GET THE APP

Anti-Influenza Activity of Monoterpene-Containing Substituted Cou
Organic Chemistry: Current Research

Organic Chemistry: Current Research
Open Access

ISSN: 2161-0401

+44 1478 350008

Research Article - (2018) Volume 7, Issue 1

Anti-Influenza Activity of Monoterpene-Containing Substituted Coumarins Using Physicochemical Parameters

Suresh Kumar* and Rekha Kumari
Department of Chemistry, Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India
*Corresponding Author: Suresh Kumar, Department of Chemistry, Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India, Tel: +9459947921 Email:

Abstract

A Quantative-Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) study is performed on monoterpene-containing substituted coumarins, A number of highly descriptive and predictive QSAR models for these compounds were obtained by Using physicochemical parameters using stepwise-multiple linear regressions methods. Model validation is performed by incorporating training and test sets approach and calculating R2 which is equal to 0.9943 and also Regression analysis data has indicated that activity can be best modeled in multi-parametric regression.

Keywords: Substituted coumarins, QSAR, Molar volume, Molar refractivity, Parachore, Density, Refractive index, Surface tension, Polarizability

Introduction

The term influenza refers to illness caused by influenza virus. This is commonly called the flu, but many different illnesses cause flu like symptoms such as fever, chills aches and pains, and cough [1]. Influenza causes different illness patterns, ranging from mild common cold symptoms, to typical flu, to life-threatening pneumonia, bacterial infection and other complications. This virus consists of major surface glycoprotein (HEF, hemagglutinin-esterase-fusion protein) and a minor surface glycoprotein (CM2). These surface glycoproteins form ordered hexagonal arrays [2-6].

There are a number of drugs approved by FDA for the treatment and prevention of influenza. Yearly vaccination is the primary means of preventing and controlling influenza.

Antibiotics are used to treat illnesses caused by bacteria. Examples of illnesses caused by bacteria include strep throat, tuberculosis and many types of pneumonia. Antibiotics do not treat viral illnesses like flu, cold, and most viral infections.

Coumarin and other benzopyrones, such as 5, 6-benzopyrone, 1, 2-benzopyrone, diosmin, others are known to stimulate macrophages to degrade extracellular albumin, allowing faster resorption of edematous fluids [7,8]. Other biological activities that may lead to other medical uses have been suggested, with varying degrees of evidence. Coumarin is also used as a gain medium in some dye lasers [9-11] and as a sensitizer in older photovoltaic technologies [12].

The QSAR methods, with simple molecular indexes, are a promising shortcut to resolve the cost and time issue. The QSAR method enables the calculation of numerous quantitative descriptors on the basis of molecular structural information and is very useful to optimize important aspects such as antiinflunza activity. In this paper we are modeling the Anti-influenza activity of monoterpene-containing substituted coumarins Using physicochemical parameters.

Experimental Details

The water/octanol partition coefficient (Log P)) is often considered to be an important molecular descriptor as it is linked to toxicity issues and oral bioavailability. it is Calculated using the ACD/LogP ChemSketch 12 software.

Antiviral activity and cytotoxicity of compounds

Against influenza virus A/California/07/09(H1N1)pdm09 in MDCK cells [13].

Parameters used

We have following physicochemical parameters for modeling of which were calculated by using ACD labs software Chemsketch [14].

Molecular volume (MV)

equation (1)

Molecular refractivity (MR)

equation (2)

Parachor (P)

equation (3)

Density (d)

equation (4)

Refractive Index (n)

equation (5)

Surface tension (γ)

equation (6)

Polarizability (α)

Polarizability=0.3964308.MR

The compounds used in the present study with their values are reported in Table 1. The values of various parameters obtained are reported in Table 2.

Compd. No. Parent compound R clogP
1 image image 5.69
2 image 5.04
3 image 5.04
4 image 5.52
5 image 3.35
6 image image 6.28
7 image 5.63
8 image 5.63
9 image 3.94
10 image image 6.75
11 image 6.09
12 image 6.09
13 image 6.57
14 image 4.40
15 image image 7.31
16 image 6.66
17 image 6.66
18 image 7.14
19 image 4.97

Table 1: Structural details along with their clogP values.

S No. MW MR MV PC IR ST D POL
1 298.38 87.94 276.40 692.60 1.55 39.30 1.08 34.86
2 296.36 83.71 252.00 642.00 1.58 42.10 1.18 33.18
3 296.36 83.71 252.00 642.00 1.58 42.10 1.18 33.18
4 310.38 88.34 268.50 682.00 1.57 41.60 1.15 35.02
5 282.29 77.61 225.80 596.70 1.60 48.70 1.25 30.76
6 312.40 92.64 294.40 728.90 1.54 37.50 1.06 36.72
7 310.39 88.41 270.00 678.30 1.57 39.80 1.15 35.05
8 310.39 88.41 270.00 678.30 1.57 39.80 1.15 35.05
9 296.32 82.31 243.70 630.00 1.59 45.40 1.22 32.63
10 338.44 99.15 301.80 775.90 1.57 43.60 1.12 39.30
11 336.42 95.35 272.70 725.20 1.62 50.00 1.23 37.80
12 336.42 95.35 272.70 725.20 1.62 50.00 1.23 37.80
13 350.45 99.98 288.80 765.30 1.60 49.20 1.21 39.63
14 322.35 89.19 250.50 679.90 1.63 54.50 1.28 35.36
15 352.46 103.79 318.00 815.90 1.56 43.30 1.10 41.14
16 350.45 99.98 288.80 765.30 1.61 49.20 1.21 39.63
17 350.45 99.98 288.80 765.30 1.61 49.20 1.21 39.63
18 364.48 104.62 305.00 805.40 1.60 48.60 1.19 41.47
19 336.38 93.82 266.70 720.00 1.62 53.10 1.26 37.19

Table 2: Value of the calculated physicochemical parameters used in the present study.

A close look of Table 3 reveals that:

Model No. Parameter Used Ai=(1-6) B Se R2 R2A F
1 MV 0.0446 (± 0.0031) -6.5072 0.0531 0.9244 0.9199 207.7740
2 PC 0.0162 (± 0.0016) -5.8312 0.0736 0.8547 0.8462 100.0100
3 MR 0.1267 (± 0.0142) -5.9719 0.0808 0.8246 0.8143 79.9160
4 POL 0.3196 (± 0.0358) -5.9731 0.0809 0.8245 0.8142 79.8690
5 MW 0.0356 (± 0.0064) -5.7931 0.1148 0.6463 0.6255 31.0650
6 D -7.9445 (± 3.7838) 15.1155 0.1720 0.2059 0.1592 4.4090
7 IR -7.4157 (± 9.8492) 17.5074 0.1899 0.0323 0.0000 0.5670
8 ST -0.0231 (± 0.0515) 6.7776 0.1919 0.0117 0.0000 0.2010
9 MR
ST
0.1417 (± 0.0068)
-0.0832 (± 0.0105)
-3.5630 0.0375 0.9644 0.9599 216.6560
10 ST
POL
-0.0832 (± 0.0105)
0.3575 (± 0.0173)
-3.5642 0.0375 0.9644 0.9599 216.6180
11 MW
ST
0.0487 (± 0.0027)
-0.1345 (± 0.0131)
-3.9193 0.0429 0.9535 0.9476 163.8790
12 MW
D
0.0382 (± 0.0027)
-9.5626 (± 1.0671)
4.6723 0.0482 0.9412 0.9339 128.1460
13 D
POL
-6.0208 (± 1.0729)
0.3042 (± 0.0216)
1.7074 0.0484 0.9409 0.9335 127.2950
14 MR
D
0.1206 (± 0.0086)
-6.0181 (± 1.0733)
1.7057 0.0484 0.9408 0.9334 127.2320
15 PC
ST
0.0172 (± 0.0011)
-0.0619 (± 0.0138)
-3.6783 0.0505 0.9357 0.9276 116.3230
16 MW
POL
-0.0610 (± 0.0121)
0.7909 (± 0.0964)
-3.4721 0.0518 0.9321 0.9236 109.8030
17 MW
MR
-0.0609 (± 0.0121)
0.3131 (± 0.0382)
-3.4726 0.0519 0.9319 0.9234 109.5510
18 MV
IR
0.03458 (± 0.0032)
3.6696 (± 2.8035)
-12.6461 0.0520 0.9317 0.9231 109.1030
19 MR
PC
D
0.5203 (± 0.0660)
-0.0516 (± 0.0085)
-11.9344 (± 1.1423)
8.4751 0.0269 0.9829 0.9795 287.2480
20 PC
D
POL
-0.0509 (± 0.0086)
-11.8727 (± 1.1561)
1.3002 (± 0.1681)
8.3999 0.0273 0.9824 0.9788 278.5110
21 PC
IR
ST
0.0191 (± 0.0007)
31.7224 (± 5.2849)
-0.2224 (± 0.02784)
-48.1435 0.0283 0.9811 0.9773 259.3340
22 MW
MR
PC
-0.1361 (± 0.0143)
1.0187 (± 0.1197)
-0.060 (± 0.0101)
-1.2969 0.0291 0.9799 0.9759 244.3760
23 MR
IR
ST
0.1489 (± 0.0057)
17.6780 (± 5.2477)
-0.1732 (± 0.0279)
-28.2069 0.0293 0.9797 0.9757 241.6390
24 IR
ST
POL
17.6099 (± 5.2621)
-0.1729 (± 0.0280)
0.3756 (± 0.0145)
-28.1126 0.0293 0.9796 0.9755 240.2040
25 MW
PC
POL
-0.1352 (± 0.0144)
-0.0594 (± 0.0102)
2.5437 (± 0.3046)
-1.3335 0.0296 0.9793 0.9752 236.6480
26 MR
MV
ST
0.2811 (± 0.0474)
-0.0453 (± 0.0153)
-0.1703 (± 0.0306)
-0.0420 0.0308 0.9775 0.9731 217.6600
27 MV
ST
POL
-0.0449 (± 0.0153)
-0.1697 (± 0.0306)
0.7066 (± 0.1196)
-0.0711 0.0309 0.9774 0.9729 216.2450
28 MV
IR
ST
0.0504 (± 0.0021)
34.2318 (± 5.9016)
-0.1604 (± 0.0297)
-55.1749 0.0313 0.9768 0.9722 210.6810
29 MW
MR
MV
ST
-0.0886 (± 0.0138)
0.7436 (± 0.0763)
-0.1131 (± 0.013)
-0.2059 (± 0.0169)
6.1159 0.0161 0.9943 0.9927 609.9460
30 MW
MV
ST
POL
-0.0887 (± 0.0141)
-0.1125 (± 0.0135)
-0.2048 (± 0.0172)
1.8727 (± 0.1960)
6.0661 0.0164 0.9941 0.9924 588.4540
31 MR
MV
ST
D
0.5894 (± 0.0613)
-0.1666 (± 0.0233)
-0.1585 (± 0.0177)
-20.3032 (± 3.6204)
28.1866 0.0177 0.9931 0.9911 502.4890

Table 3: Regression parameters and quality of correlation when physicochemical parameters are used.

1) Out of Eight mono-parametric model, MV shows the highest regression value for the best model.

2) Out of ten bi-parametric model, MR and ST together shows the highest regression value for the best model.

3) Out of ten tri-parametric model, MR, PC and D together shows the highest regression value for the best model.

4) Out of three tetra-parametric model, MW, MR, MV and D together shows the highest regression value for the best model.

Cross validated parameter for the best obtained model (clogP) are reported in Table 4.

Compd. No.   (clogP) Model-29  
Actual Predicted Residual
       
1 5.69 5.74 -0.05
2 5.04 4.96 0.08
3 5.04 4.96 0.08
4 5.52 5.40 0.12
5 3.35 3.27 0.08
6 6.28 6.33 -0.05
7 5.63 5.65 -0.02
8 5.63 5.65 -0.02
9 3.94 4.18 -0.24
10 6.75 6.77 -0.02
11 6.09 6.10 -0.01
12 6.09 6.10 -0.01
13 6.57 6.64 -0.07
14 4.40 4.35 0.05
15 7.31 7.21 0.09
16 6.66 6.64 0.02
17 6.66 6.64 0.02
18 7.14 7.14 -0.004
19 4.97 5.01 -0.04

Table 4: Actual and predicted clogP values Using Model no-29.

Results And Discussion

In recent work they have used different electronic properties along with the topo-chemical analysis for modeling. In the present work we have used data from the work of Khomenko et al. [13] for modeling of Anti-influenza activity of Monoterpene-containing substituted coumarins.

It may be inferred that no mono-variate correlation yield excellent results. The only parameters showing correlation with clogP is.

Mono-parametric model

clogP=0.0446 (± 0.0031) MV-6.5072 (7)

N=19, R2=0.9244, R2A=0.9199, F=207.7740, Se=0.0531

When MR and ST were taken together a bi-parametric model has been obtained with improved statistics here R2 comes out to be 0.9644.

Bi-parametric model

clogP=0.1417 (± 0.0068) MR-0.0832 (± 0.0105) ST-3.5630 (8)

N=19, R2=0.9644, R2A=0.9599, F=216.6560, Se=0.0375

tri-parametric model has been obtained when MR, PC and D were taken together. In this model the R2 shows significant Improvement.

Tri-parametric model

clogP=0.5203(± 0.0660) MR-0.0516 (± 0.0085) PC-11.9344(± 1.1423) D+8.4751 (9)

N=19, R2=0.9829, R2A=0.9795, F=285.2480, Se=0.0269

However, very small improvement is observed in a tetra-parametric model when MW, MR, MV and ST have been taken as correlating parameter. This model has been found to be excellent for modelling (clogP) activity of the compound of the present study.

Tetra-parametric model

clogP=-0.0886(± 0.0318) MW+0.7436 (± 0.0763) MR-0.1131(± 0.013) MV-0.2059(± 0.0169) ST+6.1159 (10)

N=19, R2=0.9943, R2A=0.9927, F=609.9460, Se=0.0161

We have estimated clogP values using Model-29. The predictive power of best Model has been obtained by plotting graph between actual and predicted clogP values demonstrated in Figure 1.

organic-chemistry-predicted

Figure 1: Correlation between Predicted and Actual clogP using Model-29.

This clearly indicates that this is best model for estimating predicting clogP values of the compounds in the present study, the small residue value and R2pred confirms the above statement.

The residual plot for Model-29 is demonstrated in Figure 2, on the basis of Table 5 which contains actual and predicted clogP values using this model. The residual points distributed evenly about the line y=0 indicates there is no systemic error in the model.

organic-chemistry-residual

Figure 2: Residual plot.

Model No. Parameter used PRESS/SSY R2CV Spress PSE
1 MV 0.0818 0.9182 0.0737 0.0659
9 MR
ST
0.0369 0.9631 0.0537 0.0452
19 MR
PC
D
0.0174 0.9826 0.0397 0.0314
29 MW
MR
MV
ST
0.0057 0.9943 0.0246 0.0191

Table 5: Cross validated parameters for the best obtained models.

Conclusions

Physicochemical parameters can be successfully used for modelling the Anti-influenza activity of Monoterpene-containing substituted coumarins, and Molecular weight, Molar refractivity, molar volume are the best parameters for modelling such activities.

References

  1. Schutten M, Van BC, Zoeteweij P, Fraaij P (2013) The influenza virus: disease, diagnostics, and treatment. MLO Med Lab Obs 45: 38-40.
  2. Bouviera N, Paleseab P (2008) The biology of influenza viruses. Vaccine 26: D49-D53.
  3. Pleschka S, Klenk H, Herrler G (1995) The catalytic triad of the influenza C virus glycoprotein HEF esterase: characterization by site-directed mutagenesis and functional analysis. J Gen Virol 76: 2529-2537.
  4. Kollerova E, Betáková T (2006) Influenza viruses and their ion channels. Acta Virol 50: 7-16.
  5. Fischer W, Sansomb M (2002) Viral ion channels: structure and function. Biochim Biophys Acta 1561: 27-45.
  6. Fischer W, Sansomb M (2002) Viral ion channels: structure and function. Biochim Biophys Acta 1561: 27-45.
  7. Lamb R, Choppin P (1983) The gene structure and replication of influenza virus. Annu Rev Biochem 52: 467-506.
  8. Casley SJ, Morgan R, Piller N (1993) Treatment of lymphedema of the arms and legs with 5,6-benzo-(alpha)-pyron. N Engl J Med 329: 1158-63.
  9. Duarte F (2003) Appendix of Laser Dyes. Tunable Laser Optics. New York: Elsevier-Academic.
  10. US Patent No. 4175982 to Loutfy et al. Issued Nov 27 1978 to Xerox Corp.
  11. Khomenko T, Zarubaev V, Orshanskaya I, Kadyrova R, Sannikova V, et al. (2017) Anti-influenza activity of monoterpene-containing substituted coumarins. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 27: 2920-2925.
Citation: Suresh K, Rekha K (2018) Anti-Influenza Activity of Monoterpene- Containing Substituted Coumarins Using Physicochemical Parameters. Organic Chem Curr Res 7:187.

Copyright: © 2018 Suresh K, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Top