| Literature DB >> 30921370 |
Magdalena Malinowska1, Barbara Miroslaw2, Elzbieta Sikora1, Jan Ogonowski1, Agnieszka M Wojtkiewicz3, Maciej Szaleniec3, Monika Pasikowska-Piwko4, Irena Eris4.
Abstract
The purpose of the research was to obtain new derivatives of natural triterpene lupeol and to evaluate their potential as active substances in the treatment of skin damage. Four new lupeol esters (propionate, succinate, isonicotinate and acetylsalicylate) and lupeol acetate were obtained using an eco-friendly synthesis method. In the esterification process, the commonly used hazardous reagents in this type of synthesis were replaced by safe ones. This unconventional, eco-friendly, method is particularly important because the compounds obtained are potentially active substances in skin care formulations. Even trace amounts of hazardous reagents can have a toxic effect on damaged or irritated tissues. The molecular structure of the esters were confirmed by 1H NMR, 13C NMR and IR spectroscopy methods. Their crystal structures were determined using XRD method. To complete the analysis of their characteristics, physicochemical properties (melting point, lipophilicity, water solubility) and biological activity of the lupeol derivatives were studied. Results of an irritant potential test, carried out on Reconstructed Human Epidermis (RHE), confirmed that the synthesized lupeol derivatives are not cytotoxic and they stimulate a process of human cell proliferation. The safety of use for tested compounds was determined in a cell viability test (cytotoxicity detection kit based on the measurement of lactate dehydrogenase activity) for keratinocytes and fibroblasts. The results obtained showed that the modification of lupeol structure improve its bioavailability and activity. All of the esters penetrate the stratum corneum and the upper layers of the dermis better than the maternal lupeol. Lupeol isonicotinate, acetate and propionate were the most effective compounds in a stimulation of the human skin cell proliferation process. This combination resulted in an increase in the concentration of cells of more than 30% in comparison to control samples. The results indicate that the chemical modification of lupeol allows to obtain promising active substances for treatment of skin damage, including thermal, chemical and radiation burns.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30921370 PMCID: PMC6438679 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214216
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The structures of lupeol (1) and synthesized esters (2-lupeol acetate, 3-lupeol propionate, 4-lupeol isonicotinate, 5-lupeol succinate, 6-lupeol acetylsalicylate).
Lupeol esters physicochemical properties (MP–melting point, RT- retention time, RF—retardation factor).
| No | Name | MP [ºC] | Purity | Reaction yield [%] | UV/VIS max [nm] | RT [min] | RF [–] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lupeol | 213–215 | 96.8 | - | 208.8 | 8.9 | 0.65 | |
| Lupeol acetate | 216–219 | 95.1 | 85.4 | 207.8 | 9.0 | 0.72 | |
| Lupeol propionate | 220–222 | 93.3 | 70.9 | 208.5 | 10.2 | 0.78 | |
| Lupeol isonicotinate | 179–183 | 95.7 | 66.4 | 209.8 | 10.4 | 0.81 | |
| Lupeol succinate | 221–223 | 96.2 | 69.2 | 208.3 | 8.9 | 0.68 | |
| Lupeol acetylsalicylate | 226–229 | 92.2 | 53.0 | 209.3 | 9.4 | 0.77 |
Fig 2General scheme of the experiment with RHE (Reconstructed Human Epidermis) model and lupeol derivates (PBS–phosphate buffer, i-PrOH–isopropanol, RT–room temperature, MTT—3-(4,5-methylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide, OD–optical density).
Fig 3Molecular structures of 2 (lupeol acetate), 3 (lupeol propionate) and 5 (lupeol succinate) with shown two positions of the disordered ester group.
Crystal data and structure refinement for 2- lupeol acetate, 3- lupeol propionate and 5-lupeol succinate.
| ID | 2 | 3 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Empirical formula | C32H52O2 | C33H54O2 | C34H54O4 |
| Crystal system | orthorhombic | monoclinic | monoclinic |
| Space group | |||
| 8.0837(2) | 14.341(2) | 14.269(2) | |
| 21.6854(5) | 6.5377(7) | 6.6401(8) | |
| 47.385(1) | 30.880(3) | 31.787(5) | |
| 90 | 96.70(1) | 96.31(1) | |
| Volume/Å3 | 8306.5(3) | 2875.4(5) | 2993.6(7) |
| 12, 3 | 4, 1 | 4, 1 | |
| 1.124 | 1.115 | 1.169 | |
| 0.508 | 0.502 | 0.576 | |
| 3120.0 | 1072.0 | 1160.0 | |
| Crystal size/mm3 | 0.4 × 0.08 × 0.05 | 0.3 × 0.15 × 0.05 | 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.05 |
| Reflections collected | 58157 | 20119 | 9772 |
| Independent reflections | 15034 [ | 5193 [ | 4597 [ |
| Data/restraints/parameters | 15034/0/967 | 5193/1/324 | 4597/1/366 |
| Goodness-of-fit on | 1.016 | 1.080 | 1.047 |
| Final | |||
| Final | |||
| Largest diff. peak/hole / e Å-3 | 0.36/-0.26 | 0.52/-0.34 | 0.61/-0.44 |
| Flack | 0.1(2) | 0.1(5) | 0.2(5) |
| Hooft | 0.1(2) | 0.6(3) | 0.1(4) |
| CCDC No. | 1487997 | 1487998 | 1487999 |
Lupeol esters lipophilic properties (RM0, ACD/logP, XlogP3, AlogP and logSw), RT- retention time, Rf—Retardation factor.
| No | Name | logP (RM0) | ACD/logP | XlogP3 PubMed | AlogP | ACD/logD | Chemaxon logD | logSw |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lupeol | 7.67+0.07 | 10.98+/- 0.38 | 9.9 | 7.403 | 9.41/ | 7.45 | -8.757 |
| 2 | Lupeol acetate | 8.12+0.03 | 11.87+/- 0.40 | 10.4 | 7.782 | 10.92/ | 7.889 | -9.565 |
| 3 | Lupeol propionate | 8.23+0.09 | 12.41+/- 0.40 | - | 8.449 | - | 8.59 | -9.994 |
| 4 | Lupeol isonicotinate | 7.98+0.04 | 12,58+/- 0,41 | - | 7,627 | - | 8.73 | -9.998 |
| 5 | Lupeol succinate | 8.34+0.08 | 11.49+/- 0.53 | 10.3 | 7.627 | 8.99/ | 4.72 | -8.479 |
| 6 | Lupeol acetylsalicylate | 9.76+0.08 | 13.17+/- 0.57 | - | 9.214 | - | 9.55 | -10.005 |
The selected ADMET calculations for lupeol (1) and its derivatives (2-lupeol acetate, 3-lupeol propionate, 4-lupeol isonicotinate, 5-lupeol succinate, 6-lupeol acetylsalicylate).
| ID | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.95 | 2.00 | 0.82 | 0.17 | 24.38 | 0.03 | |
| 1.42 | 0.67 | 0.18 | 0.32 | 1.63 | 0.01 | |
| 7.48 | 7.78 | 8.42 | 6.43 | 6.43 | 9.16 | |
| 3.05 | 1.70 | 1.33 | 1.06 | 1.55 | 0.29 |
Viability assay of the cells in vivo conditions after exposure to tested triterpenes 1–6.
| Method | Tested cells | Viability [%] / SD | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | NC | PC | ||
| Viability | 89.2 | 131.2/ | 133/ | 134.1/ | 120.0/ | 120.9/ | 100.0/ | 28.1/ | |
| LDH | keratinocytes | 91.6/ | 98.1/ | 94.7/ | 101/ | 93.2/ | 91.5/ | 101.0/ | - |
| fibroblasts | 100.0/ | 100.9/ | 101.1/ | 101/ | 102.0/ | 101/ | 100.6/ | - | |
(NC-negative control, PC–positive control), LDH cytotoxicity assay (SD-standard deviation, n = 3)