| Literature DB >> 35864866 |
Melita Lončarić1, Ivica Strelec1, Valentina Pavić2, Vesna Rastija3, Maja Karnaš3, Maja Molnar1.
Abstract
Thiazolidinediones are five-membered, heterocyclic compounds that possess a number of pharmacological activities such as antihyperglycemic, antitumor, antiarthritic, anti-inflammatory, and antimicrobial. Conventional methods for their synthesis are often environmentally unacceptable due to the utilization of various catalysts and organic solvents. In this study, deep eutectic solvents were used in the synthesis of thiazolidinedione derivatives that acted as both solvents and catalysts. Initially, a screening of 20 choline chloride-based deep eutectic solvents for thiazolidinedione synthesis, via Knoevenagel condensation, was performed in order to find the most suitable solvent. Deep eutectic solvent, choline chloride, N-methylurea, was proven to be the best for further synthesis of 19 thiazolidinedione derivatives. Synthesized thiazolidinediones are obtained in yields from 21.49% to 90.90%. The synthesized compounds were tested for the inhibition of lipid peroxidation as well as for the inhibition of soy lipoxygenase enzyme activity. The antioxidant activity of the compounds was also determined by the ABTS and DPPH methods. Compounds showed lipoxygenase inhibition in the range from 7.7% to 76.3%. Quantitative structure-activity relationship model (R 2 = 0.88; Q 2 loo = 0.77; F = 33.69) for the inhibition of soybean lipoxygenase was obtained with descriptors Mor29m, G2u, and MAXDP. The molecular docking confirms experimentally obtained results, finding the binding affinity and interactions with the active sites of soybean LOX-3.Entities:
Keywords: 2,4-thiazolidinedione; QSAR; deep eutectic solvents; green chemistry; lipoxygenase; molecular docking; synthesis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35864866 PMCID: PMC9294463 DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2022.912822
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Chem ISSN: 2296-2646 Impact factor: 5.545
Reaction times and product yields obtained in different deep eutectic solvents.
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HBA | HBD | Ratio ChCl:HBD | Time (h) | Y (%) |
| ChCl | Urea | 1:2 | 2.5 | 22.8 |
|
| 1:3 | 2 | 79.9 | |
| Thiourea | 1:2 | 6 | 6.4 | |
| Glucose | 1:1 | 9 | 17.9 | |
| Fructose | 1:1 | 8 | 14.1 | |
| Xylitol | 1:1 | 10 |
| |
| Sorbitol | 1:1 | 10 |
| |
| Butan-1,4-diole | 1:2 | 10 |
| |
| Ethan-1,2-diole | 1:2 | 10 |
| |
| Glycerol | 1:2 | 6 | 25.2 | |
| Acetamide | 1:2 | 10 |
| |
| Malic acid | 1:1 | 10 |
| |
| Citric acid | 1:2 | 10 |
| |
| Tartaric acid | 1:1 | 10 |
| |
| Malonic acid | 1:1 | 10 |
| |
| Oxalic acid | 1:1 | 10 |
| |
| 1,3-Dimethylurea | 1:2 | 8 | 3.8 | |
| Lactic acid | 1:2 | 10 |
| |
| Levulinic acid | 1:2 | 10 |
| |
|
| 1:1 | 10 |
| |
No product obtained.
scheme 1Synthesis of thiazolidinedione derivatives 1a-s.
FIGURE 1Proposed mechanism of Knoevenagel condensation for the synthesis of thiazolidinedione derivatives in DES..
Comparison to other reported methods of thiazolidinedione synthesis.
| Compound | Yield obtained in this research (%) | Method | Yield (%) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 35.9 | Reflux in ethanol; piperidine | 37 |
|
| Ethanol; baker’s yeast | 40 |
| ||
| Tetrabutylammonium bromide; potassium carbonate | 95 |
| ||
| Water; KAl (SO4)2 ∙ 12H2O; stirring | 88 |
| ||
|
| 53.9 | Reflux in ethanol; piperidine | 53 |
|
|
| 29.3 | Water; KAl (SO4)2 ∙ 12H2O; stirring | 85 |
|
|
| 57.8 | Reflux in polyethylene glycol-300 | 78 |
|
| Reflux in ethanol; piperidine | 38 |
| ||
|
| 81.3 | Tetrabutylammonium bromide; potassium carbonate | 92 |
|
|
| 29.7 | Tetrabutylammonium bromide; potassium carbonate | 89 |
|
|
| 60.8 | Mechanosynthesis; ammonium acetate | 96 |
|
| Reflux in ethanol; piperidine | 67 |
| ||
| Ethanol: water (1:1); ionic liquid tetrabutylammonium hydroxide, stirring | 92 |
| ||
| Tetrabutylammonium bromide; potassium carbonate | 91 |
| ||
| Water; KAl (SO4)2 ∙ 12H2O; stirring | 92 |
| ||
|
| 90.9 | Ethanol: water (1 : 1); ionic liquid tetrabutylammonium hydroxide, stirring | 90 |
|
| Tetrabutylammonium bromide; potassium carbonate | 92 |
| ||
| Water; KAl (SO4)2 ∙ 12H2O; stirring | 87 |
| ||
|
| 87.9 | Reflux in ethanol; piperidine | 96 |
|
|
| 32.7 | Mechanosynthesis; ammonium acetate | 96 |
|
| Ethanol: water (1 : 1); ionic liquid tetrabutylammonium hydroxide, stirring | 90 |
| ||
| Ethanol; baker’s yeast | 45 |
| ||
| Tetrabutylammonium bromide; potassium carbonate | 93 |
| ||
| Water; KAl (SO4)2 ∙ 12H2O; stirring | 95 |
| ||
|
| 89.8 | Reflux in toluene; L-proline | 92 |
|
The impact of solvent recycling on product yield for model reaction.
| Solvent | Yield (%) |
|---|---|
| Choline chloride: | 70.43 |
| 1st recycle | 75.53 |
| 2nd recycle | 64.01 |
| 3rd recycle | 62.25 |
| 4th recycle | 63.35 |
| 5th recycle | 61.88 |
Structures of analyzed compounds, values of the experimentally determined inhibition of soybean lipoxygenase, the inhibition of lipid peroxidation induced by AAPH, DPPH, and radical scavenging ability (at 100 μM concentrations of the compounds).
|
| ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compound | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | R5 | LP inh. (%) (100 μM) | LOX inh. % (100 μM) | LOX inh. IC50 (μM) | DPPH (%) (100 μM) | ABTS (%) (100 μM) |
| 1a | OH | H | H | H | H | 55.2 | 13.8 | - | 3.5 | 97.5 |
| 1b | H | OCH3 | OH | H | H | 36.5 | 8.5 | - | 27.9 | 99.7 |
| 1c | OH | H | H | OH | H | 61.6 | 76.3 | 3.52 | 16.5 | 97.6 |
| 1d | H | OCH3 | H | H | H | 84.2 | 27.2 | - | 6.2 | NA |
| 1e | H | OH | OCH3 | H | H | 65.1 | 14.5 | - | 3.1 | 98.9 |
| 1f | H | OH | OH | H | H | 50.4 | 13.4 | - | 57.6 | 100.0 |
| 1g | H | OCH3 | OCH3 | OCH3 | H | 46.3 | 7.3 | - | 3.3 | NA |
| 1h | OCH3 | H | H | OCH3 | H | 62.4 | 17.6 | - | 4.2 | NA |
| 1i | H | Br | H | H | H | 49.2 | 7.7 | - | 3.1 | NA |
| 1j | OH | H | H | NO2 | H | 76.9 | 18.3 | - | 9.6 | 49.3 |
| 1k | OCH3 | H | H | H | H | 55.9 | 30.31 | - | 3.8 | NA |
| 1l | H | OH | H | H | H | 68.2 | 20.2 | - | 10.7 | 84.7 |
| 1m | H | H | OH | H | H | 69.5 | 12.7 | - | 3.8 | 94.8 |
| 1n | H | H | NC2H6 | H | H | 23.0 | 12.5 | - | 7.6 | 74.7 |
| 1o | OH | H | OCH2PH | H | H | 50.0 | 34.7 | - | NA | 100.0 |
| 1p | H | F | H | H | H | 46.0 | 12.9 | - | 9.4 | NA |
| 1q | OCH3 | H | OCH3 | H | H | 59.9 | 19.2 | - | 4.7 | 6.6 |
| 1r | H | H | H | H | H | 56.7 | 18.8 | - | 3.6 | NA |
| 1s |
| 82.9 | 71.1 | 7.46 | 2.7 | 84.2 | ||||
| Trolox | 62.3 | - | - | - | - | |||||
| NDGA | - | 80.8 | - | - | - | |||||
NA, no activity; NDGA, nordihydroguaiaretic acid; DPPH-1, 1-diphenyl-picrylhydrazyl; ABTS, 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid; LP, lipid peroxidation; LOX, inh., soybean lipoxygenase inhibition.
FIGURE 2Chart of each descriptor t-values in the model (1).
Correlation matrix between descriptors included in model (1).
| log LOX inh. % |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| log LOX inh. % | 1.00 | −0.03 | 0.74 | 0.21 |
|
| −0.03 | 1.00 | 0.33 | −0.15 |
|
| 0.74 | 0.33 | 1.00 | −0.31 |
|
| 0.21 | −0.15 | −0.31 | 1.00 |
The statistical parameters of the QSAR models (1) and (2).
| Parameter | Model (1) | Model (2) |
|---|---|---|
|
| 19 | 18 |
|
| 0.82 | 0.88 |
|
| 0.79 | 0.85 |
|
| 0.13 | 0.11 |
|
| 23.45 | 33.69 |
|
| 0.27 | 0.29 |
|
| 0.05 | 0.10 |
|
| 0.11 | 0.10 |
|
| 0.10 | 0.09 |
|
| 0.90 | 0.94 |
|
| 0.70 | 0.77 |
|
| 0.66 | 0.75 |
|
| 0.15 | 0.14 |
|
| 0.13 | 0.12 |
|
| 0.43 | 0.33 |
|
| 0.83 | 0.88 |
|
| 0.17 | 0.17 |
|
| −0.38 | −0.42 |
|
| 0.25 | 0.25 |
|
| 0.67 | 0.70 |
| Applicability domain | ||
| | 1 ( | - |
| | - | - |
LOO (the leave-one out); LMO (the leave-more out); R 2 (coefficient of determination); R 2 adj (adjusted coefficient of determination); s (standard deviation of regression); F (Fisher ratio); Kxx (global correlation among descriptors); ΔK (global correlation among descriptors); tr = training set; cv = cross-validation); Yscr = Y-scramble; RMSE, root-mean-square error; MAE, mean absolute error; CCC, concordance correlation coefficient; Q 2 = variance explained; PRESS, predictive error sum of squares; r 2 m = absolute difference between the R 2 and R 2 0 (determination coefficients with and without intercept); h* (warning leverage for the applicability domain of the model).
FIGURE 3Williams plot of applicability domain of the QSAR model (1).
FIGURE 4Graph of experimental vs. calculated values of log LOX inh. % by the model (2).
FIGURE 5Difference in the symmetry of structures molecules 1a (A) and 1c (B) respect to axes y..
Total energies of a predicted poses (fitness) and energies of interactions (hydrogen-bonding (H), van der Waals (V), and electrostatic (E)) between protein residue and ligand (kcal mol−1) in the binding site of soybean LOX-3 (1NO3).
| Compound | Pose | Fitness |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2 | −72.91 | −18.42 | −54.45 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −72.87 | −1.60 | −71.31 | 0.00 |
|
| 0 | −70.08 | −9.48 | −60.61 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −67.68 | −11.74 | −55.93 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −66.46 | −2.73 | −63.73 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −64.74 | −15.06 | −51.49 | 1.81 |
|
| 0 | −64.62 | −7.84 | −56.78 | 0.00 |
|
| 1 | −63.72 | −20.09 | −44.82 | 1.19 |
|
| 2 | −63.65 | −15.53 | −48.12 | 0.00 |
|
| 0 | −62.70 | −7.30 | −55.40 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −62.47 | −3.50 | −58.97 | 0.00 |
|
| 1 | −61.41 | −8.27 | −53.13 | 0.00 |
|
| 0 | −60.81 | −5.69 | −55.12 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −60.66 | −3.36 | −57.30 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −60.13 | 0.00 | −60.13 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −58.51 | −9.36 | −49.16 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −57.36 | −2.50 | −54.86 | 0.00 |
|
| 1 | −56.65 | −3.17 | −53.48 | 0.00 |
|
| 2 | −55.38 | −10.50 | −44.88 | 0.00 |
|
| 1 | −54.50 | −7.00 | −47.50 | 0.00 |
Energy of the main interactions between LOX-3 residues and ligand 1s (M = main chain; S = side chain).
| H bond | Energy | van der Waals interaction | Energy |
|---|---|---|---|
| M-Gln514 | −1.16 | S-Gln514 | −4.81 |
| S-Gln514 | −3.50 | S-His518 | −1.14 |
| S-His518 | −9.50 | S-Trp519 | −9.33 |
| S-His523 | −1.99 | S-His523 | −10.14 |
| M-Ile857 | −2.26 | M-Asn558 | −1.38 |
| S-Asn558 | −0.47 | ||
| S-Leu565 | −2.92 | ||
| S-Ile572 | −1.77 | ||
FIGURE 6(A) Hydrophobic surface representation of soybean LOX-3 binding site with docked compound 1s. (B) 2D representation of the main interactions of compound 1s with residues in binding site of LOX-3: green = conventional hydrogen bond; light green = van der Waals; very light green = carbon-hydrogen bond; dark purple = π-sigma; purple = π-π T-shaped; light purple = alkyl and π-alkyl.