Identification of antiproliferative emodin analogues as inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor in cancer

Chen,Kuan‑Chung; Juang,Shin‑Hun; Lien,Jin‑Cherng

doi:10.3892/ijmm.2019.4066

Identification of antiproliferative emodin analogues as inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor in cancer

Authors:
- Kuan‑Chung Chen
- Shin‑Hun Juang
- Jin‑Cherng Lien
View Affiliations

Affiliations: School of Pharmacy, China Medical University, Taichung 40402, Taiwan, R.O.C., Department of Pharmacy, Tajen University, Pingtung 90741, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Published online on: January 16, 2019 https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2019.4066
Pages: 1281-1288
Copyright: © Chen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

A series of emodin analogues have been demonstrated to exhibit potent antiproliferative activity in three human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)‑overexpressing cell lines. However, in docking simulations, not all of these emodin analogues docked into the HER2 protein binding site. As the epidermal growth factor receptor (EFGR) and HER2 proteins are members of the ErbB family, the present study aimed to determine whether these anthraquinone derivatives exhibit potent antitumour bioactivity due to their inhibition of EGFR protein. Two 2D quantitative structure‑activity relationship (QSAR) models, applied using multiple linear regression and a support vector machine, indicated seven representative molecular descriptors of anthraquinone derivatives associated with their antitumour activities. Molecular docking simulation indicated the possible docking poses of binding in the EGFR kinase domain. Two 3D‑QSAR models performed by comparative force field analysis and comparative similarity indices analysis indicated the favoured and disfavoured fields for four physicochemical parameters (steric and hydrophobic properties, and hydrogen bond donor and acceptor), which may further improve the antitumour properties. These results demonstrate the benefits of further investigations on the development of lead compounds with improved anticancer bioactivity.

View Figures

View References

1	Herbst RS: Review of epidermal growth factor receptor biology. Int J Radiat Oncol Bio Phys. 59:21–26. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar
2	Zhang H, Berezov A, Wang Q, Zhang G, Drebin J, Murali R and Greene MI: ErbB receptors: From oncogenes to targeted cancer therapies. J Clin Invest. 117:2051–2058. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Walker F, Abramowitz L, Benabderrahmane D, Duval X, Descatoire V, Henin D, Lehy T and Aparicio T: Growth factor receptor expression in anal squamous lesions: Modifications associated with oncogenic human papillomavirus and human immunodeficiency virus. Hum Pathol. 40:1517–1527. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Lynch TJ, Bell DW, Sordella R, Gurubhagavatula S, Okimoto RA, Brannigan BW, Harris PL, Haserlat SM, Supko JG, Haluska FG, et al: Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib. N Engl J Med. 350:2129–2139. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Kuan CT, Wikstrand CJ and Bigner DD: EGF mutant receptor vIII as a molecular target in cancer therapy. Endocr-Relat Cancer. 8:83–96. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Liang FP, Lien JC, Wu YH, Chen CS and Juang SH: Em08red, a dual functional antiproliferative emodin analogue, is a downregulator of ErbB2 expression and inducer of intracellular oxidative stress. Drug Des Devel Ther. 9:1499–1510. 2015.PubMed/NCBI
7	Shia CS, Suresh G, Hou YC, Lin YC, Chao PD and Juang SH: Suppression on metastasis by rhubarb through modulation on MMP-2 and uPA in human A549 lung adenocarcinoma: An ex vivo approach. J Ethnopharmacol. 133:426–433. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar
8	Huang Q, Lu G, Shen HM, Chung MC and Ong CN: Anti-cancer properties of anthraquinones from rhubarb. Med Res Rev. 27:609–630. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar
9	Lee MS, Cha EY, Sul JY, Song IS and Kim JY: Chrysophanic acid blocks proliferation of colon cancer cells by inhibiting EGFR/mTOR pathway. Phytother Res. 25:833–837. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar
10	Heald R, Bowman KK, Bryan MC, Burdick D, Chan B, Chan E, Chen Y, Clausen S, Dominguez-Fernandez B, Eigenbrot C, et al: Noncovalent mutant selective epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors: A lead optimization case study. J Med Chem. 58:8877–8895. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ, Swaminathan S and Karplus M: CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy minimization and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem. 4:187–217. 1983. View Article : Google Scholar
12	Fan R-E, Chen P-H and Lin C-J: Working set selection using second order information for training support vector machines. J Mach Learn Res. 6:1889–1918. 2005.
13	Rogers D and Hopfinger AJ: Application of genetic function approximation to quantitative structure-activity relationships and quantitative structure-property relationships. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 34:854–866. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar
14	Venkatachalam CM, Jiang X, Oldfield T and Waldman M: LigandFit: A novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites. J Mol Graphics Modelling. 21:289–307. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar
15	Hartigan JA: Clustering Algorithms. John Wiley & Sons Inc;
16	Gehlhaar DK, Verkhivker GM, Rejto PA, Sherman CJ, Fogel DB, Fogel LJ and Freer ST: Molecular recognition of the inhibitor Ag-1343 by Hiv-1 protease-conformationally flexible docking by evolutionary programmin g. Chem Biol. 2:317–324. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Gehlhaar Daniel K, Bouzida D and Rejto Paul A: Reduced dimensionality in ligand - Protein structure prediction: Covalent inhibitors of serine proteases and design of site-directed combinatorial libraries. Ration Drug Des Am Chem Soc. 719:292–311. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar
18	Muegge I and Martin YC: A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: A simplified potential approach. J Med Chem. 42:791–804. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Cramer RD, Patterson DE and Bunce JD: Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J Am Chem Soc. 110:5959–5967. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Klebe G, Abraham U and Mietzner T: Molecular similarity indices in a comparative analysis (CoMSIA) of drug molecules to correlate and predict their biological activity. J Med Chem. 37:4130–4146. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Hall LH, Mohney B and Kier LB: The electrotopological state: Structure information at the atomic level for molecular graphs. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 31:76–82. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar
22	Hall LH and Kier LB: The E-state as the basis for molecular structure space definition and structure similarity. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 40:784–791. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Stanton DT and Jurs PC: Development and use of charged partial surface area structural descriptors in computer-assisted quantitative structure-property relationship studies. Anal Chem. 62:2323–2329. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar
24	Rohrbaugh RH and Jurs PC: Descriptions of molecular shape applied in studies of structure/activity and structure/property relationships. Analytica Chimica Acta. 199:99–109. 1987. View Article : Google Scholar