5154
D. Sriram et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 21 (2011) 5149–5154
Figure 2. Figure depicting binding of 22 to ICL at the active site of 3-nitropropionate.
resting macrophages.6 It has also been demonstrated that ICL is
important for survival of MTB in the lungs of mice during the per-
sistent phase of infection (2–16 weeks), but is not essential during
the acute phase (0–2 weeks) of infection.6
As these synthesized compounds showed activity against dor-
mant mycobacterium, we decided to explore the possible mecha-
nism by screening some compounds against MTB ICL enzyme
(Table 2).16 Among 10 compounds screened, three compounds
References and notes
1. Parrish, N. M.; Dick, J. D.; Bishai, W. R. Trends Microbiol. 1998, 6, 107.
2. Mitchison, D. A. J. R. Coll. Physicians Lond. 1980, 14, 91.
3. Girling, D. J. The Biology of the Mycobacteria In Clinical Aspects of Mycobacterial
Disease; Ratledge, C., Stanford, J., Grange, J. M., Eds.; Academic: London, 1989;
vol. 3,.
4. Voskuil, M. I. Tuberculosis 2004, 84, 138.
5. Smith, C. V.; Sharma, V.; Sacchettini, J. C. Tuberculosis 2004, 84, 45.
6. Saxena, A.; Srivastava, V.; Srivastava, R.; Srivastava, B. S. Tuberculosis 2008, 88,
518.
(19, 20, and 22) inhibited ICL with IC50 of less than 1
10 screened compounds showed better activity (IC50 0.1–
36.80 M) than standard 3-nitropropionic acid (IC50 116 M).
Four compounds were further examined for cytotoxicity (CC50
in a mammalian Vero cell line at single concentration of 62.5 g/
lM. All the
7. Kumar, R.; Bhakuni, V. Proteins 2008, 72, 892.
8. Spectroscopic data for representative compound 22 is given below. 1H NMR
(300 MHz, DMSO-d6) d (ppm): 0.28–0.46 (m, 4H, cyclopropyl), 1.32 (m, 1H,
cyclopropyl), 1.15 (d, 6H, –CH3 J = 9.8 Hz), 2.86 (t, 2H, –CH2 J = 7.1 Hz), 3.44–
3.51 (m, 4H, –CH2), 3.53 (s, 3H, –OCH3), 4.02 (m, 2H, –CH), 4.42 (t, 2H, –CH2
J = 7.4 Hz), 6.71 (s, 1H, C5-H), 7.95 (s, 1H, C2-H), 12.00 (s, 1H, COOH); 13C NMR
(DMSO-d6) d (ppm): 176.4 (1C@O of 4-quinolone), 171.1 (1C@O of amide),,
166.2 (1C@O of 3-COOH), 158.6 (1CH of 6-benzene), 146.9 (1C of 2-quinolone),
146.3 (1CH of 8-benzene), 132.5 (1CH of 7-benzene), 125.9 (1C of 8a-
quinolone), 123.8 (1C of 4a-quinolone), 109.3 (1C of 3-quinolone), 104.5
(1CH of 4-benzene), 72.0 (3rd CH2 of nitropropanoyl), 55.8 (1C of methoxy),
54.4 (2ÂC of piperazine), 53.1(2ÂC of piperazine), 36.1(1ÂC of cyclopropane),
28.6 (2nd CH2 of nitropropanoyl), 18.7 (2ÂC of methyl), 7.7 (2ÂC of
cyclopropane). Anal (C23H27FN4O7) C, H, N.
l
l
)
l
mL. After 72 h of exposure, viability was assessed on the basis of
cellular conversion of MTT into a formazan product using the Pro-
mega Cell Titer 96 non-radioactive cell proliferation assay. Most of
the compounds were not cytotoxic to Vero cells (Table 2). Com-
pound 22 was not toxic up to 127.42
of 3185 for starved MTB. CC50 of standard anti-TB compound INH
is >455.73 M.
lM with selectivity index
l
9. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Antimycobacterial
Susceptibility Testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Proposed standard
M24-T. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Villanova, Pa.,
1995.
10. Xie, Z.; Siddiqi, N.; Rubin, E. J. J. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2005, 49, 4778.
11. Herbert, K. C.; Foster, S. J. Microbiol. 2001, 147, 2275.
12. Mckinney, J. D.; Jacobs, W. R.; Bloom, B. R. Persisting Problems in Tuberculosis.
In Emerging Infections; Kraus, R. M., Ed.; Academic Press: New York, 1998; pp
51–146.
13. Wheeler, P. R.; Ratledge, C. In Tuberculosis Pathogenesis Protection and Control;
Bloom, B. R., Ed.; Washington DC: ASM Press, 1994; pp 353–385.
14. Bentrup, H. K.; Miczak, A.; Swenson, D. L.; Russell, D. G. J. Bacteriol. 1999, 181,
7161.
In this study we have designed and developed various small
molecule inhibitors of MTB ICL based on 3-nitripropionate. A series
of derivatives of 3-nitropropionate were synthesized and docked
into catalytic core of ICL and coordinates were taken from PDB
ID: 1F8I. Docking studies using Molegro Virtual Docker 2.2.5 pro-
gram,17 showed that 4, 11, 21, 22 has given better affinity, Moldock
score, hydrogen bonding energy compared to 3-nitropropionate
(Table 3). Moreover the interacting amino acid residues were also
almost same (Figs. 1 and 2).
15. Graham, J. E.; Clark-Curtiss, J. E. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 11554.
16. Sriram, D.; Yogeeswari, P.; Senthilkumar, P.; Sangaraju, D.; Nelli, R.; Banerjee,
D.; Bhat, P.; Manjashetty, T. H. Chem. Biol. Drug Des. 2010, 75, 381.
17. Thomsen, R.; Christensen, M. H. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 3315.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to University Grant Commission
[F. No. 36-61/2008 (SR)], Government of India for their financial
assistance.