| Literature DB >> 31720511 |
Alireza Barmak1, Khodabakhsh Niknam1, Gholamhossein Mohebbi2.
Abstract
A series of new quinazoline derivatives were designed and synthesized via a one-pot condensation reaction between isatoic anhydride and aromatic aldehydes with anilines using aluminum sulfate as a catalyst in refluxing ethanol. Their structures were confirmed by their physical, IR, 1H NMR, 13C NMR, and mass spectroscopy data and evaluated for some biological effects, including the antioxidant and α-glucosidase inhibitory activities as well as some in vivo hematological parameters. The ability of synthesized compounds in the inhibition of α-glucosidase was also investigated through the in silico study. The significant and important changes in some hematological tests were perceived. Notably, compound 4h showed more reducing effects on cholesterol and triglyceride levels. This molecule certainly has the potential to be developed as the antihyperlipemic compound. The tested compounds, in particular, compounds 4j and 4l, were found to be uniquely reducing blood sugar levels. The entire synthesized compounds showed the potent α-glucosidase inhibitory activity compared with acarbose as a standard material. Amongst, the compounds 4h and 4i showed the strongest enzyme inhibitory potentials than the standard drug acarbose. There was a good correlation between in vitro and in silico studies for ligands 4i and 4l. The majority of compounds presented a good radical scavenging activity, though the compound 4j exhibited the strongest activity, even to the standard of ascorbic acid. Further studies are required to determine whether these main compounds could be a potential treatment for diabetes and hyperlipidemia diseases.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31720511 PMCID: PMC6843711 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.9b01906
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Optimization of the Reaction Conditionsa
| entry | catalyst (mmol) | solvent | conditions | time (min) | yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ethanol | reflux | 600 | ||
| 2 | 0.01 | ethanol | R.T. | 80 | 32 |
| 3 | 0.01 | ethanol | 40 °C | 80 | 60 |
| 4 | 0.02 | ethanol | 55 °C | 80 | 72 |
| 5 | 0.02 | ethanol | 65 °C | 80 | 74 |
| 6 | 0.02 | ethanol | reflux | 80 | 78 |
| 7 | 0.02 | reflux | 80 | 70 | |
| 8 | 0.02 | water | 80 °C | 80 | 20 |
| 9 | 0.02 | methanol/water (50:50) | 80 °C | 80 | 53 |
| 10 | 0.02 | ethyl acetate | reflux | 80 | 60 |
| 11 | 0.04 | ethanol | reflux | 80 | 82 |
| 12 | 0.06 | ethanol | reflux | 80 | 88 |
| 13 | 0.07 | ethanol | reflux | 80 | 89 |
| 14 | 0.06 | ethanol | reflux | 80 | 55 |
| 15 | 0.006 g | ethanol | reflux | 80 | 43 |
Reaction conditions: isatoic anhydride (1 mmol), 5-chloro-3-methyl-1-phenylpyrazole-4-carbaldehyde (1 mmol), aniline (1 mmol), and solvent (5 mL). R.T., room temperature.
Isolated yield.
The reaction was catalyzed by AlCl3 (0.06 mmol).
The reaction was catalyzed by acidic alumina (0.006 g).
Synthesis of 2,3-Disubstituted-2,3-Dihydroquinazolin-4(1H)-ones by Reaction of Isatoic Anhydride with Aldehydes and Primary Aminesa
Reaction conditions: isatoic anhydride (1 mmol), aniline (1 mmol), aldehyde (1 mmol), and solvent 5 mL.
Isolated yield. Car*. = 5-chloro-3-methyl-1-phenylpyrazole-4-carbaldehyde.
Figure 1Mechanism of the synthesis of 2,3-dihydroquinazolin-4(1H)-ones.
Inhibition Percent (%) Values of Different Concentrations (μg mL–1) of the Tested Substances (4g–4l) and Ascorbic Acid (AA) as a Standard Antioxidant Obtained from the DPPH Scavenging Assay
| compound | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| conc. (μg mL–1) | AA | ||||||
| 0.2 | 20.71 ± 0.2 | 11.42 ± 0.03 | 80.07 ± 0.77 | 79.9 ± 0.9 | 67.72 ± 0.2 | 60.14 ± 0.1 | 53.13 ± 0.7 |
| 0.4 | 20.32 ± 0.2 | 11.44 ± 0.02 | 81.18 ± 0.5 | 87.68 ± 0.7 | 67.80 ± 0.3 | 60.19 ± 0.2 | 61.22 ± 0.7 |
| 0.6 | 20.51 ± 0.1 | 11.46 ± 0.02 | 83.9 ± 0.1 | 93.58 ± 1 | 67.87 ± 0.1 | 60.25 ± 0.2 | 69.18 ± 1 |
| 0.8 | 21.16 ± 0.1 | 11.48 ± 0.04 | 85.62 ± 0.3 | 99.37 ± 0.7 | 67.95 ± 0.2 | 60.30 ± 0.1 | 88.47 ± 0.9 |
| 1.0 | 20.62 ± 0.5 | 11.50 ± 0.07 | 86.47 ± 0.27 | 102 ± 2 | 68.03 ± 0.1 | 60.35 ± 0.2 | 98.03 ± 2 |
Figure 2Comparison of the free rotation between molecules 4h and 4k.
Figure 3Intermolecular interaction between single electrons with the adjacent p orbitals.
Significant Changes, in Some Hematological Parameters and Electrolyte Levels (Mean ± SD), of Mice Blood Samples, after Administration of Two 0.3 and 0.5 mM Doses of Quinazolinone Derivatives Compared with Control Groups
| compound | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| parameters | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | diabetic control | normal control |
| WBC (103/mm3) | 5.3 | 5.6 | 7.6 | 8 | 3.15 | 2.8 | 8.3 | 5.6 |
| RBC (106/mm3) | 9.05 | 9.92 | 9.34 | 9.17 | 8.05 | 7.92 | 8.74 | 9.18 |
| HB (g/dl) | 14.5 ± 0.1 | 14.2 ± 0.25 | 14.8 ± 0.34 | 14.8 ± 0.3 | 8.0 ± 0.2 | 10.9 ± 0.1 | 13.3 ± 0.2 | 14.5 ± 0.2 |
| HCT (%) | 37.1 ± 0.1 | 37.9 ± 0.1 | 38.6 ± 0.1 | 39.6 ± 0.08 | 18.1 ± 0.1 | 34.9 ± 0.2 | 38.5 ± 0.1 | 37.3 ± 0.1 |
| MCV (μm3) | 40.9 | 40.1 | 40.2 | 39.9 | 44.9 | 44.1 | 44.1 | 40.6 |
| MCH (ρg) | 15.8 ± 0.1 | 15.5 ± 0.23 | 15.7 ± 0.2 | 15.5 ± 0.03 | 15.8 ± 0.1 | 15.8 ± 0.1 | 15.3 ± 0.1 | 15.8 ± 0.07 |
| MCHC (g/dL) | 44.0 ± 0.2 | 41.2 ± 0.1 | 38.6 ± 0.2 | 38.2 ± 0.1 | 44.0 ± 0.2 | 41.2 ± 0.2 | 34.7 ± 0.1 | 38.9 ± 0.1 |
| PLT (103/mm3) | 5884 | 10000 | 1350 | 1326 | 5884 | 10000 | 1072 | 1336 |
| RDW (%) | 21.8 ± 0.03 | 23.6 ± 0.02 | 22.5 ± 0.01 | 22.2 ± 0.02 | 12.2 ± 0.01 | 24.8 ± 0.01 | 24.3 ± 0.02 | 22.2 ± 0.01 |
| Alb (g/dL) | 2.7 ± 0.04 | 2.7 ± 0.02 | 2.9 ± 0.02 | 2.8 ± 0.01 | 2.8 ± 0.07 | 2.8 ± 0.03 | 3.3 ± 0.03 | 2.8 ± 0.03 |
| UA (μM) | 61 ± 3 | 62 ± 1.5 | 65 ± 2 | 65 ± 2 | 66 ± 2.7 | 67 ± 3.3 | 71.9 ± 2.7 | 64 ± 3.2 |
| Chlst (mg/dL) | 64 ± 3.2 | 58 ± 6 | 66 ± 1.4 | 62 ± 2.8 | 64 ± 3.2 | 60 ± 6 | 79 ± 2.4 | 73 ± 5 |
| TG (mg/dL) | 127 ± 1.5 | 109 ± 0.7 | 123 ± 3 | 116 ± 3 | 127 ± 2.5 | 121 ± 4 | 191.2 ± 5.2 | 131 ± 4.2 |
| Cr (mg/dL) | 0.41 ± 0.05 | 0.4 ± 0.05 | 0.41 ± 0.07 | 0.41 ± 0.09 | 0.45 ± 0.05 | 0.42 ± 0.05 | 0.85 ± 0.03 | 0.45 ± 0.02 |
Mean Blood Glucose Levels (in mM) in Diabetic Mice Treated with Quinazoline Derivatives (4g–4l)
| compound | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| conc. (mM) | diabetic control | normal control | ||||||
| 0.3 | 65 ± 2 | 44 ± 1 | 44 ± 1 | <LOQ | 29 ± 1 | <LOQ | 365 ± 4 | 70 ± 2 |
| 0.5 | 27 ± 1 | 22 ± 1 | <LOQ | <LOQ | <LOQ | <LOQ | 524 ± 6 | 57 ± 2 |
Limit of quantification.
α-Glucosidase Inhibition of Quinazoline Derivatives (4g–4l) Compared with Acarbose as a Standard
| IC50 (μM) | ||
|---|---|---|
| no. | conc. (0.3 mM) | conc. (0.5 mM) |
| 29.3 ± 0.5 | 25.4 ± 0.6 | |
| 2.6 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | |
| 2.96 ± 0.8 | 2.62 ± 0.5 | |
| 15.9 ± 0.3 | 11.7 ± 0.3 | |
| 21.5 ± 0.4 | 18.2 ± 0.2 | |
| 3.03 ± 0.5 | 3.0 ± 0.1 | |
| acarbose | 34.7 ± 0.3 | 30.1 ± 0.2 |
Binding Energies of the Compounds Based on Their Clusters (kcal/mol)
| binding
energy (kcal/mol) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| compound | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| –8.02 | –8.36 | –7.75 | –7.75 | –6.71 | –7.77 | –7.93 | –7.31 | –6.41 | –6.37 | |
| –6.92 | –6.90 | –6.87 | –6.31 | –6.11 | –5.91 | –5.83 | –5.83 | –5.81 | –4.87 | |
| –8.85 | –8.83 | –8.8 | –8.64 | –8.46 | –8.42 | –8.02 | –7.85 | –6.03 | –6.02 | |
| –6.32 | –6.22 | –6.15 | –6.04 | –6.05 | –5.77 | –5.77 | –5.18 | –5.18 | –5.11 | |
| –6.10 | –6.07 | –5.96 | –5.94 | –5.89 | –5.83 | –5.67 | –5.67 | –5.41 | –4.79 | |
| –6.46 | –6.46 | –8.25 | –6.73 | –7.14 | –6.88 | –7.83 | –7.49 | –7.79 | –7.29 | |
Docking Results of Synthesized Compounds against α-Glucosidase
| compound | Ki (μM) | binding energy (kcal/mol) | ligand efficiency | intermolecular energy | torsional energy | electrostatic energy | unbound energy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.66 | –7.61 | –0.25 | –8.2 | 0.6 | 0.03 | –1.64 | |
| 8.43 | –6.92 | –0.22 | –7.52 | 0.6 | 0.03 | –1.72 | |
| 0.326 | –8.85 | –0.29 | –9.74 | 0.89 | 0.0 | –1.59 | |
| 23.39 | –6.32 | –0.2 | –6.91 | 0.6 | 0.02 | –1.62 | |
| 33.82 | –6.10 | –0.19 | –6.7 | 0.6 | 0.08 | –1.33 | |
| 0.903 | –8.25 | –0.26 | –8.84 | 0.6 | –0.11 | –1.46 | |
| acarbose | 0.67 | 0.02 | –5.89 | 6.56 | –0.73 | –11.41 |
Number of Different Types of Molecular Bonds between Ligands and the α-Glucosidase
| compound | hydrogen bonding | van der Waals | π–anion and π–cation | π–π | π alkyl |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 3 | 2 | 6 | ||
| 7 | 4 | 3 | 4 | ||
| 1 | 13 | 2 | 1 | 7 | |
| 12 | 2 | 6 | |||
| 8 | 1 | 2 | 5 | ||
| 3 | 10 | 1 | 3 | 3 | |
| acarbose | 2 | 11 | 1 |
Figure 4Docking of the six synthesized compounds (4g–4l) and acarbose (as the standard molecule) with α-glucosidase enzyme.
Residues of the Synthesized Compounds and Acarbose in Docking Study with α-Glucosidase Enzyme
| compound | number of residues | residues |
|---|---|---|
| 18 | Trp49, Asn324, Phe282, Glu256, Asn258, His103, Phe163, Ala200, Val100, Tyr63, Gln167, Asn61, Asp60, Phe144, Asp199, Asp326, Arg197, His325 | |
| 16 | Phe144, Ile143, Phe163, Gln167, Asp60, His103, His203, Asn61, Tyr63, Asp236, Ala200, Asn258, His325, Asp199, Glu256, Arg197 | |
| 20 | His325, Trp49, Asp324, Phe282, Glu256, Arg197, Asn258, His103, His203, Phe163, Ile143, Ala200, Val100, Trp63, Glu167, Asn61, Asp60, Phe 144, Asp199, Asp326 | |
| 17 | Trp49, Arg197, Glu256, Asp98, Asp199, His325, Asp326, Arg415, Ala200, Asn61, Tyr63, His103, Ile143, Phe163, Phe144, Asn258, Asp60 | |
| 16 | Gly259, Met229, Phe225, Asn258, Glu256, Phe282, His203, Leu285, Phe163, Asn324, Try63, Leu327, Asp326, Asp199, Ala200, Ile143 | |
| 20 | Phe225, Phe144, His103, Asp60, Try63, Phe163, Glu167, Asp199, Arg197, Asp236, Leu327, Leu285, Asn324, Phe282, Glu256, Asn258, Ala200, Ile143, Met229, His203 | |
| acarbose | 16 | Phe144, Phe163, Arg411, Tyr63, Asp326, Leu327, His103, Leu258, Asn324, phe282, Asn258, Ala200, Asp199, Val100, Glu256, Arg197 |