| Literature DB >> 34095308 |
Arshia Majeed1, Waqar Hussain2,3, Farkhanda Yasmin4, Ammara Akhtar5, Nouman Rasool3.
Abstract
The recent COVID-19 pandemic has impacted nearly the whole world due to its high morbidity and mortality rate. Thus, scientists around the globe are working to find potent drugs and designing an effective vaccine against COVID-19. Phytochemicals from medicinal plants are known to have a long history for the treatment of various pathogens and infections; thus, keeping this in mind, this study was performed to explore the potential of different phytochemicals as candidate inhibitors of the HR1 domain in SARS-CoV-2 spike protein by using computer-aided drug discovery methods. Initially, the pharmacological assessment was performed to study the drug-likeness properties of the phytochemicals for their safe human administration. Suitable compounds were subjected to molecular docking to screen strongly binding phytochemicals with HR1 while the stability of ligand binding was analyzed using molecular dynamics simulations. Quantum computation-based density functional theory (DFT) analysis was constituted to analyze the reactivity of these compounds with the receptor. Through analysis, 108 phytochemicals passed the pharmacological assessment and upon docking of these 108 phytochemicals, 36 were screened passing a threshold of -8.5 kcal/mol. After analyzing stability and reactivity, 5 phytochemicals, i.e., SilybinC, Isopomiferin, Lycopene, SilydianinB, and Silydianin are identified as novel and potent candidates for the inhibition of HR1 domain in SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Based on these results, it is concluded that these compounds can play an important role in the design and development of a drug against COVID-19, after an exhaustive in vitro and in vivo examination of these compounds, in future.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34095308 PMCID: PMC8139335 DOI: 10.1155/2021/6661191
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Illustration of the spike protein and its all regions.
Binding energies (kcal/mol) and K (μM) of compounds with 2-dimensional plots of ligand-protein interaction.
| S. No. | Compounds | Binding affinity (kcal/mol) |
| Interaction plots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | SilybinC | -10.0 | 0.046 |
|
| 2. | Isopomiferin | -9.9 | 0.054 |
|
| 3. | Lycopene | -9.8 | 0.064 |
|
| 4. | SilydianinB | -9.8 | 0.064 |
|
| 5. | Silydianin | -9.7 | 0.076 |
|
| 6. | Osajin | -9.5 | 0.107 |
|
| 7. | Anthraxin | -9.5 | 0.107 |
|
| 8. | Derrisin | -9.5 | 0.107 |
|
| 9. | SigmoidinA | -9.4 | 0.127 |
|
| 10. | SigmoidinC | -9.4 | 0.127 |
|
| 11. | EuchrenoneB | -9.3 | 0.150 |
|
| 12. | SilybinD | -9.3 | 0.150 |
|
| 13. | IsosilybinA | -9.2 | 0.177 |
|
| 14. | Cannflavin | -9.2 | 0.177 |
|
| 15. | Fumaritine N-oxide | -9.1 | 0.210 |
|
| 16. | SilybinA | -9.1 | 0.210 |
|
| 17. | Diprenyleriodictyol | -9.1 | 0.210 |
|
| 18. | Robustone | -9.0 | 0.249 |
|
| 19. | Mundulinol | -9.0 | 0.249 |
|
| 20. | Narlumicine | -8.9 | 0.294 |
|
| 21. | Papracinine | -8.9 | 0.294 |
|
| 22. | Oxysanguinarine | -8.8 | 0.349 |
|
| 23. | Papraine | -8.8 | 0.349 |
|
| 24. | Paprarine | -8.8 | 0.349 |
|
| 25. | AbyssinoneV | -8.8 | 0.349 |
|
| 26. | TomentodiplaconeB | -8.8 | 0.349 |
|
| 27. | Emodin | -8.7 | 0.413 |
|
| 28. | SigmoidinB | -8.7 | 0.413 |
|
| 29. | SilybinB | -8.7 | 0.413 |
|
| 30. | IsosilybinB | -8.7 | 0.413 |
|
| 31. | SchizolaenoneB | -8.7 | 0.413 |
|
| 32. | EryvarinQ | -8.6 | 0.489 |
|
| 33. | IsoerysenegalenseinE | -8.6 | 0.489 |
|
| 34. | Laburnetin | -8.6 | 0.489 |
|
| 35. | Isomangostin | -8.6 | 0.489 |
|
| 36. | Raddeanine | -8.5 | 0.579 |
|
Average RMSD values for all complexes at temperatures 300 K, 325 K, 340 K, and 350 K.
| The complex of HR1 and phytochemicals | Average RMSD at various temperatures (Å) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 300 K | 325 K | 340 K | 350 K | |
| SilybinC | 0.55 | 0.77 | 1.25 | 1.36 |
| Isopomiferin | 0.59 | 1.04 | 1.29 | 1.61 |
| Lycopene | 1.20 | 1.70 | 1.89 | 1.96 |
| SilydianinB | 1.65 | 1.88 | 2.62 | 2.87 |
| Silydianin | 1.70 | 1.93 | 2.72 | 2.94 |
Figure 2R graphs for complexes of strongly binding phytochemicals with HR1 domain. (a) SilybinC, (b) Isopomiferin, (c) Lycopene, (d) SilydianinB, and (e) Silydianin.
Reactivity of phytochemicals with HR1 domain, depicted by band energy gaps.
| The complex of HR1 domain and phytochemicals |
|
| Band energy gap (Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| SilybinC | -0.280 | -0.395 | 0.116 |
| Isopomiferin | -0.218 | -0.335 | 0.117 |
| Lycopene | -0.229 | -0.342 | 0.114 |
| SilydianinB | -0.164 | -0.288 | 0.124 |
| Silydianin | -0.212 | -0.339 | 0.127 |
Figure 3Illustration of the interaction of top five phytochemicals in terms of highest binding affinity, strong binding stability, and reactivity values with HR1 domain. (a) SilybinC, (b) Isopomiferin, (c) Lycopene, (d) SilydianinB, and (e) Silydianin. The purple colour exhibits a hydrogen bond donor, and the green colour shows hydrogen bond acceptor interactions between the HR1 residues and ligand.