| Literature DB >> 35558992 |
Huanhuan Xu1,2, Titi Liu1,3, Jing Xu1,3, Jin Li1,3, Fei Chen1,3, Zemin Xiang1,3, Yewei Huang1,2, Dongying Zhang1,2, Lihong Hu1,3, Banglei Zhang1,3, Chengting Zi1,2, Xuanjun Wang1,2,4, Jun Sheng1,4.
Abstract
Galloylated catechins, the most important secondary metabolites in green tea including (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) and (-)-epicatechin-3-gallate, constitute nearly 75% of all tea catechins and have stronger health effects than non-galloylated catechins such as (-)-epigallocatechin and (-)-epicatechin. EGCG is the most abundant, active, and thoroughly investigated compound in green tea, and its bioactivity might be improved by complexing with β-cyclodextrin (β-CD). We investigated interactions between four catechins and β-CD in a PBS buffer solution of pH 6.5 at 25 °C using biolayer interferometry and isothermal titration calorimetry, and to determine whether β-CD could enhance the anti-osteoclastogenesis effect of EGCG. β-CD could directly bind galloylated catechins at a stoichiometric ratio close to 1 : 1, with high specificities and affinities, and these inclusion interactions were primarily enthalpy-driven processes. We synthesized the EGCG-β-CD complex and identified it using infrared radiation and nuclear magnetic resonance spectra. Interestingly, we revealed that the EGCG-β-CD complex could inhibit osteoclastogenesis significantly more than EGCG. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 35558992 PMCID: PMC9088451 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra05889c
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Chemical structures of major tea catechins.
Fig. 2Interactions between the main catechins and β-CD assessed using the label-free ForteBio Octet Red96 System assay. (A) EGCG; (B) GCG; (C) ECG; (D) EGC; (E) EC; (F) GA. Concentration, 10 μM. Curves correspond to the phases of association and dissociation.
Fig. 3Raw data for the titration of (A) 0.1 mM EGCG, (B) 0.1 mM GCG, (C) 0.1 mM ECG, (D) 0.1 mM EGC, and (E) 0.1 mM EC with 2 mM β-CD, and (F) 0.88 mM GA with 8.81 mM β-CD at pH 6.5 and 25 °C. Integrated heat profile of the calorimetric titration shown in upper panel. The solid line in the lower panel represents the best nonlinear least-squares fit to One Set of Sites model.
Summary of the ITC results for interactions of different catechins with β-CD
| Variant |
|
| Δ | Δ | − |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EGCG | 0.873 | 8.60 × 10−5 | −11.5 | −5.55 | 5.95 |
| GCG | 1.12 | 2.41 × 10−5 | −10.6 | −6.3 | 4.26 |
| ECG | 1.3 | 8.68 × 10−5 | −11.2 | −5.54 | 5.64 |
| EGC | 0.044 | 7.40 × 10−4 | −34 | −4.27 | 29.8 |
| EC | 0.021 | 3.41 × 10−4 | −80 | −4.73 | 75.3 |
| GA | 0.001 | 4.47 × 10−4 | −6.42 | −4.57 | 1.85 |
Fig. 4FT-IR spectra of (A) EGCG, (B) β-CD, and (C) the EGCG–β-CD inclusion complex.
Fig. 5(A) 1H-NMR (500 MHz, D2O, 298 K) spectra of (a) EGCG, (b) β-CD, and (c) the EGCG–β-CD complex. (B) 1H-ROESY (500 MHz, D2O, 298 K) spectra of the EGCG–β-CD complex. (C) Inclusion model of the EGCG–β-CD complex.
Chemical shifts (δ) of EGCG, β-CD, and the EGCG–β-CD complex and their complexation shifts (Δδ)a
| H2′′,H6′′ | H2′,H6′ | H8 | H6 | H4 | H3 | H2 | H3′′′ | H5′′′ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EGCG | 6.82 | 6.41 | 5.96 | 5.98 | 2.82 | 4.84 | 5.39 | — | — |
| β-CD | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3.72 | 3.84 |
| EGCG–β-CD | 6.92 | 6.60 | 5.91 | 5.92 | 2.81 | 4.80 | 5.38 | 3.65 | 3.66 |
| Δ | 0.10 | −0.19 | −0.05 | −0.06 | −0.01 | −0.04 | −0.01 | −0.07 | −0.18 |
Δδ = δ(complex) − δ(free).
Fig. 6HPLC chromatograms of the EGCG standard (A) and EGCG in the EGCG–β-CD complex (B).
Fig. 7EGCG–β-CD complex inhibits osteoclast differentiation more effectively than EGCG. Osteoclast formation was detected using TRAP staining, and TRAP-positive cells with more than three nuclei in each well were considered as osteoclasts under a microscope (original magnification ×40). Representative images are displayed. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM of three independent experiments. ***p < 0.001 compared with the control; ##p < 0.01 compared with RANKL treatment only; $p < 0.05 compared with EGCG treatment.
Fig. 8EGCG–β-CD complex inhibits osteoclastogenesis-related expression of marker genes and key transcription factor more effectively than EGCG. The RANKL-induced mRNA expression of (A) NFATc1, (B) MMP-9, and (C) TRAP during osteoclastogenesis was determined using qRT-PCR analysis. (D) The expression level of NFATc1 protein was examined by western blotting, and representative images are shown. Gray densities of the bands for NFATc1 were quantified using AlphaView software. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM of three independent experiments. ***p < 0.001 compared with the control; ###p < 0.001 compared with RANKL treatment only; $$$p < 0.001 compared with EGCG treatment.