| Literature DB >> 30717397 |
Tu Cam Le1, Eun Ju Lee2, Jihye Lee3,4, Ahreum Hong5, Chae-Yoon Yim6, Inho Yang7, Hyukjae Choi8, Jungwook Chin9, Sung Jin Cho10, Jaeyoung Ko11, Hayoung Hwang12, Sang-Jip Nam13, William Fenical14.
Abstract
A cytotoxic alkaloidal meroterpenoid, saccharoquinoline (1), has been isolated from the fermentation broth of the marine-derived bacterium Saccharomonospora sp. CNQ-490. The planar structure of 1 was elucidated by 1D, 2D NMR, and MS spectroscopic data analyzes, while the relative configuration of 1 was defined through the interpretation of NOE spectroscopic data. Saccharoquinoline (1) is composed of a drimane-type sesquiterpene unit in combination with an apparent 6,7,8-trihydroxyquinoline-2-carboxylic acid. This combination of biosynthetic pathways was observed for the first time in natural microbial products. Saccharoquinoline (1) was found to have cytotoxicity against the HCT-116 cancer cell line by inducing G1 arrest, which leads to cell growth inhibition.Entities:
Keywords: Saccharomonospora sp.; cytotoxicity; marine natural product; meroterpenoid
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30717397 PMCID: PMC6410326 DOI: 10.3390/md17020098
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Figure 1Chemical structure of saccharoquinoline (1).
NMR spectroscopic data for saccharoquinoline (1) in DMSO-d6, δ in ppm a.
| No. | 1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COSY | HMBC | |||
| 1 | 38.5, CH2 | 0.99, brd; 1.83, d (14.3) | 2 | |
| 2 | 18.0, CH2 | 1.44, m c; 1.66, m c | 1, 3 | |
| 3 | 41.3, CH2 | 1.18 c; 1.39 c | 2 | |
| 4 | 32.8, C | |||
| 5 | 55.3, CH | 1.08 c | 4, 6, 10, 12, 14 | |
| 6 | 19.3, CH2 | 1.42, m c; 1.74, mc | 7 | |
| 7 | 40.3, CH2 | 1.73 c; 2.15, dt (12.3, 3.6) | 6 | |
| 8 | 78.1, C | |||
| 9 | 51.2, CH | 1.67 c | 11 | 8, 10, 11, 14, 15 |
| 10 | 36.6, C | |||
| 11 | 17.9, CH2 | 2.69, dd (16.8, 5.2); 2.91, dd (16.8, 13.1) | 9 | 8, 9, 1′, 6′ |
| 12 | 21.5, CH3 | 0.85, s | 3, 4, 5, 13 | |
| 13 | 33.2, CH3 | 0.90, s | 3, 4, 5, 12 | |
| 14 | 14.6, CH3 | 0.94, s | 1, 5, 9, 10 | |
| 15 | 20.3, CH3 | 1.18, s | 7, 8, 9 | |
| 1′ | 104.9, C | |||
| 2′ | 122.8, C | |||
| 3′ | 133.6, C | |||
| 4′ | 135.0, C | |||
| 5′ | 136.9, C | |||
| 6′ | 145.8, C | |||
| 7′ | 132.1, CH | 8.40, d (8.6) | 8′ | 1′, 3′, 9′ |
| 8′ | 116.9, CH | 7.92, d (8.6) | 7′ | 2′ |
| 9′ | 140.8, C | |||
| 10′ | 165.6, C | |||
| 4′-OH | 9.54, s | 3′, 4′, 5′ | ||
a 300 MHz for 1H NMR and 75 MHz for 13C NMR. b Numbers of attached protons were determined by analysis of 2D NMR spectroscopic data (500 MHz). c Overlapping signals.
Figure 2(A) COSY and key HMBC correlations. (B) Key NOESY correlations of saccharoquinoloine (1).
Figure 3Plausible biosynthetic pathway for saccharoquinoline (1) and thallusin (2).
Viability assay in several types of cancer cells and normal cells after treatment with saccharoquinoline (1) for 72 h.
| Cancer | Normal | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (μM) | Lung | Colon | Prostate | Liver | Skin | ||
| H1299 | A549 | HCT116 | PC-3 | HepG2 | BJ | ||
| DMSO (0.1%) | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
| Doxorubicin | 10 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 24 | 7 | 16 |
|
| 1 | 87 | 103 | 89 | 106 | 98 | 87 |
| 10 | 45 | 100 | 39 | 88 | 82 | 80 | |
| 25 | 29 | 81 | 25 | 46 | 71 | 57 | |
Figure 4Colon cancer cell (HCT116) growth in saccharoquinoline (1)-treated and vehicle-treated (DMSO, 0.1%) cells measured using live cell imaging. Doxorubicin treated cells were used as a control for cytotoxicity.
Figure 5Downregulation of cell cycle checkpoint proteins involved in the G1 phase transition to the S phase. HCT116 cells were treated with 1 (10 μM, +) for 24 hours or 48 hours, and with vehicle (DMSO, 0.1%). The expressions of CDK2, CDK4, CDK6, cyclin D1, and cyclin D3 were illustrated by Western blot analysis. GAPDH was used as the internal control.