| Literature DB >> 35911157 |
Sherouk Hussein Sweilam1,2, Mohammed H Alqarni1, Fadia S Youssef3.
Abstract
Therapeutic strategies based upon enzyme inhibition have recently gained higher attention in treating hazardous ailments. Herein, the potential use of seventy-two antimicrobial alkaloids isolated from marine-derived fungi to fight COVID-19 infection via inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 lethal virus was performed using in silico analyses. Molecular modelling was performed to assess their enzyme inhibitory potential on the main protease SARS-CoV-2 MPro, 3-chymotrypsin-like protease SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro, and papain-like protease SARS-CoV-2 PLpro using Discovery Studio 4.5. Validation of the docking experiments was done by determination of RMSD (root mean square deviation) after redocking the superimposition of the cocrystalized ligands. Results showed that gymnastatin Z (72) showed the best fitting score in SARS-CoV-2 MPro and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr active sites with ∆G equal -34.15 and -34.28 Kcal/mol, respectively. Meanwhile, scalusamide C (62) displayed the highest fitting within SARS-CoV-2 PLpro active sites (∆G = -26.91 Kcal/mol) followed by eutypellazine M (57). ADMET/TOPKAT prediction displayed that eutypellazine M and scalusamide C showed better pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Gymnastatin Z is safer showing better toxicity criteria and higher rat oral LD50 and rat chronic LOAEL (lowest observed adverse effect level). Chemometric analysis using principle component analysis (PCA) based on the binding energies observed for the compounds with respect to the three tested enzymes revealed the clustering of the compounds into different clusters. Eutypellazine M, scalusamide C, and gymnastatin Z appear in one cluster due to their closeness in activity. Thus, these compounds could serve as promising SARS-CoV-2 enzymes inhibitors that could help in alleviation of COVID-19 infection. Further investigations are recommended to confirm the results of molecular modelling.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35911157 PMCID: PMC9325633 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5403757
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Figure 1Diverse alkaloids identified from marine-derived fungal strains showing antimicrobial activities.
Figure 2Diverse alkaloids identified from marine-derived fungal strains showing antimicrobial activities (cont'd).
Figure 3Diverse alkaloids identified from marine-derived fungal strains showing antimicrobial activities (cont'd).
Figure 4The ribbon structure of the three targeted proteins, SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-2PLpro, (b) and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro (c) downloaded from the protein data bank.
Figure 5Validation of the docking experiments for SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (b), and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro (c).
Binding energies (∆G) of the docked compounds expressed in kcal/mole using in silico studies within the active centers of SARS-CoV-2 MPro, SARS-CoV-2PLpro, and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr.
| Compound | Genus | SARS-CoV-2 MPro | SARS-CoV-2 PLpro | SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arthpyrone F |
| 20.01 | 26.33 | 12.49 |
| Arthpyrone G |
| 47.11 | 47.43 | 44.89 |
| Arthpyrone H |
| 21.01 | 29.33 | 14.49 |
| Arthpyrone I |
| 23.28 | 39.35 | 23.92 |
| Apiosporamide |
| 7.29 | 23.30 | 6.18 |
| Fumitremorgin C |
| 5.12 | 12.48 | 4.36 |
| Fumiquinazoline C |
| 11.92 | 43.37 | 12.07 |
| 12,13-Dihydroxy fumitremorgin C ( |
| −5.12 | −12.48 | −4.36 |
| Fumiquinazoline G |
| 19.91 | 29.28 | 17.30 |
| Fumigatoside E |
| 2.57 | 4.77 | 6.28 |
| Fumigatoside F |
| −1.57 | 2.77 | −5.28 |
|
|
| 27.74 | 233.99 | 27.2962 |
| Versicoloid A |
| −14.40 | −6.18 | −15.17 |
| Versicoloid B |
| −10.39 | −4.22 | −12.12 |
| Aspergicin |
| −12.43 | −5.21 | −14.19 |
| Stephacidin A |
| 23.86 | 29.94 | 23.69 |
| Compound |
| 18.25 | 20.25 | 20.25 |
| Compound |
| 24.49 | 22.05 | 20.66 |
| Compound |
| 0.12 | 21.08 | 0.95 |
| Cytochalasin Z17 |
| 39.52 | 128.81 | 41.66 |
| Gliotoxin |
| 24.35 | 32.94 | 26.95 |
| Curvulamine |
| 15.23 | 17.72 | 9.62 |
| Scequinadoline A |
| −5.32 | 31.30 | −10.14 |
| Neoechinulin B |
| −12.62 | −12.99 | −17.19 |
| Cristatumin A |
| −17.28 | −14.32 | −21.48 |
| Rubrumazine A |
| −20.945 | 10.63 | −23.22 |
| Rubrumazine B |
| −21.11 | 10.37 | −23.02 |
| Rubrumazine C |
| −20.334 | −12.64 | −22.96 |
| Compound |
| −13.83 | −17.65 | −18.81 |
| Compound |
| −2.41 | 6.93 | −3.06 |
| Compound |
| −6.73 | 17.15 | −3.05 |
| Compound |
| 15.00 | 54.20 | 6.22 |
| Compound |
| −26.77 | −9.58 | −27.69 |
| Compound |
| −19.50 | −10.22 | −24.53 |
| Compound |
| 18.16 | 67.10 | 22.15 |
| Compound |
| 33.22 | FD | 30.89 |
| Compound |
| −19.24 | −25.36 | −21.94 |
| Compound |
| −15.36 | −12.32 | −21.52 |
| Compound |
| −6.69 | 26.60 | −8.54 |
| Compound |
| −13.83 | 15.93 | −1.76 |
| Isoechinulin A |
| −1.17 | −0.52 | −6.21 |
| Rubrumline D |
| −22.96 | −3.98 | −21.88 |
| Variecolorine O |
| −20.22 | −21.52 | −24.26 |
| Neoechinulin C |
| −2.17 | 3.17 | 15.50 |
| Eutypellazine A |
| 34.07 | 59.98 | 36.55 |
| Eutypellazine B |
| 41.54 | 52.74 | 42.17 |
| Eutypellazine C |
| 30.37 | 59.19 | 31.74 |
| Eutypellazine D |
| 17.54 | 63.22 | 15.50 |
| Eutypellazine E |
| 27.24 | 12.27 | 23.06 |
| Eutypellazine F |
| 17.83 | 12.58 | 17.47 |
| Eutypellazine G |
| 21.80 | 9.57 | 24.47 |
| Eutypellazine H |
| 30.28 | 7.70 | 30.27 |
| Eutypellazine I |
| −19.44 | 6.62 | −23.38 |
| Eutypellazine J |
| −22.19 | −6.84 | −25.75 |
| Eutypellazine K |
| −24.46 | −3.43 | −28.53 |
| Eutypellazine L |
| −24.24 | −6.01 | −26.82 |
| Eutypellazine M |
|
|
|
|
| Oxysporizoline |
| FD | FD | FD |
| Varioxepine A |
| FD | FD | FD |
| Scalusamide A |
| −14.08 | −19.86 | −17.83 |
| Scalusamide B |
| −13.55 | −21.52 | −14.25 |
| Scalusamide C |
|
|
|
|
| Penipanoid A |
| 11.34 | 9.65 | 6.96 |
| Penipanoid C |
| −13.92 | −15.16 | −18.17 |
| Raistrickindole A |
| −5.87 | 27.75 | −9.07 |
| Raistrickin |
| −16.90 | 13.96 | −22.09 |
| Brevianamide F |
| −9.31 | −10.74 | −12.92 |
|
|
| 18.89 | 23.11 | 16.10 |
| Terretrione A |
| −18.30 | −20.70 | −24.36 |
| Didymellamide A |
| 7.00 | 20.45 | 4.37 |
| Thielaviazoline |
| −9.52 | −5.20 | −12.09 |
| Gymnastatin Z |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| SARS-CoV-2 MPro ligand (FHR/PRD_002347) | −4.60 | ND | ND | |
| Main SARS-CoV-2 PLpro ligand (Y97) | ND | −4.08 | ND | |
| Main SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr ligand (3WL) | ND | ND | −34.66 | |
| Remdesivir | −35.56 | 2.28 | −33.56 | |
FD: fail to dock; ND: not done; positive values indicate unfavorable interactions.
Figure 62D and 3D binding modes of the gymnastatin Z (72) in SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-2PLpro (b), and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr (c) active sites.
Figure 72D and 3D binding modes of the scalusamide C (62) in SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-PLpro (b), and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr (c) active sites.
Figure 82D and 3D binding modes of the eutypellazine M (57) in SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (b), and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr (c) active sites.
Figure 92D and 3D binding modes of the respective ligands in SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (b), and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr (c) active sites.
Figure 10The presence of gymnastatin Z in the active pocket of SARS-CoV-2 MPro (a), SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (b), and SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr (c) active sites showing regions of hydrogen bond formation, hydrophobicity regions, and ionizable regions.
The absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity (ADMET/TOPKAT) predictions for bioactive compounds, eutypellazine M (57), scalusamide C (62), and gymnastatin Z (72) and the cocrystalized ligands with the examined proteins.
| Compounds | Eutypellazine M | Scalusamide C | Gymnastatin Z | SARS-CoV-2 MPro ligand | SARS-CoV-PLpro ligand | SARS-CoV-2 3CLpr ligand |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ADMET | ||||||
| Absorption level | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Solubility level | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
| BBB level | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 3 |
| PPB level | True | True | False | False | True | True |
| CPY2D6 | NI | NI | NI | NI | Inhibition | NI |
| Hepatotoxic | Nontoxic | Nontoxic | Nontoxic | Nontoxic | Toxic | Toxic |
| PSA-2D | 94.02 | 58.77 | 71.74 | 120.98 | 33.46 | 88.68 |
| Alog p98 | 2.15 | 2.85 | 6.44 | 2.56 | 4.66 | 2.41 |
|
| ||||||
| TOPKAT | ||||||
| Ames prediction | Nonmutagen | Nonmutagen | Nonmutagen | Nonmutagen | Mutagen | Nonmutagen |
| Rat oral LD50 (g/kg.bw) | 0.28 | 1.35 | 1.16 | 0.97 | 0.52 | 0.27 |
| Rat female FDA | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen |
| Rat male FDA | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Noncarcinogen | Carcinogen |
| Skin irritancy | None | Moderate | Mild | Mild | None | None |
| Ocular irritancy | Severe | Moderate | None | Moderate | Mild | Mild |
| Rat chronic LOAEL(g/kg.bw) | 0.03 | 0.08 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 0.02 | 0.15 |
0, 1, 2, and 3 indicate good, moderate, low, and very low absorption, respectively; 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 indicate extremely low, very low but possible, low, good, optimal, and too soluble, respectively; 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 denote very high, high, medium, low, and undefined, penetration via BBB, respectively. PBB is plasma protein binding; FALSE means less than 90%; TRUE means more than 90%; NI is noninhibitor.
Figure 11ADMET Plot for bioactive compounds, eutypellazine M (57), scalusamide C (62), and gymnastatin Z (72) and the cocrystalized ligands with the examined proteins showing the 95% and 99% confidence limit ellipses corresponding to the blood brain barrier (BBB) and the human intestinal absorption models; eutypellazine M (57), (triangle); scalusamide C (62) (filled square); and gymnastatin Z (72), (star) in ADMET_AlogP98.
Figure 12PCA score plot performed based on the binding energies observed for the compounds with respect to the three tested proteins. Compounds are numbered as given in Table 1. The black arrow indicates the presence of eutypellazine M (57), scalusamide C (62), and gymnastatin Z (72) close to each other in a subcluster.