| Literature DB >> 32617855 |
Abbas Khan1, Mazhar Khan2, Shoaib Saleem3, Zainib Babar4, Arif Ali1, Abdul Aziz Khan5, Zain Sardar6, Fahad Hamayun1, Syed Shujait Ali6, Dong-Qing Wei7,8,9.
Abstract
Most recently, an outbreak of severe pneumonia caused by the infection of SARS-CoV-2, a novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China, imposes serious threats to public health. Upon infecting host cells, coronaviruses assemble a multi-subunit RNA-synthesis complex of viral non-structural proteins (nsp) responsible for the replication and transcription of the viral genome. Therefore, the role and inhibition of nsp12 are indispensable. A cryo-EM structure of RdRp from SARs-CoV-2 was used to identify novel drugs from Northern South African medicinal compounds database (NANPDB) by using computational virtual screening and molecular docking approaches. Considering Remdesivir as the control, 42 compounds were shortlisted to have docking score better than Remdesivir. The top 5 hits were validated by using molecular dynamics simulation approach and free energy calculations possess strong inhibitory properties than the Remdesivir. Thus, this study paved a way for designing novel drugs by decoding the architecture of an important enzyme and its inhibition with compounds from natural resources. This disclosing of necessary knowledge regarding the screening and the identification of top hits could help to design effective therapeutic candidates against the coronaviruses and design robust preventive measurements.Entities:
Keywords: Free energy; Phylogenetic; RdRp; SARs-CoV-2; Simulation; Virtual screening
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32617855 PMCID: PMC7332347 DOI: 10.1007/s12539-020-00381-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Interdiscip Sci ISSN: 1867-1462 Impact factor: 3.492
Fig. 1Phylogenetic tree constructed by Beast. The values above nodes are posterior probability values. Clade I–V are discussed in this study
Docking of the top 42 compounds using AutoDock Vina
| Ligand | Affinity (kcal/mol) |
|---|---|
| Diosmetin-7- | − 10.4 |
| 3- | − 9.9 |
| 3′-epi-afroside | − 9.3 |
| Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside | − 9.1 |
| 14beta-17alpha-epoxy-5-6-dehydrocalotropin | − 9 |
| 15beta-hydroxycalotropin | − 8.7 |
| Frugoside-19-acetate | − 8.5 |
| Gesglucouzarin | − 8.4 |
| Silybin B | − 8.3 |
| Frugoside | − 8.3 |
| Silybin A | − 8.2 |
| 511 6-dehydroxyghalakinoside | − 8.1 |
| 1326 kaempferol-7-rhamnoside | − 8 |
| 436 beta-anhydroepidigitoxigenin-3beta- | − 8 |
| 520 12-dehydroxyghalakinoside | − 8 |
| 1303 20-hydroxyecdysone | − 7.7 |
| 1327 kaempferol-3-rhamnoside | − 7.7 |
| 752 terminic acid | − 7.7 |
| 432 5-hydroxy-3-7-dimethoxyflavone-4′-O-beta-glucopyranoside | − 7.7 |
| 939 apigenin-7- | − 7.6 |
| 841 luteolin-7-3-4-trimethyl ether | − 7.5 |
| 19 pectolinarigenin 7- | − 7.5 |
| 312 3-3ʺ-dimethoxy ellagic acid 4- | − 7.4 |
| 997 kaempferol 3- | − 7.2 |
| 792 ajugol | − 7.1 |
| 29 byzantionoside B 6′- | − 7.1 |
| 399 syringaresinol | − 7 |
| 761 1-6-di- | − 6.9 |
| 807 amphipaniculoside E | − 6.9 |
| 17 roseoside | − 6.8 |
| 42 3-4-5-trimethoxyphenol | − 6.8 |
| 763 1- | − 6.7 |
| 823 stigmasterol | − 6.7 |
| 1054 Delta7-stigmastenol | − 6.6 |
| 372 subereamolline B | − 6.6 |
| 44 isounedoside | − 6.5 |
| 554 6-7-dihydroxy-dihydrolinalool 3- | − 6.5 |
| 724 beta-sitosterol | − 6.4 |
| 306 gentesic acid 5- | − 6.4 |
| 1058 beta-tocopherol | − 5.6 |
| 1057 alpha-tocopherol | − 5.3 |
| 376 aeroplysinin-1 | − 5.1 |
This table shows the compound names and their respective docking scores in kcal/mol
The table is showing the results obtained from virtual screening and a controlled drug
| Drug name | Interacting residues | Docking score (kcal/mol) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrogen bonding residues | Hydrophobic bonding residues | Salt bridges/π-cation bonding residues | ||
| Remdesivir | Lys621, Cys622, Asp761, Lys798, Glu811 | Tyr455, Asp618, Pro620, Lys621, Arg624 | Arg553 | |
| Diosmetin-7- | Trp617, Tyr619, Lys621, Cys622, Asp623, Asp760, Asp761, Ala762, Trp800 | Asp618, Lys798, Glu811 | ||
| 3- | Asp452, Thr556, Asp618, Tyr619, Lys621, Asp623, Arg624, Asp760 | Arg553, Lys621, Lys798 | ||
| 3′-epi-afroside | Trp617, Tyr619, Lys621, Cys622, Asp623, Asp760, Asp761, Trp800 | Asp618, Lys798, Glu811 | ||
| Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside | Asp452, Arg553, Thr556, Lys621, Cys622, Asp623, Asp760, | Arg555 | ||
With the compounds name, their interacting residues and bond types such as hydrogen, hydrophobic, salt bridges, and π-Cation interactions are given. The docking score of each compound in kcal/mol is also given
Fig. 2Interaction pattern of RdRp from SARs-CoV-2 with Remdesivir and the top four hits from the Northern African Natural products database. a Remdesivir, b Diosmetin-7-O-Beta-d-apiofuranoside, c 3-O-Alpha-l-arabinopyranosyl-echinocystic acid, d 3′-epi-afroside and e Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside
2D structures, ADMET properties, and bioactivity of the top 4 hits and Remdesivir. The Molinspiration server predicts the activity of the compounds against different classes. If the score is between 0 and 5, it is considered as the best
Fig. 3RMSD of all the five systems. a Remdesivir, b Diosmetin-7-O-Beta-d-apiofuranoside, c 3-O-Alpha-l-arabinopyranosyl-echinocystic acid, d 3′-epi-afroside and e Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside. The x-axis shows time in nanosecond while y-axis shows RMSD in Å
Fig. 4RMSF of all the five systems. a Remdesivir, b Diosmetin-7-O-Beta-d-apiofuranoside, c 3-O-Alpha-l-arabinopyranosyl-echinocystic acid, d 3′-epi-afroside and e Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside. The x-axis shows the total number of residues while the y-axis shows RMSF in Å
Fig. 5Rg of all the five systems. a Remdesivir, b Diosmetin-7-O-Beta-d-apiofuranoside, c 3-O-Alpha-l-arabinopyranosyl-echinocystic acid, d 3′-epi-afroside and e Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside. The x-axis shows the total number of frames while the y-axis shows Rg in Å
Shows the total binding free energy and related term of all the five complexes subjected to MMGBSA analysis
| Complex name | MMGBSA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ΔvdW | Δelec | ΔSASA | ΔG Total | |
| RdRp-Remdesivir | − 60.22 | − 3.49 | − 5.2762 | − 54.4061 |
| RdRp-Diosmetin-7- | − 64.62 | − 2.301 | − 5.5596 | − 59.486 |
| RdRp-3- | − 43.245 | − 10.453 | − 3.736 | − 57.184 |
| RdRp-3′-epi-afroside | − 66.865 | − 3.012 | − 2.245 | − 60.315 |
| RdRp-Genkwanin 8-C-beta-glucopyranoside | − 62.830 | − 1.214 | 0.255 | − 63.695 |
Remdesivir was taken as control. All the energies are given in kcal/mol
Elec electrostatic energy, SASA solvent‐accessible surface area energy, vdW van der Waals energy, G Total total binding free energy, MMGBSA molecular mechanics generalized Born solvent accessibility