| Literature DB >> 28933564 |
Carina Proença1, Marisa Freitas1, Daniela Ribeiro1, Eduardo F T Oliveira2, Joana L C Sousa3, Sara M Tomé3, Maria J Ramos2, Artur M S Silva3, Pedro A Fernandes2, Eduarda Fernandes1.
Abstract
α-Glucosidase inhibitors are described as the most effective in reducing post-prandial hyperglycaemia (PPHG) from all available anti-diabetic drugs used in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. As flavonoids are promising modulators of this enzyme's activity, a panel of 44 flavonoids, organised in five groups, was screened for their inhibitory activity of α-glucosidase, based on in vitro structure-activity relationship studies. Inhibitory kinetic analysis and molecular docking calculations were also applied for selected compounds. A flavonoid with two catechol groups in A- and B-rings, together with a 3-OH group at C-ring, was the most active, presenting an IC50 much lower than the one found for the most widely prescribed α-glucosidase inhibitor, acarbose. The present work suggests that several of the studied flavonoids have the potential to be used as alternatives for the regulation of PPHG.Entities:
Keywords: Diabetes; flavonoids; in silico; in vitro; α-glucosidase inhibition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28933564 PMCID: PMC6009965 DOI: 10.1080/14756366.2017.1368503
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Enzyme Inhib Med Chem ISSN: 1475-6366 Impact factor: 5.051
Figure 1.Chemical structures of the tested flavonoids.
K i values (mean ± SEM, μM) for the inhibition of yeast α-glucosidase by the selected flavonoids.
| Flavonoid | Type of inhibition | |
|---|---|---|
| Mixed | 41 ± 7 | |
| Mixed | 127 ± 9 | |
| Competitive | 6.5 ± 0.2 | |
| Competitive | 6.8 ± 0.6 | |
| Non-competitive | 51 ± 6 | |
| Non-competitive | 347 ± 15 | |
| Positive control: | Competitive | 457 ± 11 |
Structures and in vitro α-glucosidase inhibition by the studied flavonoids (IC50 μM, mean ± SEM).
| Compounds | Structure | R2′ | R3 | R3′ | R4′ | R6 | R7 | R8 | IC50 (μM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | H | H | H | – | – | – | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | H | OH | H | – | – | – | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | H | H | OH | – | – | – | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | H | OH | OH | – | – | – | 32 ± 4%*200 μM | ||
| – | OH | OH | OH | – | – | – | |||
| – | OH | OMe | OMe | – | – | – | <20%*100 μM | ||
| – | – | H | H | – | – | – | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | – | OH | OH | – | – | – | 31 ± 4%*200 μM | ||
| – | – | H | OH | – | – | – | |||
| – | – | OH | OH | – | – | – | |||
| – | H | H | H | – | OH | H | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | H | OH | H | – | OH | H | 53 ± 4 | ||
| – | H | H | OH | – | OH | H | ≈200 | ||
| – | OH | OH | H | – | OH | H | 42 ± 4 | ||
| – | OH | H | OH | – | OH | H | 96 ± 10 | ||
| – | H | OH | OH | – | OH | H | 95 ± 7 | ||
| – | OH | OH | OH | – | OH | OH | |||
| – | OH | OMe | H | – | OMe | H | 22 ± 2%*100 μM | ||
| – | OH | H | OMe | – | OMe | H | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | OH | OH | OH | – | OMe | OMe | 86 ± 6 | ||
| – | OH | OMe | OMe | – | OH | OH | 31 ± 3%*200 μM | ||
| – | OH | OBn | OBn | – | OMe | OMe | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | OH | OMe | OMe | – | OBn | OBn | 32 ± 3%*200 μM | ||
| H | H | H | H | H | – | H | <20%*50 μM | ||
| H | OH | H | H | H | – | H | 21 ± 3%*200 μM | ||
| H | H | H | H | OH | – | H | 44 ± 3 | ||
| H | H | OH | H | H | – | H | 89 ± 3 | ||
| H | H | H | OH | H | – | H | 82 ± 6 | ||
| H | OH | H | OH | H | – | H | 32 ± 3 | ||
| H | H | OH | OH | H | – | H | 46 ± 6 | ||
| H | OH | OH | OH | H | – | H | |||
| OH | OH | H | OH | H | – | H | 32 ± 2 | ||
| H | Cl | OH | OH | H | – | H | 21 ± 2 | ||
| H | H | OH | OH | Cl | – | H | ≈200 | ||
| H | H | OH | OH | H | – | Cl | 55 ± 2 | ||
| H | Cl | OH | OH | H | – | Cl | 43 ± 3 | ||
| H | H | OH | OH | Cl | – | Cl | 34 ± 3 | ||
| H | H | OMe | OH | H | – | H | 156 ± 5 | ||
| H | H | H | OMe | H | – | H | ≈200 | ||
| H | H | OMe | OMe | H | – | H | <20%*200 μM | ||
| H | Rutinose | OH | OH | H | – | H | <20%*200 μM | ||
| – | H | H | – | – | – | – | 45 ± 3%*200 μM | ||
| – | H | OH | – | – | – | – | 35 ± 4%*200 μM | ||
| – | OH | OH | – | – | – | – | |||
| Positive control: | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 607 ± 56 |
Inhibitory activity (mean ± SEM %) at the highest tested concentration (in superscript).
Figure 2.Lineweaver–Burk double reciprocal plots of α-glucosidase inhibition by A5 (A), B3 (B), C7 (C), D8 (quercetin) (D), D10 (E), E3 (taxifolin) (F) and acarbose (G).
Figure 3.Predicted binding poses for acarbose (A) and flavones A5 (B), B1 and B3 (C), C7 (D), D8 (quercetin) (E), D10 (F) and E3 (taxifolin) (G). Hydrogen bonds are represented by dashed lines. (B) B1 is coloured salmon and B3 light blue. The residues that establish the most relevant interactions are also shown. Asp214 and Glu276 are the catalytic residues that participate in the hydrolysis reaction. Asp349 is also a conserved residue.
Figure 4.Potential flavonoids ‘substitution pattern that contributes to increase the α-glucosidase inhibition.