| Literature DB >> 35497510 |
Oludare M Ogunyemi1,2, Gideon A Gyebi3, Ibrahim M Ibrahim4, Charles O Olaiya2, Joshua O Ocheje5, Modupe M Fabusiwa1, Joseph O Adebayo6.
Abstract
Despite the development of COVID-19 vaccines, at present, there is still no approved antiviral drug against the pandemic. The SARS-CoV-2 3-chymotrypsin-like proteases (S-3CLpro) and papain-like protease (S-PLpro) are essential for the viral proliferation cycle, hence attractive drug targets. Plant-based dietary components that have been extensively reported for antiviral activities may serve as cheap sources of preventive nutraceuticals and/or antiviral drugs. A custom-made library of 176 phytochemicals from five West African antiviral culinary herbs was screened for potential dual-target-directed inhibitors of S-3CLpro and S-PLpro in silico. The docking analysis revealed fifteen steroidal saponins (FSS) from Vernonia amygdalina with the highest binding tendency for the active sites of S-3CLpro and S-PLpro. In an optimized docking analysis, the FSS were further docked against four equilibrated conformers of the S-3CLpro and S-PLpro. Three stigmastane-type steroidal saponins (vernonioside A2, vernonioside A4 and vernonioside D2) were revealed as the lead compounds. These compounds interacted with the catalytic residues of both S-3CLpro and S-PLpro, thereby exhibiting dual inhibitory potential against these SARS-CoV-2 cysteine proteases. The binding free energy calculations further corroborated the static and optimized docking analysis. The complexed proteases with these promising phytochemicals were stable during a full atomistic MD simulation while the phytochemicals exhibited favourable physicochemical and ADMET properties, hence, recommended as promising inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 cysteine proteases. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35497510 PMCID: PMC9042289 DOI: 10.1039/d1ra05976a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Binding site coordinates of SARS-CoV-2 protease
| Dimensions | SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro (Å) | SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (Å) |
|---|---|---|
| Center_ | −16.26 | −1.406 |
| Center_ | −27.23 | −13.00 |
| Center_ | 2.92 | −8.26 |
| Size | 21.88 | 24.53 |
| Size | 25.96 | 14.84 |
| Size | 27.88 | 19.36 |
Binding docking scores of 15 lead phytochemicals docked in the active sites of 3-chymotrypsin-like and papain-like proteases of SARS-CoV-2a
| S/no. | Compounds | Class of Compounds | Binding energies kcal mol−1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3CLpro | PLPro | |||
| S1 | α-Ketoamide 13b | −7.7 | ||
| S2 | Ritonavir | −6.8 | ||
| S3 | GRL0617 | −6.7 | ||
| 1 | Vernonioside A2 | Steroidal saponins |
|
|
| 2 | Vernonioside D2 | Steroidal saponins |
| −6.3 |
| 3 | Vernonioside A4 | Steroidal saponins |
|
|
| 4 | Vernonioside B3 | Steroidal saponins | −8.1 | −6.1 |
| 5 | Vernodalin | Steroidal saponins | −8.1 | −5.9 |
| 6 | Vernoniamyoside C | Steroidal saponins | −8.0 |
|
| 7 | Vernonioside D | Steroidal saponins | −8.0 | −6.1 |
| 8 | Vernonioside B2 | Steroidal saponins | −8.0 | −5.9 |
| 9 | 11,13-Dihydrovernodalin | Steroidal saponins | −8.0 | −5.7 |
| 10 | Vernomygdin | Steroidal saponins | −7.9 | −5.3 |
| 11 | Neoandrographolide | Steroidal saponins | −7.8 | −6.7 |
| 12 | Vernoniamyoside A | Steroidal saponins | −7.8 | −6.2 |
| 13 | Vernonioside A3 | Steroidal saponins | −7.8 | −6.2 |
| 14 | Vernonioside A1 | Steroidal saponins | −7.8 | −6.2 |
| 15 | Andrographoside | Steroidal saponins | −7.8 | −6.2 |
Figures in bold represent the three lead compounds in view of binding scores.
Molecular interactions of the amino acid residues of the 3-chymotrypsin-like and papain-like proteases of SARS-CoV-2 with the three lead phytocompounds
| Compounds | SARS-CoV-2 protein | Hydrogen bonds (bond distance Å) | Hydrophobic interaction | Other interactions | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Numbers | Interacted residues | Numbers | Interacted residues | Numbers | Interacted residues | ||
| Alpha-ketoamide | 7 |
| 2 | Met165, | 2 |
| |
| Ritonavir | 3CLpro | 4 |
| 5 |
| None | |
| Vernonioside A2 | 6 | Leu167 (2.81), | 3 |
| None | ||
| Vernonioside A4 | 4 |
| 3 |
| |||
| Vernonioside D2 | 5 | Leu141 (2.81), | 2 |
| None | ||
| GRL0617 | PLpro | 5 | Gln269 (2.14), Asp164 (2.16), Try268 (2.88) | Pro248, Pro248, Try264, Try268, Leu162, Asp164, Gln269 | None | ||
| Vernonioside A4 | 5 | Try268 (2.88), Pro248 (2) (2.88), Gln250 (2.88) | 3 | Pro248 (2), Pro247 | None | ||
| Vernonioside A2 | 2 | Asn267 (2.67), Tyr264 (2.34) | 6 | Leu162, Pro248 (3), Tyr264 (2) | |||
| Vernoniamyoside C | 7 | Tyr264 (2) (2.34), Gln250 (2.88), Asn267 (2.67), Pro248 (2) (2.88), Asp164 (2.34) | 4 | Pro247, Tyr264, Pro248 (2) | |||
Fig. 1Flow chat for the virtual-screening of 176 phytochemicals from 5 West African antiviral culinary herbs.
Fig. 23D (i) and 2D (ii) amino acid interactions of phytochemicals and reference inhibitors in substrate binding cavity of SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro. (S) Surface representation. The ligands in stick representations are shown by colours (a) green: α-ketoamide (b) red: ritonavir C (c) blue: vernonioside A2 (d) gold: vernonioside A4.
Fig. 33D (i) and 2D (ii) amino acid interactions of phytochemicals and reference inhibitors in substrate binding cavity of SARS-CoV-2 PLpro. (S) Surface representation. Stick representations of the phytocompounds are shown by colours (a) Green: GRL0617 (b) Red: vernonioside A4 (c) Blue: vernonioside A2.
Fig. 4The mean binding energies and SEM of the reference inhibitors (ritonavir and α-ketoamide) and the ten lead phytochemicals against representative conformation obtained from the cluster analysis of the MD simulation trajectories of SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro and PLpro. Number of clusters: SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro = 4; PLpro = 4. The error bars represent the SEM (standard error of mean).
Molecular interactions of selected steroidal saponins and reference inhibitors (α-ketoamide and ritonavir) with representative conformers of 3CLpro and PLpro
| SARS-CoV-2 protease | Compounds | Binding energies (kcal mol−1) | H-bonding | Hydrophobic interactions | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | Residues from SARS-CoV-2 Mpro | Number | Residues from SARS-CoV-2 Mpro | |||
| 3CLpro | Ritonavir | −6.4 | 4 | Cys145, His41, Leu167, Glu166 | 2 | Met165, Pro168 |
| Vernonioside A2 | −6.3 | 5 | Gly143, Ala191, Thr26 | 1 | Pro168(2), Leu167, Cys145 | |
| Vernonioside D2 | −7.5 | 3 | Arg188, Thr190 Pro168 | 1 | Leu167, Met165, Cys145 | |
| PLpro | GRL0617 | −6.9 | 3 | Asn142, Gly271, Cys270 | 2 | Asn109, and Trp106 |
| Vernonioside A2 | −6.6 | 6 | Trp106, Asn109, Gln269, Cys270, His272, Ans267 | 4 | Lys94, Ala107, Trp106 (2) | |
| Vernonioside A4 | −7.7 | 4 | Gln269, Asn109, Cys270, Trp106 | 1 | Lys92, Ala107, Trp93, Lys94, Lys105 | |
Fig. 5The root mean square deviation plots of selected complexes: (A) blue line: 3CLpro-vernonioside D2 and red line: 3CLpro-vernonioside A2; (B) PLpro-vernonioside A4 and PLpro-vernonioside A2.
Fig. 6Per residue Root Mean Square Fluctuations (RMSF) plots selected complexes: (A) blue line: 3CLpro-vernonioside D2 and red line: 3CLpro-vernonioside A2; (B) PLpro-vernonioside A4 and PLpro-vernonioside A2. In (A) the alignment of frame 0 (green) and frame 500 (cyan) of 3CLpro-vernonioside A2 complex shows motion of the loop (blue) that caused a spike in the RMSF value.
Fig. 7The radius of gyration (RoG) plots of selected complexes: (A) blue line: 3CLpro-vernonioside D2 and red line: 3CLpro-vernonioside A2; (B) PLpro-vernonioside A4 and PLpro-vernonioside A2.
Fig. 8The Surface Accessible Surface Area (SASA) plots of selected complexes: (A) blue line: 3CLpro-vernonioside D2 and red line: 3CLpro-vernonioside A2; (B) PLpro-vernonioside A4 and PLpro-vernonioside A2.
Fig. 9The changes in the number of H-bonds during the MDS trajectory of SARS-CoV-2 protease complexes: (A) blue line: 3CLpro-vernonioside D2 and red line: 3CLpro-vernonioside A2; (B) PLpro-vernonioside A4 and PLpro-vernonioside A2.
Fig. 10Molecular mechanics/Poisson–Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) plot of binding free energy contribution per residue of SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro-phytochemical complexes (A) 3CLpro-vernonioside A2 (B) 3CLpro-vernonioside D2.
Fig. 11Molecular mechanics/Poisson–Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) plot of binding free energy contribution per residue of SARS-CoV-2 PLpro complexes (A) PLpro-vernonioside A4 (B) PLpro-vernonioside A2.
The cluster number and types of interactions for the SARS-CoV-2 proteases in complex with the two lead phytochemicalsa
| Protein–compound complex | Cluster | Hydrophobic interactions | H-bonds | Salt bridges | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of interactions | Residues involved in the interaction | Number of interactions | Residues involved in the interaction | Number of salt bridges | Residues involved in the interaction | ||
| 3CLpro– | Cluster 1 | 6 | T26 (3)–H41–N142–G143 | 3 | H41–M165–P168 | ||
| Cluster 2 | 5 | T26 (2)–G143–V186–Q192 | 3 | L50–L167–P168 | |||
| Cluster 3 | 7 | T26 (3)–H41–N119–N142–G143 | 1 | M49 | |||
| Cluster 4 | 3 | T26–H41–E166 | 2 | L50–M165 | |||
| 3CLpro– | Cluster 1 | 9 | C44–N142 (2)–R188–T190 (2)–Q192 (3) | 3 | L27–M165–Q192 | 0 | None |
| Cluster 2 | 5 | T25 (2)–S46–H164–Q192 | 1 | A191 | 1 | H41 | |
| Cluster 3 | 3 | H41–T45–Q192 | 3 | M165–P168–Q189 | 1 | H41 | |
| PLpro– | Cluster 1 | 2 | D108–N267 | 1 | W106 | ||
| Cluster 2 | 0 | None | 0 | None | |||
| Cluster 3 | 0 | None | 0 | None | |||
| Cluster 4 | 2 | T158–G271 | 2 | L162–Y264 | |||
| Cluster 5 | 1 | G271 | 0 | None | |||
| PLpro– | Cluster 1 | 0 | None | 2 | K92–A107 | ||
| Cluster 2 | 0 | None | 1 | Y268 | |||
| Cluster 3 | 1 | W106 | 0 | None | |||
Amino acid residues are represented in one-letter format and most common amino acids are in bold font.
Predictive physicochemical properties and ADMETa parameters of the two lead phytocompounds to SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro and PLpro
| (a) Druglikeness properties | Vernonioside A2 | Vernonioside A4 | Vernonioside D2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Molecular weight (g mol−1) | 632.35 | 648.8 | 648.78 | |
| Num. heavy atoms | 46 | 47 | 46 | |
| Num. arom. heavy atoms | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Num. rotatable bonds | 7 | 8 | 6 | |
| Num. H-bond acceptors | 10 | 11 | 10 | |
| Hydrogen bond donor | 5 | 7 | 4 | |
| cLog | 2.14 | 0.93 | 2.64 | |
| Molar refractivity | 169.29 | 172.17 | 166.66 | |
| TPSA (Å2) | 158.44 | 186.37 | 147.44 | |
|
| ||||
| Lipinski | Yes | No | Yes | |
| Bioavailability score | 0.55 | 0.17 | 0.56 | |
|
| ||||
| (b) Admet SAR | ||||
| HIA | HIA + (0.961) | HIA + (0.960) | HIA + (0.960) | |
| Caco-2 permeability | Caco2 + (−5.772) | Caco2 + (−0.84) | Caco2 + (−5.661) | |
| P-glycoprotein substrate | Negative (0.826) | Negative (0.778) | Negative (0.88) | |
|
| ||||
| Blood–brain barrier | BBB − (0.123) | BBB − (0.476) | BBB − (0.34) | |
| PPB% | 69.685 | 67.689 | 79.737 | |
| VD L kg−1 | −0.322 | −0.142 | −0.186 | |
|
| ||||
| CYP450 1A2 inhibitor | Negative (0.047) | Negative (0.039) | Negative (0.055) | |
| CYP450 1A2 substrate | Negative (0.318) | Negative (0.297) | Negative (0.297) | |
| CYP450 3A4 inhibitor | Negative (0.457) | Negative (0.515) | Positive (0.592) | |
| CYP4502C9 inhibitor | Negative (0.315) | Negative (0.365) | Negative (0.183) | |
| CYP450 2C9 substrate | Negative (0.288) | Negative (0.296) | Negative (0.372) | |
| CYP4502C19 inhibitor | Negative (0.072) | Negative (0.009) | Negative (0.111) | |
| CYP450 2C19 substrate | Negative (0.384) | Negative (0.324) | Negative (0.35) | |
| CYP4502D6 inhibitor | Negative (0.298) | Negative (0.295) | Negative (0.32) | |
| CYP450 2D6 substrate | Negative (0.223) | Negative (0.238) | Negative (0.253) | |
|
| ||||
|
| 2.292 h | 2.302 h | 2.388 h | |
| CL (clearance rate) mL min−1 kg−1 | 0.972 | 1.055 | 1.04 | |
|
| ||||
| hERG blockers | Negative (0.256) | Negative (0.474) | Negative (0.101) | |
| H-HT | Negative (0.428) | Negative (0.468) | Negative (0.41) | |
| AMES | Negative (0.312) | Negative (0.252) | Negative (0.312) | |
| SkinSen | Negative (0.286) | Negative (0.259) | Negative (0.286) | |
| LD50 (LD50 of acute toxicity) | 4.22 −log mol kg−1 (38.975 mg kg−1) | 4.36 −log mol kg−1 (28.933 mg kg−1) | 4.282 −log mol kg−1 (33.02 mg kg−1) | |
| DILI | Negative 0.154 | Negative (0.136) | Negative 0.154 | |
ADMET: absorption, distribution, metabolism, P-gp: permeability glycoprotein; GI: gastro-intestinal; BBB: blood–brain barrier; CYP: cytochrome P450; hERG: human ether-à-go-go-related gene; HIA: human intestinal absorption; H-HT: human hepatotoxicity AMES: Ames mutagenicity; DILI: drug induced liver injury; VD: volume distribution; PPB: plasma protein binding. (Values in bracket represent the probability.) The acceptable range for each descriptor is on (https://admet.scbdd.com/calcpre/index_sys_result/).
Pharmacophoric features of the lead phytochemicalsa
| Atoms | Features | Spatial features | Aromatic | Hydrophobic | Donors | Acceptors | Negatives | Positives |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V. A2 | 96 | 38 | 28 | 0 | 25 | 4 | 9 | 0 |
| V. A4 | 100 | 43 | 26 | 0 | 27 | 6 | 10 | 0 |
| V. D2 | 92 | 36 | 28 | 0 | 22 | 4 | 10 | 0 |
V. – vernonioside.
Fig. 12The pharmacophoric features of lead phytochemicals. (a) Vernonioside A2 (b) vernonioside A4 (c) vernonioside D2 (d) merged pharmacophore of the three phytochemical. Round meshes represent pharmacophoric features. Orange – hydrogen bond acceptor and hydrogen bond donor and green – hydrophobic.
Pharmacophoric features of best pair wise solution of lead phytochemicalsa
| Compounds | Scores | Features | Spatial features | Aromatic | Hydrophobic | Donors | Acceptors | Negatives | Positives |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V. A2, V. A4, and V. D2 | 35.916 | 22 | 19 | 0 | 13 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| V. A2 and V. D2 | 22.75 | 27 | 23 | 0 | 16 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
| V. A2 and V. A4 | 19.66 | 19 | 16 | 0 | 9 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
V. – vernonioside.