.24 | 78.47 ± 1.67 | 57.33 ± 1.36 | 36.78 ± 0.43 | 24.58 ± 0.80 | 18.89 ± 0.57 | 12.37 ± 0.27 | 8.16 ± 0.29 | 5.07 ± 0.12 | 16.46 | |
| 75.91 ± 1.39 | 88.72 ± 2.36 | 78.00 ± 3.89 | 31.76 ± 8.36 | 12.79 ± 0.53 | 14.51 ± 0.63 | 12.95 ± 0.58 | 11.32 ± 1.02 | 7.38 ± 0.53 | 17.95 | |
| 74.01 ± 3.18 | 27.88 ± 7.04 | 22.58 ± 1.05 | 11.25 ± 0.63 | 5.88 ± 0.33 | 4.86 ± 0.24 | 4.56 ± 0.14 | 4.73 ± 0.35 | 4.98 ± 0.19 | 7.48 | |
| 65.16 ± 4.29 | 13.49 ± 1.31 | 5.08 ± 0.26 | 4.97 ± 0.32 | 5.14 ± 0.36 | 5.44 ± 0.41 | 5.74 ± 0.20 | 5.74 ± 0.39 | 6.58 ± 0.28 | 6.00 | |
| 61.13 ± 3.10 | 68.18 ± 2.27 | 63.21 ± 2.57 | 62.06 ± 0.95 | 49.05 ± 3.46 | 53.31 ± 2.23 | 42.92 ± 1.78 | 42.54 ± 1.93 | 29.53 ± 1.51 | 25.45 | |
| 149.95 ± 13.45 | 106.03 ± 19.03 | 46.02 ± 5.56 | 22.48 ± 2.32 | 11.71 ± 1.87 | 8.66 ± 1.17 | 7.96 ± 0.99 | 7.83 ± 0.92 | 8.23 ± 0.98 | 15.51 | |
| 80.29 ± 1.26 | 79.63 ± 1.68 | 58.73 ± 3.57 | 45.53 ± 2.32 | 29.16 ± 1.13 | 14.52 ± 1.33 | 9.43 ± 1.07 | 6.61 ± 0.32 | 5.26 ± 0.23 | 16.91 | |
1 IC50 is the drug concentration effective in inhibiting 50% of the cell viability measured by WST-1 cell proliferation assay after 48 h exposure. GraphPad Prism was employed to produce dose-response curves by performing nonlinear regression analysis. The viability of the treated cells was normalized to the viability of the untreated (control) cells, and cell viability fractions were plotted versus drug concentrations in the logarithmic scale. IC50 values were reported as mean values.
Figure 1Dose response curves. PC–3, DU–145 and MCF–7 cells were exposed to either 4a (A) or 12d (B) for 48 h, followed by the WST–1 assay to determine cell viability (mean ± SD).
Figure 2Dose response curves. PC–3, DU–145 and MCF–7 cells were exposed to either 14c (A) or 14d (B) for 48 h, followed by the WST–1 assay to determine cell viability (mean ± SD).
Figure 3Dose response curves. PC–3, DU–145 and MCF–7 cells were exposed to either 11c (A) or 11d (B) for 48 h, followed by the WST–1 assay to determine cell viability (mean ± SD).
Influence of examined compounds on ds–DNA thermal stability.
| Additive | Oligonucleotide | Melting Temperature, |
|---|---|---|
| ds–DNA | 61.69 ± 0.58 | |
| ds–DNA | 61.67 ± 0.56 | |
| ds–DNA | 65.10 ± 0.11 | |
| ds–DNA | 67.52 ± 0.72 | |
| ds–DNA | 61.02 ± 0 | |
| ds–DNA | 61.34 ± 1.18 | |
| ds–DNA | 61.02 ± 1.73 | |
| ds–DNA | 70.08 ± 1.08 |
Figure 4Influence of compounds 11c (A), 11d (B) on conversion of relaxed plasmid DNA to supercoiled molecule. Control reactions were carried out in the absence of topo I (supercoiled plasmid) (lane 1), with topo I (relaxed plasmid) (lane 2), with topo I and 0.1% DMSO (lane 3). Plasmid conformation was analyzed in increasing concentrations of investigated compounds (lane 4–9, concentration: 1; 5; 10; 15; 20 and 30 μM, respectively) with constant topo I concentration. 9AA (100 μM) was used as a positive control (lane 10).
Drug-likeness parameters for the biologically active compounds.
| Entry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 HBD | 2 HBA | 3 Mw | 4 log | |
| 0 | 8 | 486.61 | 2.18 | |
| 2 | 5 | 453.58 | 4.17 | |
| 3 | 5 | 439.55 | 4.37 | |
| 3 | 7 | 441.53 | 2.34 | |
| 4 | 7 | 431.53 | 3.6 | |
| 5 | 7 | 417.5 | 3.8 | |
1 HBD—number of hydrogen bond donors; 2 HBA—number of hydrogen bond acceptors; 3 Mw—molecular weight; 4 logP—the logarithm value of octanol-water partition coefficient.
In silico ADMET parameters for the biologically active compounds.
| Computed ADMET Parameters | 4a | 11c | 11d | 12d | 14c | 14d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | 100 | 100 | 99.02 | 99.57 | 94.54 | |
| 6.14 | 6.73 | 6.11 | 1.77 | 2.23 | 0.97 | |
| 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | |
| −2.17 | −1.65 | −1.93 | −2.93 | −2.73 | −2.99 | |
| 0.1 | −0.22 | −0.31 | −0.93 | −0.08 | −0.08 | |
| 0.27 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.08 | |
| −2.73 | −3.58 | −3.65 | −3.64 | −3.84 | −4.06 | |
| 65.87 | 99.38 | 98.91 | 97.74 | 93.48 | 92.91 | |
| 3.48 | 5.04 | 4.98 | 4.65 | 4.2 | 4.23 | |
| 7.51 | 6.53 | 6.78 | 4.63 | 6.13 | 6.00 | |
| 190 | 1600 | 1600 | 850 | 430 | 420 |
1 %HIA—the maximum achievable extent of human intestinal absorption; 2 P, 10−4 cm/s—effective jejunal permeability coefficients at pH 6.5; 3 ka—absorption rate constants (min−1); 4 logPS—the rate of brain penetration; 5 logBB—extent of brain penetration; 6 fu, brain—fraction unbound in brain tissue; 7 log(PS*fu, brain)—brain/plasma equilibration rate; 8 %PPB—the cumulative percentage of the analyzed compound bound to human plasma proteins; 9 log K—the drug’s affinity constant to human serum albumin; 10 V (L/kg)—calculated apparent volume of distribution of a compound; 11 LD50 (mg/kg)—acute toxicity for rat after oral administration.