EXCLI Journal 2019;18:962-987 – ISSN 1611-2156
Received: September 11, 2019, accepted: October 17, 2019, published: October 28, 2019
Computational section
score in kcal mol-1). Hydrogen bond interac-
tions, as well as favorable π-π interactions be-
tween the ligands and hemozoin dimer solv-
Computational details
The molecular structure of compounds 4a
and 5a have been elucidated theoretically
with Gaussian 09 program using the DFT
(B3LYP) level of theory at 6-31G (d,p) basis
ated, were explored.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
set (Frisch et al., 2009). The harmonic vibra- Characterization of ligands (L)
tional frequencies were calculated at the same
4-[(7-chloroquinolin-4-yl)amino]aceto-
levels of theory for the optimized structure phenone (4). Pale yellow amorphous com-
and the vibrational band assignments were pound, yield: 94.66 %, m.p. 288-290 °C, Rf
made using the Gauss-View molecular visu- (Hexane:ethyl acetate = 3:7): 0.76. UV-vis
alization program (Dennington et al., 2007). (DMSO) [λmax (nm), ε (cm-1 mol-1 L), assign-
The nonexistence of imaginary wavenumbers ment]: 261, 2100, aromatic π→π*; 362, 2792,
of the theoretically calculated vibrational π→π* and/or n→π* (conjugated carbonyl). IR
spectra affirms that these deduced structures (KBr) cm−1: 3440, 1678, 1623, 1588, 1098.
correspond to minimum energy. However, the 1H NMR (DMSO-d6): δ 2.62 (s, 3H, CH3),
wavenumber values obtained at these levels 7.04 (d, 1H, H3, J2,3: 6.7 Hz), 7.66 (d, 2H,
contain well-known systematic errors (For-
esman and Frisch, 1996). Therefore, the cal- J5,6: 9.2 Hz, J6,8: 1.7 Hz), 8.12 (d, 2H, H2´,6´
culated vibrational wavenumbers were scaled 2´,3´ = J5´,6´: 8.4 Hz), 8.22 (d, 1H, H8, J6,8: 1.7
with a scale factor of 0.9614 for B3LYP Hz), 8.62 (d, 1H, H2, J2,3: 6.9 Hz), 8.95 (d, 1H,
H3´,5´, J2´,3´ = J5´,6´: 8.4 Hz), 7.89 (dd, 1H, H6,
,
J
method (Young, 2001).
H5, J5,6: 9.2 Hz), 11.39 (broad s, 1H, NH). 13C
NMR: δ 27.21 (CH3), 102.2, 117.42, 120.73,
124.50, 126.99, 127.84, 130.44, 135.22,
138.43, 140.86, 142.67, 145.06, 154.14 (Aro-
matic-C), 197.30 (C=O). HRMS m/z (ESI):
297.00 [M+H]+, exact mass calculated for
C17H14ClN2O [M+H]+: 297.00, found:
297.00; ESI-CID-MS2: 297.00 (21) [M+H]+,
253.99 (100), 218.14 (16), 163.10 (3), 137.97
(≈ 1), 111.07 (≈ 1), 91.15 (≈ 1), 77.06 (≈ 1),
43.17 (≈ 1).
3-[(7-chloroquinolin-4-yl)amino]aceto-
phenone (5). Pale yellow crystalline com-
pound, yield: 97.92 %, m.p. 294 °C, Rf (Hex-
ane:ethyl acetate = 3:7): 0.73. UV-vis
(DMSO) [λmax (nm), ε (cm-1 mol-1 L), assign-
ment]: 259, 2351, aromatic π→π*; 347, 2335,
π→π* and/or n→π* (conjugated carbonyl). IR
(KBr) cm−1: 3440, 1685, 1611, 1581, 1100.
1H NMR (DMSO-d6): δ 2.62 (s, 3H, CH3),
6.87 (d, 1H, H3, J2,3: 6.9 Hz), 7.75 (m, 2H,
H4´,6´), 7.90 (dd, 1H, H6, J5,6: 9.2 Hz, J6,8: 1.97
Hz), 8.01 (t, 1H, H5´, J: 7.4 Hz), 8.04 (s, 1H,
H2´), 8.21 (d, 1H, H8, J6,8: 2.2 Hz), 8.55 (d, 1H,
H2, J2,3: 6.9 Hz), 8.95 (d, 1H, H5, J5,6: 9.2 Hz),
11.39 (broad s, 1H, NH). 13C NMR: δ 27.3
(CH3), 102.8, 119.0, 121.9, 124.3, 125.1,
125.8, 127.2, 127.9, 130.4, 134.8, 138.7,
141.4, 148.4, 149.8, 152.2 (Aromatic-C),
Molecular docking procedure
The ligands in protonated form (4 and 5)
were built using the molecule builder of the
software package ArgusLab 4.0.1. Geometry
optimizations and energy calculations of the
ligands were performed using the PM3 semi-
empirical quantum-mechanical method. The
binding site was the three-dimensional struc-
ture of the hemozoin dimer (β-hematin), and
it was obtained from the Cambridge Crystal-
lographic Database REFCODE: XETXUP
(Pagola et al., 2000). Hemozoin dimer was
solvated in order to simulate experimental
conditions of the in vitro evaluations, consid-
ering only those water molecules that estab-
lish H-bonds with the hemozoin dimer. The
docking program implements an efficient
grid-based docking algorithm which approxi-
mates an exhaustive search within the free
volume of the binding site solvated, around
which was built a bounding box (25 x 25 x 25
Å). It was used ArgusDock engine, and the
conformational space was explored by the ge-
ometry optimization of the flexible ligand un-
der a condition of high precision docking. The
final positions of the compounds were ranked
by lowest interaction energy values (docking
965