| Literature DB >> 35142606 |
Pierre Darme1, Sandie Escotte-Binet2, Julien Cordonnier1, Simon Remy2, Jane Hubert3, Charlotte Sayagh4, Nicolas Borie4, Isabelle Villena2, Laurence Voutquenne-Nazabadioko4, Manuel Dauchez5, Stéphanie Baud5, Jean-Hugues Renault4, Dominique Aubert2.
Abstract
Toxoplasmosis is a worldwide parasitosis that is generally benign. The infestation may pose a risk to immunocompromized patients and to fetuses when pregnant women have recently seroconverted. Current treatments have numerous side effects and chemoresistance is emerging, hence the need to find new anti-Toxoplasma gondii substances. This study focuses on the antiparasitic potential of lupane-type pentacyclic triterpenes isolated from the bark of black alder (Alnus glutinosa), as well as the hypothesis of their macromolecular target by an original method of reverse docking. Among the isolated triterpenes, betulone was the most active compound with an IC50 of 2.7 ± 1.2 μM, a CC50 greater than 80 μM, and a selectivity index of over 29.6. An additional study of the anti-T. gondii potential of commercially available compounds (betulonic acid methyl ester and betulonic acid) showed the important role of the C3 ketone function and the C28 oxidation level on the lupane-type triterpene in the antiparasitic activity since their IC50 and CC50 were similar to that of betulone. Finally, the most active compounds were subjected to the AMIDE reverse docking workflow. A dataset of 87 T. gondii proteins from the Protein Data Bank was created. It identified calcium-dependent protein kinase CDPK3 as the most likely target of betulin derivatives. © P. Darme et al., published by EDP Sciences, 2022.Entities:
Keywords: Alnus glutinosa; Betulone; Inverse docking; Target hypothesis; Toxoplasma gondii; triterpene
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35142606 PMCID: PMC8830292 DOI: 10.1051/parasite/2022008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasite ISSN: 1252-607X Impact factor: 3.000
Absorption and permeation computation of the eight lupane-type triterpenes.
| Compound | MW (Da) | MlogP | H-bond acceptors | H-bond donors | Lipinski compliant | GI absorption | BBB permeant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Betulin | 442.72 | 6.00 | 2 | 2 | Yes | Low | No |
| Betulinaldehyde | 440.70 | 5.89 | 2 | 1 | Yes | Low | No |
| Betulinic acid | 456.70 | 5.82 | 3 | 2 | Yes | Low | No |
| Betulone | 440.70 | 5.89 | 2 | 1 | Yes | Low | No |
| Lupeol | 426.72 | 6.92 | 1 | 1 | Yes | Low | No |
| Lupenone | 424.70 | 6.82 | 1 | 0 | Yes | Low | No |
| Betulonic acid | 454.68 | 5.73 | 3 | 1 | Yes | Low | No |
| Betulonic acid methyl ester | 468.71 | 5.92 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Low | No |
Figure 12D representation of purified compounds (1–6, 9) from n-heptane extract of A. glutinosa bark, commercially available compounds (7, 8), and reference antiparasitic compound (10).
Figure 2Screening at 10 μM of isolated compounds (1–5, 9) from n-heptane bark extract of A. glutinosa.
In vitro determination of IC50, CC50, and SI from purified and commercial lupane-type triterpenes on T. gondii.
| Compound | IC50 (μM) | CC50 (μM) | Selectivity index (SI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Betulin ( | 13.3 ± 7.3 | >80 | >6.0 |
| Betulinaldehyde ( | 5.1 ± 0.6 | >80 | >15.7 |
| Betulinic acid ( | 8.3 ± 2.7 | >80 | >9.6 |
| Betulone ( | 2.7 ± 1.2 | >80 | >29.6 |
| Lupeol ( | 13.8 ± 4.0 | >80 | >5.8 |
| Betulonic acid ( | 4.3 ± 1.4 | >80 | >18.6 |
| Betulonic acid methyl ester ( | 3.1 ± 0.4 | >80 | >25.8 |
| Pyrimethamine ( | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 27.7 | 38.0 |
Positive control.
Cluster population, free energy of binding, scoring 1 and 2 of the 10 most relevant complexes containing betulone. The three underlined PDB IDs are selected proteins for re-docking experiments.
| Protein | PDB ID | Population | Δ | Scoring 1 (a.u.) | Scoring 2 (a.u.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 86 | −8.42 | 0.6441 | 0.6577 |
| DHFR | 6AOI | 95 | −7.14 | 0.6247 | 0.6623 |
| DJ-1 | 4XLL | 74 | −8.58 | 0.6917 | 0.7109 |
| PLP1 | 6D7A | 77 | −7.23 | 0.6802 | 0.7334 |
| OA | 5EAV | 68 | −8.52 | 0.7167 | 0.7432 |
| FBP A | 5TKP | 67 | −8.28 | 0.7208 | 0.7532 |
|
|
| 62 | −9.44 | 0.7417 | 0.7658 |
| ROP18 | 4JRN | 61 | −8.82 | 0.7461 | 0.7772 |
|
|
| 61 | −8.63 | 0.7459 | 0.7798 |
| MP 2 | 2XGG | 65 | −7.38 | 0.7318 | 0.7887 |
Population, free energy of binding, and ligand efficiency of the three re-docked ligand-complexes. Free energy of binding (ΔG) is expressed in kcal/mol. POP stands for cluster population. Ligand efficiency (Lig. Eff.) is an AutoDock Tools computed quantity. The lower the value, the better the complex.
| Protein (PDB ID) | Betulone | Betulonic acid | Betulonic acid methyl ester | Betulinic acid | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDPK3 (3HZT) | POP | 149 | 128 | 138 | 110 |
| Δ | −11.52 | −9.61 | −12.74 | −9.79 | |
| Lig. Eff. | −0.36 | −0.30 | −0.39 | −0.30 | |
| ENR (2O50) | POP | 137 | 85 | 113 | 72 |
| Δ | −9.55 | −8.89 | −10.87 | −8.87 | |
| Lig. Eff. | −0.30 | −0.28 | −0.33 | −0.27 | |
| ROP8 (3BYV) | POP | 150 | 150 | 139 | 111 |
| Δ | −9.22 | −7.34 | −10.39 | −7.74 | |
| Lig. Eff. | −0.29 | −0.23 | −0.31 | −0.23 | |
Figure 3PyMol visualization of PDB ID 3HZT (CDPK3), 2O50 (ENR), and 3BYV (ROP8). (a) 3HZT with betulone (orange) and co-crystallized ligand (PDB ID J60, pink). (b) 2O50 with betulone (orange) and triclosan (pink). (c) 3BYV with betulone (orange). (d) 3HZT with BAME (yellow) and co-crystallized ligand (PDB ID J60, pink). (e) 2O50 with BAME (yellow) and triclosan (pink). (f) 3BYV with BAME (yellow). The inserts of each panel are the co-location of ligands and known inhibitors (if available) in the pockets (surfaces).
Figure 4(a) PyMol visualization of the binding site of BAME (yellow) with PDB ID 3HZT (a); betulone (orange) in protein with PDB ID 3HZT (b); betulone (orange) with PDB ID 2O50 (c). Yellow dotted lines represent contacts between the complexes within 3.5 Å. Labeled residues associated with yellow dotted lines are contacts within 3 Å.