| Literature DB >> 32328475 |
Jing Ma1, Yingguang Li1, Linrong Li1, Kexin Yue1, Hanfang Liu1, Jiajia Wang2, Zhuoqing Xi1,3, Man Shi1, Sihan Zhao1, Qi Ma1, Sitong Liu1, Shudi Guo1, Jianing Liu4, Lili Hou1, Chaojie Wang5, Peng George Wang6, Zhiyong Tian1, Songqiang Xie1.
Abstract
Naphthalimides, such asEntities:
Keywords: cancer; dinitro-naphthalimide conjugate; minimized side-effects; polyamine; polyamine transporter
Year: 2020 PMID: 32328475 PMCID: PMC7160362 DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2020.00166
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Chem ISSN: 2296-2646 Impact factor: 5.221
Figure 1Chemical structures of amonafide, mitoafide, polyamine analogs CHENSpm, and CPENSpm, and target compound 5c.
Scheme 1Chemical structures and synthetic route of polyamine-based naphthalimide conjugates 5a-5c, 7a-7b, and 11a-11b in yield of 25–30%. Reagents and conditions: (a) HNO3, 50°C, 3 h; (b) K2CO3, CH3CN, 85°C, 5 h; (c) EtOH, 4 M HCl, rt, overnight; (d) Pd/C, H2, MeOH, rt, 2 h.
IC50 values (μM) of polyamine-based naphthalimide conjugates 5a-5c, 7a-7b, and 11a-11b, the positive control amonafide, and cisplatin by MTT assays.
| Cyclohexyl | 2 | 1 | / | 2.94 ± 0.06 | 2.16 ± 0.10 | 1.19 ± 0.12 | 2.3 ± 0.18 | 2.17 ± 0.20 | 3.62 ± 0.15 | 1.67 | |
| Cyclohexyl | 2 | 2 | / | 2.72 ± 0.25 | 3.89 ± 0.35 | 1.07 ± 0.10 | 1.25 ± 0.10 | 1.75 ± 0.15 | 2.27 ± 0.25 | 1.30 | |
| Cyclopropyl | 2 | 1 | / | 1.09 ± 0.10 | 0.76 ± 0.05 | 1.33 ± 0.12 | 1.35 ± 0.15 | 1.92 ± 0.23 | 0.83 ± 0.08 | 0.43 | |
| Cyclopropyl | 2 | 1 | / | >30 | 25.77 ± 2.90 | 26.91 ± 2.65 | 8.62 ± 0.85 | 13.98 ± 1.39 | 17.38 ± 1.68 | / | |
| H | 2 | 2 | / | >30 | >30 | >30 | >30 | >30 | 17.30 ± 1.78 | / | |
| / | 1 | 1 | 1 | >50 | 9.69 ± 0.98 | 25.96 ± 2.56 | 14.81 ± 1.45 | 28.3 ± 2.85 | 16.33 ± 1.69 | / | |
| / | 1 | 2 | 1 | >30 | 23.17 ± 2.36 | >30 | 25.91 ± 2.56 | >30 | 15.81 ± 1.58 | / | |
| Amonafide | 13.98 ± 1.78 | 12.98 ± 1.56 | 14.89 ± 1.75 | 5.89 ± 0.56 | 6.89 ± 0.68 | 10.98 ± 1.02 | 1.59 | ||||
| FI | 12.83 | 17.08 | 11.20 | 4.36 | 3.59 | 13.23 | 3.70 | ||||
| Cisplatin | 16.37 ± 1.26 | 10.02 ± 1.23 | 15.98 ± 1.59 | 9.60 ± 0.60 | 11.00 ± 0.15 | 40.36 ± 4.36 | 3.67 | ||||
| FI | 15.02 | 13.18 | 12.02 | 7.11 | 5.73 | 48.63 | 8.74 | ||||
The RF (resistance factor) is defined as the IC.
FI (fold increase) is defined as IC.
FI (fold increase) is defined as IC.
An average of three measurements. ND = not determined.
Inhibitory effect (IC50 in μM) of dinitro-naphthalimide conjugates 5a-5c, amonafide, and cisplatin on cancer cells Snu-368 and Snu-739 (hepatic carcinoma), and the matched normal cells HL-7702 (normal liver cell).
| 2.94 ± 0.06 | 2.16 ± 0.10 | 6.30 ± 0.23 | 2.14 | 2.92 | |
| 2.72 ± 0.25 | 3.89 ± 0.35 | 7.56 ± 0.43 | 2.78 | 1.94 | |
| 1.09 ± 0.10 | 0.76 ± 0.05 | 5.68 ± 0.83 | 5.21 | 7.47 | |
| Amonafide | 13.98 ± 1.78 | 12.98 ± 1.56 | 11.56 ± 1.36 | 0.83 | 0.89 |
| Cisplatin | 16.37 ± 1.26 | 10.02 ± 1.23 | 8.60 ± 0.20 | 0.53 | 0.86 |
SI(selectivity index) is defined as IC.
SI(selectivity index) is defined as IC.
Figure 2Inhibition ratio of amonafide (A) and 5c (B) on cancer cells (Snu-368 and Snu-739) and the matched normal cells (HL-7702) with 10 μM of tested complexes.
Figure 3In vivo antitumor activity of 5c and amonafide in HCC tumors. Eight mice each received the vehicle, amonafide (5 mg/kg), 5c (3 mg/kg), or 5c (5 mg/kg). (A) Relative weight of the mice for PBS, amonafide, and 5c group. (B) Tumor weight for PBS, amonafide, and 5c group at the end of the experiment. (C) Images of the tumors for PBS, amonafide, and 5c group at the end of the experiment. First horizontal line, control group; second line, amonafide group (5 mg/kg); third line, 5c group (3 mg/kg); fourth line, 5c group (5 mg/kg). (D) Organ weight indexes [(organ weight/body weight) × 100%] including heart, liver, kidney, lung, and spleen were calculated for PBS, amonafide, and 5c group at the end of the experiment. ***P < 0.001.
Figure 4The apoptotic percentage in Snu-739 cells was detected by FCM with (C) or without (A) 5c (10 μM) or amonafide (B) (10 μM) for 24 h.
Figure 5The expression of p53 in Snu-739 cells after treatment with 5c and amonafide.
Figure 6Cell viability of Snu-368 (A) and Snu-739 (B) cells after treatment with 5c was determined with and without Spd (50 μM). ***P < 0.001.
Figure 7Effect of 5c on PAO expression in Snu-368 (A) and Snu-739 (B) cells with 10 μM after 24 h treatment. **P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
Figure 8Put, Spd, and Spm concentrations in Snu-368 (A) and Snu-739 cells (B) after 24 h treatment with or without 5c was determined. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
Figure 9Proposed mechanism of action for dinitro-naphthalimide conjugates 5c.