| Literature DB >> 35458776 |
Lorenzo Chiaverini1, Alessandro Pratesi2, Damiano Cirri2, Arianna Nardinocchi3, Iogann Tolbatov4, Alessandro Marrone5, Mariagrazia Di Luca3, Tiziano Marzo1, Diego La Mendola1.
Abstract
Auranofin (AF, hereafter) is an orally administered chrysotherapeutic agent approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis that is being repurposed for various indications including bacterial infections. Its likely mode of action involves the impairment of the TrxR system through the binding of the pharmacophoric cation [AuPEt3]+. Accordingly, a reliable strategy to expand the medicinal profile of AF is the replacement of the thiosugar moiety with different ligands. Herein, we aimed to prepare the AF analogue bearing the acetylcysteine ligand (AF-AcCys, hereafter) and characterize its anti-staphylococcal activity. Biological studies revealed that AF-AcCys retains an antibacterial effect superimposable with that of AF against Staphylococcus aureus, whereas it is about 20 times less effective against Staphylococcus epidermidis. Bioinorganic studies confirmed that upon incubation with human serum albumin, AF-AcCys, similarly to AF, induced protein metalation through the [AuPEt3]+ fragment. Additionally, AF-AcCys appeared capable of binding the dodecapeptide Ac-SGGDILQSGCUG-NH2, corresponding to the tryptic C-terminal fragment (488-499) of hTrxR. To shed light on the pharmacological differences between AF and AF-AcCys, we carried out a comparative experimental stability study and a theoretical estimation of bond dissociation energies, unveiling the higher strength of the Au-S bond in AF-AcCys. From the results, it emerged that the lower lipophilicity of AF-AcCys with respect to AF could be a key feature for its different antibacterial activity. The differences and similarities between AF and AF-AcCys are discussed, alongside the opportunities and consequences that chemical structure modifications imply.Entities:
Keywords: ESI-MS; S. aureus; S. epidermidis; acetylcysteine; antibacterial agents; antibiotic resistance; auranofin; computational chemistry; gold; metal-based drugs
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35458776 PMCID: PMC9032686 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27082578
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Figure 1Chemical structure of Auranofin (AF, left) and its analogue bearing L-Acetylcysteine in place of the thiosugar (AF-AcCys, right).
MIC (µM) values of AF-AcCys and AF.
| ID Strain | Origin | Resistance Profile b | AF-AcCys (µM) | AF (µM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pacemaker | OXA; MET; LVX; PEN | 0.5 | 0.5 | |
| osteomyelitis | ERY; CLI; PEN | 0.25 | 0.25 | |
| CVC a | ERY; PEN | 0.5 | 0.5 | |
| emocolture | ERY; GEN; FA; OXA; MET; TET; CLI; LVX; | 2 | ≤0.12 | |
| CVC | GEN; OXA; MET; TET; LVX; | 2 | ≤0.12 | |
| pacemaker | ERY; GEN; OXA; MET; CLI; LVX; TMP/SMX | >2 | ≤0.12 |
a CVC: Central Venous Catheter; b OXA: oxacillin; MET: methicillin; LVX: levofloxacin; PEN: penicillin; ERY: erythromycin; CLI: clindamycin; GEN: gentamycin; FA: fusidic acid; TET: tetracycline; TMP/SMX: trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole.
Figure 2Deconvoluted ESI mass spectra of (A) HSA 5 × 10−6 M in 20 mM ammonium acetate solution, pH = 6.8, and (B) HSA 5 × 10−6 M incubated with AF-AcCys (1:2 ratio) for 2 h at 37 °C in 20 mM ammonium acetate solution, pH = 6.8.
Snapping energies, bond-dissociation enthalpies (BDE) and bond-dissociation Gibbs free energies (BDFE). All values are in kcal/mol.
| Complex | Bond | Snapping Energies | BDE | BDFE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AF-AcCys | Au-S | 54.8 | 51.8 | 40.0 |
| Au-P | 58.8 | 54.4 | 42.2 | |
| AF | Au-S | 52.6 | 49.8 | 39.0 |
| Au-P | 59.1 | 54.7 | 43.7 |