4.7 Article

Inhibition of acetylcholinesterase by two genistein derivatives: kinetic analysis, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation

期刊

ACTA PHARMACEUTICA SINICA B
卷 4, 期 6, 页码 430-437

出版社

INST MATERIA MEDICA, CHINESE ACAD MEDICAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2014.10.002

关键词

Genistein derivatives; Acetylcholinesterase (AChE); Kinetics analysis; Molecular docking; Molecular dynamics simulation; MM/GBSA

资金

  1. Research Special Fund for Public Welfare Industry of Health [200802041]
  2. National Great Science and Technology Projects [2012ZX09301002, 2014ZX09507003-002]
  3. International Collaboration Project [2011DFR31240]
  4. Institue of Chinese Materia Medica, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College graduate student innovation fund [2013-1007-18]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study two genistein derivatives (G1 and G2) are reported as inhibitors of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE), and differences in the inhibition of AChE are described. Although they differ in structure by a single methyl group, the inhibitory effect of G1 (IC50 = 264 nmol/L) on AChE was 80 times stronger than that of G2 (IC50 = 21,210 nmol/L). Enzyme-kinetic analysis, molecular docking and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations were conducted to better understand the molecular basis for this difference. The results obtained by kinetic analysis demonstrated that G1 can interact with both the catalytic active site and peripheral anionic site of AChE. The predicted binding free energies of two complexes calculated by the molecular mechanics/generalized born surface area (MM/GBSA) method were consistent with the experimental data. The analysis of the individual energy terms suggested that a difference between the net electrostatic contributions (Delta E-ele+Delta G(GB)) was responsible for the binding affinities of these two inhibitors. Additionally, analysis of the molecular mechanics and MM/GBSA free energy decomposition revealed that the

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据