Multiple ligands simultaneous molecular docking and dynamics approach to study the synergetic inhibitory of curcumin analogs on ErbB4 tyrosine phosphorylation

La Ode Aman , Netty Ino Ischak, Teti Sutriyati Tuloli, Arfan Arfan, Aiyi Asnawi

Abstract


Background and purpose: Lapatinib (FMM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) are anticancer drugs employed in a combination approach. FMM inhibits tyrosine phosphorylation of ErbB4 while 5-FU inhibits cell proliferation. This research aimed to investigate the potential of two compounds, namely (1E,4E)-1,5-bis (4-hydroxyphenyl) penta-1,4-dien-3-one (AC01) and (1E,4E)-1,5-bis (3,4-dihydroxy phenyl) penta-1,4-dien-3-one (AC02), both as individual inhibitors and combination partners with FMM, targeting ErbB4 inhibition. AC01 and AC02 were combined with FMM, which targets ErbB4. The combination of 5-FU with FMM served as a reference in this study.

Experimental approach: The research utilized computational simulation methods such as single and multiple ligands simultaneously docking and dynamics. Data analysis was performed using AutoDockTools and gmx_MMPBSA.

Findings/Results: Single docking results indicated that 5-FU exhibited the lowest binding affinity, while FMM demonstrated the highest. Simultaneous docking of AC01 and AC02 paired with FMM revealed their binding positions overlapping with the FMM-5-FU workspace. The FMM-AC01 and FMM-AC02 complexes exhibited slightly weaker binding affinities compared to FMM-5-FU. In combination with FMM, AC01 and AC02 occupied the ErbB4 activation loop, whereas 5-FU was outside the activation loop. Furthermore, in their interaction with ErbB4, AC02 exhibited slightly stronger binding than AC01, as confirmed by the average binding free energy calculations from molecular dynamics simulations.

Conclusion and implications: In conclusion, computational simulations indicated that both AC01 and AC02 have the potential to act as anticancer candidates, demonstrating ErbB4 inhibitory potential both as individual agents and in synergy with FMM.

 

 


Keywords


ErbB4; Simultaneously molecular docking; Simultaneously molecular dynamics.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Cancer research UK worldwide cancer statistics. Available: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/worldwide-cancer (accessed on 8 September 2023).

World health organization cancer. Available: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ cancer (accessed on 8 September 2023).

World cancer research fund international worldwide cancer data. Available: https://www.wcrf.org/cancer-trends/worldwide-cancer-data (accessed on 8 September 2023).

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249.DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660.

Sundvall M, Iljin K, Kilpinen S, Sara H, Kallioniemi OP, Elenius K. Role of ErbB4 in breast cancer. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2008;13(2): 259-268.DOI: 10.1007/s10911-008-9079-3.

Canfield K, Li J, Wilkins OM, Morrison MM, Ung M, Wells W, et al. Receptor tyrosine kinase ERBB4 mediates acquired resistance to ERBB2 inhibitors in breast cancer cells. Cell Cycle. 2015;14(4):648-655.DOI: 10.4161/15384101.2014.994966.

Bose R, Zhang X. The ErbB kinase domain: structural perspectives into kinase activation and inhibition. Exp Cell Res. 2009;315(4):649-658.DOI: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2008.07.031.

Gerbin CS. Activation of ERBB receptors. Available: https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/activation-of-erbb-receptors-14457210/ (accessed on 8 September 2023).

Collins DM, Conlon NT, Kannan S, Verma CS, Eli LD, Lalani AS, et al. Preclinical characteristics of the irreversible Pan-HER kinase inhibitor neratinib compared with lapatinib: implications for the treatment of HER2-positive and HER2-mutated breast cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(6):737,1-27.DOI: 10.3390/cancers11060737.

Black LE, Longo JF, Carroll SL. Mechanisms of receptor tyrosine-protein kinase ErbB-3 (ERBB3) action in human neoplasia. Am J Pathol. 2019;189(10):1898-1912.DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2019.06.008.

Li H, Li C. Multiple ligand simultaneous docking: orchestrated dancing of ligands in binding sites of protein. J Comput Chem. 2010;31(10):2014-2022.DOI: 10.1002/jcc.21486.

Gupta A, Chauhan SS, Gaur AS, Parthasarathi R. Computational screening for investigating the synergistic regulatory potential of drugs and phytochemicals in combination with 2-deoxy-d-glucose against SARS-CoV-2. Struct Chem. 2022;33(6):2179-2193.DOI: 10.1007/s11224-022-02049-0.

O’Boyle NM, Banck M, James CA, Morley C, Vandermeersch T, Hutchison GR. Open babel: an open chemical toolbox. J Cheminform. 2011;3:33,1-14.DOI: 10.1186/1758-2946-3-33.

Waterhouse A, Bertoni M, Bienert S, Studer G, Tauriello G, Gumienny R, et al. Swiss-model: homology modelling of protein structures and complexes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:W296-W303.DOI: 10.1093/nar/gky427.

Morris GM, Huey R, Lindstrom W, Sanner MF, Belew RK, Goodsell DS, et al. Autodock4 and autodocktools4: automated docking with selective receptor flexibility. J Comput Chem. 2009;30(16):2785-2791.DOI: 10.1002/jcc.21256.

Ischak NI, Aman LO, Hasan H, Kilo Ala, Asnawi A. In Silico screening of Andrographis paniculata secondary metabolites as anti-diabetes mellitus through PDE9 inhibition. Res Pharm Sci. 2023;18(1):100-111.DOI: 10.4103/1735-5362.363616.

Eberhardt J, Santos-Martins D, Tillack AF, Forli S. Autodock vina 1.2.0: new docking methods, expanded force field, and python bindings. J Chem Inf Model. 2021;61(8):3891-3898.DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00203.

Van Der Spoel D, Lindahl E, Hess B, Groenhof G, Mark AE, Berendsen HJC. GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem. 2005;26(16):1701-1718.DOI: 10.1002/jcc.20291.

Pronk S, Páll S, Schulz R, Larsson P, Bjelkmar P, Apostolov R, et al. GROMACS 4.5: a high-throughput and highly parallel open source molecular simulation toolkit. Bioinformatics 2013;29(7):845-854.DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt055.

Valdés-Tresanco MS, Valdés-Tresanco ME, Valiente PA, Moreno E. Gmx_MMPBSA: a new tool to perform end-state free energy calculations with GROMACS. J Chem Theory Comput. 2021;17(10):6281-6291.DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00645.

Lindorff-Larsen K, Piana S, Palmo K, Maragakis P, Klepeis JL, Dror RO, et al. Improved side-chain torsion potentials for the Amber ff99SB protein force field. Proteins. 2010;78(8): 1950-1958.DOI: 10.1002/prot.22711.

Da Silva AWS, Vranken WF. ACPYPE-antechamber python parser interface. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5(367):1-8.DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-367.

Durrant JD, McCammon JA. Molecular dynamics simulations and drug discovery. BMC Biol. 2011;9(71):1-9.DOI: 10.1186/1741-7007-9-71.

Miller BR 3rd, McGee TD Jr, Swails JM, Homeyer N, Gohlke H, Roitberg AE. MMPBSA.Py: an efficient program for end-state free energy calculations. J Chem Theory Comput. 2012;8(9):3314-3321.DOI: 10.1021/ct300418h.

Qiu C, Tarrant MK, Choi SH, Sathyamurthy A, Bose R, Banjade S, et al. Mechanism of activation and inhibition of the HER4/ErbB4 kinase. Structure. 2008;16(3):460-467.DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2007.12.016


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.