| Literature DB >> 31816928 |
Katharigatta N Venugopala1,2, Christophe Tratrat1, Melendhran Pillay3, Fawzi M Mahomoodally4, Subhrajyoti Bhandary5, Deepak Chopra5, Mohamed A Morsy1,6, Michelyne Haroun1, Bandar E Aldhubiab1, Mahesh Attimarad1, Anroop B Nair1, Nagaraja Sreeharsha1, Rashmi Venugopala7, Sandeep Chandrashekharappa8, Osama I Alwassil9, Bharti Odhav2.
Abstract
Novel series of diversely substitutedEntities:
Keywords: Mycobacterium tuberculosis; indolizines; molecular modeling; multi-component reaction; multi-drug resistance; whole-cell anti-TB screening
Year: 2019 PMID: 31816928 PMCID: PMC6963442 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics8040247
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
Figure 1Chemical structure of anti-tuberculosis (TB) indolizine compound (1) and the proposed poly-functionalized indolizines (2) as potential anti-TB agents.
Scheme 1Microwave-assisted multicomponent reaction (MCR) for the synthesis of poly-functionalized indolizines.
Physicochemical characteristics of ethyl 3-(4-substitutedbenzoyl)-7-substituted-2-substitutedindolizine-1-carboxylates (4 and 5).
| Entry | Mol Formula | R1 | R2 | R3 | Yield (%) | m.p. (°C) | cLog |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | C20H16NO4Br (413) | CHO | CH3 | Br | 86 | 105–106 | 5.2033 |
| 5 | C24H18NO3F (387) | CH3 | C6H5 | F | 88 | 167–168 | 6.3602 |
Yield of the product was calculated after column chromatography purification. cLogP of the title compounds was calculated using ChemDraw Professional 16.0. m.p.: melting point.
In vitro anti-TB activity of indolizines 1a–e, 2a–e, 3a–e, 4, and 5 against susceptible H37Rv and multi-drug-resistant (MDR) strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)
| Entry | R1 | R2 | R3 | MIC (µg/mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H37Rv | MDR–MTB b | ||||
| 1a a | CH3 | H | H | >32 | - |
| 1b a | CH3 | H | F | >32 | - |
| 1c a | CH3 | H | Cl | >32 | - |
| 1d a | CH3 | H | Br | >32 | - |
| 1e a | CH3 | H | CN | >32 | - |
| 2a a | CH3 | CH3 | H | >32 | - |
| 2b a | CH3 | CH3 | F | >32 | - |
| 2c a | CH3 | CH3 | Cl | 16 ± 0.02 c,e | >32 |
| 2d a | CH3 | CH3 | Br | 16 ± 0.02 c,e | 32 ± 0.02 c,e |
| 2e a | CH3 | CH3 | CN | 16 ± 0.02 d,e | 32 ± 0.02 c,d |
| 3a a | CH3 | CH2CH3 | H | 16 ± 0.02 c,d | >32 |
| 3b a | CH3 | CH2CH3 | F | >32 | - |
| 3c a | CH3 | CH2CH3 | Cl | >32 | - |
| 3d a | CH3 | CH2CH3 | Br | >32 | - |
| 3e a | CH3 | CH2CH3 | CN | >32 | - |
| 4 | CHO | CH3 | Br | 4 ± 0.02 c,e | 32 ± 0.02 c,e |
| 5 | CH3 | C6H5 | F | 32 ± 0.02 c,d | >32 |
Note: MIC (minimum inhibitory concentration). a Synthesis and structural elucidation of the indolizine compounds are reported in [21]. b MDR-MTB isolates were found to be resistant to first-line antibiotics, isoniazid (0.2 µg/mL), and rifampicin (1 µg/mL). c–e The compounds not sharing a letter differ significantly (p < 0.05).
Docking results of the indolizine derivatives 2c–e, 3a–e, 4, and 5 into the binding domain of the selected molecular targets.
| Entry | CYP 121A1 (PDB 5OP9) | Malate Synthase (PDB 5CBB) | DNA GyrB ATPase (PDB 4B6C) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDocker E. | Residue Interactions | CDocker E. | Residue Interactions | CDocker E. | Residue Interactions | ||||
| H-Bond (Dist. Å, atom) | Pi-Bond | H-Bond (Dist. Å, atom) | Pi-Bond | H-Bond (Dist. Å, atom) | Pi-Bond | ||||
| 2c | −42 | Gln 385 (2.07, CO benzoyl) | Phe168 | −44 | Arg 339 (2.72, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −34 | Gln 102 (2.27, CO benzoyl) | Glu 56 |
| 2d | −42 | Gln 385 (1.90, CO benzoyl) | Phe168 | −45 | Arg 339 (2.71, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −33 | Gln 102 (2.32, CO benzoyl) | Glu 56 |
| 2e | −41 | Gln 385 (1.98, CO benzoyl) | Phe168 | −41 | Phe 460 (2.48, CO ester) | Try 541 | −37 | Gln 102 (2.16, CO ester) | Arg 82 |
| 3a | −38 | Gln 385 (2.27, CO benzoyl) | Phe168 | −31 | Arg 339 (2.36, CO benzoyl) | Asp 462 | −34 | Gln 102 (2.21, CO benzoyl) | Arg 82 |
| 3b | −41 | His 343 (2.28, F) | Phe168 | −36 | Arg 339 (2.62, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −33 | Gln 102 (2.45, CO benzoyl) | Arg 82 |
| 3c | −41 | Gln 385 (2.21, CO benzoyl) | Met 62 | −40 | Arg 339 (2.74, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −34 | Gln 102 (2.45, CO benzoyl) | Glu 56 |
| 3d | −41 | Gln 385 (2.24, CO benzoyl) | Met 62 | −37 | Arg 339 (2.56, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −33 | Gln 102 (2.45, CO benzoyl) | Arg 82 |
| 3e | −39 | Gln 385 (2.94, CN) | - | −36 | Arg 339 (2.55, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −33 | Gln 102 (2.26, CO benzoyl) | Arg 82 |
| 4 | −44 | Gln 385 | Phe168 | −50 | Arg 339 (2.72, CO benzoyl) | Try 541 | −45 | Gly 83 (2.13, CO formyl)Gln 102 (2.70, CO benzoyl) | Glu 56 |
| 5 | −40 | Gln 385 (2.02, CO benzoyl) | Phe168 | −18 | Arg 339 (2.32, CO benzoyl) | Asp 462 | −27 | - | Arg 82 |
Figure 2Predicted interaction patterns of compounds 1c, 2c, 2d, 3c, 4, and 5 (salmon-filled spheres) into the CYP121 domain (PDB 5OP9). The molecular interactions are represented with a green dotted line for the H-bond, a magenta dotted line for the π–π stacking interaction, and a violet dotted line for the hydrophobic contact.
Figure 3Predicted interaction pattern of 2c, 2d, 2e, 3a, and 4 (salmon-filled spheres) in the malate synthase domain (PDB 5CBB). The molecular interactions are represented with a green dotted line for the H-bond, with a magenta dotted line for the π–π staking interaction, with an orange dotted line for the ion–π staking interaction, and with a violet dotted line for the hydrophobic contact.
Figure 4Predicted interaction patterns of 3a and 4 (salmon-filled spheres) into the DNA GyrB ATPase domain (PDB 4B6C). The molecular interactions are represented with a green dotted line for the H-bond, an orange dotted line for the ion–π interaction, and a violet dotted line for hydrophobic contact.