| Literature DB >> 36036302 |
Claudia Ardino1, Filomena Sannio2, Carolina Pasero1, Lorenzo Botta3,4, Elena Dreassi1, Jean-Denis Docquier5,6,7, Ilaria D'Agostino8,9.
Abstract
Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), due to its strong acidity and low boiling point, is extensively used in protecting groups-based synthetic strategies. Indeed, synthetic compounds bearing basic functions, such as amines or guanidines (commonly found in peptido or peptidomimetic derivatives), developed in the frame of drug discovery programmes, are often isolated as trifluoroacetate (TF-Acetate) salts and their biological activity is assessed as such in in vitro, ex vivo, or in vivo experiments. However, the presence of residual amounts of TFA was reported to potentially affect the accuracy and reproducibility of a broad range of cellular assays (e. g. antimicrobial susceptibility testing, and cytotoxicity assays) limiting the further development of these derivatives. Furthermore, the impact of the counterion on biological activity, including TF-Acetate, is still controversial. Herein, we present a focused case study aiming to evaluate the activity of an antibacterial AlkylGuanidino Urea (AGU) compound obtained as TF-Acetate (1a) and hydrochloride (1b) salt forms to highlight the role of counterions in affecting the biological activity. We also prepared and tested the corresponding free base (1c). The exchange of the counterions applied to polyguanidino compounds represents an unexplored and challenging field, which required significant efforts for the successful optimization of reliable methods of preparation, also reported in this work. In the end, the biological evaluation revealed a quite similar biological profile for the salt derivatives 1a and 1b and a lower potency was found for the free base 1c.Entities:
Keywords: Antibacterials; Counterion; Free base guanidine; Guanidine; Hydrochloride salt; Trifluoroacetate salt
Year: 2022 PMID: 36036302 PMCID: PMC9421121 DOI: 10.1007/s11030-022-10505-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Divers ISSN: 1381-1991 Impact factor: 3.364
Fig. 1Structure of AGU 1 as TF-Acetate (a) and HCl (b) salts or free base (c) and the Boc-intermediate 2
Scheme 1Synthetic routes explored to obtain 1b and 1c. Successful (iii, vi) and failed (i, iv, v) reaction steps. In green and blue are presented the approaches for 1b and 1c, respectively. Reagents and reaction conditions: ii. freshly dist. TFA (20% v/v), dry CH2Cl2, sealed flask, r.t., 5 h [10]; iii. Amberlite IRA400 chloride form, CH3OH, r.t., 72 h; vi. NaOEt in situ dry EtOH, N2, 0 °C-r.t., 30 min. Unsuccessful reactions are reported in Tables 1, S1, and S2
Attempts to synthesize compound 1b
| Entry | Reagents and Conditions | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|
| i | 1 | HCl 4 N in dry 1,4-dioxane, 2.3 µM, 0 °C, 8 h | Compound degradation |
| 2 | Freshly dist. acetyl chloride (20% dry CH3OH 5 µM, sealed flask, r.t., 24 h | Compound not isolated | |
| iii | 3 | HCl 5 N, CH3OH 5 µM, r.t., 16 h | TF-Acetate still present |
| 4 | 1. TEA (up to 40 eq.), CH2Cl2, 20 µM, r.t., 16 h; 2. HCl 2 N, CH3OH 10 µM, r.t., 48 h | TF-Acetate still present | |
| 5 | 1. DBU (up to 40 eq.), CH3OH 20 µM, r.t., 16 h; 2. HCl 2 N, CH3OH 10 µM, r.t., 48 h | Compound degradation | |
| 6 | 1. NaOH 2.5 N, CH3OH 10 µM, r.t., 48 h; 2. HCl 2 N, CH3OH 10 µM, r.t., 48 h | TF-Acetate still present | |
| 7 | Amberlite IRA 400 chloride form, CH3OH 6 µM, r.t., 72 h | Reaction occurred and product isolation | |
Reagents, reaction conditions, and main results are reported for each reaction
Fig. 2Comparison of 1H and 19F NMR spectra of AGUs 1a–c. A 1H NMR spectra of 1a (purple) and 1b (green) were recorded at Bruker 400 MHz. 1H NMR spectrum of 1c (blue) was recorded at Bruker 600 MHz. B 19F NMR spectra of 1a (purple) and 1b (green) were recorded at Bruker 600 MHz. All the experiments were performed in CD3OD. Spectra were visualized and analyzed through MestreNova 14.2 [44]
Antibacterial activity of compounds 1a–c against representative Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial species, including multi-drug resistant clinical isolates
| Bacterial strain | MIC (µg/mL) | MIC (µM) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | VAN | DAP | 1a | 1b | 1c | 1a | 1b | 1c | |
| –b | 0.5 | 1 | 2c | 1 | 8 | 1.54 | 1.18 | 9.46 | |
| – | 1 | 1 | 2c | 2 | 8 | 1.54 | 2.02 | 9.46 | |
| – | 0.5 | 0.125 | 2c | 2 | 8 | 1.54 | 2.02 | 9.46 | |
| – | 0.5 | 0.125 | 1c | 1 | 4 | 0.77 | 1.01 | 4.73 | |
| – | 0.5 | 0.125 | 1c | 0.5 | 4 | 0.77 | 0.50 | 4.73 | |
| 0.5 | – | – | 2c | 2 | 16 | 1.54 | 2.02 | 18.92 | |
| 0.5 | – | – | 2c | 2 | 16 | 1.54 | 2.02 | 18.92 | |
| 1 | – | – | 8c | 8 | 32 | 6.15 | 8.07 | 37.85 | |
| 0.5 | – | – | 8c | 8 | 64 | 6.15 | 8.07 | 75.71 | |
| > 256 | – | – | 64 | 16 | 128 | 49.18 | 16.14 | 151.42 | |
| 0.25 | – | – | 64 | 1 | 16 | 49.18 | 1.01 | 18.93 | |
| 0.5 | – | – | 4 | 4 | 128 | 3.07 | 4.04 | 151.42 | |
| 0.25 | – | – | 1c | 2 | 128 | 0.77 | 2.02 | 151.42 | |
| 64 | – | – | 2c | 2 | 128 | 1.54 | 2.02 | 151.42 | |
| 0.25 | – | – | 2c | 4 | 32 | 1.54 | 4.04 | 37.86 | |
| 32 | – | – | 16 | 4 | 64 | 12.29 | 4.04 | 75.71 | |
| 0.5 | – | – | 16c | 2 | 32 | 12.29 | 2.02 | 37.86 | |
| 0.25 | – | – | 16c | 2 | 32 | 12.29 | 2.02 | 37.86 | |
MIC values, expressed in both μg/mL and µM, are the average values from experiments performed at least in triplicate. Colistin (COL), Vancomycin (VAN), and Daptomycin (DAP) were used as control antibiotics
aMICs conversion in molarity (µM) was calculated through the formula: , considering 1301.42, 991.16, and 845.33 g/mol as the molecular weight for 1a, 1b, and 1c, respectively
b-: not determined
cData from references 7–10
MBCs of 1a–c against representative drug-resistant bacterial species
| Bacterial strain | MBC (µg/mL) | MBC (µM) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1a | 1b | 1c | 1a | 1b | 1c | |
| 64 | 32 | 128 | 49.18 | 32.28 | 151.42 | |
| 64 | 2 | 16 | 49.18 | 2.02 | 18.93 | |
| 4 | 4 | 128 | 3.07 | 4.04 | 151.42 | |
| 1 | 2 | 128 | 0.77 | 2.02 | 151.42 | |
| 2 | 2 | 128 | 1.54 | 2.02 | 151.42 | |
| 2 | 4 | 64 | 1.54 | 4.04 | 75.71 | |
| 16 | 4 | 64 | 12.29 | 4.04 | 75.71 | |
| 16 | 2 | 32 | 12.29 | 2.02 | 37.86 | |
| 32 | 2 | 32 | 24.58 | 2.02 | 37.86 | |
MBC values, expressed in both μg/mL and µM, are the average values from experiments performed at least in triplicate. the unit system conversion was calculated through the formula: , considering 1301.42, 991.16, and 845.33 g/mol as the molecular weight for 1a, 1b, and 1c, respectively