Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1389-2010
ISSN (Online): 1873-4316

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

Molecular Docking of Natural Phenolic Compounds for the Screening of Urease Inhibitors

Author(s): Ritu Kataria and Anurag Khatkar*

Volume 20, Issue 5, 2019

Page: [410 - 421] Pages: 12

DOI: 10.2174/1389201020666190409110948

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: Bacterial ureases have been the cause of various human and animal pathogenicity including hepatic encephalopathy, hepatic coma urolithiasis, gastric and peptic ulcers, pyelonephritis, and urinary catheter encrustation by the production of ammonia. Hence, in view of the side effects of existing drugs, there is a strong need to discover, more safe, effective and potent compounds for the treatment of infections caused by urease.

Methods: For this purpose, several natural phenolic compounds have been screened by molecular modelling techniques, wherein the phenolic compounds were docked to the active site of Jack bean urease (PDB ID 3LA4) using the Schrodinger docking software.

Results: The lead compounds were identified via in-silico screening technique where docking score, binding energy, ADME and toxicity data were considered to screen the lead compounds as compared with the available standard drugs. From the docking study of screened natural phenolic compounds, five compounds diosmin, morin, chlorogenic acid, capsaicin and resveratrol were selected based upon their better affinity towards the receptor and were considered for further wet lab studies.

Conclusion: The in-silico results were confirmed by in vitro experiments by use of the Jack bean urease using Weatherburn method.

Keywords: Gastric ulcer, urease, docking, Helicobacter pylori, diosmin, morin, chlorogenic acid.

« Previous Next »
Graphical Abstract

[1]
Psomiadou, E.; Tsimidou, M. Stability of virgin olive oil: Autoxidation studies. J. Agric. Food Chem., 2002, 50, 716-721.
[2]
Merkl, R.; Hrádková, I.; Filip, V.; Šmidrkal, J. Antimicrobial and antioxidant properties of phenolic acids alkyl esters. Czech J. Food Sci., 2010, 28(4), 275-279.
[3]
Huang, W.Y.; Cai, Y.Z.; Zhang, Y. Natural phenolic compounds from medicinal herbs and dietary plants: Potential use for cancer prevention. Nutr. Cancer, 2010, 62(1), 1-20.
[4]
Mobley, H.L.; Hausinger, R.P. Microbial ureases: Significance, regulation, and molecular characterization. Microbiol. Rev., 1989, 53(1), 85-108.
[5]
Mobley, H.L.; Island, M.D.; Hausinger, R.P. Molecular biology of microbial ureases. Microbiol. Rev., 1995, 59(3), 451-480.
[6]
Collins, C.M.; D’Orazio, S.E. Bacterial ureases: Structure, regulation of expression and role in pathogenesis. Mol. Microbiol., 1993, 9, 907-913.
[7]
Ciurli, S.; Benini, S.; Rypniewski, W.R. Structural properties of the nickel ions in urease: Novel insights into the catalytic and inhibition mechanisms. Coord. Chem. Rev., 1999, 192, 331-355.
[8]
Sudha, K.N.; Mohammed, S.; Paturi, P.; Nalla, S.; Narasimha, K.C.H.; Padavala, A.B. Virtual screening for novel COX-2 inhibitors using the ZINC database. Bioinformation, 2008, 2, 325-329.
[9]
Protein Data Bank (http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.dostructureId =121P).
[10]
PDBsum (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/thornton-srv/databases/cgi-bin/ pdbsum/ GetPage.pl) .
[11]
Lovell, S.C.; Davis, I.W.; Arendall, W.B.; de Bakker, P.I.; Word, J.M.; Prisant, M.G.; Richardson, J.S.; Richardson, D.C. Structure validation by Calpha geometry: phi, psi and Cbeta deviation. Proteins, 2003, 50, 437-450.
[12]
Kabsch, W.; Sander, C. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers, 1983, 22, 2577-2637.
[13]
Maestro, version 10.2; Schrödinger, LLC: New York, NY, 2015.
[14]
Friesner, R.A.; Banks, J.L.; Murphy, R.B.; Halgren, T.A.; Klicic, J.J.; Mainz, D.T.; Repasky, M.P.; Knoll, E.H.; Shelley, M.; Perry, J.K.; Shaw, D.E. Glide: A new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem., 2004, 47, 1739-1749.
[15]
Halgren, T.A.; Murphy, R.B.; Friesner, R.A.; Beard, H.S.; Frye, L.L.; Pollard, W.T.; Banks, J.L. Glide: A new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring enrichment factors in database screening. J. Med. Chem., 2004, 47, 1750-1759.
[16]
Glide, version 6.6; Schrödinger, LLC: New York, NY, 2015.
[17]
Friesner, R.A.; Murphy, R.B.; Repasky, M.P.; Frye, L.L.; Greenwood, J.R.; Halgren, T.A.; Sanschagrin, P.C.; Mainz, D.T. Extra precision glide: Docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes. J. Med. Chem., 2006, 49, 6177-6196.
[18]
Genheden, S.; Ryde, U. The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities. ‎. Exp Opin. Drug Discov., 2015, 10, 449-461.
[19]
Godschalk, F.; Genheden, S.; Söderhjelm, P.; Ryde, U. Comparison of MM/GBSA calculations based on explicit and implicit solvent simulations. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2013, 15, 7731-7739.
[20]
Sengupta, D.; Verma, D.; Naik, P. K. Docking-MM-GB/SA and ADME screening of HIV-1 NNRTI inhibitor: Nevirapine and its analogues. In Silico Biol., 2008, 8, 275-289.
[21]
Cecchelli, R.; Berezowski, V.; Lundquist, S.; Culot, M.; Renftel, M.; Dehouck, M.P.; Fenart, L. Modelling of the blood-brain barrier in drug discovery and development. ‎. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov., 2007, 6, 650-661.
[22]
Lipinski, C.A.; Lombardo, F.; Dominy, B.W.; Feeney, P.J. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev., 2012, 64, 4-17.

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
55
10
1
1
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy