| Literature DB >> 29597255 |
Graziela Rangel Silveira1, Karoline Azerêdo Campelo2, Gleice Rangel Silveira Lima3, Lais Pessanha Carvalho4, Solange Silva Samarão5, Olney Vieira-da-Motta6, Leda Mathias7, Carlos Roberto Ribeiro Matos8, Ivo José Curcino Vieira9, Edesio José Tenório de Melo10, Edmilson José Maria11.
Abstract
Most cinnamic acids, their esters, amides, aldehydes, and alcohols present several therapeutic actions through anti-inflammatory, antitumor, and inhibitory activity against a great variety of microorganisms. In this work, eight amines derived from cinnamic acid were synthesized and tested against host cells infected with Toxoplasma gondii and the bacteria Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus epidermidis, and three strains of Staphylococcus aureus. Compounds 3 and 4 showed the best result against intracellular T. gondii, presenting antiparasitic activity at low concentrations (0.38 and 0.77 mM). The antibacterial activity of these compounds was also evaluated by the agar microdilution method, and amides 2 and 5 had a minimum inhibitory concentration of 250 µg mL-1 against two strains of S. aureus (ATCC 25923 and bovine strain LSA 88). These also showed synergistic action along with a variety of antibiotics, demonstrating that amines derived from cinnamic acid have potential as pharmacological agents.Entities:
Keywords: acrylamides; antibiotic; antiparasitic; synthetic amides
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29597255 PMCID: PMC6017938 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23040774
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chemical structure of compounds 1–8.
Figure 2Toxicity in uninfected LLC-MK2 cells. The black arrow indicates nuclei with physiological appearance. White arrows indicate nuclear morphological changes indicative of toxicity. (a) Control case; In (b–d) a gradual increase of cytotoxicity is visible, associated with significant nuclear disorders and a decrease of the cellular number.
Cytotoxicity of the compounds 1 and 3–7 in LLC-MK2 uninfected cells.
| Cytotoxicity (Uninfected Culture) a | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (mM) | |||||
| Untreated | 0.17 | 0.35 | 1.69 | 2.92 | |
| 226 ± 09 | - | 229 ± 13 | 112 ± 14 | 0 | |
| 196 ± 12 | - | 194 ± 11 | - | 0 | |
| 196 ± 12 | 200 ± 21 | - | 0 | 0 | |
| 226 ± 09 | - | - | 217 ± 30 | 71 ± 10 | |
| 206 ± 10 | - | - | - | 209 ± 12 | |
| 206 ± 10 | - | - | - | 209 ± 17 | |
a Values means ± SD.
Figure 3Optical microscopy of the biological test showing infected LLC-MK2 cells. The black arrows point to the cell nucleus; the white arrows indicate the parasitophorous vacuole. (a) Control case. Reduction of infection with the elimination of the parasite in the cells treated with (b) compound 1 and (c) 7.
Effect of compounds 1 and 3–7 on cultures of LLC-MK2 cells infected and multiplication of T. gondii.
| Cytotoxicity (Infected Culture) a | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drugs | Concentration (mM) | Uninfected Cells | Infected Cells | Total of Cells | Parasites |
| 0 | 83 ± 8 | 28 ± 4 | 111 ± 12 | 179 ± 29 | |
| 0.18 | 129 ± 6 | 24 ± 4 | 153 ± 10 | 166 ± 15 | |
| 0 | 108 ± 19 | 51 ± 6 | 159 ± 25 | 254 ± 38 | |
| 0.077 | 147 ± 3 | 23 ± 5 | 170 ± 8 | 127 ± 32 | |
| 0 | 108 ± 19 | 51 ± 6 | 159 ± 25 | 254 ± 38 | |
| 0.038 | 149 ± 24 | 35 ± 10 | 184 ± 34 | 134 ± 32 | |
| 0 | 83 ± 8 | 28 ± 4 | 111 ± 12 | 179 ± 29 | |
| 0.16 | 114 ± 3 | 12 ± 1 | 126 ± 4 | 82 ± 19 | |
| 0 | 79 ± 7 | 37 ± 3 | 116 ± 10 | 174 ± 16 | |
| 1.33 | 89 ± 12 | 31 ± 5 | 120 ± 17 | 83 ± 23 | |
| 0 | 79 ± 7 | 37 ± 3 | 116 ± 10 | 174 ± 16 | |
| 1.46 | 104 ± 9 | 28 ± 3 | 132 ± 12 | 98 ± 12 | |
a Values means ± SD.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of compounds 1–8 against different bacterial strains.
| Compound | Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) in µg mL−1 a | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATCC 15442 | LSA 88 | ATCC 33591 | ATCC 25923 | ATCC 25922 | ATCC 12228 | |
| >250 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| >250 | >250 | >250 | 250 | − | >250 | |
| >250 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| >250 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| >250 | 250 | − | − | − | − | |
| − | − | − | − | >250 | >250 | |
| − | − | − | − | >250 | >250 | |
| − | − | − | − | − | − | |
a The maximum concentration tested was 250 µg mL−1. Gentamicin was used as control antibiotic (concentration 10 µg mL−1). Tests were performed in triplicate. - No inhibition at the concentration tested. >250 indicates that there was sensitivity, but the concentration should be higher than 250 µg mL−1 for a count of fewer than 300 colonies.
Antibiogram (average halo diameter expressed in mm) of strains of S. aureus treated with amides derived from cinnamic acid and submitted to 12 different antibiotics. Assessed by agar gel diffusion method [23].
| Strains | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATCC 25923 | LSA 88 | |||
| Antibiotic | Control | 2 | Control | 5 |
| 16.74Bg | 23.98Ad | 17.50Ae | 17.45Ai | |
| 27.05Ba | 36.99Aa | 33.17Aab | 34.64Ab | |
| 25.00Bbc | 37.00Aa | 28.05Bc | 29.68Ade | |
| 21.40Be | 34.42Aab | 26.76Ac | 27.17Ag | |
| 23.70Bcd | 34.86Aab | 28.09Bc | 28.90Aef | |
| 20.87Be | 32.42Aabc | 25.73Bc | 27.99Afg | |
| 24.95Bbc | 32.88Aab | 33.98Aab | 31.36Bc | |
| 25.69Bab | 33.40Aab | 36.11Aa | 36.21Aa | |
| 21.37Be | 30.24Abc | 26.72Ac | 26.99Ag | |
| 26.81Ba | 35.52Aab | 35.06Aab | 35.62Aab | |
| 19.02Bf | 26.61Acd | 21.31Ad | 21.32Ah | |
| 22.40Bde | 33.33Aab | 32.49Ab | 30.91Acd | |
The averages followed by the same small letter in the column (antibiotics) and a capital letter on the line (treatment with amines derived from cinnamic acid) do not differ from each other. Tukey test, 1 and 5% probability. VAN: Vancomycin; AMP: Ampicillin; SUT: Sulfazotrim; CLI: Clindamycin; CFX: Cefalexin; ERI: Erythromycin; AMO: Amoxicillin; PEN: Penicillin G; GEN: Gentamicin; AMC: Amoxicillin/ Clavulanic acid; OXA: Oxacillin; TET: Tetracycline.