MOLECULAR DOCKING STUDIES OF N-SUBSTITUTED 4-METHOXY-6-OXO-1-ARYL-PYRIDAZINE-3-CARBOXAMIDE DERIVATIVES AS POTENTIAL MODULATORS OF GLUTAMATE RECEPTORS Текст научной статьи по специальности «Фундаментальная медицина»

# Research Results in Pharmacology

Research Results in Pharmacology 6(1): 69-82

UDC: 616.858 DOI 10.3897/rrpharmacology. 6.52026

3 Research Article

Molecular docking studies of N-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamide derivatives as potential modulators of glutamate receptors

Hanna I. Severina1, Victoriya A. Georgiyants1, Sergiy M. Kovalenko2, Natalia V. Avdeeva3, Artem I. Yarcev3, Svetlana N. Prohoda3

1 National University of Pharmacy, 53 Pushkinskaya St., Kharkiv 61002, Ukraine

2 V.N.Karazin Kharkiv National University, 4 Svobody Sq., Kharkiv 61077, Ukraine

3 Kursk State Medical University, 3 K. Marksa St., Kursk 305041, Russia

Corresponding author: Natalia V. Avdeeva ([email protected])

Academic editor: Oleg Gudyrev ♦ Received 13 January 2020 ♦ Accepted 19 February 2020 ♦ Published 30 March 2020

Citation: Severina HI, Georgiyants VA, Kovalenko SM, Avdeeva NV, Yarcev AI, Prohoda SN (2020) Molecular docking studies of N-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamide derivatives as potential modulators of glutamate receptors. Research Results in Pharmacology 6(1): 69-82. https://doi.org/10.3897/rrpharmacology.6.52026

Abstract

Introduction: The virtual target-oriented screening is a necessary stage of modern drug-design. In the present study, the affinity of pyridazine derivatives for the most promising antiparkinsonian biotargets - I—III groups of metabotropic and ionotropic NMDA-glutamate receptors — was evaluated.

Materials and methods: Docking of the studied ligands to the active sites of biotargets — mGluR5, mGluR3, mGluR8, NMDA GluN2B — was performed using AutoDockVina. Base of the preparation of ligands and proteins — AutoDock-Tools-1.5.6. A Discovery Studio Visualizer 2017/R2 was used to visualize the interpretation of the results.

Results and discussion: A high degree of the affinity is predicted for group III of the metabotropic mGlu8 receptors -binding energy from -5.0 to -8.7 kcal/mol, compared to -6.1 kcal/mol of that of the reference drug (L-AP4), as well as for the ionotropic NMDA GluN2B receptors —binding energy from -8.7 to -11.6 kcal/mol, compared to -11.3 kcal/mol of that of ifenprodil.

Conclusion: The prospects of the searching for glutamate receptor modulators in a number ofn-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamide derivatives are proved. Some aspects of the structure-affinity relationship are discussed.

Keywords

pyridazine, antiparkinson agents, docking, mGluR, NMDA.

Copyright Severina HI et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Introduction

Scientific achievements of the last decades concerning the mechanisms of the antiparkinsonian action, the crystal structure of target proteins and the amino acid composition of active sites of receptors, the developed arsenal of in silico methods for analyzing and evaluating the affinity of the ligand for the receptor makes it possible to rationalize the search for new biologically active substances, in particular, antiparkinsonian ones.

The feasibility and prospects of searching for antipar-kinsonian substances among n-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamide derivatives was evaluated using the virtual screening tools, namely, molecular docking to the active sites of the known antipar-kinsonian biotargets.

In accordance with the research algorithm, the first stage of research is to assess the affinity for the metabo-tropic glutamate receptors (mGluR). The prospect of

studying the compounds affecting mGluR as potential antiparkinsonian agents was proved in 2003 (Marino et al. 2003) and continues to be relevant nowadays (Avdeeva et al. 2017; Zhang et al. 2019).

Structurally, mGluR belong to the C-class of G-pro-tein-coupled receptors. According to the functional activity, structure homology, and the list of selective ligands, all mGlu receptors are divided into 3 groups, which in turn are subdivided into 8 more subtypes (Kunishima et al. 2000; Kravchenko et al. 2016; Avdeeva et al. 2018).

All glutamate receptors have a modular architecture (Jin and Ma 2017), wherein each of the subunits is made up of 4 main parts: an amino-terminal domain (ATD) located in the extracellular space, a ligand-binding domain (LBD) also located in the extracellular space, a transmembrane domain (TD) located inside the membrane, and a C-termi-nal domain (CTD) located in the intracellular space.

Objective of the study: To conduct the docking and to evaluate the affinity of the virtual ligand base among

Flowchart 1. The algorithm of the searching for the antiparkinsonian agents.

n-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamide derivatives for the active sites of the most promising antiparkinsonian biotargets - the metabotrop-ic receptors of groups I-III and ionotropic NMDA receptors of glutamate.

Materials and methods

The affinity for a biological target was studied using flexible molecular docking. For this purpose, the AutoDock Vina program was used, which gives a good correlation indicators between the calculated and experimentally obtained data (Wang et al. 2016). The ability of the used docking algorithm to reproduce the experimental data was evaluated by the reference docking of the native li-gands. Macromolecules (proteins) from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) were used as the biological targets, which are freely available: metabotropic glutamate receptors: mGlu5 - PDB ID 6FFH, mGlu3 - PDBID 4XAR, mGlu8 - PDBID 6BT5, and ionotropic NMDAgluN2B receptors of glutamate - PDBID 3QEL.

Preparation of the ligands

The substance structures were obtained using MarvinS-ketch 18.23 and saved in mol format. After that, they were optimized by Chem3D, using the molecular mechanics (MM2) algorithm and saved as pdb files. Using Au-toDockTools-1.5.6, pdb files were converted to PDBQT (Trott and Olson 2010).

Preparation of the proteins

PDB files were downloaded from The Protein Data Bank. Discovery Studio Visualizer 2017/R2 was used to remove water and ligand molecules from the crystal. Protein structures were saved as pdb files. In Au-toDockTools-1.5.6, polar hydrogens were added to the protein structure and stored as PDBQT. Gridboxes were established relative to native ligands. AutoDock Vina was used for docking (Trott and Olson 2010). Discovery Studio V17.2. 0.16349 was used to visualize the docking results.

Results and discussion

Stage I of the study: the assessment of the compounds affinity for metabotropic glutamate receptors of Group I

The affinity of the virtual data base of compounds for Group I of the metabotropic glutamate receptors was evaluated by docking of the mGlu5 receptor into a active site. The crystal structure of the transmembrane domain of mGlu5 receptor in a closed conformation with the negative allosteric modulator mavoglurant in the active site was established in 2014 (Doré et al. 2014). Despite the fact that mavoglurant passed the second phase of the clinical trials for the treatment of Levodopa-induced dyskinesia, the affinity of potential antiparkinson agents for the active site of the transmembrane domain of mGlu5 (PDB 6FFH) was evaluated in comparison with feno-bam - an mGluR5-selective negative allosteric modulator (Christopher et al. 2019). The choice of fenobam as a reference drug for assessing the affinity for the mGluR5 receptor is due to some structural similarity with the substances to be synthesized (Fig. 1).

The transmembrane domain of the mglu5 receptor consists of seven transmembrane a-helices (Fig. 2A). The configuration of the helical bundle together with extracellular loops strongly restricts the entrance to the allosteric pocket, which results in its relatively small size - the entrance radius is about ~7 A°. In addition, the allosteric site itself is located at a distance of about 8 A° from the receptor surface and is a fairly narrow hydrophobic space. This size of the pocket entry and the location of the active site condition a small size of the ligand and can impair the scoring functions during docking.

According to the literature data (Doré et al. 2014, Christopher et al. 2019), the main hydrophobic pocket of the active site is formed by residues of the following amino acids: valine (Val806), methionine (Met802), phenylalanine (Phe788), tryptophan (Trp785), leucine (Leu744), isoleucine (Ile651), proline (Pro655), asparag-ine (Asn747), and glycine (Gly652). The main "shrinkage" of the ligand occurs between alanine (Ala810) and proline (Pro 655), bordered by isoleucine (Ile625), glycine (Gly624), serine (Ser654 and 658) on one side, and by tyrosine (Tyr659) - on the other. Hydrophobic interac-

Mavoghiant Phenobam Potential antiparkinsonic substances

Figure 1. The structure of the mGluR5 negative allosteric modulators in comparison with the ligands under study.

Figure 2. A. 3D structure of mGlu5 with a negative allosteric modulator fenobam in the active site B. 3D image of the fenobam conformation in the mGluR5 active site.

tion occurs with tyrosine (Tyr659), serial (Ser 809) valine (Val806), and proline (Prp 655).

Despite the location of the allosteric site and its narrow size, when evaluating the reproducibility of the docking technique in mGluR5 of the native ligand, it was possible to achieve a suitable conformation and a satisfactory evaluation function, which was -8.7 kcal/ mol for fenobam. As seen in Fig. 2B, fenobam is completely immersed in a narrow hydrophobic cleft of the active site of the receptor, forming a stable conformation by entering a hydrophobic interaction; this conformation is further stabilized by the hydrogen bonds, in particular with the hydroxyl groups of serine and tyrosine (Ser809, Tyr659), which is consistent with the literature data (Christopher et al. 2019).

At the stage of the selecting compounds for synthesis, no detailed analysis of conformational placement was carried out, with only the binding energy (the scoring function) being taken into account in comparison with the native ligand. The results of the docking of the compounds with the active site of the mGluR5 receptor are presented in Table 1.

As can be seen from the results of the docking, a satisfactory level of affinity for the active site of the mGlu5 receptor is predicted for pyridazine derivatives: the binding energy was from -11.2 to -5.2 kcal/mol, versus -8.7 kcal/mol for the native fenobam ligand. The highest(un-favorable) binding energy level was demonstrated by the compound with the N-(4-diethylamino)phenyl substituent (0182), and the lowest - with the diphenylpropyl in the carboxamide fragment (0131), which may be explained by the conformational mobility of the radical and by the additional centers of the hydrophobic interaction. The compounds with a benzyl amide fragment have a higher affinity than the substances with a phenylamide radical. A decrease in the affinity is predicted for all the compounds that have a substituted NH-group of the carboxamide residue (for example, 0129, 0265, 0249), which is probably due to the ability of the NH-group to form hydrogen bonds to stabilize the ligand in the cavity of the active site.

Stage 2 of the study: the evaluation of the compounds affinity for the metabotropic glutamate receptors of Group II

At the next stage, the virtual database of compounds was docked into the active site of the metabotropic glutamate receptor of Group II subtype 2 - mGluR3 (PDB ID 4XAR). A strong allosteric agonist of the mglur2/3 receptor (1S, 2S, 5R, 6S)-2-aminobicyclo[3.1.0]hexane-2,6-dicarboxylic acid (LY354740)) was used as a reference ligand (Schoepp et al. 2003, Linden et al. 2005, Menezes et al. 2013).

The recombinant protein of the mGlu3 amino-terminal domain in the conformation with Ly354740, from the macroscopic point of view, is a closed topology (Monn et al. 2015), where the upper (LB1) and lower (LB 2) lobes of the protein are closely related to the ligand in the hinge region (Fig. 3A). The binding of the agonist induces the process of joining the protein lobes, which in turn leads to the opening of the channel and the activation of the receptor.

The visualization of the experimentally established interaction and the image of the ligand-binding pocket are shown in Figure 3B. Describing the binding site, it should be noted that there is a fairly spacious entrance to the binding pocket, the predominant majority of hydrogen interactions, including the tetrahedral network of ligand amino group bonds with the carboxyl groups of alanine and asparagine (Ala172, Asp301), and the threonine hydroxyl (Thr 1744), participation in the interaction of both protein lobes (LB1 and LB2), and the possibility of the ligand conformational mobility.

The amino acids of the binding site, according to the literature data, are (Fig. 4A):

• the upper lobe (LB 1) - arginine (Arg68), lysine (Lys 389), alanine (Ala172), threonine (Thr174), serine (Ser 151), which participate in the formation of hydrophilic bonds; tyrosine (Tyr222) -4-hydroxyphenyl radical enter into hydrophobic interaction (Fig. 5A);

• the lower lobe (LB2) - aspartic acid (Asp301) and tyrosine (Tyr 150).

Table 1. Results of docking of N-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-arylpyridazine-3-carboxamides with the glutamate receptors.

Ligand

R/R1

Receptors

mGluR5 (6FFH) mGlu3 (4XAR) mGlu8 NMDA Glu N2B _(6BT5)_(3QEL)

Binding energy (kcal/mol)

Native reference ligand

-8.7 (fenobam)

-8.2 (Ly235) -6.1 (L-AP4)

-11.3(Ifenprodil)

0057 0077 0098 0102 0128 0129

4-Me/H 4-F/H 4-Cl/H 2-OMe/H H/Me H/Et

-7.5 -9.2 -8.9 -8.9 -8.0 -6.1

-6.7 -6.1 -6.5 -7.2 -6.5 -5.2

-7.5 -7.9 -7.4 -7.9 -8.2 -6.7

-10.4 -10.3 -9.4 -8.9 -10.0 -8.4

O N

0058 0066 0067 0070

0095 0101 0105

0060 0126 0131

0001

0175

0176 0197 0233 0241 0244 0258 0265

2-Me,5-Cl

3.5-diMe

2.6-diMe 4,5-diMe

3-Me,6-OMe 2-Me,3-Cl 2-Me, 4-Br

CH(Ph)2 CH(CH2)2(Ph)2 (CH2)2 CH(Ph)2

4-Cl/H H/H 4-OMe/H 4-Me/H 2-Cl/H 3-OMe/H 4-I/H H/Me H/H/ NMe

-8.2 -8.7 -7.2 -9.4

-6.7 -8.7 -8.6 -8.7 -7.9 -8.3 -7.4 -6.7 -6.4

-5.5 -6.6 -6.6 -5.1 -6.7 -5.8 -6.7 -5.3 -5.3 -5.5

-5.7 -6.7 -5.1

-3.9 -6.0 -5.8 -6.1 -7.3 -7.1 -3.9 -6.7 -6.0

-7.9 -8.1 -6.0 -8.6 -6.7 -6.7 -6.9 -7.4 -6.6 -6.2

-8.7 -6.8

-8.3 -8.0 -7.2 -7.3 -8.1 -7.4 -6.4 -7.2 -6.0

-10.1 -10.1 -10.3 -10.7 -10.2 -10.5 -10.2 -9.9 -10.4 -10.6

-9.7 -10.2 -12.3

-11.1 -9.5 -9.4 -9.9 -9.5 -9.7 -9.4 -10.0 -9.6

0181 0182

H

4-N(Et)2

-8.3 -5.2

-7.0 -4.8

-6.2 -5.8

-10.1 -9.6

O

O

R

O

O

R

Ligand

R/R1

Receptors

mGluR5 (6FFH) mGlu3 (4XAR)

mGlu8

(6BT5)

NMDA Glu N2B (3QEL)

Binding energy (kcal/mol)

0184

0185 0190 0192

0198

0199 0201 0205

0207

0208

0209

0210 0213

0215

0216 0218

0219

0220 0222 0224 0226 0228

0230

0231

0234

0235 0239

0245

0246 0248 0260 0268

3-OMe

4-OMe 3-COCH3 2-COOMe 2-Me, 4-Cl

2,5-diCOOMe 2-OH 4-OEt 2,6-diMe

2-OEt 3,4-diMe

3-Cl

4-Et

2-Et 2,4,6-triMe

4-Bu

2-naphtyl

3-Me

2.3-diMe

2.4-diMe 2-OMe, 5-Me

4-Br

3-Cl, 4-Me 2-Me, 3-Cl

3.5-diCF3 2-Me,4-Br

3,5-diCl 4-Me 3-Br 2-OMe, 5-Cl 4-O-Ph 2-CONH

-8.1 -7.8 -8.3 -5.7 -6.2 -5.4 -8.0 -6.7 -6.4 -6.1 -6.1 -7.8 -6.3 -6.3 -5.6 -6.2 -8.6 -9.1 -6.9 -7.0 -6.1 -7.1 -7.6 -6.3 -8.0 -6.5 -6.9 -7.8 -8.9 -5.7 -7.6 -6.2

-5.4 -5.1 -6.0 -5.9 -4.8 -4.4 -7.0 -5.6 -7.0 -6.6 -6.7 -7.6 -5.8 -6.6 -7.2 -5.3 -5.4 -5.0 -7.5 -7.6 -7.2 -4.6 -7.3 -5.2 -5.8 -5.8 -5.6 -5.8 -6.0 -5.2 -6.3 -6.7

-6.7 -6.4 -7.2 -6.4 -6.6 -5.0 -6.6 -6.5 -5.4 -5.7 -6.5 -7.4 -6.5 -5.9 -4.8 -6.5 -7.6 -6.8 -6.7 -6.7 -6.9 -6.2 -7.3 -6.3 -8.1 -6.9 -6.6 -6.2 -6.5 -6.5 -7.3 -6.7

-9.6 -9.6 -9.7 -8.7 -9.9 -9.3 -9.7 -9.2 -10.7 -8.7 -8.7 -9.6 -9.4 -8.7 -8.5 -9.6 -10.4 -10.4 -11.1 -10.9 -9.3 -9.8 -9.6 -10.3 -10.9 -9.5 -10.9 -9.6 -9.9 -9.7 -11.0 -9.3

^N

0163 0168

0200 0243

0249 0256 0194

О

CH(Ph)2

Ph/Bn Bn/Bn

О

-6.5 -6.2

-7.4 -6.4

-6.7 -7.5 -8.1

-6.1 -5.3

-5.5 -3.6

-4.4 -3.2 -6.9

-6.6 -7.5

-7.9 -5.6

-7.5 -7.0 -6.5

-7.9 -9.9

-10.4 -9.7

-9.1 -9.8 -9.6

0305 0325 0357 0360

0386

0387

H/H 4-Me/H 4-Cl/H 2-OMe H/Me H/H/NMe

-8.8 -9.4 -9.1 -9.2 -8.2 -7.2

-5.8 -5.0 -5.0 -5.8 -5.4 -5.1

-7.9 -7.5 -7.4 -7.6 -7.9 -6.2

-10.5 -9.8 -9.7 -9.8 -10.7 -9.1

O

и

R

R1

R

O

O

Ligand

R/R1

Receptors

mGluR5 (6FFH) mGlu3 (4XAR)

mGlu8

(6BT5)

Binding energy (kcal/mol)

NMDA Glu N2B (3QEL)

0311 0332 0335

0337

0338

0339

0348

0349

0354

0355

0358

0359 0373 0376

H

2-OH, 5-Cl 2,6-diMe 3,4-diMe

3-Cl

2-Cl

3-Me 2-Me

2-OMe, 5-Me

4-Me

3-Cl,4-Me 3-Cl,2-Me

4-Me 2-OMe, 5-Cl

-7.8 -7.9 -7.0 -9.3 -8.7 -8.0 -8.1 -8.0 -7.2 -8.0 -9.1 -8.4 -8.5 -6.1

-6.2 -4.5 -5.6 -5.5 -7.4 -6.5 -5.3 -5.5 -5.6 -6.4 -5.5 -5.4 -5.5 -5.4

-6.4 -6.8 -6.6 -7.8 -6.6 -6.5 -7.1 -6.7 -6.0 -6.7 -7.0 -6.7 -6.7 -6.8

-10.9 -10.6 -10.5 -11.3 -10.8 -11.3 -10.6 -11.6 -9.6 -10.7 -11.2 -10.7 -10.7 -10.7

0328 0377

CH(Ph)2 Ph/Bn

-7.6 -6.7

-4.4 -4.9

-8.4 -7.5

-10.3 -9.3

0419 0484

H

Me

-9.1 -8.4

-7.0 -6.1

-8.4 -8.0

-10.3 -10.6

0435 0455 0458

2-Me,5-Cl 2-Me 4-Cl

-7.7 -7.9 -8.6

-6.3 -5.3 -5.5

-7.2 -6.9 -6.9

-10.3 -10.9 -10.2

R

The ability of the docking algorithm used in the study to reproduce the experimental data in the case of the mGlu3 receptor is demonstrated in Figure 4B. The location of the ligand and all the interactions agree with the experimental data, except the missing hydrogen bond with threonine (Thr174), but its close and correct location indicates the correct location of the ligand in the active site. The success of the method is also confirmed by the low binding energy of the native ligand -8.2 kcal/mol.

No compound exceeded the affinity index of the native ligand, demonstrating higher binding energy values from -3.2 to -7.4 kcal/mol in the result of the virtual database of compounds docking to the active binding site of the alloster-

ic agonist of mGlu3. No clear patterns of dependence of the affinity level on structural features were identified. The lowest affinity is predicted for the N,N-dibenzylcarboxamide derivative with a 2-methylphenyl radical in the 1st position (0256), and the highest for the N-3-Chlorobenzyl-substitut-ed with a 4-methylphenyl radical in the 1st position.

Stage 3 of the study: the evaluation of the compounds affinity for Group III of the metabotropic glutamate receptors

The first ligand that exhibits a strong selective agonism to mGluIII group receptors, but at the same time not being

B

H-Bonds Donor

Figure 3. Â. 3D macroscopic structure of mGluR3 with allosteric agonist of mGlu2/3 receptors - LY354740 B. 3D molecular structure of the active mGluR3 site with the LY354740 ligand (green-colored molecule).

A

B

AÏÏfc

m......

A'

AÏÏS)

m

a1^ m a *

Figure 4. A. Experimentally established interaction of LY354747 with the amino acids in the active mGluR3 site. B. Reference interaction of LY354747 with amino acids in the active site of the mGlu3 receptor.

selective of certain subtypes of Group III mGlu receptors, is L-2-amino-4-phosphonobutyric acid (L-AP4), described back in 1997 (Thomsen 1997). The crystal structure of the recombinant human amino-terminal domain mGlu8 in combination with the selective l-AP4 agonist was isolated and described only in 2018 (PDBID 6BT5) (Avdeeva et al. 2019). Unfortunately, at the moment, the crystal structure of the closed conformations with agonists of other subtypes of Group III mGlu receptors - mGlu4, mGlu6 or mGlu7 - has not been established. However, there is evidence of a significant similarity of the amino acid sequence of active sites of Group III mGlu receptors, which, accordingly, allows predicting to some extent the affinity for all receptors in this group.

The mGlu8 amino-terminal domain consists of two asymmetric protomers that form a homodimer (Fig. 5A) (Schkeryantz et al. 2018). The binding center of the selective LAP 4 agonist is the hinge region of the protein, located between the complementary globules (LB1/LB2), which are connected to each other by three short loops.

The following amino acid residues are the experimentally established binding site of the L-AP4 agonist (Fig. 5B): two

molecules of alanine (Ala 155 and 177), serine (Ser156), threonine (Thr179) from the upper lobe of the protomer (LB1), tyrosine (Tyr227), and aspartic acid (Asp309) from the lower lobe (LB2). The important interactions which may be responsible for the selectivity of L-AP4 are postulated to be ionic interactions of phosphate with the formation of salt bridges with lysine 71 and 401, arginine 75 (LB1), and its bidentant hydrogen interaction with lysine 314 (LB2).

In this study, the binding energy was -6.1 kcal/mol, when docking the reference ligand l-AP4 into the active site of the mGlu8 amino-terminal domain. The visualization of the docking results (Fig. 6A, B) demonstrates almost a complete compliance of the obtained conformation of l-AP4/mGlu8 with the experimentally established data: a characteristic tetrahedral network of hydrogen bonds between the amino group of the ligand and the thre-onine hydroxyl (Thr179), the alanine carbonyl (Ala 155), and the carboxyl group of aspartic acid (Asp309), as well as all salt bridges between the phosphate. The exception was the hydrogen bond with a water molecule, since the automatic docking methodology involves removing water molecules from the protein globule.

A

B

A'*- Hy» .>7;»

LB1

LB2

Figure 5. Spatial structure of the mGlu8 receptor with an L-AP4 agonist at the binding site A 3D MGlu8 structure with an L-AP4 agonist in the binding site B. Interaction of L-AP4 with amino acid residues of the binding site. Hydrophilic bonds are indicated by blue lines, hydrophobic bonds are indicated by gray lines.

A

B

a m

fS71

» II

\V<

R156

TYR227

o

o

m

M m №

I S311 Wge Carbon Hydrogen Bond

I Attractive Charge □ Pi-Donor Hydrogen Band

I Conventional Hydrogen Bond

-o

Figure 6. 3D (A) and 2D (B) interactions of L-AP4 with the amino acids of the mGlu8 binding site.

The binding energy of the native ligand was -6.1 kcal/ mol. For derivatives of N-substituted 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamides, a higher degree of affinity for the active site of the mGlu8 receptor is predicted: the binding energy of all the compounds that were selected for synthesis is either at or above the reference drug value (from -5.0 to -8.7 kcal/mol). The lowest affinity (binding energy -5.0 kcal/mol) is predicted for dimethyl 2 - [[4-methoxy-1-(2-methylphenyl)-6-oxo-pyridazine-3-carbonyl]amino]benzene-1,4-dicarboxylate (0199). It can also be noted that benzylamine derivatives have some of the best indicators of the affinity in comparison with the phenylsubstituted carboxamide derivatives.

Stage 4 of the study: the evaluation of the affinity of the compounds for NMDA glutamate receptors

The next stage of the research was to study the affinity of the virtual database of the compounds for the allos-

teric site of ionotropic NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) glutamate receptors. The ionotropic NMDA glutamate receptor is a heterotetramer of two subunits - N1R and N2R. Each of the subunits is made up of 4 parts: an ami-no-terminal domain (ATD), a ligand-binding domain (LBD), a transmembrane domain (TD), and a C-termi-nal domain (CTD). The activity of the NMDA receptors in the ion channels is regulated by the allosteric binding of small molecules to the amino-terminal domain, or the ligand-binding domain, in a subtype-specific manner: in particular, after the simultaneous binding of glycine and glutamate to the GluNl and GluN2 subunits, respectively (Mothet et al. 2015). Ifenprodyl-4 - [(1R, 2S) - 2 - (4-ben-zylpiperazine-1-yl)-1-hydroxypropyl phenol is considered to be such a molecule, specifically inhibiting the NMDA receptor of the GluN1 and GluN2 subtypes (Williams 1993; Gallagher et al. 1996). The negative allosteric modulation of the NMDA receptors occurs by binding ifenprodil to active sites of the amino-terminal domain.

A

Ж Ф Ж 0

Ф

m Ш

B

Ш

m b!1!i Ф

Ф m a

Interactions

ZI van der Waals Ш pi_p, Tshaped

Conventional Hydrogen Bond |—[ дц^

■ P¡-StS™ П Pi aim

Figure 8. Experimentally established (A) and reference interaction (B) of ifenprodil with amino acids in the active site of the NMDA glutamate receptor.

It is the complex of amino-terminal domains GluNl/ GluN2B in a closed conformation with ifenprodil (PDB ID 3QEL) that were used to dock the virtual database of the compounds (Fig. 7A, B).

It was experimentally established that the hydrophobic pocket where ifenprodil is immersed consists of the following amino acid residues of both subunits:

• GluNlb subunit - threonine (Thr 110), tyrosine (Tyr109), phenylalanine (Phe 113), serine (Ser132), and leucine (Leu135);

• GluN2B subunit - (Pro 177), isoleucine (Ile 111), glutamine (Gln110), alanine (Ala107), glutamic acid (Glu 236), and phenylalanine (Phe176).

Next to the binding pocket is an empty space that is surrounded by hydrophobic residues, including alanine (Ala75) of the GluN1b subunit and isoleucine (Ile 82), phenylalanine (Phe114) of the GluN2B subunit.

The accuracy of the docking methodology and the ability to reproduce the parameters of the experimental data were confirmed when evaluating the affinity of the native ifenprodil ligand for the active site of the amino-terminal domain of the NMDA glutamate receptor.

Comparing the experimental literature data and the results of the reference docking (Fig. 8A, B), the reproducibility of the method becomes obvious: all hydrophobic and hy-drophilic bonds are present, and the locations of ifenprodyl fragments relative to amino acid residues are comparable.

The difference in the reference docking is the absence of a single hydrogen bond between phenylalanine (Phe176) and ifenprodyl hydroxyl, whereas the hydrophobic interaction is preserved. The binding energy of the native ifenprodil ligand was -11.3 kcal/mol, which demonstrates a high affinity for the receptor.

As for the studied derivatives of N-substituted 4-meth-oxy-6-oxo-1-aryl-pyridazine-3-carboxamides, they demonstrate a high affinity for the NMDA glutamate receptor: the binding energy ranges from -8.7 to-11.6 kcal/mol. When docked to this receptor, it is substituted phenyl car-boxamide derivatives that show more stable results, whereas benzyl-substituted ligands show a bit worse results.

Conclusion

• According to the results of docking, a high degree of affinity of 4-methoxy-6-oxo-1-arylpyridazine-3-car-

boxamide derivatives is predicted for the following glutamate receptors:

◦ metabotropic mGluR8 (Group III) - binding energy from -5.0 to -8.7 kcal/mol, versus -6.1 kcal/mol in the reference drug (L-AP4);

◦ ionotropic NMDA of the GluN2 subtype - the binding energy from -8.7 to -11.6 kcal/mol, compared to -11.3 kcal/mol in the native ifenprodyl ligand.

• A satisfactory level of the affinity is predicted with the active mGluR5 site (Group I): binding energy 11.2-5.2 kcal/mol versus -8.7 kcal/mol in the reference ligand fenobam.

• The results of the docking to the active mGluR3 site (Group II) were less satisfying. No compound exceeded the affinity of the native ligand: binding energies from -3.2 to -7.4 kcal/mol compared to -8.2 kcal/mol, respectively.

References

■ Avdeeva NV, Pokrovskiy MV, Kulikov AL (2017) The study of organ distribution and excretion of the substance Rapitalam. Modern Problems of Science and Education [Sovremennye Problemy Nauki I Obrazovanija] 2: 88. [in Russian]

■ Avdeeva NV, Sidorova SA, Povetkin SV, Zhernakova NI, Sernov LN (2018) Positive allosteric modulation of mglur4 receptors as a potential approach to Parkinson's disease treatment proceedings of higher educational institutions. Medical Laboratory Sciences [Medicinskie Nauki] 3(47): 194-206. https://doi.org/10.21685/2072-3032-2018-3-18 [in Russian]

■ Avdeeva NV, Sidorova SA, Gudyrev OS, Osipova OA, Golubev IV (2019) Mechanism of neuroprotective effect of mGluR4 agonists. Reseach Results in Pharmacology 5(2): 43-47. https://doi. org/10.3897/rrpharmacology. 5.36565

■ Christopher JA, Orgovan Z, Congreve M, Dore AS, Errey JC, Marshall FH, Mason JS, Okrasa K, Rucktooa P, Serrano-Vega MJ, Fer-enczy GG, Keseru GM (2019) Structure-based optimization strategies for g protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) allosteric modulators: a case study from analyses of new metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGlu5) X-ray structures. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 62(1): 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.7b01722 [PubMed]

■ Doré AS, Okrasa K, Patel JC, Serrano-Vega M, Bennett K, Cooke RM, Errey JC, Jazayeri A, Khan S, Tehan B, Weir M, Wiggin GR, Marshall FH (2014) Structure of class C GPCR metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 transmembrane domain. Nature 511(7511): 557-562. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13396 [PubMed]

■ Gallagher MJ, Huang H, Pritchett DB, Lynch DR (1996) Interactions between ifenprodil and the NR2B subunit of the N-methyl-D-aspar-tate receptor. Journal of Biological Chemistry 271(16): 9603-9611. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.271.16.9603 [PubMed]

■ Jin C, Ma S (2017) Recent advances in the medicinal chemistry of group II and group III mGlu receptors. MedChemComm 8(3): 501-515. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6MD00612D [PubMed] [PMC]

■ Karakas E, Simorowski N, Furukawa H (2011) Subunit arrangement and phenylethanolamine binding in GluN1/GluN2B NMDA receptors. Nature 475(7355): 249-253 https://doi.org/10.1038/na-ture10180. [PubMed] [PMC]

• SAR analysis of the docking results shows that the N-benzyl-substituted derivatives have better affinity, compared to that of the N-phenyl-sub-stituted carboxamide derivatives. Substitution of hydrogen of the NH-group of the carboxamide residue with a methyl or ethyl radical leads to a decrease in the affinity, which is probably due to the ability of the NH-group to form hydrogen bonds to stabilize the ligand conformation in the cavity of the active site. There is no clear relationship between the substituent in the phenyl ring and the affinity level.

• According to the binding energy values for metabotropic and ionotropic glutamate receptors, 96 substances were selected for synthesis, with the best affinity predicted for at least two of the four types of the glutamate receptors.

■ Kravchenko D, Avdeeva NV, Korokin MV (2016) Assessment of the DNA damage level in peripheral blood leukocytes of mice treated orally with Rapitalam in acute and therapeutic doses. Research Result: Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology 2(4): 9-11. https:// doi.org/10.18413/2500-235X-2016-2-4-9-11

■ Kunishima N, Shimada Y, Tsuji Y, Sato T, Yamamoto M, Kumasaka T, Nakanishi S, Jingami H, Morikawa K (2000) Structural basis of glutamate recognition by a dimeric metabotropic glutamate receptor. Nature 407(6807): 971-977. https://doi.org/10.1038/35039564 [PubMed]

■ Linden AM, Shannon H, Baez M, Yu JL, Koester A, Schoepp DD (2005) Anxiolytic-like activity of the mGlu2/3 receptor agonist LY354740 in the elevated plus maze test is disrupted in metabo-tropicglutamate receptor 2 and 3 knock-out mice. Psychopharma-cology (Berl) 179(1): 284-291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-004-2098-x [PubMed]

■ Marino M, Valenti O, Conn PJ (2003) Glutamate receptors and parkinson's disease opportunities for intervention. Drugs and Aging 20(5): 377-397. https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200320050-00006 [PubMed]

■ Menezes MM, Santini MA, Benvenga MJ, Marek GJ, Merchant KM, Mikkelsen JD, Svensson KA (2013) The mglu2/3 receptor agonists ly354740 and ly379268 differentially regulate restraint-stress-induced expression of c-fos in rat cerebral cortex. Neuroscience Journal 73: 6439-6447. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/736439 [PubMed] [PMC]

■ Monn JA, Prieto L, Taboada L, Pedregal C, Hao J, Reinhard MR, Henry SS, Goldsmith PJ, Beadle CD, Walton L, Man T, Rudyk H, Clark B, Tupper D, Baker SR, Lamas C, Montero C, Marcos A, Blanco J, Bures M, Clawson DK, Atwell SLF, Wang J, Russell M, Heinz BA, Wang X, Carter JH, Xiang C, Catlow JT, Swanson S, Sanger H, Broad LM, Johnson MP, Knopp KL, Simmons RM, Johnson BG, Shaw DB, McKinzie DL (2015) Synthesis and pharmacological characterization of c4-disubstituted analogs of 1S,2S,5R,6S-2-Ami-nobicyclo[3.1.0]hexane-2,6-dicarboxylate: Identification of a potent, selective metabotropic glutamate receptor agonist and determination of agonist-bound human mglu2 and mglu3 amino terminal domain structures. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 58: 1776-1794. https:// doi.org/10.1021/jm501612y [PubMed]

■ Mothet JP, Matilde LB, Billard JM (2015) Time and space profiling of NMDA receptor co-agonist functions. Journal of Neurochemistry 135(2): 210-225. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.13204 [PubMed]

■ Protein Data Bank. http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/home/home.do [Accessed December, 2019]

■ Schkeryantz JM, Chen Q, Ho JD, Atwell S, Zhang A, Vargas MC, Wang J, Monn JA, Hao J (2018) Determination of L-AP4-bound human mGlu8 receptor amino terminal domain structure and the molecular basis for L-AP4's group III mGlu receptor functional potency and selectivity. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters 28: 612-617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2018.01.037 [PubMed]

■ Schoepp DD, Wright RA, Levine LR, Gaydos B, Potter WZ (2003) LY354740, an mGlu2/3 receptor agonist as a novel approach to treat anxiety/stress. Stress 6(3): 189-197. https://doi. org/10.1080/1025389031000146773 [PubMed]

■ Thomsen C (1997) The L-AP4 receptor. General Pharmacology 29(2): 151-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-3623(96)00417-X [PubMed]

■ Trott O, Olson AJ (2010) AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. Journal of Computational Chemistry 31(2): 455-461. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.21334 [PubMed] [PMC]

■ Wang Z, Sun H, Yao X, Li D, Xu L, Li Y, Tiand S, Hou T (2016) Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 18: 12964-12975. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6CP01555G [PubMed]

■ Williams K (1993) Ifenprodil discriminates subtypes of the N-meth-yl-D-aspartate receptor: selectivity and mechanisms at recombinant heteromeric receptors. Molecular Pharmacology 44(4): 851-859. [PubMed]

■ Zhang Z, Zhang S, Fu P, Zhang Z, Lin K, Ka-Shun Ko J, Yun KKL (2019) Roles of glutamate receptors in Parkinson's disease. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 20(18): 4391. https://doi. org/10.3390/ijms20184391 [PubMed] [PMC]

Author contributions

■ Natalia V. Avdeeva, PhD in Medical Sciences, Associate Professor, e-mail: [email protected], ORCID ID https:// orcid.org/0000-0003-1405-4555. The author suggested the idea of the article, made substantial contributions to the design of the article and participated in drafting the article.

■ Hanna I. Severina, PhD in Pharmaceutical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, e-mail: [email protected], ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2894-9384. The author played a leading role in conducting the experiment, interpreting the data, and writing the article.

■ Victoriya A. Georgiyants, Doctor of Sciences (Pharmacy), Professor, Head of the Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, e-mail: [email protected], ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8794-8010. The author played a leading role in the design of the experiment and analysis of the data, and participated in the experiment.

■ Sergiy M. Kovalenko, Doctor of Sciences (Chemstry), Professor, e-mail: [email protected], ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2222-8180. The author analyzed and interpreted the data, wrote and edited the article.

■ Artem I. Yarcev, 6-year student, Faculty of Medicine, e-mail: [email protected]. The author analyzed the literature and participated in interpreting the data.

■ Svetlana N. Prohoda, medical doctor of the Kursk Regional Clinical Hospital, e-mail: prohoda_svetlana@yandex. ru. The author analyzed the literature and participated in interpreting the data.