Literature DB >> 30702122

Molecular mechanism and binding free energy of doxorubicin intercalation in DNA.

Bahaa Jawad1, Lokendra Poudel, Rudolf Podgornik, Nicole F Steinmetz, Wai-Yim Ching.   

Abstract

The intercalation process of binding doxorubicin (DOX) in DNA is studied by extensive MD simulations. Many molecular factors that control the binding affinity of DOX to DNA to form a stable complex are inspected and quantified by employing continuum solvation models for estimating the binding free energy. The modified MM-PB(GB)SA methodology provides a complete energetic profile of ΔGele, ΔGvDW, ΔGpolar, ΔGnon-polar, TΔStotal, ΔGdeform, ΔGcon, and ΔGion. To identify the sequence specificity of DOX, two different DNA sequences, d(CGATCG) or DNA1 and d(CGTACG) or DNA2, with one molecule (1 : 1 complex) or two molecule (2 : 1 complex) configurations of DOX were selected in this study. Our results show that the DNA deformation energy (ΔGdeform), the energy cost from translational and rotational entropic contributions (TΔStran+rot), the total electrostatic interactions (ΔGpolar-PB/GB + ΔGele) of incorporation, the intramolecular electrostatic interactions (ΔGele) and electrostatic polar solvation interactions (ΔGpolar-PB/GB) are all unfavorable to the binding of DOX to DNA. However, they are overcome by at least five favorable interactions: the van der Waals interactions (ΔGvDW), the non-polar solvation interaction (ΔGnon-polar), the vibrational entropic contribution (TΔSvib), and the standard concentration dependent free energies of DOX (ΔGcon) and the ionic solution (ΔGion). Specifically, the van der Waals interaction appears to be the major driving force to form a stable DOX-DNA complex. We also predict that DOX has stronger binding to DNA1 than DNA2. The DNA deformation penalty and entropy cost in the 2 : 1 complex are less than those in the 1 : 1 complex, thus they indicate that the 2 : 1 complex is more stable than the 1 : 1 complex. We have calculated the total binding free energy (BFE) (ΔGt-sim) using both MM-PBSA and MM-GBSA methods, which suggests a more stable DOX-DNA complex at lower ionic concentration. The calculated BFE from the modified MM-GBSA method for DOX-DNA1 and DOX-DNA2 in the 1 : 1 complex is -9.1 and -5.1 kcal mol-1 respectively. The same quantities from the modified MM-PBSA method are -12.74 and -8.35 kcal mol-1 respectively. The value of the total BFE ΔGt-sim in the 1 : 1 complex is in reasonable agreement with the experimental value of -7.7 ± 0.3 kcal mol-1.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30702122     DOI: 10.1039/c8cp06776g

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Chem Chem Phys        ISSN: 1463-9076            Impact factor:   3.676


  22 in total

1.  A novel method to detect intracellular metabolite alterations in MCF-7 cells by doxorubicin induced cell death.

Authors:  Ajay Kumar; Sheetal Patel; Devyani Bhatkar; Sachin C Sarode; Nilesh Kumar Sharma
Journal:  Metabolomics       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 4.290

2.  Targeting ebola virus VP40 protein through novel inhibitors: exploring the structural and dynamic perspectives on molecular landscapes.

Authors:  Shama Khan; Zeynab Fakhar; Aijaz Ahmad
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 1.810

3.  Synthesis and characterization of a novel pH-responsive drug-releasing nanocomposite hydrogel for skin cancer therapy and wound healing.

Authors:  Andrea Gonsalves; Pranjali Tambe; Duong Le; Dheeraj Thakore; Aniket S Wadajkar; Jian Yang; Kytai T Nguyen; Jyothi U Menon
Journal:  J Mater Chem B       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 6.331

4.  Self-Assembled Maslinic Acid Attenuates Doxorobucin Induced Cytotoxicity via Nrf2 Signaling Pathway: An In Vitro and In Silico Study in Human Healthy Cells.

Authors:  Jhimli Banerjee; Sk Nurul Hasan; Sovan Samanta; Biplab Giri; Braja Gopal Bag; Sandeep Kumar Dash
Journal:  Cell Biochem Biophys       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 2.989

5.  Lysophosphatidic acid protects cervical cancer HeLa cells from apoptosis induced by doxorubicin hydrochloride.

Authors:  Xibo Wang; Haihua Wang; Xiaoxiao Mou; Yilin Xu; Wenbo Han; Aimin Huang; Yanwei Li; Hui Jiang; Xiaoyun Yang; Zhenbo Hu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 3.111

6.  Evaluating Radioactive Analogs of Doxorubicin to Quantify ChemoFilter Binding and Whole-Body Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Drug Biodistribution.

Authors:  Parth Kumar; Colin Yee; Joseph E Blecha; Thomas R Hayes; Bridget F Kilbride; Carol Stillson; Aaron D Losey; Eric Mastria; Caroline D Jordan; Tony L Huynh; Terilyn Moore; Mark W Wilson; Henry F VanBrocklin; Steven W Hetts
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 3.682

7.  Binding Interactions between Receptor-Binding Domain of Spike Protein and Human Angiotensin Converting Enzyme-2 in Omicron Variant.

Authors:  Bahaa Jawad; Puja Adhikari; Rudolf Podgornik; Wai-Yim Ching
Journal:  J Phys Chem Lett       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 6.888

8.  Functionalization of Polyethyleneimine with Hollow Cyclotriveratrylene and Its Subsequent Supramolecular Interaction with Doxorubicin.

Authors:  Carmine Coluccini; Yoke Mooi Ng; Yves Ira A Reyes; Hsin-Yi Tiffany Chen; Yit Lung Khung
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 4.411

9.  Repeated Remote Ischemic Conditioning Reduces Doxorubicin-Induced Cardiotoxicity.

Authors:  Quan He; Fangfei Wang; Thomas D Ryan; Meghana Chalasani; Andrew N Redington
Journal:  JACC CardioOncol       Date:  2020-03-17

10.  Computational Design of Miniproteins as SARS-CoV-2 Therapeutic Inhibitors.

Authors:  Bahaa Jawad; Puja Adhikari; Kun Cheng; Rudolf Podgornik; Wai-Yim Ching
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.