| Literature DB >> 30960130 |
Khanittha Kerdpol1, Jintawee Kicuntod2, Peter Wolschann3,4,5, Seiji Mori6, Chompoonut Rungnim7, Manaschai Kunaseth8, Hisashi Okumura9, Nawee Kungwan10,11, Thanyada Rungrotmongkol12,13,14.
Abstract
2-Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HPβCD) has unique properties to enhance the stability and the solubility of low water-soluble compounds by inclusion complexation. An understanding of the structural properties of HPβCD and its derivatives, based on the number of 2-hydroxypropyl (HP) substituents at the α-d-glucopyranose subunits is rather important. In this work, replica exchange molecular dynamics simulations were performed to investigate the conformational changes of single- and double-sided HP-substitution, called 6-HPβCDs and 2,6-HPβCDs, respectively. The results show that the glucose subunits in both 6-HPβCDs and 2,6-HPβCDs have a lower chance of flipping than in βCD. Also, HP groups occasionally block the hydrophobic cavity of HPβCDs, thus hindering drug inclusion. We found that HPβCDs with a high number of HP-substitutions are more likely to be blocked, while HPβCDs with double-sided HP-substitutions have an even higher probability of being blocked. Overall, 6-HPβCDs with three and four HP-substitutions are highlighted as the most suitable structures for guest encapsulation, based on our conformational analyses, such as structural distortion, the radius of gyration, circularity, and cavity self-closure of the HPβCDs.Entities:
Keywords: 2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HPβCD); cavity self-closure; conformational change; replica exchange molecular dynamics (REMD)
Year: 2019 PMID: 30960130 PMCID: PMC6401915 DOI: 10.3390/polym11010145
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Figure 1Schematic representation of 2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HPβCD), which comprises seven glucopyranose units.
Figure 2Models introducing 2-hydroxypropyl (HP) groups at the O2 (red) and/or O6 (blue) positions on glucose subunits.
Model summary of introducing HP groups at the O2 and/or O6 positions on glucose subunits.
| Models | Degree of Substitution | O2 Substitution | O6 Substitution |
|---|---|---|---|
| βCD | 0.00 | None | None |
|
| |||
| Mon6-HPβCD | 0.14 | None | 1 (At glucose unit 1) |
| Di6-HPβCD | 0.28 | None | 2 (At glucose units 1 and 3) |
| Tri6-HPβCD | 0.43 | None | 3 (At glucose units 1, 3, and 5) |
| Tet6-HPβCD | 0.57 | None | 4 (At glucose units 1, 3, 5, and 7) |
| Hep6-HPβCD | 1.00 | None | 7 (At all glucose units) |
|
| |||
| Mon2Tet6-HPβCD | 0.71 | 1 (At glucose unit 4) | 4 (At glucose units 1, 3, 5, and 7) |
| Di2Tet6-HPβCD | 0.85 | 2 (At glucose units 2 and 6) | 4 (At glucose units 1, 3, 5, and 7) |
| Tri2Tet6-HPβCD | 1.00 | 3 (At glucose units 2, 4, and 6) | 4 (At glucose units 1, 3, 5, and 7) |
| Tet2Tet6-HPβCD | 1.14 | 4 (At glucose units 2, 4, 6, and 7) | 4 (At glucose units 1, 3, 5, and 7) |
Figure 3(a) Cyclodextrin (CD) fragment showing the atomic labels and important structural parameters, d[O2(i)–O3(i+1)], d[O4(i)–O4(i+1)], and θ[C6(i)–C2(i+1)–C6(i+1)]. (b) Set of diameters, d[Cg(Glu(i))–O4(i+3)], for circularity. (c) Set of d[Cg(βCD)–Cg(HP(i))] for studying cavity self-closure.
Figure 4(a) Contour graphs of the probability distributions in terms of free energy, (b) the probability of d, and (c) the probability of d from a total of 25,000 snapshots at 300 K of REMD simulations with the glycam06 force field for βCD and HPβCDs.
Figure 5The flipped conformations of βCD with different numbers of flip glucose subunits, which were selected from the simulation at 300 K.
The probability of different numbers of flip glucose subunits in βCD and HPβCDs, using the flip angle parameter, θ[C6(i)–C2(i+1)–C6(i+1)] at 300K (criteria: values higher than 90 degrees).
| Models | The Percentage of the Flip Angle (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No Flip | One Flip | Two Flips | |
| βCD | 58 | 35 | 7 |
|
| |||
| Mon6-HPβCD | 69 | 28 | 3 |
| Di6-HPβCD | 74 | 23 | 3 |
| Tri6-HPβCD | 75 | 24 | 1 |
| Tet6-HPβCD | 78 | 21 | 1 |
| Hep6-HPβCD | 73 | 25 | 2 |
|
| |||
| Mon2Tet6-HPβCD | 77 | 22 | 1 |
| Di2Tet6-HPβCD | 75 | 24 | 1 |
| Tri2Tet6-HPβCD | 70 | 28 | 2 |
| Tet2Tet6-HPβCD | 74 | 24 | 2 |
Figure 6The probability of the radius of gyration for βCD and all HPβCDs at 300 K.
The average and standard deviation of the circularity () of βCD and HPβCDs at 300 K, using REMD simulations.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| βCD | 0.727 ± 0.087 |
|
| |
| Mon6-HPβCD | 0.746 ± 0.085 |
| Di6-HPβCD | 0.751 ± 0.086 |
| Tri6-HPβCD | 0.814 ± 0.075 |
| Tet6-HPβCD | 0.815 ± 0.076 |
| Hep6-HPβCD | 0.773 ± 0.088 |
|
| |
| Mon2Tet6-HPβCD | 0.803 ± 0.075 |
| Di2Tet6-HPβCD | 0.767 ± 0.076 |
| Tri2Tet6-HPβCD | 0.785 ± 0.074 |
| Tet2Tet6-HPβCD | 0.742 ± 0.080 |
Figure 7The distance of the centers of mass between the βCD ring and HP group, d[Cg(βCD)–Cg(HP(i))] for Mon6-HPβCD at 300 K.
Figure 8The probability of n(HPinserted) from 25,000 snapshots (criteria: d[Cg(βCD)–Cg(HP(i))] < 3 Å) at 300 K for all HPβCDs.
Figure 9Example snapshots of different numbers of HP occupied in the CD cavity (criteria: d[Cg(βCD)–Cg(HP(i))] < 3 Å) for all HPβCDs at 300 K.