| Literature DB >> 35820918 |
Elham Zarenezhad1, Mohammad Nazari Montazer2, Masoumeh Tabatabaee3, Cambyz Irajie4, Aida Iraji5,6.
Abstract
The simple and greener one-pot approach for the synthesis of biscoumarin derivatives using catalytic amounts of nano-MoO3 catalyst under mortar-pestle grinding was described. The use of non-toxic and mild catalyst, cost-effectiveness, ordinary grinding, and good to the excellent yield of the final product makes this procedure a more attractive pathway for the synthesis of biologically remarkable pharmacophores. Accordingly, biscoumarin derivatives were successfully extended in the developed protocols. Next, a computational investigation was performed to identify the potential biological targets of this set of compounds. In this case, first, a similarity search on different virtual libraries was performed to find an ideal biological target for these derivatives. Results showed that the synthesized derivatives can be α-glucosidase inhibitors. In another step, molecular docking studies were carried out against human lysosomal acid-alpha-glucosidase (PDB ID: 5NN8) to determine the detailed binding modes and critical interactions with the proposed target. In silico assessments showed the gold score value in the range of 17.56 to 29.49. Additionally, molecular dynamic simulations and the MM-GBSA method of the most active derivative against α-glucosidase were conducted to study the behavior of selected compounds in the biological system. Ligand 1 stabilized after around 30 ns and participated in various interactions with Trp481, Asp518, Asp616, His674, Phe649, and Leu677 residues.Entities:
Keywords: Biscoumarin; MM-GBSA; MoO3-nanoparticle; Molecular dynamics simulations
Year: 2022 PMID: 35820918 PMCID: PMC9275028 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-022-00844-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Chem ISSN: 2661-801X
Fig. 1Natural coumarin compounds
Fig. 2coumarin derivatives drugs
Fig. 3PXRD patterns of the synthesized MoO3 nano-crystals
Fig. 4Scanning electron micrographs for prepared nano-MoO3
Fig. 5General pathway for synthesis of biscoumarin derivatives
Optimization of the solvent-free reaction
| Entry | Catalyst (mol%) | Time (min) | Yield (%)a |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60 | 5 | |
| 2 | H2SO4 (15) | 35 | 60 |
| 3 | CF3CO2H(10) | 50 | 40 |
| 4 | CCl3CO2H (10) | 50 | 55 |
| 5 | PTSA(10) | 50 | 45 |
| 6 | AlCl3(10) | 50 | 60 |
| 7 | MoO3(10) | 20 | 93 |
| 8 | MoO3(11) | 20 | 93 |
| 9 | MoO3(12) | 20 | 93 |
| 10 | MoO3(8) | 20 | 75 |
| 11 | MoO3(4) | 20 | 70 |
aIsolated yield
Synthesis of biscoumarins derivatives (4a–n) using nano-MoO3 under mortar and pestle grinding
aIsolated yield
Optimization of the solvent and temperature in room temperature or reflux condition
| Entry | Solvent | T (°C) | Time (min) | Yield (%)a |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CH3CN | r.t | 120 | 30 |
| 2 | CH3CN | Reflux | 120 | 50 |
| 3 | CH2Cl2 | r.t | 120 | 40 |
| 4 | CH2Cl2 | Reflux | 120 | 55 |
| 5 | EtOH | r.t | 120 | 60 |
| 6 | EtOH | Reflux | 120 | 68 |
| 7 | H2O | r.t | 120 | 70 |
| 8 | H2O | Reflux | 120 | 77 |
| 9 | EtOH/H2O | r.t | 120 | 80 |
| 10 | EtOH/H2O | Reflux | 120 | 91 |
| 11 | MeOH | r.t | 120 | 70 |
| 12 | MeOH | Reflux | 120 | 72 |
aIsolated yield
Fig. 6A plausible mechanism for synthesis of biscoumarins derivatives using MoO3
Docking scores and interactions of compounds against α-glucosidase
| Compound | ChemScore value | Interactions with key residue |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 29.49 | Asp404, Phe525, Arg600, Phe649, Leu650, Leu678 |
| 2 | 23.05 | Trp376, Trp481, Leu650, Leu677, Leu678 |
| 3 | 17.56 | Ala284, Trp376, Trp618, Phe649, Leu650 |
| 4 | 25.51 | Trp376, Asp404, Trp481, Asp518, Met519, Phe525, Asp616, Phe649, Leu650, Leu677, Leu678 |
| 5 | 18.54 | Trp481, Leu650, Leu677, Leu678 |
| 6 | 20.35 | Trp376, Trp481, Phe649, Leu650, Leu678 |
| 7 | 22.92 | Trp481, Phe649, Leu650, Ser676, Leu677, Leu678 |
| 8 | 24.63 | Trp376, Trp481, Phe649, Leu650, Leu677 |
| 9 | 23.41 | Trp376, Phe649, Leu650, Leu678 |
| 10 | 24.05 | Asp282, Ala284, Ala555, Asp616, Trp618, Leu650 |
| 11 | 18.74 | Trp376, Phe649, Leu650 |
| 12 | 24.06 | Trp376, Trp481, Phe649, Leu650, Ser676, Leu677, Leu678 |
| 13 | 21.89 | Trp376, Arg411, Trp481, Phe649, Leu650 Leu677, Leu678 |
| 14 | 22.26 | Trp376, Trp481, Phe649, Leu650, Ser676, Leu677, Leu678 |
The predicted binding pose of top-ranked docked compounds was presented in Fig. 7. All the residues involved in molecular interaction are shown in stick form and colored by atom types in which carbon is depicted in orange and oxygen in red
Fig. 7Docking conformations of compounds 1–14 (orange stick) in the α-glucosidase active site. Hydrogen bonds are depicted in green dashed lines, π-π stacked interactions are depicted in dark pink dashed lines, π-aryl interactions are depicted in pink dashed lines pi-sulfur interactions are depicted in pale orange dashed lines and and pi-anion interactions are depicted in dark orange dashed lines
Fig. 8RMSD plot of the enzyme in complexed compound 1 in the MD simulation time. RMSD values of the Ca atoms of the protein are depicted in blue, and ligand-complex values are exhibited in red
Fig. 9RMSF plot of the α-glucosidase residue in complexed with compound 1
Fig. 10Protein–ligand contacts during the whole simulation time in α-glucosidase complexed with compound 1
Fig. 112D representation of ligand-residue interactions
Binding free energy estimates via MM-GBSA after 100 ns MD simulations. All values are in Kcal/mol
| Frame(ns) | ΔGbinding | ΔGgas | ΔGsolv | BOND | ANGLE | DIHED | VDWAALS | EEL | EGB | ESURF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| − 26.664 | − 36.924 | 10.26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 33.9 | − 3.024 | 14.628 | − 4.368 | − 3.64 |
| − 31.776 | − 45.96 | 14.184 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 39.516 | − 6.444 | 18.828 | − 4.644 | − 3.87 |
| − 19.452 | − 32.592 | 13.128 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 26.976 | − 5.616 | 16.332 | − 3.192 | − 2.66 |
| − 18.744 | − 32.004 | 13.26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 26.988 | − 5.028 | 16.476 | − 3.216 | − 2.68 |
| − 17.16 | − 29.076 | 11.928 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 25.128 | − 3.948 | 14.988 | − 3.072 | − 2.56 |
| − 33.108 | − 42.156 | 9.048 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 40.044 | − 2.112 | 13.74 | − 4.692 | − 3.91 |
| − 30.552 | − 39.636 | 9.084 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 38.112 | − 1.536 | 13.596 | − 4.512 | − 3.76 |
| − 29.04 | − 38.352 | 9.312 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 36.78 | − 1.572 | 13.74 | − 4.428 | − 3.69 |
| − 28.116 | − 42.636 | 9.048 | 0 | 0 | 0 | − 36.048 | − 6.588 | 18.888 | − 4.38 | − 3.65 |
ΔG, ΔG, ΔG solvated binding free energy, binding free energy in a vacuum, solvation free energy, BOND, ANGLE, DIHED bond length, bond angle, dihedral angle energies, VDWAALS, EEL vdW interactions and electrostatics energies, EGB, ESURF polar and nonpolar solvation energies