| Literature DB >> 31074292 |
Jorge Alberto Valle da Silva1, Eugenie Nepovimova2, Teodorico Castro Ramalho2,3, Kamil Kuca2, Tanos Celmar Costa França1,2.
Abstract
7-methoxytacrine-4-pyridinealdoxime (Entities:
Keywords: 7-MEOTA-4-PA; Acetylcholinesterase; NAC; VX; molecular modeling
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31074292 PMCID: PMC6522925 DOI: 10.1080/14756366.2019.1609953
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Enzyme Inhib Med Chem ISSN: 1475-6366 Impact factor: 5.051
Figure 1.Molecular structures of some aldoximes and its experimental results for VX-inhibited HssAChE, as reported by Nepovimova et al.
Figure 2.NAC approach representation. Interactions of conjugated pyridinium aldoximes with the PAS and CAS of VX-inhibited HssAChE just before the reactivation reaction,,.
Figure 3.Energy profile for the whole process of HssAChE reactivation. NAC: Near Attack Conformation; TS: Transition State.
Molecular structures of ligands predicted through protonation analysis.
| Aldoxime | Structure | Percentage of the micro species |
|---|---|---|
| 4-PA | 96.87% | |
| 2-PAM | 97.65% | |
| Obidoxime | 93.45% | |
| Hybrid 5C | 99.74% | |
| Obidoxime deprotonatedb | 6.44% | |
| Hybrid 5C deprotonated | 0.21% |
Calculated through Chemicalize web-based resource (https://chemicalize.com/welcome).
Deprotonated ligands considered to figure out better NACs.
Figure 4.(a) Number of selected poses calculated for each oxime and (b) correlation between % of poses and % of reactivation.
Docking results for poses selected for MD simulations regarding the ratio θ.
| Ligand | H-bond interactions | Hydrophobic interactions (π–π) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4-PA | 0.81 | 185.19 ± 8.37 | –328.58 | –18.89 | Tyr124 | Tyr72, Tyr124, Trp286, Phe295, Phe297, Phe299, Phe338 |
| 2-PAM | 0.77 | 190.17 ± 6.20 | –296.57 | –1.49 | Tyr124 | Tyr72, Tyr124, Trp286, Phe295, Phe297, Phe299, Phe338, Tyr341 |
| Obidoxime | 0.87 | 168.14 | –604.94 | –18.89 | Tyr124, Phe297/Ser298 (Main-chain), Ser298 | Tyr72, Trp86, Tyr124, Trp286, Phe295, Phe297, Phe299, Tyr337, Phe338, Tyr341 |
| Hybrid 5C | 0.51 | 312.58 ± 44.61 | –514.65 | –24.86 | Tyr124, Trp286 | Tyr72, Tyr124, Trp286, Phe295, Phe297, Tyr337, Phe338, Tyr341 |
| Obidoxime deprotonated | 0.89 | 159.32 | –639.46 | –22.74 | Tyr124, Phe297/Ser298 (Main-chain), Ser298 | Tyr72, Trp86, Tyr124, Trp286, Phe295, Phe297, Phe299, Tyr337, Phe338, Tyr341 |
| Hybrid 5C deprotonated | 0.47 | 347.10 ± 3.80 | –520.35 | –5.68 | Tyr124 | Tyr72, Tyr124, Trp286, His287, Phe295, Phe297, Tyr337, Phe338, Tyr341 |
Standard deviation expressed as the mean of quantity of poses selected by docking studies. Not computed for the poses of obidoxime without –C = NO− moiety (only one selected pose) and obidoxime deprotonated (only four selected poses).
Residues in bold highlight the interactions with PAS.
Hydrophobic interactions amongst aromatic rings in parallel.
As can be seen in Figure S3 of the Supporting Information.
As can be seen in Figure S4 of the Supporting Information.
Results of new docking studies to figure out better NACs using the deprotonated forms of obidoxime and hybrid 5C, as can be seen in Table 1 and Figure S5 of the Supporting Information.
Figure 5.Comparisons amongst NAC frames of the ligands with the highest θ.
Figure 6.Comparisons amongst the most significant contributions of key residues regarding the ligands (a) 4-PA, (b) 2-PAM, (c) obidoxime, (d) hybrid 5C, (e) obidoxime deprotonated, and (f) hybrid 5C deprotonated.
Figure 7.Binding energies computed for the NAC frames selected (Supporting Information Table S3).