| Literature DB >> 35740499 |
Diana Gomes1,2,3, Shivani Yaduvanshi4, Samuel Silvestre1,5,6,7, Ana Paula Duarte1,5,7, Adriana O Santos1, Christiane P Soares8, Veerendra Kumar4, Luís Passarinha1,2,3,5, Ângela Sousa1.
Abstract
Cervical cancer is the fourth leading cause of death in women worldwide, with 99% of cases associated with a human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Given that HPV prophylactic vaccines do not exert a therapeutic effect in individuals previously infected, have low coverage of all HPV types, and have poor accessibility in developing countries, it is unlikely that HPV-associated cancers will be eradicated in the coming years. Therefore, there is an emerging need for the development of anti-HPV drugs. Considering HPV E6's oncogenic role, this protein has been proposed as a relevant target for cancer treatment. In the present work, we employed in silico tools to discover potential E6 inhibitors, as well as biochemical and cellular assays to understand the action of selected compounds in HPV-positive cells (Caski and HeLa) vs. HPV-negative (C33A) and non-carcinogenic (NHEK) cell lines. In fact, by molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulations, we found three phenolic compounds able to dock in the E6AP binding pocket of the E6 protein. In particular, lucidin and taxifolin were able to inhibit E6-mediated p53 degradation, selectively reduce the viability, and induce apoptosis in HPV-positive cells. Altogether, our data can be relevant for discovering promising leads for the development of specific anti-HPV drugs.Entities:
Keywords: E6 protein inhibitors; cervical cancer; human papillomavirus; in silico tools; lucidin; molecular docking; p53; taxifolin
Year: 2022 PMID: 35740499 PMCID: PMC9221127 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14122834
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.575
List of natural products, including flavonoids, binding energies, and main interactions with the HPV16 E6 protein on the E6AP binding site.
| Natural Products | Structure | Binding Energy (Kcal/mol) | Main Interactions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alizarin |
| −6.52 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Caffeic acid |
| −5.42 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Cyanidin-3- |
| −5.45 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Arg55 |
| Cineol |
| −4.73 | Leu67, Tyr32, Cys51, Leu50, Val62 |
| Kuromanin |
| −5.22 | Cys51, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Ellagic acid |
| −5.36 | Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62, Arg131 |
| Ferulic acid |
| −5.45 | Cys51, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Gallic acid |
| −4.43 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val62 |
| Genistin |
| −5.29 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Linalool |
| −4.56 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Lucidin |
| −5.87 | Cys51, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
|
| −5.43 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 | |
| Quercetin-3-4′-di- |
| −3.66 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Arg55, Val62, Arg131 |
| Rosmarinic acid |
| −5.11 | Cys51, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Sabinene |
| −4.53 | Cys51, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Syringic acid |
| −4.69 | Cys51, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Taxifolin |
| −5.63 | Cys51, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62, Arg131 |
| Rutin |
| −4.76 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62, Arg55, Arg131 |
| Vanillic acid |
| −4.44 | Cys51, Leu67, Leu50, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
| Luteolin |
| −6.28 | Cys51, Tyr70, Leu67, Gln107, Leu50, Arg131, Tyr32, Val31, Val62 |
Figure 1Binding modes and interactions of luteolin (A), lucidin (B), alizarin (C), and taxifolin (D) with the HPV16 E6 protein.
Figure 2MD simulation study of E6/alizarin/lucidin/taxifolin complexes. (A) Root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) of E6 complexes. E6/lucidin complex is the most stable complex. (B) Root-mean-square fluctuations (RMSF) of E6/lucidin complex. (C) Trajectory analysis of E6/alizarin complex suggests that both N- and C-domain (cyan) move away from the initial structure (grey). Lucidin binds E6 at two sites. (D) Site I at N-domain; lucidin interacting residues are shown. (E) Site II at C- domain; lucidin residues that interact shown as stick representation. Simulated structure is shown in violet whereas the original structure is in grey. (F) During simulation, E6 adopts an extended conformation. Simulated structure is shown in lime-green whereas the original structure is in grey. Abbreviation- ALZ (alizarin), LUC (lucidin), TAX (taxifolin).
Figure 3Cellular viability of different cell lines at 24 and 48 h incubation with phenolic compounds. All products were tested at 10 µM and 100 µM in HPV-positive (Caski and HeLa), negative (C33A) and non-carcinogenic (NHEK) cell lines by the MTT assay after 24 h (A) or 48 h (B) of treatment. Positive control corresponds to ethanol-treated cells. Percent viability was determined for each sample relative to the DMSO treated control samples. Data are presented as mean ± SD for three independent experiments (n = 3) with four technical replicates and analyzed by one-way ANOVA with the Bonferroni test. Significance was determined as p-values * < 0.05, ** < 0.01, *** < 0.001, **** < 0.0001.
Figure 4Effect of phenolic compounds on the viability of HPV-positive and negative cell lines. Cells were treated at several concentrations (0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 50, 100, 150, and 250 µM) for 48 h, and cell viability was determined by the MTT assay. Data are presented as mean ± SD for three independent experiments (n = 3) with four technical replicates and analyzed by one-way ANOVA with the Bonferroni test. Significance was determined as p-values ** < 0.01, *** < 0.001, **** < 0.0001.
Compound concentration required to reduce cell viability by 50% of three independent experiments (n = 3) determined by regression analysis.
| Compound Concentration that Reduces Cell Viability by 50% | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenolic Compounds | NHEK | C33A | HeLa | Caski |
| Alizarin | >100 µM | >100 µM | 64 µM | >100 µM |
| Lucidin | >100 µM | >100 µM | 23 µM | 45 µM |
| Taxifolin | >100 µM | >100 µM | 63 µM | >100 µM |
Figure 5Phase contrast images showing HeLa cell morphology at 0, 24, and 48 h treatment at 20× magnification. Scale-bar: 50 µm.
Figure 6The effect of anthraquinones and flavonoids on p53 (A) and BAX (B) protein levels in HPV-positive Hela cells was evaluated by Western blot analysis after 48 h of treatment. Data were normalized against the β-actin and plotted as a percentage related to the DMSO-treated cells. Each data set represents the mean ± SD for three independent experiments (n = 3) performed with samples acquired in three independent in vitro studies analyzed by the t-Student test. Significance was determined as p-values *** < 0.001, **** < 0.0001.
Figure 7Effect of anthraquinones and flavonoids on nuclear morphological changes of HeLa cells at 48 h treatment (A). Cells were stained with Hoechst 33,342 and PI and observed with a fluorescence microscope under a magnification of 40×. Effect of anthraquinones and flavonoids on the caspase activity of HeLa cells, determined after 48 h of contact by the Caspase 3/7-Glo assay (B). DMSO-treated cells were used as a negative control, while incubation with 1 μM of staurosporine for 48 h was used as a positive control. Data are presented as mean ± SD, n = 3 (three independent experiments) and analyzed by the t-Student test. Significance was determined as p-values * < 0.05, **** < 0.0001.
Percentage of necrotic and apoptotic cells (%) with data presented as mean ± SD, n = 6. The analysis was performed by the t-Student test (statistical significance in comparison to DMSO-treated cells as p-values * < 0.05, ** < 0.01, *** < 0.001, **** < 0.0001).
| Percentage of Necrotic Cells (%) | Percentage of Apoptotic Cells (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| DMSO | 0.74 ± 0.6 | 1.43 ± 0.44 |
| Lucidin 23 µM | 1.78 ± 0.69 | 5.16 ± 0.69 |
| Taxifolin 63 µM | 2.54 ± 0.51 | 6.43 ± 0.44 |
| Alizarin 64 µM | 8.94 ± 0.35 | 3.24 ± 0.80 |
| Luteolin 23 µM | 2.56 ± 0.62 | 4.46 ± 0.91 |