| Literature DB >> 35996135 |
Akachukwu Ibezim1, Martha N Ofokansi2, Xavier Ndukwe3, Chidera S Chiama3, Bonaventure C Obi4, Ogechukwu N Isiogugu4, Peter E Ikechukwu4, Akachukwu M Onwuka4, Stella A Ihim5, Jonnie N Asegbeloyin6, Ngozi J Nwodo3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The search for pharmacologically effective agents among molecules bearing multiple functionalities is commonly practiced. In continuation of the search for new anti-malarial agents, new pyrazole-hydrazine coupled Schiff-base derivatives previously synthesized were screened for anti-malarial property.Entities:
Keywords: Antimalarial; Docking; Hematology; Hydrazine; Pyrazole; Schiff-base
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35996135 PMCID: PMC9396901 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-022-04266-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 3.469
Theoretical molecular descriptor of the PHCSBD
| Compound | NRB | HBA | HBD | logP | TPSA | MW | Vol | BIPcaco-2 | logB/B | logS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BepBeH | 5 | 6 | 2 | 4.01 | 79.51 | 396.45 | 358.70 | 1.39 | −0.063 | −4.07 |
| BepINH | 5 | 7 | 2 | 3.46 | 92.41 | 397.44 | 354.55 | 1.08 | 0.257 | −0.44 |
Fig. 12-dimensional chemical structures of the compounds used in this study
Prophylactic Study
| Treatment | Dose (mg/kg) | Parasitaemia count | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 3 | Day 4 | Day 5 (post inoculation) | ||
| Control | – | 9.40 ± 1.23 | 14.40 ± 0.45# | 16.37 ± 1.25# |
| BePINH | 2.5 | 3.75 ± 1.08* | 2.92 ± 1.64* | 2.77 ± 1.65* |
| 10 | 3.70 ± 0.64* | 2.30 ± 2.72* | 2.05 ± 0.72* | |
| 15 | 2.43 ± 0.86* | 0.83 ± 0.92* | 0.76 ± 1.11* | |
| BePBeH | 2.5 | 3.99 ± 0.74* | 2.95 ± 0.49* | 2.93 ± 1.06* |
| 10 | 3.72 ± 0.64* | 2.50 ± 0.52* | 2.18 ± 0.77* | |
| 15 | 2.46 ± 0.75* | 0.91 ± 1.62* | 0.79 ± 1.19* | |
| ACT | 5 | 0.51 ± 0.26* | 0.26 ± 0.42* | 0.10 ± 0.66* |
Each value represents the mean ± S.E.M, n = 5
ACT artemisinin-based combination therapy
*,#p < 0.05 compared with control and Day 3, respectively (One-way ANOVA; Dunnett’s post hoc)
Curative study
| Treatment | Dose (mg/kg) | Parasitaemia count | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | ||
| Control | – | 6.76 ± 0.29 | 13.60 ± 0.62# | 14.39 ± 0.27# | 15.02 ± 0.53# |
| BePINH | 2.5 | 7.70 ± 2.76 | 7.53 ± 2.49* | 6.61 ± 1.63* | 6.33 ± 2.80* |
| 10 | 8.26 ± 2.40 | 6.56 ± 2.35* | 5.58 ± 1.79* | 5.04 ± 2.35* | |
| 15 | 6.63 ± 2.02 | 6.28 ± 1.85* | 5.53 ± 1.63* | 2.93 ± 1.73* | |
| BePBeH | 2.5 | 7.83 ± 2.58 | 7.79 ± 2.06 | 7.07 ± 1.65* | 6.64 ± 2.45* |
| 10 | 6.63 ± 2.10 | 6.77 ± 1.92* | 6.56 ± 2.11* | 5.31 ± 1.01* | |
| 15 | 6.35 ± 2.02 | 6.69 ± 1.77* | 5.58 ± 1.55* | 2.98 ± 0.57* | |
| ACT | 5 | 7.44 ± 2.01 | 6.66 ± 2.05* | 3.03 ± 2.22* | 1.40 ± 1.93*# |
Each value represents the mean ± S.E.M, n = 5
ACT artemisinin-based Combination Therapy
*,#p < 0.05 compared with control and Day 0, respectively (One-way ANOVA; Dunnett’s post hoc)
Effect of PHCSBD on haematological parameters
| Treatment | Dose (mg/kg) | Parasitaemia count | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBC (106/μL) | WBC (103/μL) | PCV (%) | HB (g/dl) | ||
| Control | – | 5.16 ± 3.88 | 8.22 ± 1..76 | 19.50 ± 1.59 | 5.75 ± 0.96 |
| BePINH | 2.5 | 9.81 ± 1.96 | 9.77 ± 1.37 | 38.25 ± 0.83* | 10.63 ± 0.19* |
| 10 | 10.63 ± 1.28* | 10.57 ± 2.02 | 36.50 ± 1.10* | 11.03 ± 0.39* | |
| 15 | 10.86 ± 1.11* | 10.92 ± 1.70 | 37.25 ± 0.96* | 12.18 ± 0.19* | |
| BePBeH | 2.5 | 8.24 ± 2.92 | 9.55 ± 1.56 | 36.87 ± 1.21* | 10.71 ± 0.74* |
| 10 | 9.89 ± 1.31 | 10.41 ± 1.24 | 37.02 ± 0.92* | 10.87 ± 0.81* | |
| 15 | 10.31 ± 0.29* | 10.85 ± 0.82 | 37.53 ± 1.01* | 11.17 ± 1.25* | |
| ACT | 5 | 10.99 ± 1.17* | 10.60 ± 1.70 | 41.50 ± 1.70* | 12.00 ± 0.32* |
Each value represents the mean ± S.E.M, n = 5
ACT Artemisinin-based Combination Therapy, RBC red blood cells, WBC white blood cells, PCV packed cell volume, HB haemoglobin
*p < 0.05 compared with control (One-way ANOVA; Dunnett’s post hoc)
Docking of PHCSBD into FP2 active site
| Compound | Binding free energy ligand (kcal/mol) | Ligand (kcal/mol) efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|
| BepBeH | 0.93 ± 0.61 | −10.02 ± 0.78 | 0.27 ± 0.09 |
| BepINH | 1.14 ± 0.81 | −8.11 ± 0.49 | 0.27 ± 0.09 |
| E64 | 711.70 ± 0.75 | −4.29 ± 0.44 | 0.23 ± 0.10 |
E64 = reference (cocrystallized) ligand, Ki is the theoretical inhibition constant and like binding energy, lower values indicate more favorable interaction. Ligand efficiency is a concept that expresses the sensitivity of binding affinity to an increase in molecular size. The higher the ligand efficiency the better the molecule is as a drug-lead [13]
Fig. 2Theoretical binding poses of the pyrazole-hydrazine coupled schiff base derivatives (PHCSB) in FP2 active site. The surface map in which hydrophilic, lipophilic and neutral regions are respectively presented in purple, green and white colours while BepBeH and BepINH are shown in cyan and yellow colours, respectively. Note that only residues involved in hydrogen bonding are represented for clarity