| Literature DB >> 35352998 |
Kirsten E Knoll1, Mietha M van der Walt1, Du Toit Loots1.
Abstract
The highly adaptive cellular response of Mycobacterium tuberculosis to various antibiotics and the high costs for clinical trials, hampers the development of novel antimicrobial agents with improved efficacy and safety. Subsequently, in silico drug screening methods are more commonly being used for the discovery and development of drugs, and have been proven useful for predicting the pharmacokinetics, toxicities, and targets, of prospective new antimicrobial agents. In this investigation we used a reversed target fishing approach to determine potential hit targets and their possible interactions between M. tuberculosis and decoquinate RMB041, a propitious new antituberculosis compound. Two of the 13 identified targets, Cyp130 and BlaI, were strongly proposed as optimal drug-targets for dormant M. tuberculosis, of which the first showed the highest comparative binding affinity to decoquinate RMB041. The metabolic pathways associated with the selected target proteins were compared to previously published molecular mechanisms of decoquinate RMB041 against M. tuberculosis, whereby we confirmed disrupted metabolism of proteins, cell wall components, and DNA. We also described the steps within these pathways that are inhibited and elaborated on decoquinate RMB041's activity against dormant M. tuberculosis. This compound has previously showed promising in vitro safety and good oral bioavailability, which were both supported by this in silico study. The pharmacokinetic properties and toxicity of this compound were predicted and investigated using the online tools pkCSM and SwissADME, and Discovery Studio software, which furthermore supports previous safety and bioavailability characteristics of decoquinate RMB041 for use as an antimycobacterial medication. IMPORTANCE This article elaborates on the mechanism of action of a novel antibiotic compound against both, active and dormant Mycobacterium tuberculosis and describes its pharmacokinetics (including oral bioavailability and toxicity). Information provided in this article serves useful during the search for drugs that shorten the treatment regimen for Tuberculosis and cause minimal adverse effects.Entities:
Keywords: Mycobacterium tuberculosis; decoquinate RMB041; in silico; pharmacokinetics; virtual docking
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35352998 PMCID: PMC9045315 DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.02315-21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiol Spectr ISSN: 2165-0497
FIG 1Structure of decoquinate RMB041.
Molecular properties of decoquinate RMB041, as provided by SwissADME and Discovery Studio
| Molecular properties | SwissADME | Discovery Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Canonical SMILES | CCCCCCCCCCOc1cc2c(cc1OCC)n | -0 |
| Formula | C28H44N2O6 | C28H44N2O6 |
| MW | 504.66 | 504.67 |
| Number atoms | 36 | 80 |
| TPSA | 99.02 | 98.37 |
| Molecular refractivity | 145.00 | - |
| Number rotatable bonds | 19 | 19 |
| Number H-bond acceptors | 6 | 8 |
| Number H-bond donors | 2 | 2 |
No values were given by the associated tools.
Number of violations of commonly applied pharmaceutical rules of drugability, as provided by SwissADME
| Pharmaceutical test | SwissADME | Rule violated | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lipinski number violations | 1/5 | MW > 500 | Lipinski ( |
| Veber number violations | 1/2 | Number rotatable bond > 10 | Veber, Johnson ( |
| Egan number violations | 0/2 | - | Egan, Merz ( |
| Muegge number violations | 2/8 | MW > 300 | Muegge, Heald ( |
No values were given by the associated tools.
ADMET pharmacokinetic properties of decoquinate RMB041, provided by computational prediction methods and previous literature
| Absorption | SwissADME | pkCSM | Discovery Studio | Previous literature |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lipophilicity | 4.63 (iLogP) | 4.80 (AlogP98) | 4.90 (cLogP) | |
| Aqueous solubility (log mol/L) | −5.68 | −5.82 | −3.60 | - |
| Solubility | Moderate | - | Good | - |
| Caco2 permeability (log Papp) | - | 0.662 | - | - |
| GI absorption | High | 82.14% | Moderate | - |
| Bioavailability | 0.55 | - | - | 21% |
| Pgp substrate | No | Yes | - | - |
| Pgp I & II inhibitor | - | Yes | - | - |
| Distribution | ||||
| BBB permeant (log) | No | −0.741 | Very low | - |
| CNS permeant (log) | - | −3.671 | - | - |
| VDss (human) | 0.32 log L/kg | - | - | - |
| Metabolism | ||||
| Plasma protein binding | - | - | No | - |
| Plasma binding (Fu) | - | 0.06 (human) | - | 0.1 (mouse) |
| Microsomal binding (Fu) | - | - | 0.06 (mouse) | |
| CYP1A2 inhibitor | No | No | - | - |
| CYP2C19 inhibitor | No | Yes | - | - |
| CYP2C9 inhibitor | No | Yes | - | - |
| CYP2D6 inhibitor | No | No | No | - |
| CYP3A4 inhibitor | Yes | Yes | - | - |
| Elimination | ||||
| CLint | - | - | - | 16 mL/min/kg |
| EH | <0.43 | - | - | - |
| CLtot | - | 19 mL/min/kg | - | - |
| t1/2 | - | - | - | 23.4h |
| Toxicity | ||||
| AMES toxicity | NP | No | Non-mutagen | NP |
| Max tolerated dose | NP | 799 mg/kg (human) | 90 mg/kg (rat) | NP |
| hERG I & II inhibitor | NP | No | - | NP |
| Hepatotoxicity | NP | Yes | No | NP |
| Carcinogen (standard FDA test) | NP | NP | Noncarcinogen | NP |
| Aerobic biodegradability | NP | NP | Degradable | NP |
NP, none predicted; Papp, apparent permeability coefficient; GI, gastrointestinal; Pgp, P-glycoprotein; BBB; blood brain barrier; CNS, central nervous system; VDss, volume of distribution; Fu, fraction unbound; CLint, intrinsic clearance; EH, hepatic elimination; CLtot, total clearance; t1/2, half-life; AMES, assay of the ability of a chemical compound to induce mutations in DNA.
No values were given by the associated tools.
The targets identified by PharmMapper, along with their respective identification codes, fit scores, binding free energies, and residues that interact with both, their respective cocrystalized ligands and decoquinate RMB041
| Target protein | PDB ID | UniProt ID | Fit score | Binding free energy (kcal/mol) | Overlapping residues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyp130 (Rv1256c) | 2UVN | P9WPN5 | 4.36 | −7.5 | Leu A:71, Pro A:87, Pro A:88, Phe A:236, Thr A:239, Met A:240, Thr A:247, Pro A:289, Val A:290, Phe A:347, Cys A:354, Leu A:355, Gly A:356, Ala A:359, Ala A:360, Val A:393 |
| FbpB (Rv1886) | 1F0N | P9WQP1 | 4.30 | −7.4 | Asp A:40, Leu A:42, Arg A:43, Ser A:126, Leu A:152, Leu A:163, Leu A:229, Phe A:232, His A:262, Trp A:264, Trp A:267 |
| LysA (Rv1293) | 2O0T | P9WIU7 | 5.70 | −7.0 | Cys A:375, Glu A:376, Ser A:377, His B:213, Arg A:303, Tyr B:405 |
| AdoK (Rv2202c) | 2PKF | P9WID5 | 4.24 | −6.9 | Val A:49, Gln A:172, Asn A:195, Thr A:223, Val A:255, Asp A:257, Phe A:259, Ser A:281, Leu A:288 |
| SecA1 (Rv3240) | 1NKT | P9WGP5 | 4.90 | −6.6 | Gln A:80, Phe A:83, Gln A:86, Lys A:107, Leu A:109, Arg A:137, Trp A:141, Asp A:493, Asn A:499, Asp A:501, Arg A:573 |
| GlnA1 (Rv2220) | 2bvc | P9WN39 | 4.71 | −6.5 | Glu A:133, Glu A:214, Lys A:215, Glu A:227, His A:276, His A:278, Arg A:347, Arg A:352, Arg A:364, Glu A:366, Arg A:368 |
| LpdA (Rv3303c) | 1XDI | P9WHH7 | 4.11 | −6.3 | Cys A:48, Lys A:52, Tyr A:450 |
| LppX (Rv2945) | 2BYO | P9WK65 | 4.75 | −5.9 | Val A:45, Leu A:54, Leu A:55, Ile A:57, Ala A:60, Phe A:85, Ile A:92, Ile A:106, Leu A:109, Ser A:110, Arg A:113, Met A:158 |
| GlcB (Rv1837c) | 1N8W | P9WK17 | 6.48 | −5.9 | Leu A:117, Val A:118, Val A:119, Pro A:120, Phe A:126, Asn A:129, Ala A:130, Ser A:275, Arg A:312, Pro A:543, Ser A:544, Pro A:545, Cys A:619, Ser A:620, Lys A:621, Met A:631, Phe B:310 |
| FabD (Rv2243) | 2QC3 | P9WNG5 | 4.46 | −5.5 | His A:90, Ser A:91, Asn A:155 |
| BlaI (Rv1846c) | 2G9W | P9WMJ5 | 4.63 | −5.3 | Lys B:3, Arg A:6, Arg B:6 |
| FolP1 (Rv3608c) | 1EYE | P9WND1 | 4.45 | −5.3 | Asp A:21, Gly A:181, Phe A:182, Lys A:213 |
FIG 2Interconnected network provided by STRING (gray), with additional interactions retrieved from TBDB; positively correlated interactions (red) and negatively correlated interactions (green).
FIG 3Interactions between (A) Cyp130 and decoquinate RMB041, (B) BlaI and decoquinate RMB041, and (C) LpdA and decoquinate RMB041.
FIG 4Interactions between decoquinate RMB041 and (A) FabD, (B) FbpB and (C) SecA1, as well as those between LppX and (D) vaccenic acid and (E) decoquinate RMB041.
FIG 5Intercations between (A) GlcB and acetyl-coenzyme-A, (B) GlcB and decoquinate RMB041, (C) LysA and decoquinateRMB041, and (D) GlnA1 and decoquinate RMB041.
FIG 6Interactions between decoquinate RMB041 and (A) AdoK and (B) FolP1.
FIG 7The workflow followed to elucidate the potential antimycobacterial mechanism of decoquinate derivative RMB041. The tools used during each step: a) pkCSM and SWISSadme, b) PharmMapper, c) Discovery Studio, d) AutoDock Vina, e) TDR Targets, f) KEGG and STRING.