Next Article in Journal
Investigating the Molecular Interactions of Thymol and Menthol as Green Solvents Using Density Functional Theory Methods
Previous Article in Journal
Synthesis of New O- and S-Containing Polyheteroatomic Systems Based on 3-Substituted Pyran-2-Ones with Lawesson’s Reagent
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

Anti-Helicobacter Pylori Activity of Phytochemicals from Artocarpus spp.: In Silico Analysis †

Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Technology, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra 835215, Jharkhand, India
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 28th International Electronic Conference on Synthetic Organic Chemistry (ECSOC-28), 15–30 November 2024; Available online: https://sciforum.net/event/ecsoc-28.
Chem. Proc. 2024, 16(1), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/ecsoc-28-20200
Published: 14 November 2024

Abstract

:
Peptic ulcer disease, affecting up to 20% of the global population, poses a significant health challenge with limited treatment options due to side effects and the inefficiency of existing drugs. This study explores the potential of penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs) as targets for peptic ulcer treatment. PBPs, critical for bacterial cell wall integrity, are inhibited by beta-lactam antibiotics, leading to bacterial vulnerability. Flavonoids, prominent in plants, exhibit antimicrobial and gastroprotective properties against peptic ulcers. A docking analysis of 35 phytochemicals from the Artocarpus plant against PBP (PDB code: 1QMF) revealed artocarpin as a promising candidate (docking score: −148.24 Kcal/mol). Artocarpin exhibited interactions with key amino acids and demonstrated favourable in silico pharmacokinetics, including high absorption and good drug-likeness. Additionally, engeletin 5 and rutin showed significant docking scores (−134.89 and −148.07 kcal/mol, respectively). Artocarpin, identified as a potential H. pylori inhibitor, presents a promising avenue for peptic ulcer treatment, warranting further exploration of its therapeutic application. This study contributes valuable insights into the molecular interactions of phytochemicals with PBPs, paving the way for novel and effective approaches in peptic ulcer therapy.

1. Introduction

The World Health Organisation classifies Helicobacter pylori, a spiral-shaped, Gram-negative bacillus that affects 50% of people worldwide, as a class 1 carcinogen [1]. Helicobacter pylori is one of the primary causative agents of chronic gastritis, which in turn causes the development of peptic ulcers [1]. By interacting with gastric epithelial cells, H. pylori directly colonises the gastric mucosa. It is commonly known that H. pylori causes intestinal metaplasia, severe atrophy, increased levels of mononuclear and neutrophilic infiltrates, apoptosis, and changes in the gastric epithelial cell cycle.
Antimicrobial resistance has been shown to reduce the global rates of H. pylori infection eradication, according to evidence from clinical practice [2]. Furthermore, there may be toxicity concerns with the main medications used to treat H. pylori.
As an alternative to triple therapy, a number of plant-based treatment approaches, including as plant extracts and isolated phytochemicals, have been explored recently to address drug resistance and side effects [3]. The focus of recent research on natural goods has particularly concerned plant extracts that are high in flavonoids. These substances have demonstrated encouraging outcomes in addressing several modes of action of the anti-H. pylori. Flavonoids also strengthen the mucosal defences against peptic ulcers by enhancing their cytoprotective, antioxidative, anti-inflammatory, and antibacterial properties (Figure 1 and Figure 2) [3]. Typically, a single kind of flavonoid can function as an anti-ulcer through a variety of ways. Numerous studies have shown how flavonoids protect the intestinal epithelium [3]. These effects include preserving the integrity of the intestinal barrier, absorbing fats and carbohydrates, modifying the activities of enzymes, controlling secretions from the stomach, regulating the immune system, and interacting with pathogenic microorganisms. PBPs, or penicillin-binding proteins, have a critical role in the bacterial cell wall’s maintenance. The penicillin-binding proteins that have an allosteric site binding mechanism cause the active site to slightly open during binding, increasing the accessibility of the site for substrate binding. Finding inhibitors that are able to bind to both the active and allosteric sites shows promise as a clinical approach [4]. Both the active and allosteric binding mechanisms had to be examined in order to accurately assess the affinity of flavonoids from Artocarpus spp. for PBPs, as doing so would produce a different and extra inhibitory pattern. In the present study, we have evaluated the set of phytomolecules reported from Artocarpus against the PBP (Figure 1). This study puts forward the usefulness of flavonoids to assist the conventional drug therapy [4]. We further also evaluated in-silico pharmacokinetics to gain more insights into the absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion (ADME) characteristics.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Molecular Docking Simulations

The 3D crystal structure of the penicillin-binding protein (PDB code: 1QMF) was downloaded from the Protein Database Bank. The concerned 3D structure was then processed to add missing H atoms and missing amino acid residues. The binding site for this protein was referred to from the earlier publication. The docking was then performed with the software ‘iGemDock’ V. 2.1 [5,6,7,8]. Finally, the visualization was performed with the ‘Discovery Studio 2020 Visualizer’ [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26].

2.2. In Silico Drug-Likeness and ADMET Analysis

The top 3 hits were further analysed for in silico pharmacokinetics using ‘SwissADME’ (http://www.swissadme.ch, accessed on 1st June 2023). The toxicity parameters were then assessed using toxicity assessments, conducted using ‘admetSAR’ (http://lmmd.ecust.edu.cn:8000/, accessed on 1st June 2023) [6].

2.3. Boiled Egg Model Analysis

At different phases of the drug development process, it is essential to estimate two pharmacokinetic behaviours: brain access and gastrointestinal absorption. For this reason, an accurate predictive model called the Brain Or IntestinaL EstimateD permeation method (BOILED-Egg) was developed. It computes the lipophilicity and polarity of tiny compounds. The same two physicochemical characteristics yield concurrent predictions for intestine and brain penetration, which may be easily translated into the molecular design due to the model’s quickness, precision, conceptual simplicity, and easily understandable graphical output. The BOILED-Egg model can be used in many different contexts, such as evaluating drug candidates for development or filtering chemical libraries in the early stages of drug discovery.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Molecular Docking Simulations

The dataset of 35 molecules were analysed against penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs). Out of 35 phytomolecules, the phytomolecule artocarpin depicted strong interaction with PBP (PDB code: 1QMF) via THR 526, TRP 374, Ser 337, Ser 395, Thr 550, Met 527, and Tyr 595 (Table 1 and Table 2, Figure 3). The docking interaction showed H-bonding, van der Waals and π-π types interactions. The standard amoxicillin demonstrated major interactions with Trp 374, Ser 571, Gly 549, Thr 526, and Ser 395. The standard amoxicillin (docking score: −109.20 kcal/mol) had lesser affinity as compared with artocarpin (docking score: −148.24 kcal/mol) against the PBPs [7]. PBPs, or penicillin-binding proteins, have a critical role in the bacterial cell wall’s maintenance. The penicillin-binding proteins that have an allosteric site binding mechanism cause the active site to slightly open during binding, increasing the accessibility of the site for substrate binding (Table 3) [7]. Finding inhibitors that are able to bind to both the active and allosteric sites shows promise as a clinical approach. It was vital to look into both the active and allosteric binding mechanisms in order to accurately assess artocarpin’s affinity for PBPs, as doing so may reveal a different and additional inhibitory pattern. Moreover, our re-docking validation protocol also resulted in an RMSD value below 1.4 Å, suggesting valid docking results.

3.2. In Silico ADMET Studies

Cytochrome P450 (CYPs) enzymes play a crucial role in diverse metabolic processes within the human body, serving as key catalysts for the transformation of various endogenous and exogenous compounds. These enzymes, predominantly located in the liver, contribute significantly to the biotransformation of drugs, xenobiotics, and endogenous substances, influencing their absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion. Our study focused on understanding the implications of CYP-mediated metabolism on the pharmacokinetics of potential drug candidates. Through in silico calculations, we evaluated the ADMET (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, toxicity) properties of the top three docked hits, shedding light on their behaviour within the intricate landscape of human physiology. Notably, artocarpin exhibited favourable characteristics, such as positive human intestinal absorption profiles, while also demonstrating a lack of carcinogenicity, absence of AMES toxicity, and a class IV acute oral toxicity profile (Figure 4). These findings provide valuable insights into the interplay between molecular docking and the intricate network of cytochrome enzymes, offering a comprehensive understanding of the potential therapeutic relevance of the studied compounds.

4. Conclusions

In the present study, we analysed the potential of Artocarpus phytochemicals against the PBP, as indicated by a higher docking score of the same phytochemicals. Moreover, among the list of 35 known phytocompounds, it had a low human ether-a-go-go-related gene inhibition, no AMES toxicity, and no carcinogens. This study may provide further directions to develop more potent anti-H. pylori compounds.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.Y. and A.P.; methodology S.Y. and A.P.; writing—original draft preparation, S.Y. and A.P.; writing—review and editing SY. and AP. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No data have been used.

Acknowledgments

The author (S.Y.) is thankful to Suraj Mali for his support in in silico calculations and proofreading of the manuscript. Authors are also thankful to the Dept. of Pharm., Sci. and Tech., BIT, Mesra.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Yadav, S.; Pandey, A.; Mali, S.N. From Lab to Nature: Recent Advancements in the Journey of Gastroprotective Agents from Medicinal Chemistry to Phytotherapy. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2024, 272, 116436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Sugano, K.; Tack, J.; Kuipers, E.J.; Graham, D.Y.; El-Omar, E.M.; Miura, S.; Haruma, K.; Asaka, M.; Uemura, N.; Malfertheiner, P. Kyoto global consensus report on Helicobacter pylori gastritis. Gut 2015, 64, 1353–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dadgostar, P. Antimicrobial resistance: Implications and costs. Infect. Drug Resist. 2019, 12, 3903–3910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Guerra-Valle, M.; Orellana-Palma, P.; Petzold, G. Plant-based polyphenols: Anti-Helicobacter pylori effect and improvement of gut microbiota. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gerrits, M.M.; Schuijffel, D.; Van Zwet, A.A.; Kuipers, E.J.; Vandenbroucke-Grauls, C.M.J.E.; Kusters, J.G. Alterations in penicillin-binding protein 1A confer resistance to β-lactam antibiotics in Helicobacter pylori. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2002, 46, 2229–2233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hsu, K.C.; Chen, Y.F.; Lin, S.R.; Yang, J.M. iGEMDOCK: A graphical environment of enhancing GEMDOCK using pharmacological interactions and post-screening analysis. BMC Bioinform. 2011, 12, S33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Yang, H.; Lou, C.; Sun, L.; Li, J.; Cai, Y.; Wang, Z.; Li, W.; Liu, G.; Tang, Y. admetSAR 2.0: Web-service for prediction and optimization of chemical ADMET properties. Bioinformatics 2019, 35, 1067–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mishra, V.R.; Ghanavatkar, C.W.; Mali, S.N.; Qureshi, S.I.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Sekar, N. Design, synthesis, antimicrobial activity and computational studies of novel azo linked substituted benzimidazole, benzoxazole and benzothiazole derivatives. Comput. Biol. Chem. 2019, 78, 330–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kshatriya, R.; Kambale, D.; Mali, S.; Jejurkar, V.P.; Lokhande, P.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Saha, S.S. Brønsted acid catalyzed domino synthesis of functionalized 4H-chromens and their ADMET, molecular docking and antibacterial studies. ChemistrySelect 2019, 4, 7943–7948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jadhav, B.S.; Yamgar, R.S.; Kenny, R.S.; Mali, S.N.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Mandewale, M.C. Synthesis, In silico and Biological Studies of Thiazolyl-2h-chromen-2-one Derivatives as Potent Antitubercular Agents. Curr. Comput.-Aided Drug Des. 2020, 16, 511–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Desale, V.J.; Mali, S.N.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Mali, M.C.; Thorat, B.R.; Yamgar, R.S. Synthesis and Anti-mycobacterium Study on Halo-substituted 2-aryl oxyacetohydrazones. Curr. Comput.-Aided Drug Des. 2020, 16, 618–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Shelke, P.B.; Mali, S.N.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Pratap, A.P. Chitosan hydrochloride mediated efficient, green catalysis for the synthesis of perimidine derivatives. J. Heterocycl. Chem. 2019, 56, 3048–3054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Thorat, B.R.; Rani, D.; Yamgar, R.S.; Mali, S.N. Synthesis, Spectroscopic, In-vitro and Computational Analysis of Hydrazones as Potential Antituberculosis Agents:(Part-I). Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2020, 23, 392–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Thorat, B.R.; Mali, S.N.; Rani, D.; Yamgar, R.S. Synthesis, In silico and In vitro Analysis of Hydrazones as Potential Antituberculosis Agents. Curr. Comput.-Aided Drug Des. 2021, 17, 294–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. The Protein Database Bank, PDB Database. Available online: www.rcsb.org (accessed on 10 October 2021).
  16. Mali, S.N.; Pandey, A. Balanced QSAR and Molecular Modeling to Identify Structural Requirements of Imidazopyridine Analogues as Anti-infective Agents against Trypanosomiases. J. Comput. Biophys. Chem. 2021, 21, 83–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mishra, V.R.; Ghanavatkar, C.W.; Mali, S.N.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Sekar, N. Schiff base clubbed benzothiazole: Synthesis, potent antimicrobial and MCF-7 anticancer activity, DNA cleavage and computational study. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2019, 38, 1772–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jejurkar, V.P.; Mali, S.N.; Kshatriya, R.; Chaudhari, H.K.; Saha, S. Synthesis, antimicrobial screening and in silico appraisal of iminocarbazole derivatives. ChemistrySelect 2019, 4, 9470–9475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Anuse, D.G.; Mali, S.N.; Thorat, B.R.; Yamgar, R.S.; Chaudhari, H.K. Synthesis, SAR, in silico appraisal and anti-microbial study of substituted 2-aminobenzothiazoles derivatives. Curr. Comput.-Aided Drug Des. 2020, 16, 802–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kapale, S.S.; Mali, S.N.; Chaudhari, H.K. Molecular modelling studies for 4-oxo-1,4-dihydroquinoline-3-carboxamide derivatives as anticancer agents. Med. Drug Discov. 2019, 2, 100008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Desale, V.J.; Mali, S.N.; Thorat, B.R.; Yamgar, R.S. Synthesis, admetSAR Predictions, DPPH Radical Scavenging Activity, and Potent Anti-mycobacterial Studies of Hydrazones of Substituted 4-(anilino methyl) benzohydrazides (Part 2). Curr. Comput.-Aided Drug Des. 2021, 17, 493–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kshatriya, R.; Shelke, P.; Mali, S.; Yashwantrao, G.; Pratap, A.; Saha, S. Synthesis and evaluation of anticancer activity of pyrazolone appended triarylmethanes (TRAMs). ChemistrySelect 2021, 6, 6230–6239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mali, S.N.; Thorat, B.R.; Gupta, D.R.; Pandey, A. Mini-Review of the Importance of Hydrazides and Their Derivatives—Synthesis and Biological Activity. Eng. Proc. 2021, 11, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Nagre, D.T.; Mali, S.N.; Thorat, B.R.; Thorat, S.A.; Chopade, A.R.; Farooqui, M.; Agrawal, B. Synthesis, In-Silico Potential Enzymatic Target Predictions, Pharmacokinetics, Toxicity, Anti-Microbial and Anti-Inflammatory Studies of Bis-(2-Methylindolyl) Methane Derivatives. Curr. Enzym. Inhib. 2021, 17, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ghosh, S.; Mali, S.N.; Bhowmick, D.N.; Pratap, A.P. Neem oil as natural pesticide: Pseudo ternary diagram and computational study. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 2021, 98, 100088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mali, S.N.; Tambe, S.; Pratap, A.P.; Cruz, J.N. Molecular Modeling Approaches to Investigate Essential Oils (Volatile Compounds) Interacting with Molecular Targets. In Essential Oils; Santana de Oliveira, M., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; Volume 1, pp. 417–442. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Isolated phytomolecules from Artocarpus spp.
Figure 1. Isolated phytomolecules from Artocarpus spp.
Chemproc 16 00017 g001
Figure 2. The potential mechanistic pathway for flavonoids acting as anti-H. pylori agents.
Figure 2. The potential mechanistic pathway for flavonoids acting as anti-H. pylori agents.
Chemproc 16 00017 g002
Figure 3. The 2D and 3D interaction profiles for the best docked artocarpin with the target PBP.
Figure 3. The 2D and 3D interaction profiles for the best docked artocarpin with the target PBP.
Chemproc 16 00017 g003
Figure 4. BOILED-Egg model analysis for the phytochemical artocarpin.
Figure 4. BOILED-Egg model analysis for the phytochemical artocarpin.
Chemproc 16 00017 g004
Table 1. Docking interaction energies* of selected bio-active molecules and 3 FDA-approved drugs for target protein 4P8C.
Table 1. Docking interaction energies* of selected bio-active molecules and 3 FDA-approved drugs for target protein 4P8C.
Molecules-iGemDock Interaction EnergyMolecules-iGemDock Interaction Energy
Quercetin −111.11Artonin A−117.1
Ascorbates−84.29Artocarpanone −98.62
Catechine −94.99Caffeic acid −78.51
Lupeol acetate −90.55Cycloheterophyllin−125.23
Bita -sitosterol−97.62Cyclocommunol−106.54
Kaempferol −107.95Isobavachalcone−121.11
Gallic acid −90.35Artonin E−128.21
Engeletin 5−134.89Heterophyllin−131.91
Oxyresveratrol−72.08Cyclomorusin−120.05
Artocarpin−48.24Cryptoxanthin−92.1799
Cycloartocarpin−111.69Myricetin−82.5936
Cudraflavone−111.35Ascorbic acid−85.54
Vanillic acid−79.88Cinnamic acid−69.96
Isorhamnetin−113.3Ferulic acid−79.6
Psoralenoside-107.8Betulinic acid−95.9
Epigallocatechin Gallate−140Resorcinol−59.9
Morin−106.1Norartocarpetin−105
Ursolic acid−99.6Pyrogallol−69.1
Artocarpesin−112.9Rutin−148.07
Albanin A−107.9Arbutin−98.2
Engeletin−116.79Diethyl phthalate−83.86
α-amyrin acetate−92.9 β-amyrin acetate−95.27
Cycloartenol−92.66
Amoxicillin *−109.20
* Docking scores have been provided only for the higher affinity-scored target protein.
Table 2. Energy contribution of the key residues computed by the docking methodology.
Table 2. Energy contribution of the key residues computed by the docking methodology.
Sr. No.MoleculesResidues with Contribution Energy
1.AmoxicillinTHR 526, TRP 374, Ser 337, Ser 395, Thr 550, Met 527, and Tyr 595
2.Artocarpin
(Best docked)
THR 526, TRP 374, Ser 337, Ser 395, Thr 550, Met 527, and Tyr 595
Table 3. In silico ADMET profiling for the top 3 best docked hits against the target 1QMF.
Table 3. In silico ADMET profiling for the top 3 best docked hits against the target 1QMF.
PropertiesArtocarpin *RutinEngeletin 5
GI absorptionHighHighHigh
BBB permeantLowLowLow
P-gp substrateNONONO
CYP1A2 inhibitorNONONO
CYP2C19 inhibitorYesYesYes
CYP2C9 inhibitorNONONO
CYP2D6 inhibitorNONONO
CYP3A4 inhibitorNONONO
LipinskiYesYesYes
GhoseNONONO
VeberYesYesYes
EganYesYesYes
Blood–Brain Barrier---
* Best docked.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yadav, S.; Pandey, A. Anti-Helicobacter Pylori Activity of Phytochemicals from Artocarpus spp.: In Silico Analysis. Chem. Proc. 2024, 16, 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ecsoc-28-20200

AMA Style

Yadav S, Pandey A. Anti-Helicobacter Pylori Activity of Phytochemicals from Artocarpus spp.: In Silico Analysis. Chemistry Proceedings. 2024; 16(1):17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ecsoc-28-20200

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yadav, Susmita, and Anima Pandey. 2024. "Anti-Helicobacter Pylori Activity of Phytochemicals from Artocarpus spp.: In Silico Analysis" Chemistry Proceedings 16, no. 1: 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ecsoc-28-20200

APA Style

Yadav, S., & Pandey, A. (2024). Anti-Helicobacter Pylori Activity of Phytochemicals from Artocarpus spp.: In Silico Analysis. Chemistry Proceedings, 16(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ecsoc-28-20200

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop