| Literature DB >> 35520644 |
Solida Long1, Diana I S P Resende1,2, Andreia Palmeira1,2, Anake Kijjoa2,3, Artur M S Silva4, Maria Elizabeth Tiritan1,2,5, Patrícia Pereira-Terra2,3, Joana Freitas-Silva2,3, Sandra Barreiro6, Renata Silva6, Fernando Remião6, Eugénia Pinto2,7, Paulo Martins da Costa2,3, Emília Sousa1,2, Madalena M M Pinto1,2.
Abstract
Due to the emergence of multidrug-resistant pathogenic microorganisms, the search for novel antimicrobials is urgent. Inspired by marine alkaloids, a series of indolomethyl pyrazino [1,2-b]quinazoline-3,6-diones was prepared using a one-pot microwave-assisted multicomponent polycondensation of amino acids. The compounds were evaluated for their antimicrobial activity against a panel of nine bacterial strains and five fungal strains. Compounds 26 and 27 were the most effective against Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 29213 reference strain with MIC values of 4 μg mL-1, and a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolate with MIC values of 8 μg mL-1. It was possible to infer that enantiomer (-)-26 was responsible for the antibacterial activity (MIC 4 μg mL-1) while (+)-26 had no activity. Furthermore, compound (-)-26 was able to impair S. aureus biofilm production and no significant cytotoxicity towards differentiated and non-differentiated SH-SY5Y cells was observed. Compounds 26, 28, and 29 showed a weak antifungal activity against Trichophyton rubrum clinical isolate with MIC 128 μg mL-1 and presented a synergistic effect with fluconazole. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35520644 PMCID: PMC9056383 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra05319h
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Marine antimicrobials 1–4 and rational of this work.
Synthesis of halogenated quinazolinone derivatives 22–32a
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compound | R | R′ | R′′ | Yield (%) | [ | er | % purity |
| 22 |
| H | Cl | 5 | −273 | 56 : 44 | 92 |
| 23 |
| H | Cl | 3 | +154 | 44 : 56 | >99 |
| 24 |
| H | Cl | 2 | +130 | 46 : 54 | 93 |
| 25 |
| Cl | Cl | 5 | +140 | 43 : 57 | 90 |
| 26 |
| Cl | Cl | 4.5 | −169 | 60 : 40 | >99 |
| 27 |
| Cl | Cl | 2.6 | −264 | 71 : 29 | >99 |
| 28 |
| H | I | 4.1 | −175 | 51 : 49 | 95 |
| 29 |
| H | Br | 1.2 | −170 | 50 : 50 | 95 |
| 30 |
| H | I | 11.8 | −165 | 51 : 49 | 98 |
| 31 |
| H | Br | 13.8 | −243 | 51 : 49 | 98 |
| 32 |
| I | I | 3.5 | −229 | 54 : 46 | 90 |
Reaction conditions: (a) dried-pyridine, (PhO)3P, 55 °C, 24 h; (b) dried-pyridine, (PhO)3P, 220 °C, 1.5 min.
Optical rotation.
er = enantiomeric ratio determined by enantioselective LC (column: amylose, Lux® 5 μm amylose-1, 250 × 4.6 mm, flow rate: 0.5 mL min−1, mobile phase: hexane : EtOH, 9 : 1).
% purity determined by RP-LC.
Antibacterial activity of quinazolinones 22–27, 30, 31 on Gram-positive reference and clinically relevant strains (μg mL−1)
| Compound |
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | |
| Neofiscalin[ |
| 16 | 8 | 32 |
| 32 | 8 | 32 |
| 5–21 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 22 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 |
| (−)-22 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| (+)-22 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 23 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 23b | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 24 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 25 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 26 |
| >64 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| (−)-26 |
| >64 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| (+)-26 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 27 |
| >64 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 28 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 29 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 30 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 31 |
| >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
| 32 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
Classification criteria of adherence capabilities of tested strains using the crystal-violet assaya[42]
| Classification | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Non-adherent | OD less than or equal to ODc |
| Weakly adherent | OD more than ODc and less than two-fold ODc |
| Moderately adherent | OD more than two-fold ODc and less than four-fold ODc |
| Strongly adherent | OD more than four-fold ODc |
OD, optical density; ODc, optical density cut-off value.
Classification of the ability of S. aureus ATCC 29213 to adhere and form biofilm after exposure to (−)-26, in comparison with untreated controla
| Comp. | Concentration (μg mL−1) | OD ± SD | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
| None | 0 | 3.020 ± 0.046 | Strong |
| (−)-26 | 8 (2 × MIC) | 0.347 ± 0.177 | Moderate |
| (−)-26 | 4 (MIC) | 2.231 ± 0.952 | Strong |
| (−)-26 | 2 (½ MIC) | 3.132 ± 0.059 | Strong |
| (−)-26 | 1 (¼ MIC) | 3.119 ± 0.046 | Strong |
OD, optical density; SD, standard deviation; ODc, optical density cut-off value. The classification is based on the criteria from Table 3. Average OD value for negative control was 0.082 ± 0.006, therefore ODc equals 0.082 + (3 × 0.006) = 0.100; 2 × ODc = 0.201; 4 × ODc = 0.402.
Classification of the ability of S. aureus 66/1 to adhere and form biofilm after exposure to 26, (−)-26, 27, in comparison with untreated controla
| Compound | Concentration (μg mL−1) | OD ± SD | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
| None | 0 | 2.943 ± 0.098 | Strong |
| 26 | 16 (2 × MIC) | 0.112 ± 0.020 | Weak |
| 26 | 8 (MIC) | 0.131 ± 0.045 | Weak |
| 26 | 4 (½ MIC) | 0.453 ± 0.248 | Strong |
| 26 | 2 (¼ MIC) | 2.980 ± 0.549 | Strong |
| (−)-26 | 8 (2 × MIC) | 0.093 ± 0.013 | None |
| (−)-26 | 4 (MIC) | 0.884 ± 0.439 | Strong |
| (−)-26 | 2 (½ MIC) | 2.952 ± 0.437 | Strong |
| (−)-26 | 1 (¼ MIC) | 3.110 ± 0.210 | Strong |
| 27 | 16 (2 × MIC) | 0.285 ± 0.079 | Moderate |
| 27 | 8 (MIC) | 2.753 ± 0.676 | Strong |
| 27 | 4 (½ MIC) | 3.165 ± 0.192 | Strong |
| 27 | 2 (¼ MIC) | 2.755 ± 0.548 | Strong |
OD, optical density; SD, standard deviation; ODc, optical density cut-off value. The classification is based on the criteria from Table 3. Average OD value for negative control was 0.078 ± 0.007, therefore ODc equals 0.078 + (3 × 0.007) = 0.098; 2 × ODc = 0.196; 4 × ODc = 0.391.
Fig. 2Time-kill kinetics of 26 at 64 μg mL−1 and untreated control for S. aureus ATCC 29213 (A) and S. aureus 66/1 (B) after 20 h incubation.
Fig. 3SEM of S. aureus ATCC 29213 untreated (A), treated with ½ MIC (2 μg mL−1) (B) and MIC (4 μg mL−1) (C) of 26; and S. aureus 66/1 untreated (D), treated with ½ MIC (4 μg mL−1) (E) and MIC (8 μg mL−1) (F) of 26 at 5000× amplification.
Fig. 4Structure–activity relationship for antibacterial activity of the library of quinazolinones 5–32.
Docking scores of test molecules (22–32) and controls (08B, and 9PC) using GyrB, and FtsZ as targetsa
| Test molecules | Docking scores (kcal mol−1) | |
|---|---|---|
| 3u2d (GyrB) | 4dxd (FtsZ) | |
| 22 | −9.5 | −9.5 |
| 23 | −9.6 | −9.5 |
| 24 | −9.3 | −8.5 |
| 25 | −9.6 | −7.8 |
| 26 | −9.6 | −9.7 |
| 27 | −9.5 | −6.9 |
| 28 | −9.3 | −8.4 |
| 29 | −9.5 | −9.1 |
| 30 | −9.5 | −7.7 |
| 31 | −9.4 | −9.1 |
| 32 | −9.4 | −8.1 |
| 08B | −7.8 | — |
| 9PC | — | −10.1 |
08B (3u2d co-crystallized 4-bromo-5-methyl-N-[1-(3-nitropyridin-2-yl)piperidin-4-yl]-1H-pyrrole-2-carboxamide), and 9PC (4dxd co-crystallized 3-[(6-chloro[1,3]thiazolo[5,4-b]pyridin-2-yl)methoxy]-2,6-difluorobenzamide).
Fig. 5(A) Ribbon representation of GyrB (pdb code 3u2d), and docked 22–32 (sticks). (B and C) Detailed view of two representative top docked poses of 26 (yellow sticks) with polar interactions depicted as yellow broken lines (residues evolved are labelled); GyrB is represented as transparent surface, with carbons, oxygens, and nitrogens coloured grey, red, and blue, respectively. Hydrogens are omitted for simplification.
Fig. 6Final (2200 ps) MD conformations of 26:GyrB complexes (top ranked docking poses (A) and (B)). Polar interactions are depicted as yellow broken lines (residues evolved are labelled); GyrB is represented as transparent surface, with carbons, oxygens, and nitrogens coloured grey, red, and blue, respectively. Hydrogen atoms are omitted for simplification. Potential energy plot of the complexes during MD simulation is represented below each MD image (U = potential energy; t = time).
Fig. 7Cytotoxicity of 26 (0–25 μM) in differentiated (A, C and E) and non-differentiated (B, D and F) SH-SY5Y cells evaluated by the neutral red (NR) uptake (A and B), resazurin (REZ) reduction (C and D) and sulforhodamine B (SRB) binding (E and F) assays, 24 h after exposure. Results are expressed as mean ± SD from at least 3 independent experiments, performed in triplicate. Statistical comparisons were made using the parametric method of one-way ANOVA, followed by the Dunnett's multiple comparisons test.