Sherif Ashraf Fahmy1, Fortuna Ponte2, Emilia Sicilia2, Hassan Mohamed El-Said Azzazy1. 1. Department of Chemistry, School of Sciences & Engineering, The American University in Cairo, AUC Avenue, P.O. Box 74, New Cairo 11835, Egypt. 2. Department of Chemistry and Chemical Technologies, University of Calabria, Arcavacata di Rende 87036, Italy.
Abstract
Supramolecular systems (macromolecules), such as calix[n]arenes (SCn), cyclodextrins (CDs), and cucurbiturils (CBs), are promising vehicles for anticancer drugs. In this work, guest-host complexes of carboplatin, a second-generation platinum-based anticancer drug, and p-4-sulfocalix[n]arenes (n = 4 and 6; PS4 and PS6, respectively) were prepared and studied using 1H NMR, UV, Job's plot analysis, HPLC, and density-functional theory calculations. The experimental and the computational studies suggest the formation of 1:1 complexes between carboplatin and each of PS4 and PS6. The stability constants of the formed complexes were estimated to be 5.3 × 104 M-1 and 9.8 × 104 M-1, which correspond to free energy of complexation of -6.40 and -6.81 kcal mol-1, in the case of PS4 and PS6, respectively. The interaction free energy depends on the different inclusion modes of carboplatin in the host cavities. UV-vis findings and atoms in molecules analysis showed that hydrogen bond interactions stabilize the host-guest complexes without the full inclusion in the host cavity. The in vitro anticancer study revealed that both complexes exhibited stronger anticancer activities against breast adenocarcinoma cells (MCF-7) and lung cancer cells (A-549) compared to free carboplatin, preluding to their potential use in cancer therapy.
Supramolecular systems (macromolecules), such as calix[n]arenes (SCn), cyclodextrins (CDs), and cucurbiturils (CBs), are promising vehicles for anticancer drugs. In this work, guest-host complexes of carboplatin, a second-generation platinum-based anticancer drug, and p-4-sulfocalix[n]arenes (n = 4 and 6; PS4 and PS6, respectively) were prepared and studied using 1H NMR, UV, Job's plot analysis, HPLC, and density-functional theory calculations. The experimental and the computational studies suggest the formation of 1:1 complexes between carboplatin and each of PS4 and PS6. The stability constants of the formed complexes were estimated to be 5.3 × 104 M-1 and 9.8 × 104 M-1, which correspond to free energy of complexation of -6.40 and -6.81 kcal mol-1, in the case of PS4 and PS6, respectively. The interaction free energy depends on the different inclusion modes of carboplatin in the host cavities. UV-vis findings and atoms in molecules analysis showed that hydrogen bond interactions stabilize the host-guest complexes without the full inclusion in the host cavity. The in vitro anticancer study revealed that both complexes exhibited stronger anticancer activities against breast adenocarcinoma cells (MCF-7) and lung cancer cells (A-549) compared to free carboplatin, preluding to their potential use in cancer therapy.
Platinum-based chemotherapeutic drugs (PBDs) are potent broad-spectrum
anticancer medicines used in chemotherapy of more than 50% of cancerpatients.[1,2] Cisplatin (cis-diammine(dichloro)platinum(II)),
a first-generation platinum complex, has significant broad-spectrum
anticancer activities against a wide range of solid tumors, such as
lung, cervical, ovarian, esophageal, uterine, and bladder.[1,2] Cisplatin has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) in the late 1970s. However, cisplatin administration has been
accompanied by many systemic side effects including ototoxicity, nephrotoxicity,
neurotoxicity, and emetogenesis. Additionally, cisplatin treatment
is limited by intrinsic and acquired resistance presented by many
tumor cells following repeated treatment regimens.[1−3]Consequently,
newer generations of PBDs have been developed to
increase anticancer activities and reduce systemic toxic effects.[1−5] Carboplatin (cis-diammine(1,1-cyclobutanedicarboxylato)platinum(II)
was developed as a second-generation PBD and was granted FDA approval
as a safer alternative to cisplatin, with negligible neurotoxicity
and ototoxicity and reduced renal toxicity and emetogenesis.[3−5] Carboplatin exerts its antitumor activity, similarly to cisplatin,
via aquation and formation of activated aquated species interacting
with the DNA of cancer cells, forming Pt-DNA adducts leading to apoptosis.[6,7]Both cisplatin and carboplatin have similar chemical structures,
but they differ in their leaving groups, which are dichloride ligands
in cisplatin and cyclobutane-1,1-dicarboxylate ligand in carboplatin
(Figure S1). This structural modification
imparts a more tolerable toxicity profile to carboplatin. However,
frequent administration of carboplatin results in severe thrombocytopenia
and myelosuppression. Because carboplatin has a similar chemical structure
to cisplatin, it exhibits similar activity spectrum and resistance.
This has limited the use of carboplatin in treating cisplatin-resistant
cancers.[6−9]Various mechanisms are responsible for developing PBD drug
resistance
such as reducing the intracellular accumulation of drugs by reducing
influx or increasing efflux or detoxifying the chemotherapeutic agent
by biomolecules containing thiol groups. Other mechanisms include
intonation of downstream signaling pathways or inhibiting apoptosis.
Hence, significant efforts have been exerted to develop novel approaches
to overcome the limitations of PBDs. In this context, PBDs have been
partially or fully encapsulated into drug delivery vehicles such as
PEGylated liposomes, niosomes, polymeric nanocomposites, and dendrimers.[9−15]More recently, supramolecular systems (macrocycles), including
calix[n]arenes (CXs), cyclodextrins (CDs), cucurbiturils
(CBs), and pillararenes, have drawn attention as potential carriers
for PBDs via either host–guest complexation or self-assembly.[16−20]Some previous studies reported the possible use of supramolecular
host molecules as promising carriers for PBDs to enhance their water
solubility, chemical stability, and bioavailability.[16] The host–guest complexation could also improve the
selective delivery of chemotherapeutics to cancer cells, resulting
in improved anticancer activities with minimal toxic systemic effects.[16−20] Host–guest complexation between PBDs and host supramolecular
systems might reduce systemic side effects and resistance and improve
the complex’s anticancer activity compared to the free drug.[16−20] For instance, the host–guest complexation between cisplatin
and cucurbit[7]uril (CB7) stabilized through four hydrogen bonds reduced
systemic adverse effects and overcame cancer cell resistance by modifying
the pharmacokinetic profile of cisplatin in the blood circulation.[7]uril
encapsulated cisplatin overcomes cisplatin resistance via a pharmacokinetic
effect. Metallomics. 2012 ">20] Another study reported reducing oxaliplatin’s
toxic effects and enhancing its anticancer activity against leukemia
cancer cells (L1210FR) upon its host–guest complexation with
CB7 at significantly lower concentrations than the free drug.[7]uril
containers
for targeted delivery of oxaliplatin to cancer cells. Angew. Chem.. 2013 ">17]CXs, in specific, have attracted much
attention as significant
host molecules that have been used in many fields of supramolecular
chemistry. CXs (n = 4, 6, and 8) are cone-shaped
cyclic oligomers composed of phenol units connected by methylene bridges.
CXs have a unique structure that comprises an upper rim with a para-substituent
of a phenolic ring, a lower rim with a phenolic hydroxyl group, and
a hydrophobic π electron-rich core cavity. Thus, they are excellent
host molecules for various therapeutically active guest molecules.
The water solubility of CXs is improved by adding some functional
groups, such as carboxylates and sulfonates, at the para-position
of their phenolic units.[16,21,22]Para-sulfonato-calix[n]arenes
[n = 4 and 6, (PS4 and PS6)] exhibited remarkable
water solubility (>0.1 mol/L). More importantly, they are biocompatible
and non-toxic to human cells as they show no in vitro hemolysis at
doses up to 5 × 103 μM. However, they may cause
minimal systemic toxicity in vivo at doses up to 104 μg/Kg.
Owing to their π-rich cavities, para-sulfonato-calix[n]arenes in aqueous media were used to accommodate active
guest molecules.[21,22]This work investigates
the complexation between either PS4 or PS6
and carboplatin in aqueous media for potential use in cancer therapy.
Experimental and theoretical studies of the host–guest complexation
between PS4 or PS6 and carboplatin in aqueous media were conducted
for potential cancer therapy applications. The formed complexes have
been characterized by UV–vis spectrophotometry and 1H NMR spectroscopy. The stoichiometry and binding constants were
detected employing Job’s plot (continuous variation method)
and HPLC. The derivative ratio method was utilized to eliminate the
interference caused by the overlapped host spectra. Moreover, the
anticancer activities of both complexes against breast adenocarcinoma
cells (MCF-7) and lung cancer cells (A-549) were evaluated using sulforhodamine
B colorimetric assay (SRB assay). Density-functional theory (DFT)
calculations were carried out to obtain structural information on
the inclusion of carboplatin into the cavities of the examined calixarenes
and binding energies for the host–guest (1:1) formed complexes.
The intermolecular hydrogen bonds for all the intercepted adducts
were investigated utilizing Atoms in Molecules (AIM) analysis.
Results and Discussion
1H NMR Spectroscopy
1H NMR measurements in D2O were performed
to study
the complexation between carboplatin and either PS4 or PS6. The 1H NMR findings revealed that carboplatin protons had not displayed
remarkable shifts upon adding PS4 (Figure S2 and Table ). The
signal for the protons of the two doublet 4H and the triplet 2H of
the methylene groups in the cyclobutane ring of carboplatin, Ha and
Hb, respectively (Figure S2 and Table ), demonstrated small
chemical shifts of 0.045 and 0.094 ppm, respectively. This shows that
these protons are not fully embedded inside the PS4 cavity. Previous
studies reported the direct relationship between the extent of the
chemical shift of the protons of a guest molecule and the depth of
these protons inside the hollow cavity of the host macromolecule.[23−25] However, we observed that the signal of the methylene bridge protons,
Hy, of the 1:1 M ratio mixture of PS4 and carboplatin, showed remarkable
broadening compared with the same signal in PS4 alone (Figure S2). This signal widening indicates the
macromolecule host structure’s conformational rigidity induced
by its complexation with the carboplatin guest molecule.[23,26] The complexation of oxaliplatin with PS6 exhibited a similar behavior.
These exciting findings suggest that there is complexation, due to
bond formation (hydrogen bonds as evidenced from the theoretical investigation
below), between carboplatin and either PS4 or PS6 but without involving
the embedding of CH2 protons (of the cyclobutane nucleus
of carboplatin) inside the hollow cavities of either PS4 or PS6. This
complex was further evaluated by UV–vis spectroscopy and HPLC.
Table 1
Detected Shielding (ppm) for Allocated
Protons in Carboplatin, PS4, and 1:1 M Ratio Carboplatin to PS4 in
D2O
proton signals
individual
molecules
1:1 M ratio
Hza
7.353
7.355
Hya
4.081
4.091
Hab
2.657
2.612
Hbb
1.643
1.737
Protons of PS4
(Figure S2).
Protons of Carboplatin (Figure S2).
Protons of PS4
(Figure S2).Protons of Carboplatin (Figure S2).
UV–Vis
Spectroscopy
Figure S3 depicts
the UV absorbance spectra of
0.2 mM carboplatin, 0.2 mM PS4, and mixtures encompassing increasing
carboplatin concentrations (ranging from 0.01–0.21 mM) and
0.2 mM PS4 all in aqueous media. The same procedure was followed using
PS6 instead of PS4 (Figure S3). Carboplatin
exhibited weak absorbance through the wavelength in the range of 245–310
nm (Figure S3). However, it is evident
that the spectrum of either PS4 or PS6 showed noticeable absorption
maxima at 277 and 284 nm (Figure S3). The
spectra of the mixtures (prepared using PS4 or PS6) displayed a significant
hyperchromic shift, which was associated with increasing carboplatin
concentration. Additionally, the characteristic pair of absorption
maxima for either PS4 or PS6 was reserved without any merging, and
no remarkable red or blue shifts took place. This suggests that most
probably, the complex formed between carboplatin and either PS4 or
PS6 does not involve full penetration of the guest molecule within
the cavity of the host macromolecule (the complex formed is not an
inclusion complex). This was evidenced by previous studies that observed
the merging of the host’s characteristic pair of maxima and
the appearance of new maxima specific for the inclusion complex.[23]The hyperchromic shift observed with increasing
concentrations of carboplatin was studied using our previously reported
methods.[23] The zero-order spectra of the
prepared mixtures were divided by the spectrum of PS4, and the first
derivative of the ratio spectra was found using a scaling factor of
10 and Δλ = 4 nm.[23] The values
of the peak amplitudes of the first derivative of the ratio spectra
for the mixtures were then obtained at 266 nm. Figure A depicts a plot of the attained peak amplitudes
and the corresponding concentrations of carboplatin. The consecutive
addition of increasing carboplatin concentrations to a fixed concentration
of PS6 has resulted in a similar behavior. A plot of the acquired
peaks in carboplatin/PS4 and the equivalent concentrations of carboplatin
are depicted in Figure B. The ideal linear relationships depicted in Figure suggested that the hyperchromic shifts observed
in carboplatin/PS4 and carboplatin/PS6 are attributed to a complex
formation between carboplatin and each of PS4 (Figure A) and PS6 (Figure B).
Figure 1
Plot of peak amplitudes at 266 nm obtained from
the mixtures containing
consecutively increasing concentrations of carboplatin (0.01–0.21
mM) and a fixed concentration of (A) 0.2 mM PS4 and (B) 0.2 mM PS6.
Plot of peak amplitudes at 266 nm obtained from
the mixtures containing
consecutively increasing concentrations of carboplatin (0.01–0.21
mM) and a fixed concentration of (A) 0.2 mM PS4 and (B) 0.2 mM PS6.The stoichiometry and the stability constants of
the supramolecular
complexes were investigated using Job’s plot (the method of
continuous variation) involving the derivative ratio method, using
methods described previously.[23] From Job’s
plots, we observed that the maximum amplitudes were detected at molar
fractions of 0.5, indicating a host–guest complex stoichiometry
of 1:1 for carboplatin/PS4 and carboplatin/PS6. A normalized form
of these Job’s plots for carboplatin/PS4 and carboplatin/PS6,
where each of the amplitude values, S, were divided
by the equivalent maximum amplitude, Smax, is shown in Figure A,B, respectively. The stability constants of the complexes detected
using methods described previously[23,27−29] were found to be 5.3 × 104 M–1 and 9.8 × 104 M–1, which correspond
to complexation free energy of −6.4 and −6.81 kcal mol–1, for carboplatin/PS4, and carboplatin/PS6, respectively.
These values are in line with the stability constants (0.01 ×
103 to 1.7 × 105 M–1)
formerly reported for supramolecular complexes intended to be used
for drug delivery purposes, and many of them showed improved pharmacokinetics,
chemical stability, and more significant biological actions.[23,30−41]
Figure 2
Normalized
Job’s plot: (A) PS4/carboplatin complex and (B)
PS6/carboplatin complex.
Normalized
Job’s plot: (A) PS4/carboplatin complex and (B)
PS6/carboplatin complex.
HPLC
HPLC coupled with a photodiode
array detector has been used to investigate the complexation between
carboplatin and each of PS4 and PS6. A photodiode array detector facilitated
the simultaneous detection of carboplatin at 210 nm and each of PS4,
PS6, and their complexes with carboplatin at 266 nm. The chromatographic
conditions involved the use of Column C18 Scharlau (1 cm × 25
cm, 5 μm), mobile phase composed of water and acetonitrile (99:1),
a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min, temperature of 40 °C, and isocratic
elution mode. At a fixed concentration of carboplatin, its detected
signal was found to weaken with increasing concentrations of each
of PS4 and PS6. This indicated that carboplatin formed a complex with
PS4 and PS6, in line with our discussion mentioned earlier. This led
us to test some solutions of varying molar ratios of carboplatin and
each of PS4 and PS6, where the former was fixed at 0.05 mM, and the
latter was allowed to vary from 0.01 to 0.09 mM, as presented in Figure . In Figure A,B, carboplatin (0.05 mM)
was not observed when PS4 and PS6 existed in the range of 0.09–0.06
mM. This indicates that at these molar ratios, almost all the carboplatin
in these solutions was complexed with PS4 and PS6. Additionally, Figure shows a signal for
carboplatin to be detected initially only when equal molar ratios
of 0.05 mM for each carboplatin, PS4, and PS6 were present in the
medium, indicating a 1:1 carboplatin to PS4 and PS6 complexation as
discussed previously. The stability constants of PS4/carboplatin and
PS6/carboplatin complexes were calculated, as reported previously,[23] to be 4.8 × 104 M–1 and 8.8 × 104 M–1, respectively,
which is in line with the stability constants estimated from Job’s
plot.
Figure 3
HPLC determined concentrations of carboplatin of solutions containing
a fixed 0.05 mM of carboplatin and varying concentrations of (A) PS4
and (B) PS6 (0.01–0.09 mM).
HPLC determined concentrations of carboplatin of solutions containing
a fixed 0.05 mM of carboplatin and varying concentrations of (A) PS4
and (B) PS6 (0.01–0.09 mM).
In Vitro Cell Viability Assay
The
anticancer activities of PS4, PS6, carboplatin, PS4/carboplatin, and
PS6/carboplatin were tested on breast adenocarcinoma cells (MCF-7)
and lung cancer cells (A-549) using SRB assay. Both PS4 and PS6 were
utilized as host control, where they both exhibited no significant
decrease in cell viability. Our observations show that both complexes
have significant in vitro anticancer activities compared to free drug.
The anticancer activities (IC50 in μg/mL, computed by Sigma
plot, as detailed earlier) of PS4, PS6, carboplatin, PS4/carboplatin,
and PS6/carboplatin against both cell lines are presented in Table . The IC50 of both
complexes exhibited almost twice that of the free carboplatin against
MCF-7 cells, while the IC50 of PS4/carboplatin and PS6/carboplatin
against A-549 displayed about four-times and ten-times that of free
drug, respectively. The increased anticancer activities of both complexes
compared to free carboplatin might be due to their enhanced water
solubility, and hence bioavailability, of the drug upon complexation
with PS4 and PS6.[42,43]
Table 2
In Vitro
Anticancer Activities of
PS4, PS6, Carboplatin, PS4/Carboplatin, and PS6/Carboplatin against
Two Different Cancer Cell Lines
in vitro
anticancer activity (IC50 in μg/mL)
cells
PS4
PS6
carboplatin
PS4/carboplatin
PS6/carboplatin
MCF-7
N/A
136
9.5
4.3
3.8
A-549
>300
136
23
5
2.1
These preliminary findings are very promising
and support the use
of the developed complex for a possible reduction of the therapeutic
dose of carboplatin, which consequently will decrease the toxic side
effects. Alternatively, clinicians may choose to use a higher dose
of carboplatin in the designed complex to boost cancer therapy.
Computational Studies
The optimized
structures of the para-sulfonato-calix[4]arene (PS4)
in cone conformation and the PS6 in the partial cone conformation
are shown in Figure .[44]
Figure 4
Optimized structures of PS4 and PS6 shown
in two projections: (A)
side view and (B) top view. The three-dimensional images of the optimized
structures were prepared using CYLview Visualization Software.[44]
Optimized structures of PS4 and PS6 shown
in two projections: (A)
side view and (B) top view. The three-dimensional images of the optimized
structures were prepared using CYLview Visualization Software.[44]The PS4 is characterized
by upper and lower rim distances of 9.416
and 5.308 Å, respectively, and intramolecular H-bonds between
the OH groups stabilize the conformation. Such a conformation suggests
that the entrance of a guest molecule into the cavity through the
upper rim is viable. The investigated PS6 conformation exhibits a
less symmetric cavity structure than the cone conformation, stabilized
by the circular H-bonds between the hydroxyl groups, and the weak
interactions determine its stability. The protonated sulfonate groups,
in this conformation, are linked via hydrogen bonds, causing the deformation
and closure of the calixarenes.As shown recently,[45] it is possible
to predict the penetration of a guest molecule into the host’s
cavity based on their volumes. The van der Waals surface graph, obtained
by the intersection of the atomic van der Waals spheres, is reported
in Figure S4 and shows the maximum distances
in height, length, and width describing carboplatin’s size
with a total volume of 176 Å3.The calculated
carboplatin volume indicates its potential inclusion
into the PS4 and PS6 cavities, which exhibit inner volumes of 587
and 994 Å3, respectively. Moreover, on comparing the
van der Waals surfaces of carboplatin with the dimension of the symmetric
PS4, its inclusion within the cavity may be possible. However, several
factors must be taken into account in the formation of the host–guest
inclusion complexes. All the possible insertion scenarios, computationally
investigated, of the carboplatin drug into the cavity of PS4 and PS6
are reported in Scheme . The inclusion of carboplatin into the examined calixarenes was
simulated from both the upper rim (U) side and the side
of the lower rim (L). Also, carboplatin can be inserted
inside both the cavities assuming two different orientations. Label (a) depicts the arrangement in which the ammonia ligands point
toward the interior of the cavity and the cyclobutane ring points
outside, while in (b), the cyclobutane ring points toward
the inside of the cavity and the ammonia ligands are externally oriented.
Scheme 1
Investigated Possible Inclusion Modes of Carboplatin through the
Upper (U) and Lower (L) Rims of PS4, Indicated as 1, and
PS6, Indicated as 2
In U(a) configuration,
the ammonia ligands point toward the inside of the upper rim of the
cavity and the cyclobutane outward. In U(b) configuration,
the cyclobutane point toward the inside of the upper rim of the cavity
and the ammonia ligands outward. In L(a) configuration,
the ammonia ligands point toward the inside of the lower rim of the
cavity and the cyclobutane outward. In L(b) configuration,
the cyclobutane point toward the inside of the lower rim of the cavity
and the ammonia ligands outward.
Investigated Possible Inclusion Modes of Carboplatin through the
Upper (U) and Lower (L) Rims of PS4, Indicated as 1, and
PS6, Indicated as 2
In U(a) configuration,
the ammonia ligands point toward the inside of the upper rim of the
cavity and the cyclobutane outward. In U(b) configuration,
the cyclobutane point toward the inside of the upper rim of the cavity
and the ammonia ligands outward. In L(a) configuration,
the ammonia ligands point toward the inside of the lower rim of the
cavity and the cyclobutane outward. In L(b) configuration,
the cyclobutane point toward the inside of the lower rim of the cavity
and the ammonia ligands outward.The fully
optimized geometries obtained without imposing any constraint
for these host–guest complexes, together with the most significant
geometrical parameters and the values of the complexation free energies
calculated including basis set superposition error (BSSE) and entropy
change corrections in solution, are reported in Figure for the complexes formed with PS4 and in Figure for PS6 complexes.
Many attempts have been carried out, adopting different reciprocal
orientations between the hosts and the guest that collapse into the
reported optimized structures.
Figure 5
B97-D optimized geometrical structures
of PS4, bond critical points
(BCPs) present and binding energies (kcal mol–1).
The three-dimensional images of the optimized structures were prepared
using CYLview Visualization Software.[44]
Figure 6
B97-D optimized geometrical structures of PS6,
BCPs present and
binding energies (kcal mol–1). The three-dimensional
images of the optimized structures were prepared using CYLview Visualization
Software.[44]
B97-D optimized geometrical structures
of PS4, bond critical points
(BCPs) present and binding energies (kcal mol–1).
The three-dimensional images of the optimized structures were prepared
using CYLview Visualization Software.[44]B97-D optimized geometrical structures of PS6,
BCPs present and
binding energies (kcal mol–1). The three-dimensional
images of the optimized structures were prepared using CYLview Visualization
Software.[44]For PS4calixarene host, carboplatin can assume both (a) and (b) orientations, for the inclusion from the upper
side, obtaining type U(a) and U(b) conformations.
These structures are here reported as 1U(a), 1U(a), and 1U(b). Although an attempt to include carboplatin starting
from orientation (b) was carried out, during the optimization,
the orientation of the complex with respect to calixarene changed,
and the optimized geometry collapsed into the 1U(a) configuration. In the optimized 1U(b) adduct, carboplatin was manually included in the calixarene in the
host–guest model reported in Figure . For the inclusion from the lower side,
only the arrangements of (a) type converged, obtaining
two L(a) conformations indicated as 1L(a) and 1L(a). In all the intercepted structures, carboplatin prefers interacting
with the cavity through the ammonia ligands’ hydrogen atoms.
In all the systems having an (a) arrangement, the guest
remains outside the macrocycle. In the host–guest complex labeled 1U(b), the carboplatin occupies the center of the cavity with
the cyclobutane pointing inward, while the NH3 ligands
establish H-bond interactions with the oxygen atoms of the nearest
sulfonate groups. Such complexes are characterized by a computed binding
energy of −7.7, −4.7, −1.2, +9.0, and −3.8
kcal mol–1 for conformations 1U(a), 1U(a),1U(b), 1L(a) and 1L(a), respectively. The adduct in 1L(a) configuration is found to be
9.0 kcal mol–1 higher in energy with respect to
the isolated molecules. In that case, the guest lies under the cavity
with the hydrogen atoms of the two NH3 groups interacting
with the O atoms of the OH groups. The guest–host interactions
destabilize the original host structure by varying the charge distribution,
leading to a destabilization of the system. However, except for the 1L(a) configuration, the guest interacts
with both ends of the host, maximizing the stabilizing forces. Even
if all the computationally found configurations can be plausible,
the best agreement is obtained with the 1U(a) configuration. Indeed, its complexation energy is
in accordance with the experimentally estimated free energy of complexation
reported above, which corresponds to the value of −6.4 kcal
mol–1.As reported in Figure , for the inclusion of the guest from the
upper side into
PS6calixarene host, both (a) and (b) arrangements
are feasible. Despite the different initial reciprocal positions of
the host and the guest, carboplatin, in this case, chooses to interact
through the hydrogen atoms of the ammonia ligands with the PS6 cavity.
In both the intercepted structures, named 2U(a) and 2U(b), carboplatin
is located outside the host calixarene. The host–guest model
in which carboplatin was forcibly included into PS4 was computationally
simulated and indicated as 2U(b)Both (a) and (b) arrangements were
taken
into consideration for the insertion from the lower side, by obtaining
the systems identified as 2L(a) and 2L(b). Carboplatin generally prefers interacting with the host cavity
through the hydrogen atoms of the ammonia groups. In 2L(b) configuration, the NH3 groups are splayed outside the
cavity and cyclobutane points inward. In this conformation, H-bond
interactions between the carboxylic acid group of carboplatin and
the protonated sulfonate moiety are formed.The insertion of
carboplatin into the PS6 cavity entails a significant
deformation of the cavity, suggesting a stronger interaction of PS6
with the examined guest compared to PS4. Indeed, the calculated interaction
free energies are −4.2, −12.1, −12.3, −11.7,
and −8.4 kcal mol–1 for structures 2U(a), 2U(b), 2U(b), 2L(a), and 2L(b), respectively. Computational outcomes demonstrate that
several host–guest complexes with PS6 may be plausible, and
the carboplatin can interact from both U and L sides of the PS6calixarene
host, and only H-bonds determine their stability.Moreover,
the computationally obtained order of stability for the
complexation between carboplatin and either PS4 or PS6 is in agreement
with that observed experimentally.The nature of the molecular
interactions in the host–guest
complexes was investigated using the AIM tool.[46] According to Bader and Essén, the electronic density
value at the BCP—ρBCP and its Laplacian—∇2ρBCP determines the nature and the strength of the interactions.[47] In particular, for weak interactions such as
van der Waals and hydrogen bonding, ρ(r) is
quite small. ρ(r) is ∼10–2 a.u. or less for H-bond and 10–3 a.u. for van
der Waals interactions, while the corresponding Laplacian ∇2ρ(r) is positive in both the cases.
The electron density and the Laplacian values calculated at the BCPs
are reported in Table .
Table 3
Characteristics of (+3, −1)
BCPs Obtained from AIM Analysis for the Host–Guest Inclusion
Complexes.a
conformation
BCP
ρBCP
Δ2ρBCP
conformation
BCP
ρBCP
Δ2ρBCP
1U(a)1
1
0.0440
0.1179
1U(a)
1
0.0212
0.0604
2
0.0193
0.0577
2
0.0364
0.0952
3
0.0279
0.0774
4
0.0114
0.0420
1U(a)2
1
0.0292
0.0818
1U(b)1
1
0.0139
0.0442
2
0.0210
0.0660
2
0.0164
0.0457
3
0.0321
0.0908
3
0.0500
0.1350
4
0.0320
0.0873
4
0.0591
0.1470
1U(b)
1
0.0149
0.0450
1U(b)2
1
0.0109
0.0378
2
0.0289
0.0744
2
0.0164
0.0450
3
0.0191
0.0521
3
0.0105
0.0389
4
0.0231
0.0620
4
0.0194
0.0568
1L(a)1
1
0.0230
0.0666
1L(a)
1
0.0262
0.0719
2
0.0185
0.0561
3
0.0207
0.0612
2
0.0138
0.0422
4
0.0216
0.0030
1L(a)2
1
0.0397
0.1034
1L(b)
1
0.0141
0.0478
2
0.0157
0.0433
2
0.0378
0.0994
3
0.0132
0.0459
4
0.0532
0.1590
BCP: Bond Critical Point; ρ:
electron density (a.u.); ∇2: Laplacian of electron
density(a.u.).
BCP: Bond Critical Point; ρ:
electron density (a.u.); ∇2: Laplacian of electron
density(a.u.).For all the
complexes composed of carboplatin and the host PS4,
the electron density values fall in the expected range (0.0149–0.0400
a.u.) for H-bonds,[48] and the sign of Laplacian
of electron density is positive. The strength of these hydrogen bonds
in carboplatin-PS4 adducts is verified by the highest positive values
of the Laplacian. The most stable complex with carboplatin, U(a) configuration, characterized
by a complexation energy of −7.7 kcal mol–1, presents the critical points indicated as BCP1 and BCP2, which
correspond to stronger interactions than those existing in all the
presented systems. The values of Laplacian are 0.1179 a.u. for BCP1
and 0.0952 a.u. for BCP2. The bond lengths of the NH···O–S
bonds correlating to BCP1 and BCP2 are equal to 1.735 and 1.819 Å,
respectively.In the host–guest complexes formed with
the PS6 macrocycle,
the range of variation of the electron density is 0.0114–0.0800
a.u. and the Laplacian values are positive. For PS6, the most stable
configuration, excluding that in which carboplatin was manually included,
is 2U(b) with a binding energy
of −12.1 kcal mol–1. The kind of interaction
established in such complexes is considered the strongest interaction
due to the highest positive values of the Laplacian. In the complex,
four critical points corresponding to H-bonds are observed, indicated
as BCP1, BCP2, BCP3, and BCP4, defined by the corresponding values
of Laplacian of 0.0442, 0.0457, 0.1350, and 0.1470 a.u., respectively.
The bond lengths relative to BCP3 and BCP4 are very short and are
equal to 1.660 and 1.593 Å, respectively. These bond formations
help in increasing the stability of the complex.
Conclusions
Several techniques were used to investigate
and characterize the
supramolecular systems formed between either PS4 or PS6calixarenes
and carboplatin in aqueous media. UV–visible spectroscopy, 1H NMR spectroscopy, Job’s plot analysis, HPLC and DFT
calculations were employed and suggested the formation of 1:1 complexes.
The stability constants for the formed complexes were estimated to
be 5.3 × 104 M–1 and 9.8 ×
104 M–1, which correspond to free energy
of complexation of −6.40 and −6.81 kcal mol–1, in the case of PS4 and PS6, respectively, while the interaction
free energy theoretically calculated depends on the different inclusion
modes of carboplatin in the host cavities. Depending on the insertion
mode, different types of interactions are involved, and their calculated
binding energies have the same order of magnitude as those experimentally
estimated. Moreover, computational outcomes supported the same stability
order obtained experimentally. In all the intercepted structures,
the anticancer drug was not fully included within the host cavity.
This outcome was also confirmed by UV–vis analysis, and according
to the AIM analysis, hydrogen bond interactions stabilize the host–guest
complexes. This combined study contributes to ascertain the presence
in solution of stable complexes between carboplatin and PS4/PS6 macromolecules,
possibly preluding to their use as drug delivery systems.
Experimental and Computational Details
Chemicals
and Reagents
Carboplatin
and para-sulfocalix[4]arene, PS4, were obtained from
BLD Pharmatech Co., Limited, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. Para-sulfocalix[6]arene, PS6, was purchased from WuXi LabNetwork, China.
Deuterium oxide and HPLC grade water were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich.
Streptomycin, penicillin, fetal bovine serum, trichloroacetic acid
(TCA), Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium (DMEM) SRB,
and tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (TRIS) were purchased from Lonza,
Basel, Switzerland.
Instrumentation
UV spectrophotometric
measurements were conducted on a CARY 500 UV–vis–NIR
Scan dual-beam spectrophotometer (Varian, Palo Alto, California, USA). 1H NMR spectra were measured on a 400 MHz NMR Varian Mercury
console spectrometer (Varian, Palo Alto, California, USA). HPLC measurements
were carried out on a Waters 2690 Alliance HPLC system equipped with
a Waters 996 photodiode array detector (Waters, Milford Massachusetts,
USA.)
Cell Viability Assay
Cell
Culture
Breast adenocarcinoma
cells (MCF-7) and lung cancer cells (A-549) were obtained from American
Type Culture Collection, (University Boulevard, Manassas, VA 20110,
USA) and maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with streptomycin
(100 mg/mL), penicillin (100 units/mL), and 10% heat-inactivated fetal
bovine serum. Cells were incubated in 5% (v/v) CO2 at 37 °C.
Sulforhodamine B Colorimetric Assay
Breast
adenocarcinoma cells (MCF-7) and lung cancer cells (A-549)
were treated with different concentrations of PS4, PS6, carboplatin,
PS4/carboplatin and PS6/carboplatin complexes. The preliminary in
vitro anticancer activities of either MCF-7 or A-549 were tested using
SRB assay.[49−51] Briefly, aliquots of 100 μL cell suspension
(5 × 103 cells) were seeded in 96-well plates and
incubated in DMEM medium for 24 h at 37 °C and 7% CO2. Cells were treated with another aliquot of 100 μL medium
containing different concentrations of PS4, PS6, carboplatin, PS4/carboplatin
and PS6/carboplatin complexes (0.01, 0.03, 0.1, 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 30,
100, and 300 μg/mL). After 72 h, culture media were removed,
and 10% TCA (150 μL) was added at 4 °C for 1 h. The cells
were then washed several times with distilled water. SRB solution
(70 μL; 0.4% w/v) was added and incubated for 10 min (dark at
room temperature). Plates were washed three times with 1% acetic acid
and permitted to dry overnight. The protein-bound SRB stain was then
dissolved by adding 150 μL of 10 mM TRIS and absorbance measured
at 540 nm (FLUOstar Omega, Ortenberg, Germany).
Calculation of IC50
Statistical
analysis of IC50 values was computed from concentration–response
curves by Sigma Plot software, version 12.0 (System Software, San
Jose, CA, USA), using an E-max model equationwhere (R) is the residual
unaffected fraction (the resistance fraction), (D) is the drug concentration used, (Kd) is the drug concentration that produces a 50% reduction of the
maximum inhibition rate, and (m) is a Hill-type coefficient.
IC50 was defined as the drug concentration required to reduce absorbance
to 50% of the control (i.e., Kd = IC50
when R = 0 and Emax =
100 – R). All experiments were performed in
triplicate wells for each condition.
Computational
Methods
Both the calixarene
structures and their complexes with carboplatin were optimized by
using Gaussian 09 suite of programs (Gaussian, Inc., Wallingford CT,
2009),[52] at DFT level employing the B97-D
exchange and correlation functional.[53]For the Pt atom, the Stuttgart/Dresden pseudopotential was used in
conjunction with the corresponding split valence basis set.[54] The double-zeta 6-31G(d,p) basis set was used
for all the atoms except oxygen, for which a diffuse function has
been included. Similar systems have been successfully described using
this computational protocol.[45]Bulk
solvent effects were considered by using the Tomasi’s
implicit Polarizable Continuum Model (PCM)[55] as implemented in Gaussian09. The solvation Gibbs free energies
were calculated in the water dielectric environment (ε = 78.4)
at the same level, performing single-point calculations on gas-phase
optimized structures. Harmonic vibrational frequency calculations
were performed to confirm the minimum character of the intercepted
structures.The Gibbs free energies for the inclusion of the
carboplatin guest
(G) into calixarene hosts (H), in implicit water, ΔGsol, were calculated as the sum of two contributions:
gas-phase free energy ΔGgas and
a solvation free energy ΔGsolvwhereThe binding energies were corrected for the BSSE by using
the Boys–Bernardi
counterpoise technique.[56]In order
to assess the potential inclusion of carboplatin into
the calixarene cavities, the inner cavity volume was estimated by
using Swiss-Pdb Viewer software.[57]The types of molecular interactions between carboplatin and calixarenes,
responsible for the formation of the adducts, were studied using the
theory of AIM, recommended by Bader,[58] and
the AIMAll program.[46] The AIM approach
is based on the analysis of the electron density of molecular systems,
ρ(r), and is used to analyze the nature of
chemical bonds. The electron densities of all the formed adducts were
analyzed. The topological analysis of the molecular electron density,
namely the analysis of the gradient of the ρ(r), allows characterizing the chemical bonds and the so-called critical
points (CPs), points at which the gradient is zero, that is ∇ρ(r) = 0. The values of ρ(r) and its
derivatives at the CPs provide information about the nature and strength
of the molecular systems’ interactions under investigation.
A total of 9 second-order derivatives of ρ(r) are obtained, representing the elements of a real and symmetric
Hessian matrix. The matrix can be diagonalized, by a unitary transformation,
to obtain the corresponding eigenvalues (λ).CPs are characterized by ω and σ, the
rank, and the
signature, respectively. The rank is given by the number of non-zero
eigenvalues (non-zero curvatures of ρ(r) at
the CPs). The signature of a CP, instead, is the algebraic sum of
the signs of eigenvalues (signs of curvatures of ρ(r), the Laplacian ∇2ρ(r),
at the CPs). CP with ω = 3 and σ = +1, corresponding to
a (3, +1) CP, has two positive curvatures and ρ is a minimum
at CP in the plane defined by their corresponding axes while at CP
along the third axis, perpendicular to this plane, ρ is a maximum.
The presence of a CP with ω = 3 and σ = −1, corresponding
to a (3, −1) CP, highlights that an accumulation of electronic
charge density exists among the involved atoms; a chemical bond is
formed. Such a point is denoted as a BCP.
Authors: Rasha M Allam; Ahmed M Al-Abd; Alaa Khedr; Ola A Sharaf; Salwa M Nofal; Amani E Khalifa; Hisham A Mosli; Ashraf B Abdel-Naim Journal: Toxicol Lett Date: 2018-04-11 Impact factor: 4.372
Authors: Charles Lu; Roman Perez-Soler; Bilal Piperdi; Garrett L Walsh; Stephen G Swisher; W Roy Smythe; Hyung J Shin; Jae Y Ro; Lei Feng; Mylene Truong; Adiseshu Yalamanchili; Gabriel Lopez-Berestein; Waun K Hong; Abdul R Khokhar; Dong M Shin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Young Jin Jeon; Soo-Young Kim; Young Ho Ko; Shigeru Sakamoto; Kentaro Yamaguchi; Kimoon Kim Journal: Org Biomol Chem Date: 2005-04-28 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Lucas M Arantes; Eduardo V V Varejão; Karin J Pelizzaro-Rocha; Cíntia M S Cereda; Eneida de Paula; Maicon P Lourenço; Hélio A Duarte; Sergio A Fernandes Journal: Chem Biol Drug Des Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 2.817
Authors: P Skehan; R Storeng; D Scudiero; A Monks; J McMahon; D Vistica; J T Warren; H Bokesch; S Kenney; M R Boyd Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1990-07-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Marianne Nebsen; Mohamed K Abd El-Rahman; Maissa Y Salem; Amira M El-Kosasy; Mohamed G El-Bardicy Journal: Drug Test Anal Date: 2010-12-29 Impact factor: 3.345