| Literature DB >> 33228010 |
Lívia do Carmo Silva1,2, Amanda Alves de Oliveira1,2, Dienny Rodrigues de Souza1,2, Katheryne Lohany Barros Barbosa1,2, Kleber Santiago Freitas E Silva1, Marcos Antonio Batista Carvalho Júnior1, Olívia Basso Rocha1, Raisa Melo Lima1,2, Thaynara Gonzaga Santos1,2, Célia Maria de Almeida Soares1, Maristela Pereira1.
Abstract
Paracoccidioidomycosis is a neglected disease that causes economic and social impacts, mainly affecting people of certain social segments, such as rural workers. The limitations of antifungals, such as toxicity, drug interactions, restricted routes of administration, and the reduced bioavailability in target tissues, have become evident in clinical settings. These factors, added to the fact that Paracoccidioidomycosis (PCM) therapy is a long process, lasting from months to years, emphasize the need for the research and development of new molecules. Researchers have concentrated efforts on the identification of new compounds using numerous tools and targeting important proteins from Paracoccidioides, with the emphasis on enzymatic pathways absent in humans. This review aims to discuss the aspects related to the identification of compounds, methodologies, and perspectives when proposing new antifungal agents against PCM.Entities:
Keywords: Paracoccidioidomycosis; antifungal; nanotechnology; patent
Year: 2020 PMID: 33228010 PMCID: PMC7712482 DOI: 10.3390/jof6040300
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fungi (Basel) ISSN: 2309-608X
Figure 1Important events related to the treatment and establishment of a consensus on Paracoccidioidomycosis.
Figure 2Methodologies used in the search and evaluation of anti-paracoccidioidomycosis compounds. MIC (Minimal Inhibitory Concentration), SAA (Synergistic Activity Assay), MFC (Minimal Fungicidal Activity), RSVS (Receptor shape-based Virtual Screening), LSVS (Ligand shape-based Virtual Screening).
Most potent fungicidal compounds.
| Compounds | Target | MFC | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identified by virtual screening | |||
| CaCS02 | Chorismate synthase | 32 µg/mL | [ |
| ZINC4559339 | Isocitrate lyase | 7.3–15.6 µg/mL | [ |
| Oxadiazol LMM5 | Thioredoxin reductase | 1–32 μg/mL | [ |
| Oxadiazol LMM11 | Thioredoxin reductase | 8–16 μg/mL | [ |
| F3307-0100 | Thioredoxin reductase | 16.9 µM | [ |
| HS7 (Zinc15967722) | Homoserine dehydrogenase | 32 μg/mL | [ |
| HS9 (Zinc2123137) | Homoserine dehydrogenase | 8 μg/mL | [ |
| Identified by drug repositioning | |||
| Vistusertib | Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase TOR2 | 1.0–4.2 μM | [ |
| Mebendazole | Tubulin beta chain | 13.2–26.4 μM | [ |
| Butoconazole | Lanosterol 14-alpha demethylase | 0.001–0.002 µM | [ |
| Luliconazole | Lanosterol 14-alpha demethylase | 0.0013–0.0026 µM | [ |
| ENMD-2076 | Serine/threonine-protein kinase | 7.4–14.8 µM | [ |
| Plant derivatives | |||
| Isocitrate lyase | 4.5–36 μg/mL | [ | |
| Beta-glucana sintase | 125–500 μg/mL | [ | |
| ND | 7.5–125 μg/mL | [ | |
| ND | 125–250 μg/mL | [ | |
|
| ND | 2–250 µg/mL | [ |
|
| ND | 62.5 µg/mL | [ |
| Fungal derivatives | |||
| Cytoplasmic degeneration | 30 µM | [ | |
| Cell wall | 7.2 µM | [ | |
MFC—minimum fungicidal concentration; ND—not determined.
Figure 3Modes of action of argentilactone and camphene thiosemicarbazide in Paracoccidioides. The diagram shows the two natural compounds that have been tested in Paracoccidioides cells according to three different ohmic approaches (proteomics, transcriptomics, and chemoproteomics). The central circle shows the common ways both compounds act in the pathogen; both restrict the ability of cells to produce energy through several pathways and, regarding stress conditions, the difference is that while thiosemicarbazide leads to a reduced HSP levels, argentilactone acts in such a way that protein/gene levels are increased. The green color indicates downregulation and the red color indicates upregulation. SOD—superoxide dismutase; ROS—reactive oxygen species; TCA—tricarboxylic acid; ETC—electron transport chain; GAPDH—glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase.