| Literature DB >> 31936383 |
Muhammad Imran1, Lina Tariq Al Kury2, Humaira Nadeem1, Fawad Ali Shah3, Muzaffar Abbas4, Shagufta Naz1, Arif-Ullah Khan3, Shupeng Li5.
Abstract
Oxidative stress-induced neuroinflammation is the prominent feature of neurodegenerative disorders, and is characterized by a gradual decline of structure and function of neurons. Many biochemical events emerge thanks to the result of this neurodegeneration, and ultimately provoke neuroinflammation, activation of microglia, and oxidative stress, leading to neuronal death. This cascade not only explains the complexity of events taking place across different stages, but also depicts the need for more effective therapeutic agents. The present study was designed to investigate the neuroprotective effects of newly synthesized benzimidazole containing acetamide derivatives, 3a (2-(4-methoxyanilino)-N-[1-(4-methylbenzene-1-sulfonyl)-1H-benzimidazol-2-yl] acetamide) and 3b (2-(Dodecylamino)-N-[1-(4-methylbenzene-1-sulfonyl)-1H-benzimidazol-2-yl] acetamide) against ethanol-induced neurodegeneration in the rat model. Both derivatives were characterized spectroscopically by proton NMR (1H-NMR) and carbon-13 NMR (13C-NMR) and evaluated for neuroprotective potential using different pharmacological approaches. In vivo experiments demonstrated that ethanol triggered neurodegeneration characterized by impaired antioxidant enzymes and elevated oxidative stress. Furthermore, ethanol administration induced neuroinflammation, as demonstrated by elevated expression of tumor necrotic factor (TNF-α), nuclear factor κB (NF-κB), cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2), and ionized calcium-binding adapter molecule-1 (Iba-1), which was further validated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Treatment with 3a and 3b ameliorated the ethanol-induced oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and memory impairment. The affinity of synthesized derivatives towards various receptors involved in neurodegeneration was assessed through docking analysis. The versatile nature of benzimidazole nucleus and its affinity toward several receptors suggested that it could be a multistep targeting neuroprotectant. As repetitive clinical trials of neuroprotectants targeting a single step of the pathological process have failed previously, our results suggested that a neuroprotective strategy of acting at different stages may be more advantageous to intervene in the vicious cycles of neuroinflammation.Entities:
Keywords: cortex; docking; ethanol; hippocampus; neuroinflammation; neuroprotective; oxidative stress
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31936383 PMCID: PMC7023260 DOI: 10.3390/biom10010108
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Figure 1General scheme to synthesize novel benzimidazole acetamide derivatives. DMF, dimethylformamide.
Binding energy values after docking. IL, interleukin; TNF, tumor necrotic factor, COX, cyclooxygenase; Iba, ionized calcium-binding adapter molecule.
| Compounds | COX2 | TNF-α | IL-1β | Iba-1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Binding Energies (kcal/mol) | ||||
| 3a | –8.9 | –8.4 | –7.6 | –7.3 |
| 3b | –7.4 | –7.4 | –6 | –7 |
| Co-crystal | –9.1 | –9.3 | - | - |
Figure 2(A) Pose analysis and 2D depictions for meclofenamic acid (A,B) and 6,7-dimethyl-3-[(methyl{2-[methyl({1-[3-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-1h-indol-3-yl} methyl)amino]ethyl} amino)methyl]-4h-chromen-4-one (C,D) in the protein structures of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and tumor necrotic factor (TNFα), respectively (green = co-crystallized ligand, red = re-docked ligand). (B) Post docking analysis visualized by Discovery Studio Visualizer in both 2D and 3D poses. Interactions between 3a and COX2 (A,B), TNF-α (D,E), interleukin (IL)-1β (G,H), and ionized calcium-binding adapter molecule (Iba-1) (J,K). 3D poses (A,D,G,J) and 2D (B,E,H,K). (C,F,I,L) represents the best pose of 3a that fitted to COX2, TNF-α, IL-1β, and Iba-1, respectively. (C) Post docking analysis visualized by Discovery Studio Visualizer in both 2D and 3D styles. Interactions between 3b and COX2 (A,B), TNF-α (D,E), IL-1β (G,H), Iba-1 (J,K). 3D style (A,D,G,J) and 2D style (B,E,H,K). (C,F,I,L) represents the best pose of 3b that fitted to COX2, TNF-α, IL-1β, and Iba-1, respectively.
Figure 3(A) Spontaneous alteration behavior % of the rats during the Y-maze test. Mean ± SEM for the rats (n = 6/group). ## shows significantly different from the control; *, ** shows significantly different from the ethanol-treated group. Significance: p < 0.05. (B) Average escape latency time for experimental rats to reach the hidden platform from one to three days. Mean ± SEM for the rats (n = 6/group). #, ## shows significantly different from the control; *, **, *** shows significantly different from the ethanol-treated group. Significance: p < 0.05.
Figure 4Representative immunohistochemical images of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and the quantified histogram of the survival neuron reactivity and integrated density in the cortex and hippocampus region of the adult cortex. The expressed data are relative to the control. ### shows significantly different from the control; ∗ shows significantly different from the ethanol-treated group. Significance: p < 0.05. Bar 20 μm, magnification 40× (n = 6/group).
Figure 5(A) Immunohistochemistry results for Iba-1 in the cortex and Dg region of the hippocampus. Bar 20 μm, magnification 40× (n = 6/group). Histograms show a comparatively higher expression of Iba-1 in the ethanol group. ** and * show p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respectively, and indicate significant difference relative to ethanol, while ### p < 0.001 shows significant difference relative to saline group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Data are analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison test using GraphPad Prism 6 software. (B) The protein expression of Iba-1 quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). The data were expressed as the mean ± SEM. * p < 0.05 relative to ethanol, while # p < 0.05 and ## p < 0.01 relative to saline (n = 6/group). (C) Immunohistochemistry results of TNF-α in the cortex and Dg region of the hippocampus. Bar 20 μm, magnification 40× (n = 6/group). Histograms show a comparatively higher expression of TNF-α in the ethanol group. * shows p < 0.05 and indicates significant difference relative to ethanol, while ### p < 0.001 shows significant difference relative to the saline group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Data are analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison test using GraphPad Prism 6 software.
Figure 6(A,B) The protein expression of COX2 and p-NF-κB were quantified by ELISA. The data are expressed as the mean ± SEM. * and ** show p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively, relative to ethanol, while ## p < 0.01 relative to saline (n = 6/group). (C) Immunohistochemistry results of COX2 in the cortex and Dg region of the hippocampus. Bar 20 μm, magnification 40× (n = 6/group). COX2 exhibited cytoplasmic localization in both tissues. Histograms show a comparatively higher expression of COX2 in the ethanol group. * shows p < 0.05 and indicates significant difference relative to ethanol, while ### p < 0.001 shows significant difference relative to saline group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Data are analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison test using GraphPad Prism 6 software.
Effect of 3a and 3b on oxidative enzymes.
| Group | GSH (mg/1100 g Tissue) | GST (pmol) | i-NOS (pmol) | LPO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saline | 54.88 ± 3.78 | 40.42 ± 1.30 | 21.02± 7.61 | 79.32 ±0.70 |
| Ethanol | 3.30 ± 0.97 ### | 2.78 ± 0.45 ### | 85 ± 6 ### | 224.54 ± 4.32 ### |
| Ethanol + 3a | 34.3 ± 2.4 ** | 28.05 ± 4.3 ** | 63.15 ± 3.8 * | 160.45 ± 8.9 * |
| Ethanol + 3b | 40.7 ± 4.1 ** | 35.8 ± 5.1 *** | 65.2 ± 4.56 * | 130.8 ± 2.82 ** |
Symbols *** or ### show significant difference at p < 0.001, while * and ** show significant difference at p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively. All data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison test. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Symbol * shows a significant difference relative to ethanol and # shows significant difference relative to saline. Abbreviations: GST, glutathione S-transferase; GSH, glutathione; TBARS, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances; i-NOS, inducible nitric oxide synthase; LPO, lipid peroxidation.