| Literature DB >> 34890431 |
Mamaru Bitew1, Tegene Desalegn1, Taye B Demissie2, Anteneh Belayneh3, Milkyas Endale1, Rajalakshmanan Eswaramoorthy1,4.
Abstract
Computer aided toxicity and pharmacokinetic prediction studies attracted the attention of pharmaceutical industries as an alternative means to predict potential drug candidates. In the present study, in-silico pharmacokinetic properties (ADME), drug-likeness, toxicity profiles of sixteen antidiabetic flavonoids that have ideal bidentate chelating sites for metal ion coordination were examined using SwissADME, Pro Tox II, vNN and ADMETlab web tools. Density functional theory (DFT) calculations were also employed to calculate quantum chemical descriptors of the compounds. Molecular docking studies against human alpha amylase were also conducted. The results were compared with the control drugs, metformin and acarbose. The drug-likeness prediction results showed that all flavonoids, except myricetin, were found to obey Lipinski's rule of five for their drug like molecular nature. Pharmacokinetically, chrysin, wogonin, genistein, baicalein, and apigenin showed best absorption profile with human intestinal absorption (HIA) value of ≥ 30%, compared to the other flavonoids. Baicalein, butein, ellagic acid, eriodyctiol, Fisetin and quercetin were predicted to show carcinogenicity. The flavonoid derivatives considered in this study are predicted to be suitable molecules for CYP3A probes, except eriodyctiol which interacts with P-glycoprotein (p-gp). The toxicological endpoints prediction analysis showed that the median lethal dose (LD50) values range from 159-3919 mg/Kg, of which baicalein and quercetin are found to be mutagenic whereas butein is found to be the only immunotoxin. Molecular docking studies showed that the significant interaction (-7.5 to -8.3 kcal/mol) of the studied molecules in the binding pocket of the α-amylase protein relative to the control metformin with the crucial amino acids Asp 197, Glu 233, Asp 197, Glu 233, Trp 59, Tyr 62, His 101, Leu 162, Arg 195, His 299 and Leu 165. Chrysin was predicted to be a ligand with high absorption and lipophilicity with 84.6% absorption compared to metformin (78.3%). Moreover, quantum chemical, ADMET, drug-likeness and molecular docking profiles predicted that chrysin is a good bidentate ligand.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34890431 PMCID: PMC8664201 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260853
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Schematic representation of ligand screening flowchart.
vNN stands for variable nearest neighbor.
Fig 2The structures of the flavonoid derivatives considered in this study.
The numbers (1 to 18) stand for 1 = Apigenin, 2 = Baicalein, 3 = Butein, 4 = Chrysin, 5 = Ellagic acid, 6 = Eriodyctiol, 7 = Fisetin, 8 = Kaempferol, 9 = Quercetin, 10 = Genistein, 11 = Isorhamnetin, 12 = Luteolin, 13 = Morin, 14 = Naringenin, 15 = Wogonin, 16 = Myricetin, 17 = acarbose and 18 = metformin.
The physicochemical property of the flavonoids and the two control drugs.
| Physicochemical Property | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flavonoid | MW | NHBAs | NHBDs | TPSA | %Abs | MR | log S | LogD | LogP |
|
| 270.24 | 5 | 3 | 90.9 | 77.64 | 73.99 | -3.595 | 0.487 | 2.577 |
|
| 270.24 | 5 | 3 | 90.90 | 77.64 | 73.99 | -3.578 | 0.583 | 2.577 |
|
| 272.25 | 5 | 4 | 97.99 | 75.19 | 74.34 | -3.427 | 0.266 | 2.405 |
|
| 254.24 | 4 | 2 | 70.67 | 84.62 | 71.97 | -3.709 | 0.847 | 2.871 |
|
| 302.19 | 8 | 4 | 141.34 | 60.24 | 75.31 | -3.076 | -0.740 | 1.313 |
|
| 288.25 | 6 | 4 | 107.22 | 72.01 | 73.59 | -3.534 | 0.311 | 2.216 |
|
| 286.24 | 6 | 4 | 111.13 | 70.66 | 76.01 | -3.417 | 0.284 | 2.282 |
|
| 286.24 | 6 | 4 | 111.13 | 70.66 | 76.01 | -3.427 | 0.273 | 2.282 |
|
| 302.24 | 7 | 5 | 131.36 | 63.68 | 78.03 | -3.534 | 0.142 | 1.988 |
|
| 270.24 | 5 | 3 | 90.90 | 77.64 | 73.99 | -3.632 | 0.563 | 2.577 |
|
| 286.24 | 6 | 4 | 111.13 | 70.66 | 76.01 | -3.427 | 0.273 | 2.282 |
|
| 286.24 | 6 | 4 | 111.13 | 70.66 | 76.01 | -3.502 | 0.302 | 2.282 |
|
| 302.24 | 7 | 5 | 131.36 | 63.68 | 78.04 | -3.282 | 0.113 | 1.988 |
|
| 286.24 | 6 | 4 | 111.13 | 70.66 | 76.01 | -3.427 | 0.273 | 2.282 |
|
| 284.26 | 5 | 2 | 79.90 | 81.43 | 78.46 | -3.696 | 0.927 | 2.88 |
|
| 318.24 | 8 | 6 | 151.59 | 56.70 | 80.06 | -3.220 | -0.068 | 1.694 |
| 17 | 645.6 | 19 | 14 | 321.17 | -1.80 | 136.69 | -1.368 | 2.543 | -8.565 |
| 18 | 129.16 | 2 | 4 | 88.99 | 78.30 | 36.93 | -0.656 | -0.192 | -1.034 |
Comparison of solubility, partition coefficient, water solubility, and PKa of flavonoids predicted using different methods.
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | Method | ChemAxon | |||||
| ALOGPS | ADMETlab | Pred. (mg/mL) | ChemAxon | ALOGPS | ADMETlab | ||
|
| -3.4 | -3.595 | 0.118 | 2.71 | 3.07 | 2.577 | 6.63 |
|
| - | -3.578 | - | - | - | 2.577 | - |
|
| - | -3.427 | - | - | - | 2.405 | - |
|
| -3.4 | -3.709 | 0.105 | 3.01 | 3.44 | 2.871 | 6.58 |
|
| -2.6 | -3.076 | 0.823 | 2.32 | 1.59 | 1.313 | 5.54 |
|
| - | -3.534 | - | - | - | 2.216 | - |
|
| -3.3 | -3.417 | 0.151 | 1.81 | 2.03 | 2.282 | 6.32 |
|
| -3.2 | -3.427 | 0.178 | 2.46 | 1.99 | 2.282 | 6.44 |
|
| -3.1 | -3.534 | 0.261 | 2.16 | 1.81 | 1.988 | 6.44 |
|
| -3.3 | -3.632 | 0.123 | 3.08 | 3.04 | 2.577 | 6.55 |
|
| -3.427 | - | - | - | 2.282 | - | |
|
| -3.3 | -3.502 | 0.138 | 2.4 | 2.73 | 2.282 | 6.57 |
|
| -3.282 | - | - | - | 1.988 | - | |
|
| -3.1 | -3.427 | 0.214 | 2.84 | 2.47 | 2.282 | 7.91 |
|
| -3.696 | - | - | - | 2.880 | - | |
|
| -3 | -3.22 | 0.301 | 1.85 | 1.66 | 1.694 | 6.43 |
Absorption, distribution and excretion parameters of the flavonoids and the two controls.
| Flavonoids | Absorption | Distribution | Excretion | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caco-2 | Pgp inh | Pgp sub | HIA | F20 | F30 | PPB | BBB | VD | T1/2 | CL | |
|
| -4.985 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 90.03 | 0 | -0.58 | 1.358 | 1.90 |
|
| -5.120 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 85.90 | 1 | -0.69 | 1.259 | 1.92 |
|
| -5.204 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 86.74 | 0 | -0.92 | 1.102 | 1.66 |
|
| -4.973 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 89.57 | 1 | -0.35 | 1.667 | 1.98 |
|
| -6.001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 65.67 | 1 | -0.99 | 1.109 | 1.43 |
|
| -5.302 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 92.20 | 1 | -0.91 | 0.634 | 1.89 |
|
| -5.126 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 91.06 | 0 | -0.95 | 0.586 | 1.90 |
|
| -5.075 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 90.85 | 0 | -0.98 | 0.696 | 1.90 |
|
| -6.168 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 94.99 | 0 | -1.56 | 0.200 | 2.00 |
|
| -4.999 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 90.537 | 0 | -0.58 | 1.299 | 1.941 |
|
| -5.075 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 90.847 | 0 | -0.97 | 0.696 | 1.941 |
|
| -5.123 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 91.796 | 0 | -0.93 | 0.745 | 1.919 |
|
| -6.206 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 87.95 | 0 | -1.46 | 0.714 | 2.002 |
|
| -5.075 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 90.847 | 0 | -0.97 | 0.696 | 1.941 |
|
| -4.732 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 86.612 | 1 | -0.32 | 1.706 | 1.894 |
|
| -6.630 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 76.595 | 0 | -1.39 | 0.940 | 1.709 |
| 17 | -7.128 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21.14 | 0 | -1.22 | 1.320 | 0.50 |
| 18 | -5.803 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 23.65 | 1 | -0.19 | 1.806 | 0.90 |
The interaction of target flavonoids with cytochromes P450 isoforms predicted using SwissADME.
| Molecule | GI ab | BBB p | p-gp substrate | CYP 1A2 In | CYP 2C19 In | CYP 2C9 In | CYP 2D6 In | CYP 3A4 In | log Kp (cm/s) | HLM | MMP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | -5.8 | √ | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -5.7 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | -5.96 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -5.35 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | -7.36 | Ø | X |
|
| High | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes | -6.62 | Ø | Ø |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -6.65 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -6.7 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -7.05 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -6.05 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -6.7 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -6.25 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -7.05 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | -6.7 | Ø | √ |
|
| High | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | -5.56 | Ø | √ |
|
| Low | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | -7.4 | Ø | √ |
|
| Low | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | -16.29 | Ø | X |
|
| High | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | -7.84 | Ø | Ø |
logKp skin permeation, abn = absorption, prn = permission, In = Inhibitor, GI = gastrointestinal, BBB = blood brain barrier, In = inhibitor. Symbols X, √ and Ø represents inactive, active and no high confidence prediction available, respectively.
Pro Tox II predicted organ toxicity, toxicological end points and acute toxicity.
| Flavonoid | Hepatotoxicity | Carcinogenicity | Immunotoxicity | Mutagenicity | Cytotoxicity | LD50(mg/Kg) | Acute Toxicity class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 2000 | 4 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | active | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | Active | active | inactive | inactive | 1000 | 4 |
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 2500 | 5 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | inactive | inactive | 2991 | 4 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | inactive | inactive | 2000 | 4 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | inactive | inactive | 159 | 3 |
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | active | inactive | 159 | 3 |
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 2500 | 5 |
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | active | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | inactive | active | inactive | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 3919 | 5 |
|
| inactive | Active | inactive | active | inactive | 159 | 3 |
|
| Inactive | Inactive | inactive | inactive | inactive | 1300 | 4 |
Toxicity profile of flavonoids and the two controls predicted using different methods.
| Toxicity | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flavonoids considered | ADMETlab | vNN | ||||
| hERG | H-HT | AMES | SkinSen | DILI | Cytotoxicity | |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | X | X |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Ø | Ø |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Ø | Ø |
|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Ø | Ø |
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Ø | Ø |
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Ø | X |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | √ | Ø |
|
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | Ø | Ø |
The symbols X, √ and Ø represents inactive, active and no high confidence prediction available, respectively.
Quantum chemical descriptors of the flavonoid derivatives calculated using DFT/B3LYP hybrid functional was used together with 6–311++G(d,p) basis set.
| FLs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 4.190 | 0.155 | -0.155 | 0.077 | 6.494 | 0.156 | 6.393 | 6.679 |
|
| 4.114 | 0.158 | -0.158 | 0.076 | 6.615 | 0.165 | 6.043 | 7.272 |
|
| 2.838 | 0.180 | -0.180 | 0.052 | 9.587 | 0.309 | 3.234 | 4.336 |
|
| 2.428 | 0.129 | -0.129 | 0.045 | 11.207 | 0.187 | 5.333 | 8.293 |
|
| 4.339 | 0.172 | -0.172 | 0.080 | 6.272 | 0.185 | 5.413 | 1.976 |
|
| 4.142 | 0.156 | -0.156 | 0.076 | 6.569 | 0.160 | 6.232 | 5.520 |
|
| 3.764 | 0.157 | -0.157 | 0.069 | 7.230 | 0.178 | 5.616 | 5.143 |
|
| 3.867 | 0.154 | -0.154 | 0.071 | 7.036 | 0.166 | 6.011 | 6.342 |
|
| 3.794 | 0.157 | -0.157 | 0.070 | 7.173 | 0.178 | 5.627 | 6.225 |
|
| 7.982 | 0.063 | -0.063 | 0.147 | 3.409 | 0.013 | 74.683 | 8.927 |
|
| 3.867 | 0.154 | -0.154 | 0.071 | 7.037 | 0.166 | 6.013 | 6.339 |
|
| 4.082 | 0.157 | -0.157 | 0.075 | 6.666 | 0.165 | 6.065 | 7.019 |
|
| 3.787 | 0.159 | -0.159 | 0.070 | 7.185 | 0.181 | 5.539 | 4.287 |
|
| 3.869 | 0.154 | -0.154 | 0.071 | 7.034 | 0.166 | 6.024 | 6.269 |
|
| 3.956 | 0.159 | -0.159 | 0.073 | 6.879 | 0.173 | 5.765 | 8.622 |
|
| 3.812 | 0.156 | -0.156 | 0.070 | 7.138 | 0.174 | 5.754 | 6.364 |
|
| 14.281 | 0.047 | -0.047 | 0.262 | 1.905 | 0.004 | 237.574 | 5.795 |
Fig 32D (upper panel) and 3D (upper panel) representations of the binding modes of compounds apigenin to Human α-amylase (PDB ID: 4W93).
Fig 52D (upper panel) and 3D (lower panel) representations of the binding modes of metformin to Human α-amylase (PDB ID: 4W93).
Molecular docking value of flavonoids against Human α-amylase (PDB ID: 4W93).
| Compound |
| Residual Amino acid Interactions | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrophobic/Pi-Cation/Pi-Anion/ Pi-Alkyl interactions | Van-der Walls interactions | |||
|
| - 8.3 | Gln 63 | Tyr 62, Trp 58, His 299, Asp 300 | Asn 298, Arg 195, Ile 235 |
|
| -8.1 | Asp 197, Glu 233 | Trp 59, Tyr 62, Hoh 773, Hoh 789 | Leu 165, His 101, Leu 162, Ala 198, Arg 195, Asp 300, His 299 |
|
| -7.6 | Gln 63 | Trp 50 Tyr 62, Trp 58 | Thr 163, Leu 165, His 299, Arg 195, Asn 298, Glu 233, Asp 300 |
|
| -8.2 | Arg 195, Asp 300 | Trp 59, Trp 58, Tyr 62, His 299 | Gln 63 |
|
| -8.0 | Glu 233 | Trp58, Trp 59 | His 305, Asp 300, Arg 195 Asp 197, His 101, Tyr 62, Leu 165, Gln 63 |
|
| -7.8 | Gln 63, Tyr 62 Glu 233 | Trp 59, Tyr 62 | Leu 165, Trp 58, His 299, Asp 197, Arg 195, Ala 198 |
|
| -7.8 | --- | Tyr 62, Trp 59 | Trp 58, His 299, Arg, 195, Asp 197, Ala 198, His 101, Gln 63 |
|
| -8.1 | Gln 63, Tyr 62 | Trp 59, Tyr 62 | Trp 58, His 299, Glu 233, Asp 197, Arg 195, Ala 198 Leu 165 |
|
| -8.1 | Gln 63, Tyr 62, Glu 233, Asp 197 | Trp 59, Tyr 62 | Leu 165, Ala 198, Arg 195, Trp 58, His 299 |
|
| -7.7 | Gln 63, Asp 197 | Trp 59 | Ala 198, Glu 233 |
|
| -7.6 | Gln 63, Asp 197 | Trp 59, Tyr 62, Asp 197, Glu 233, Arg 195 | Leu 165, His 101, Trp 58, His 299 |
|
| -8.3 | Gln 63 | Trp 59, Tyr 62, Arg 195 | Trp 58, His 299, Glu 233, Ala 198, Leu 165 |
|
| -7.5 | Gln 63 | Tyr 62, Trp 59, Asp 300 | Asp 197, Arg 195 His 299, Trp 58 |
|
| -7.6 | Gln 63, Arg 195, Glu 233 | Trp 59, Tyr 62 | Trp 58, His 299, Leu 165 |
|
| -7.8 | Arg 195 Asp 300 | Trp 59 Tyr 62, His 299, Leu 162 | Gln 63, Asp 197, Glu 233, Asn 298, ILE 235 |
|
| -8.0 | His 299, Gln 63, Asp 197 | Trp 59, Asp 197, Tyr 62 | Gln 63, His 101, Arg 195 |
|
| -4.5 | Asp 197, Glu 233 | Asp 197, Glu 233 | Trp 59, Tyr 62, Leu 165, His 101, Leu 162, Arg 195, His 299 |