| Literature DB >> 30360426 |
Po-Yee Chung1, Pik-Ling Lam2, Yuan-Yuan Zhou3, Jessica Gasparello4, Alessia Finotti5, Adriana Chilin6, Giovanni Marzaro7, Roberto Gambari8, Zhao-Xiang Bian9, Wai-Ming Kwok10, Wai-Yeung Wong11, Xi Wang12, Alfred King-Yin Lam13, Albert Sun-Chi Chan14, Xingshu Li15, Jessica Yuen-Wuen Ma16, Chung-Hin Chui17, Kim-Hung Lam18, Johnny Cheuk-On Tang19.
Abstract
Quinoline core has been shown to possess a promising role in the development of anticancer agents. However, the correlation between its broad spectrum of bioactivity and the underlying mechanism of actions is poorly understood. The present study, with the use of bioinformatics approaches, reported a series of designed molecules which integrated quinoline core and sulfonyl moiety, with the objective of evaluating the substituent and linker effects on anticancer activities and associated mechanistic targets. We identified potent compounds (1h, 2h, 5 and 8) exhibiting significant anticancer effects towards liver cancer cells (Hep3B) with the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-5-(3-carboxymethoxyphenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium (MTS) relative values of cytotoxicity below 0.40, a value in the range of doxorubicin positive control with the value of 0.12. Bulky substituents and the presence of bromine atom, as well as the presence of sulfonamide linkage, are likely the favorable structural components for molecules exerting a strong anticancer effect. To the best of our knowledge, our findings obtained from chemical synthesis, in vitro cytotoxicity, bioinformatics-based molecular docking analysis (similarity ensemble approach, SEA),and electrophoretic mobility shift assay provided the first evidence in correlation to the anticancer activities of the selected compound 5 with the modulation on the binding of transcription factor NF-κB to its target DNA. Accordingly, compound 5 represented a lead structure for the development of quinoline-based NF-κB inhibitors and this work added novel information on the understanding of the mechanism of action for bioactive sulfonyl-containing quinoline compounds against hepatocellular carcinoma.Entities:
Keywords: NF-κB; anticancer; hepatocellular carcinoma; quinolines
Year: 2018 PMID: 30360426 PMCID: PMC6209864 DOI: 10.3390/cells7100177
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
Scheme 1Synthesis of 8-substituted sulfonyl-containing quinolines.
Bioactivity of the tested compounds (1–3) against liver cancer cell line Hep3B and the related docking results.
| Compound | MTS Relative Values a (Mean ± SD) | Log P b | Drug Score c | Nuclear Factor NF-κB p65 Subunit: |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1a | 1.05 ± 0.07 | 2.76 | 0.15 | 2.59 × 10−20 |
| 1b | 0.95 ± 0.03 | 4.10 | 0.37 | 4.01 × 10−21 |
| 1c | 0.99 ± 0.06 | 3.17 | 0.36 | 1.12 × 10−16 |
| 1d | 1.06 ± 0.08 | 3.19 | 0.38 | 2.38 × 10−12 |
| 1e | 1.01 ± 0.04 | 3.50 | 0.22 | 7.92 × 10−13 |
| 1f | 1.17 ± 0.05 | 3.50 | 0.36 | 7.92 × 10−13 |
| 1g | 0.71 ± 0.04 | 3.21 | 0.21 | 5.39 × 10−17 |
| 1h | 0.25 ± 0.03 | 3.27 | 0.10 | 8.61 × 10−7 |
| 2a | 1.08 ± 0.06 | 3.18 | 0.15 | 6.20 × 10−17 |
| 2b | 0.82 ± 0.02 | 3.59 | 0.33 | 9.52 × 10−18 |
| 2c | 1.16 ± 0.03 | 3.60 | 0.33 | 1.13 × 10−20 |
| 2d | 1.05 ± 0.08 | 3.61 | 0.34 | 1.01 × 10−15 |
| 2e | 1.05 ± 0.07 | 3.91 | 0.20 | 2.74 × 10−21 |
| 2f | 1.18 ± 0.005 | 3.90 | 0.33 | 1.46 × 10−18 |
| 2g | 0.78 ± 0.04 | 3.63 | 0.19 | 4.07 × 10−16 |
| 2h | 0.30 ± 0.04 | 3.66 | 0.09 | 7.92 × 10−13 |
| 3a | 1.04 ± 0.02 | 3.12 | 0.22 | 1.08 × 10−17 |
| 3b | 0.89 ± 0.08 | 3.49 | 0.20 | 7.19 × 10−15 |
a Cytotoxicity of all compounds 1 to 3 was determined against Hep3B cells using the cell proliferation assay (MTS assay). Cells were treated with the tested compounds at 15 μM for 48 h. Doxorubicin (Dox) was used as positive control while dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) was used as vehicle control. Each treatment was performed in three technical and independent replicates, and the average reading to the vehicle control was calculated as the relative MTS value. MTS relative values of DMSO and positive control (Dox) were determined as 1.00 ± 0.04 and 0.120 ± 0.004, respectively. b Estimated by the ALOGPS 2.1 algorithm [19]. c Estimated by the Osiris Property Explorer (https://www.organic-chemistry.org/prog/peo/).d Estimated by the similarity ensemble approach (SEA) [20].
Figure 1The MTS relative values of compounds 1 to 3 were compared with the vehicle control (DMSO) and the positive control (doxorubicin, Dox). *: compounds with MTS relative values <0.40.
Bioactivity of the tested compounds (4–8) against Hep3B cell lines and the related docking results.
| Compound | MTS Relative Values a (Mean ± SD) | Log P b | Drug Score c | Nuclear Factor NF-κB p65 Subunit: |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 0.70 ± 0.07 | 2.60 | 0.45 | 4.63 × 10−24 |
| 5 | 0.230 ± 0.003 | 2.40 | 0.60 | 9.05 × 10−71 |
| 6 | 0.868 ± 0.009 | 3.04 | 0.41 | 4.45 × 10−20 |
| 7 | 0.76 ± 0.03 | 2.96 | 0.37 | 1.27 × 10−36 |
| 8 | 0.38 ± 0.01 | 3.66 | 0.13 | 5.18 × 10−9 |
a Cytotoxicity of all compounds were determined against Hep3B cells using the cell proliferation assay (MTS assay) as described in the legend of Table 1. Each treatment was performed in three technical and independent replicates. MTS relative values of DMSO and positive control (Dox) were determined as 1.00 ± 0.04 and 0.120 ± 0.004, respectively. b Estimated by the ALOGPS 2.1 algorithm [19]. c Estimated by the Osiris Property Explorer (https://www.organic-chemistry.org/prog/peo/). d Estimated by the similarity ensemble approach (SEA) [20].
Figure 2The MTS relative values of compounds 4 to 8 were compared with the vehicle control (DMSO) and the positive control (doxorubicin, Dox). * compounds with MTS relative values <0.40.
Figure 3Morphological changes of (A) Hep3B cells after the 48 h treatment with compound 5 (at 1.8 μM), in comparison with (B) the vehicle control (DMSO) and (C) the positive control, doxorubicin (Dox, at 1.8 μM). Cancer cells showed shrinkage after the treatment of compound 5 and doxorubicin. The cells were stained by crystal violet. Each treatment was repeated in technical triplicates.
Cytotoxicity of compound 5 against three human carcinoma cell lines †.
| Cell Line | MTS50 Values (μM) (Mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Dox | |
| Hep3B | 2.91 ± 0.09 | 0.27 ± 0.02 |
| SLMT-1 | 6.53 ± 0.06 | 0.41 ± 0.03 |
| MCF-7 | 1.23 ± 0.03 | 0.28 ± 0.04 |
† MTS assay was used to evaluate the cytotoxicity of compound 5 on cancer cells. MTS50 is defined as the concentration of the test agent required to reduce the MTS activity by 50% when compared with the vehicle treated control. Each treatment was performed in three technical and independent replicates and the corresponding MTS50 values of compound 5 and doxorubicin (Dox) were obtained for the three human carcinoma cell lines, and treated for 48 h.
Figure 4Structure-and-activity relationship of the designed and prepared sulfonyl-containing quinolines for studying both the linker and substituent effects on the anticancer activity.
Figure 5Results of docking simulation between compound 5 and NF-κB. Compound 5 was docked in NF-κB using the previously reported method. (A) Docking pose of inhibitor (gray carbon colored stick) in NF-κB (pink ribbon). (B) Details of the binding mode. Compound 5 established two H-bonds with lysine 275 and a face-to-face interaction with arginine 305. The distance and the interaction geometry between quinoline and arginine are consistent with literature data. (C) Comparison between the binding mode, previously reported, for psoralene compounds and the herein considered compound 5.
Figure 6Effects of compound 5 on NF-κB/DNA interactions. (A) Compound 5 was pre-incubated for 20 min at the indicated concentrations with NF-κB p50 (Active Motif, cat.31101) and then a further 20 min incubation period was performed after adding the 32P-labelled NF-κB probe. Then the complexes were separated by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. (B) Representative data showing the effects of trimethylangelicin (TMA) on the generation of NF-κB/DNA complexes (upper part of the panel). In the lower part of the panel the comparison of the effects of compound 5, TMA and corilagin is shown. (C) The same protocol described for panel A was followed, however, in this case, compound 5 was first incubated for 20 min with the 32P-labelled NF-κB probe, after which the NF-κB p50 protein was added. (D) The effects of compound 5 were not dependent from DMSO, added in the EMSA reactions at a concentration corresponding to those of compound 5 incubations.