| Literature DB >> 30678364 |
Kamila Czarnecka1, Małgorzata Girek2, Paweł Kręcisz3, Robert Skibiński4, Kamil Łątka5, Jakub Jończyk6, Marek Bajda7, Jacek Kabziński8, Ireneusz Majsterek9, Piotr Szymczyk10, Paweł Szymański11.
Abstract
Here we report the two-step synthesis of 8 new cyclopentaquinoline derivatives as modifications of the tetrahydroacridine structure. Next, the biological assessment of each of them was performed. Based on the obtained results we identified 6-chloro-N-[2-(2,3-dihydro-1H-cyclopenta[b]quinolin-9-ylamino)-hexyl]]-nicotinamide hydrochloride (3e) as the most promising compound with inhibitory potencies against EeAChE and EqBuChE in the low nanomolar level 67 and 153 nM, respectively. Moreover, 3e compound is non-hepatotoxic, able to inhibit amyloid beta aggregation, and shows a mix-type of cholinesterase's inhibition. The mixed type of inhibition of the compound was confirmed by molecular modeling. Then, yeast three-hybrid (Y3H) technology was used to confirm the known ligand-receptor interactions. New derivatives do not show antioxidant activity (confirmed by the use of two different tests). A pKa assay method was developed to identify the basic physicochemical properties of 3e compound. A LogP assay confirmed that 3e compound fulfills Lipinsky's rule of five.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors; beta amyloid; molecular modeling; yeast three-hybrid technology (Y3H) test
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30678364 PMCID: PMC6386991 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20030498
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Scheme 1Synthesis of compounds 2a–2h and 3a–3h. Reagents: (a) 6-chloronicotinic acid, CDMT, N-methylmorpholine, THF; (b) HCl/ether.
Inhibitory effects of compounds 3a–3h against AChE and BuChE activity and on d radical scavenging activities.
| Comp. | AChE | BuChE | Selectivity for | Selectivity | ABTS | DPPH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.453 ± 0.018 | 0.124 ± 0.037 | 0.3 | 3.6 | 3.1 ± 0.18 | 14.3 ± 1.46 |
|
| 0.245 ± 0.038 | 0.618 ± 0.043 | 2.5 | 0.4 | 1.9 ± 0.30 | NA |
|
| 0.589 ± 0.072 | 0.662 ± 0.053 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 3.6 ± 0.66 | NA |
|
| 0.162 ± 0.018 | 0.534 ± 0.023 | 3.3 | 0.3 | 4.8 ± 0.66 | NA |
|
| 0.067 ± 0.002 | 0.153 ± 0.020 | 2.3 | 0.4 | NA | NA |
|
| 0.074 ± 0.004 | 0.062 ± 0.003 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 10.5 ± 1.79 | NA |
|
| 0.073 ± 0.005 | 0.042 ± 0.006 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 4.8 ± 0.34 | NA |
|
| 0.071 ± 0.005 | 0.094 ± 0.006 | 1.3 | 0.8 | NA | NA |
| THA | 0.081 ± 0.009 | 0.020 ± 0.002 | 0.24 | 4.13 | NA | NA |
| Trolox | - | - | - | - | 0.040 ± 0.006 | 0.0049 ± 0.0004 |
a IC50: 50% inhibitory concentration (means ± SD of three independent experiments) of AChE. b IC50: 50% inhibitory concentration (means ± SD of three independent experiments) of BuChE. c Selectivity for AChE: IC50(BuChE)/IC50(AChE). d Selectivity for BuChE: IC50(AChE)/IC50(BuChE). * NA = inactive (FRS50 more than 20 mM).
Figure 1Reciprocal plots for EeAChE inhibition by compound 3e.
Inhibition of Aβ1–42 self-aggregation by compound 3e at different concentrations by Thioflavin T assay (λexc = 446 nm; λem = 490 nm).
| 3e Compound Concentration (µM) | Inhibition of Aβ Aggregation (%) |
|---|---|
| Control sample | 0.00 |
| 10 | 40 ± 4.8 |
| 25 | 63 ± 4.2 |
| 50 | 72 ± 2.9 |
| 100 | 79 ± 3.2 |
Figure 2Scatterplots of mathematical formula results obtained for 3e compound with regression equation. The regression line is marked on the continuous line. Dashed lines determine the area of regression belt at the confidence level 0.95. (A) plot pH vs pH-log(Ax−Aa)/(Ab−Ax) 332/343 nm; (B) plot pH vs. pH-log(Ax−Aa)/(Ab−Ax) 343/332 nm; (C) plot pH vs. pH-log(Ax−Aa)/(Ab−Ax) 332/343 nm; (D) plot pH vs. pH-log(Ax−Aa)/(Ab−Ax) 343/332 nm.
Figure 3Calibration curve for logP assay. The regression line is marked on the continuous line. Dashed lines determine the area of regression belt at the confidence level 0.95.
Experimental and computer estimated pKa and logP values of compound 3e.
| Parameter | Experimental | ChemAxon | ACD/Percepta |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 8.53 | 8.89 | 9.01 |
|
| 11.34 | 13.78 | 13.74 |
|
| 3.990 | 4.43 | 5.00 |
Compounds used to perform calibration curve.
| Substance Name | Experimental Properties | |
|---|---|---|
| logP [ | pKa | |
| Procainamide HCl | 0.88 | 9.32 [ |
| Salicynamide | 1.28 | 8.37 [ |
| Tacrine | 2.71 | 9.95 [ |
| Thymol | 3.3 | - |
| Naphtalene | 3.6 | - |
| Promazine HCl | 4.55 | 9.36 [ |
| Prometazine HCl | 4.81 | 9.1 [ |
| Chlorpromazine HCl | 5.41 | 9.3 [ |
| Thiorydazine HCl | 5.9 | 9.5 [ |
Cells viability (%) after treatment with H2O2 (100 µM) or mixture of rotenone (30 µM) and oligomycin A (10 µM) at the chosen concentrations of 3e. Cells viability was determined by MTT test. Data were expressed as the mean ± SD. Experiment was done in quadruplicate and repeated three times.
| Comp. | Concentration | 10 µM | 1 µM | 0.1 µM | 0.01 µM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H2O2 100 µM | % cell viability | |||||
|
| 14.3 ± 1.42 | 18.4 ± 2.15 | 29.2 ± 0.41 | 60.4 ± 3.13 | ||
| Trolox | 99.2 ± 3.30 | 99.4 ± 9.81 | 98.6 ± 1.36 | 96.4 ± 1.51 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Rotenone/Oligomycin A 30/10 µM | % cell viability | |||||
|
| Pre-incubation | 34.2 ± 1.73 | 40.2 ± 2.13 | 44.5 ± 3.52 | 48.9 ± 4.42 | |
| Co-incubation | 40.6 ± 4.91 | 42.6 ± 4.87 | 43.9 ± 4.76 | 45.6 ± 3.51 | ||
| Trolox | Pre-incubation | 44.3 ± 3.73 | 46.4 ± 2.06 | 47.9 ± 4.48 | 46.2 ± 3.65 | |
| Co-incubation | 48.1 ± 8.01 | 50.3 ± 8.11 | 50.8 ± 6.98 | 42.1 ± 6.28 | ||
Figure 4Binding mode of compound 3e with acetylcholinesterase (A) and butyrylcholinesterase (B).
Figure 5Binding mode of compound 3g with acetylcholinesterase (A) and butyrylcholinesterase (B).