Review

Natural Science Laboratory, Division of Medicinal & Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, PO Box 17020, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India

School of Medical Sciences, Adamas University, Kolkata, India

Search for more papers by this author

Sk Abdul Amin

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4799-7322

Natural Science Laboratory, Division of Medicinal & Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, PO Box 17020, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India

Search for more papers by this author

Nilanjan Adhikari

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5523-7716

Natural Science Laboratory, Division of Medicinal & Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, PO Box 17020, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India

Search for more papers by this author

Tarun Jha

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: tjupharm@yahoo.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9996-738X

Natural Science Laboratory, Division of Medicinal & Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, PO Box 17020, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:12 Oct 2021https://doi.org/10.4155/fmc-2021-0262

View article

Abstract

MMP2, a Zn²⁺-dependent metalloproteinase, is related to cancer and angiogenesis. Inhibition of this enzyme might result in a potential antimetastatic drug to leverage the anticancer drug armory. In silico or computer-aided ligand-based drug design is a method of rational drug design that takes multiple chemometrics (i.e., multi-quantitative structure–activity relationship methods) into account for virtually selecting or developing a series of probable selective MMP2 inhibitors. Though existing matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors have shown plausible pan-matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) activity, they have resulted in various adverse effects leading to their being rescinded in later phases of clinical trials. Therefore a review of the ligand-based designing methods of MMP2 inhibitors would result in an explicit route map toward successfully designing and synthesizing novel and selective MMP2 inhibitors.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1. Mowers EE, Sharifi MN, Macleod KF. Autophagy in cancer metastasis. Oncogene 36, 1619–1630 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
2. Seyfried TN, Huysentruyt LC. On the origin of cancer metastasis. Crit. Rev. Oncog. 18, 43–73 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Anand P, Kunnumakara AB, Sundaram C et al. Cancer is a preventable disease that requires major lifestyle changes. Pharm. Res. 25, 2097–2116 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4. World Health Organisation. The top 10 causes of death (2018). www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death
Google Scholar
5. International Agency for Research on Cancer. All cancers (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) estimated incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide (2012). http://globocan.iarc.fr
Google Scholar
6. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel R, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68, 394–424 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
7. De Vita VT Jr, Chu E. A history of cancer chemotherapy. Cancer Res. 68(21), 8643–8653 ( 2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8. Adhikari N. Glutamine derivatives and analogs as matrix metalloproteinase-2 inhibitors: rational design, synthesis, biological screening and molecular modeling studies [PhD Thesis]. Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India (2018).
Google Scholar
9. Gialeli C, Theocharis AD, Karamanos NK. Roles of matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression and their pharmacological targeting. FEBS J. 278, 16–27 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Adhikari N, Amin SA, Saha A, Jha T. Understanding chemico-biological interactions of glutamate MMP-2 inhibitors through rigorous alignment-dependent 3D-QSAR analyses. Chem. Sel. 2, 7888–7898 (2017).
CASGoogle Scholar
11. Frantz C, Stewart KM, Weaver VM. The extracellular matrix at a glance. J. Cell Sci. 123, 4195–4200 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12. Jarvelainen H, Sainio A, Koulu M, Wight TN, Penttinen R. Extracellular matrix molecules: potential targets in pharmacotherapy. Pharmacol. Rev. 61, 198–223 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13. Hynes RO. The extracellular matrix: not just pretty fibrils. Science 326, 1216–1219 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14. Bonnans C, Chou J, Werb Z. Remodelling the extracellular matrix in development and disease. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 786–801 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Adhikari N, Amin SA, Saha A, Jha T. Structural exploration for the refinement of anticancer matrix metalloproteinase-2 inhibitor designing approaches through robust validated multi-QSARs. J. Mol. Struct. 1156, 501–515 (2018).
CASGoogle Scholar
16. Adhikari N, Amin SA, Saha A, Jha T. Exploring in house glutamate inhibitors of matrix metalloproteinase-2 through validated robust chemico-biological quantitative approaches. Struct. Chem. 29, 285–297 (2018).
CASGoogle Scholar
17. Naveed M, Han L, Hasnat M et al. Suppression of TGP on myocardial remodeling by regulating the NF-κB pathway. Biomed. Pharmacother. 108, 1460–1468 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Xue C, Wu N, Li X, Qiu M, Du X, Ye Q. Serum concentrations of Krebs von den Lungen-6, surfactant protein D, and matrix metalloproteinase-2 as diagnostic biomarkers in patients with asbestosis and silicosis: a case–control study. BMC Pulm. Med. 17, 144 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
19. Fang JH, Zhou HC, Zeng C et al. MicroRNA-29b suppresses tumor angiogenesis, invasion, and metastasis by regulating matrix metalloproteinase 2 expression. Hepatology 54, 1729–1740 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
20. Halder AK, Saha A, Jha T. Exploring QSAR and pharmacophore mapping of structurally diverse selective matrix metalloproteinase-2 inhibitors. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 65, 1541–1554 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Adhikari N, Halder AK, Mallick S, Saha A, Saha KD, Jha T. Robust design of some selective matrix metalloproteinase-2 inhibitors over matrix metalloproteinase-9 through in silico/fragment-based lead identification and de novo lead modification: syntheses and biological assays. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 24, 4291–4309 (2016). • Covers a multi-QSAR approach for designing aryl sulfonamide glutamine derivatives.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22. Jha T, Adhikari N, Saha A, Amin SA. Multiple molecular modelling studies on some derivatives and analogues of glutamic acid as matrix metalloproteinase-2 inhibitors. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 29, 43–68 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Sanyal S, Amin SA, Adhikari N, Jha T. QSAR modeling on a series of arylsulphonamide-based hydroxamates as potent MMP-2 inhibitors. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 30, 247–263 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Adhikari N, Amin SA, Jha T. Collagenases and gelatinases and their inhibitors as anticancer agents. In: Cancer Leading Proteases. 1st Edition. Gupta SP (Ed.). Chapter 10 Elsevier, MA, USA 265–294 (2020).
Google Scholar
25. Jabłońska-Trypuć A, Matejczyk M, Rosochacki S. Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), the main extracellular matrix (ECM) enzymes in collagen degradation, as a target for anticancer drugs. J. Enzyme Inhib. Med. Chem. 31, 177–183 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26. Adhikari N, Mukherjee A, Saha A, Jha T. Arylsulfonamides and selectivity of matrix metalloproteinase-2: an overview. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 129, 72–109 (2017). • Covers important topics on some arylsulfonamides with great MMP2 inhibitory activity.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Fanjul-Fernández M, Folgueras AR, Cabrera S, López-Otín C. Matrix metalloproteinases: evolution, gene regulation and functional analysis in mouse models. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1803, 3–19 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Murphy G, Knauper V. Relating matrix metalloproteinase structure to function: why the ‘hemopexin’ domain? Matrix Biol. 15, 511–518 (1997).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
29. Tester AM, Cox JH, Connor AR et al. LPS responsiveness and neutrophil chemotaxis in vivo require PMN MMP-8 activity. PLoS ONE 2, e312 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
30. Gearing AJ, Beckett P, Christodoulou M et al. Processing of tumour necrosis factor-alpha precursor by metalloproteinases. Nature 370, 555–557 (1994).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
31. Stolow MA, Bauzon DD, Li J et al. Identification and characterization of a novel collagenase in Xenopus laevis: possible roles during frog development. Mol. Biol. Cell 7, 1471–1483 (1996).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Barksby HE, Milner JM, Patterson AM et al. Matrix metalloproteinase 10 promotion of collagenolysis via procollagenase activation: implications for cartilage degradation in arthritis. Arth. Rheum. 54, 3244–3253 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Geurts N, Martens E, Van Aelst I, Proost P, Opdenakker G, Van den Steen G. Beta-hematin interaction with the hemopexin domain of gelatinase B/MMP-9 provokes autocatalytic processing of the propeptide, thereby priming activation by MMP-3. Biochemistry 47, 2689–2699 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
34. Shapiro SD, Kobayashi DK, Ley TJ. Cloning and characterization of a unique elastolytic metalloproteinase produced by human alveolar macrophages. J. Biol. Chem. 268, 23824–23829 (1993).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
35. Kolb C, Mauch S, Peter HH, Krawinkel U, Sedlacek R. The matrix metalloproteinase RASI-1 is expressed in synovial blood vessels of a rheumatoid arthritis patient. Immunol. Lett. 57, 83–88 (1997).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36. Lu Y, Papagerakis P, Yamakoshi Y, Hu JC, Bartlett JD, Simmer JP. Functions of KLK4 and MMP-20 in dental enamel formation. Biol. Chem. 389, 695–700 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Bar-Or B, Nuttall RK, Duddy M et al. Analyses of all matrix metalloproteinase members in leukocytes emphasize monocytes as major inflammatory mediators in multiple sclerosis. Brain 126, 2738–2749 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
38. Overall CM. Molecular determinants of metalloproteinase substrate specificity: matrix metalloproteinase substrate binding domains, modules, and exosites. Mol. Biotechnol. 22, 51–86 (2002).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Rio MC. From a unique cell to metastasis is a long way to go: clues to stromelysin-3 participation. Biochimie 87, 299–306 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40. Motrescu ER, Blaise S, Etique N et al. Matrix metalloproteinase-11/stromelysin-3 exhibits collagenolytic function against collagen VI under normal and malignant conditions. Oncogene 27, 6347–6355 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41. Werner SR, Dotzlaf JE, Smith RC. MMP-28 as a regulator of myelination. BMC Neurosci. 9, 83 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
42. Zucker S, Pei D, Cao J, Lopez-Otin C. Membrane type-matrix metalloproteinases (MT-MMP). Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 54, 1–74 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
43. Sounni NE, Noel A. Membrane type-matrix metalloproteinases and tumor progression. Biochimie 87, 329–342 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44. Nagase H, Visse R, Murphy G. Structure and function of matrix metalloproteinases and TIMPs. Cardiovasc. Res. 69, 562–573 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
45. Morgunova E, Tuuttila A, Bergmann U et al. Structure of human pro-matrix metalloproteinase-2: activation mechanism revealed. Science 284, 1667–1670 (1999).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
46. Tallant C, Marrero A, Gomis-Rüth FX. Matrix metalloproteinases: fold and function of their catalytic domains. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1803, 20–28 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
47. Iyer S, Visse R, Nagase H, Acharya KR. Crystal structure of an active form of human MMP-1. J. Mol. Biol. 362, 78–88 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
48. Bode W. A helping hand for collagenases: the haemopexin-like domain. Structure 3, 527–530 (1995).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
49. Maskos K. Crystal structures of MMPs in complex with physiological and pharmacological inhibitors. Biochimie 87, 249–263 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
50. Schechter I, Berger A. On the size of the active site in proteases. I. Papain. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 27, 157–162 (1967).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
51. Jacobsen JA, Jourden JLM, Miller MT, Cohen SM. To bind zinc or not to bind zinc: an examination of innovative approaches to improved metalloproteinase inhibition. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1803, 72–94 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
52. Aureli L, Gioia M, Cerbara I et al. Structural bases for substrate and inhibitor recognition by matrix metalloproteinases. Curr. Med. Chem. 15, 2192–2222 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
53. Park HI, Jin Y, Hurst DR et al. The intermediate S1′ pocket of the endometase/matrilysin-2 active site revealed by enzyme inhibition kinetic studies, protein sequence analyses, and homology modelling. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 51646–51653 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
54. Johnson AR, Pavlovsky AG, Ortwine DF et al. Discovery and characterization of a novel inhibitor of matrix metalloprotease-13 that reduces cartilage damage in vivo without joint fibroplasia side effects. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 27781–27791 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
55. Brkic M, Balusu S, Libert C, Vandenbroucke RE. Friends or foes: matrix metalloproteinases and their multifaceted roles in neurodegenerative diseases. Mediators Inflamm. 2015, 620581 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
56. Fabre B, Ramos A, de Pascual-Teresa B. Targeting matrix metalloproteinases: exploring the dynamics of the S1 pocket in the design of selective, small molecule inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 57, 10205–10219 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
57. Altruda F, Poli V, Restagno G, Argos P, Cortese R, Silengo L. The primary structure of human hemopexin deduced from cDNA sequence: evidence for internal, repeating homology. Nucleic Acids Res. 13, 3841–3859 (1985).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
58. Jenne D, Stanley KK. Nucleotide sequence and organisation of the human S-protein gene: repeating peptide motifs in the ‘pexin’ family and a model for their evolution. Biochemistry 26, 6735–6742 (1987).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
59. Pelmenschikov V, Siegbahn PE. Catalytic mechanism of matrix metalloproteinases: two-layered ONIOM study. Inorg. Chem. 41, 5659–5666 (2002).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
60. Scozzafava A, Supuran CT. Carbonic anhydrase and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors: sulfonylated amino acid hydroxamates with MMP inhibitory properties act as efficient inhibitors of CA isozymes I, II, and IV, and N-hydroxysulfonamides inhibit both these zinc enzymes. J. Med. Chem. 43, 3677–3687 (1997).
Google Scholar
61. Bertini I, Fragai M, Giachetti A et al. Combining in silico tools and NMR data to validate protein-ligand structural models: application to matrix metalloproteinases. J. Med. Chem. 48, 7544–7559 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
62. Aschi M, Besker N, Re N et al. Stereoselectivity by enantiomeric inhibitors of matrix metalloproteinase-8: new insights from molecular dynamics simulations. J. Med. Chem. 50, 211–218 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
63. Amin SA, Adhikari N, Jha T. Is dual inhibition of metalloenzymes HDAC-8 and MMP-2 a potential pharmacological target to combat hematological malignancies? Pharmacol. Res. 122, 8–19 (2017). •• Review article that covers the dual activity of MMP2 and HDAC8 inhibitors.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
64. Nuti E, Casalini F, Santamaria S et al. Synthesis and biological evaluation in U87MG glioma cells of (ethynylthiophene)sulfonamido-based hydroxamates as matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 46, 2617–2629 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
65. Fabre B, Filipiak K, Zapico JM et al. Progress towards water-soluble triazole-based selective MMP-2 inhibitors. Org. Biomol. Chem. 11, 6623–6641 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
66. Rossello A, Nuti E, Orlandini E et al. New N-arylsulfonyl-Nalkoxyaminoacetohydroxamic acids as selective inhibitors of gelatinase A (MMP-2). Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 12, 2441–2450 (2004).
CASGoogle Scholar
67. Nuti E, Cantelmo AR, Gallo C et al. N-O-isopropyl sulfonamido based hydroxamates as matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors: hit selection and in vivo antiangiogenic activity. J. Med. Chem. 58, 7224–7240 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
68. Rossello A, Nuti E, Carelli P et al. N-i-PropoxyN-biphenylsulfonylaminobutylhydroxamic acids as potent and selective inhibitors of MMP-2 and MT1-MMP. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 15, 1321–1326 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
69. Zhang J, Li X, Jiang Y et al. Design, synthesis and preliminary evaluation of α-sulfonyl γ-(glycinyl-amino)proline peptidomimetics as matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 22, 3055–3064 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
70. Halder AK, Mallick S, Shikha D, Saha A, Saha KD, Jha T. Design of dual MMP-2/HDAC-8 inhibitors by pharmacophore mapping, molecular docking, synthesis and biological activity. RSC Adv. 5, 72373–72386 (2015).
CASGoogle Scholar
71. Park IH, Kim MM. Spermidine inhibits MMP-2 via modulation of histone acetyltransferase and histone deacetylase in HDFs. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 51, 1003–1007 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
72. MacPherson LJ, Bayburt EK, Capparelli MP et al. Discovery of CGS 27023A, a non-peptidic, potent, and orally active stromelysin inhibitor that blocks cartilage degradation in rabbits. J. Med. Chem. 40, 2525–2532 (1997).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
73. Whittaker M, Floyd CD, Brown P, Gearing AJ. Design and therapeutic application of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors. Chem. Rev. 99, 2735–2776 (2007).
Google Scholar
74. Hu PEJ, Van den Steen QX, Sang GO. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors as therapy for inflammatory and vascular diseases.. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 6, 480–498 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
75. Hoekstra R, Eskens FA, Verweij J. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors: current developments and future perspectives. Oncologist 6, 415–427 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
76. Skiles JW, Monovich LG, Jeng AY. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors for treatment of cancer. Ann. Rep. Med. Chem. 35, 167–176 (2000).
CASGoogle Scholar
77. Verma RP, Hansch C. Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs): chemical-biological functions and (Q) SARs. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 15, 2223–2268 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
78. Bourguet E, Sapi J, Emonard H, Hornebeck W. Control of melanoma invasiveness by anticollagenolytic agents: a reappraisal of an old concept. Anticancer Agents Med. Chem. 9, 576–579 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
79. Kaludercic N, Lindsey ML, Tavazzi B, Lazzarino G, Paolocci N. Inhibiting metalloproteases with PD 166793 in heart failure: impact on cardiac remodelling and beyond. Cardiovasc. Ther. 26, 24–37 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
80. Hansch C, Maloney P, Fujita T, Muir R. Correlation of biological activity of phenoxyacetic acids with Hammett substituent constants and partition coefficients. Nature 194, 178–180 (1962).
CASGoogle Scholar
81. Sendecor GW, Cochran WG. Multiple Regression in Statistical Methods. 6th Edition. Oxford & IBH, New Delhi, India (1967).
Google Scholar
82. Yap CW. PaDELe Descriptor: an open source software to calculate molecular descriptors and fingerprints. J. Comput. Chem. 32, 1466–1474 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
83. Mauri A, Consonni V, Pavan M, Todeschini R. Dragon software: an easy approach to molecular descriptor calculations. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 56, 237–248 (2006).
CASGoogle Scholar
84. Ambure P, Aher RB, Gajewicz A, Puzyn T, Roy K. ‘Nano-BRIDGES’ software: open access tools to perform QSAR and nano-QSAR modeling. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 147, 1–13 (2015).
CASGoogle Scholar
85. Golbraikh A, Tropsha A. Beware of q2! J. Mol. Graph. Model. 20, 269–276 (2002).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
86. Todeschini R, Consonni V, Gramatica P. Chemometrics in QSAR. In: Comprehensive Chemometrics (Volume 4). Brown STauler RWalczak R (Eds). Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 129–172 (2009). •• Contains a description of molecular descriptors useful for the QSAR technique.
Google Scholar
87. Tute MS. History and objectives of quantitative drug design. In: Comprehensive Medicinal Chemistry (Volume 4). Hansch CSammes PGTaylor JB (.Eds). Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK, 1–31 (1990).
Google Scholar
88. Cai J, Li C, Liu Z et al. Predicting DPP-IV inhibitors with machine learning approaches. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 31, 393–402 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
89. Berger JO. Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis. Springer Science & Business Media, NY, USA (2013).
Google Scholar
90. BIOVIA Discovery Studio Visualizer (2021). https://www.3dsbiovia.com/products/collaborative-science/biovia-discovery-studio/visualization.html
Google Scholar
91. Chen L, Li Y, Zhao Q, Peng H, Hou T. ADME evaluation in drug discovery. 10. Predictions of p-glycoprotein inhibitors using recursive partitioning and naive Bayesian classification techniques. Mol. Pharm. 8, 889–900 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
92. Sastry M, Lowrie JF, Dixon SL, Sherman W. Large-scale systematic analysis of 2D fingerprint methods and parameters to improve virtual screening enrichments. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 50, 771–784 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
93. Roy K, Kar S, Das RN. Understanding the Basics of QSAR for Applications in Pharmaceutical Sciences and Risk Assessment. Elsevier, USA (2015). •• An important book that holistically covers the topics of QSAR in pharmaceutical sciences.
Google Scholar
94. Galvez-Llompart M, Recio MC, García-Domenech R. Topological virtual screening: a way to find new compounds active in ulcerative colitis by inhibiting NF-kB. Mol. Divers. 15, 917–926 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
95. Kamsri P, Punkvang A, Hannongbua S et al. In silico study directed towards identification of the key structural features of GyrB inhibitors targeting MTB DNA gyrase: HQSAR, CoMSIA and molecular dynamics simulations. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 30, 775–800 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
96. Debnath AK. Pharmacophore mapping of a series of 2,4-diamino-5-deazapteridine inhibitors of mycobacterium avium complex dihydrofolate reductase. J. Med. Chem. 45, 41–53 (2002).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
97. Pourbasheer E, Aalizadeh R, Shokouhi TS, Ganjali MR, Norouzi P, Shadmanesh J. 2D and 3D quantitative structure–activity relationship study of hepatitis C virus NS5B polymerase inhibitors by comparative molecular field analysis and comparative molecular similarity indices analysis methods. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 54, 2902–2914 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
98. Cramer RD, Wendt B. Pushing the boundaries of 3D-QSAR. J. Comput. Aided Drug Des. 21, 23–32 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
99. Cramer RD III, Patterson DE, Bunce JD. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110, 5959–5967 (1988).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
100. Certara. Certara enhances SYBYL-X drug design and discovery software suite. www.certara.com/pressreleases/certara-enhances-sybyl-x-drug-design-and-discovery-software-suite/
Google Scholar
101. Tosco P, Balle T. Open3DQSAR: a new open-source software aimed at high-throughput chemometric analysis of molecular interaction fields. J. Mol. Mod. 17(1), 201–208 (2011). • This article marks the inception of Open3DQSAR, an alternate method to CoMFA and CoMSIA techniques.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
102. Schrödinger. PyMOL. https://pymol.org/2/
Google Scholar
103. Schrödinger. Maestro. www.schrodinger.com/maestro
Google Scholar
104. Senese CL, Hopfinger AJ. Receptor-independent 4D-QSAR analysis of a set of norstatine derived inhibitors of HIV-1 protease. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43, 1297–1307 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
105. Kumar D, Gupta SP. A quantitative structure–activity relationship study on some matrix metalloproteinase and collagenase inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 11, 421–426 (2002).
Google Scholar
106. Gupta SP, Kumar D, Kumaran S. A quantitative structure–activity relationship study of hydroxamate matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors derived from funtionalized 4-aminoprolines. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 11, 1975–1981 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
107. De Melo EB. A QSAR study of matrix metalloproteinases type 2 (MMP-2) inhibitors with cinnamoyl pyrrolidine derivatives. Sci. Pharm. 80, 265–281 (2006).
Google Scholar
108. Fernandez M, Caballro J, Tundidor-Camba A. Linear and nonlinear QSAR study of N-hydroxy-2-[(phenylsulfonyl)amino]acetamide derivatives as matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 14, 4137–4150 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
109. Randic M. Characterization of molecular branching. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 97, 6609–6615 (1975).
CASGoogle Scholar
110. Jamloki A, Karthikeyan C, Moorthy HNNS, Trivedi P. QSAR analysis of some 5-amino-2-mercapto-1,3,4-thiadiazole based inhibitors of matrix metalloproteinases and bacterial collagenase. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 16, 3847–3854 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
111. Kumaran S, Gupta SP. A quantitative structure–activity relationship study on matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors: piperidine sulfonamide aryl hydroxamic acid analogs. J. Enzyme Inhib. Med. Chem. 22, 23–27 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
112. Zhu H, Fang H, Cheng X et al. 3D-QSAR study of pyrrolidine derivatives as matrix metalloproteinase-2 inhibitors. Med. Chem. Res. 18, 683–701 (2009).
CASGoogle Scholar
113. Nicolotti O, Catto M, Giangreco I et al. Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of 5-hydroxy, 5-substitutedpyrimidine-2,4,6-triones as potent inhibitors of gelatinases MMP-2 and MMP-9. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 58, 368–376 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
114. GOLD 5.1, The Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, UK. https://www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk/solutions/csd-discovery/components/gold/
Google Scholar
115. Qiu HY, Wang ZC, Wang PF et al. Design, synthesis, evaluation and 3D-QSAR analysis of benzosulfonamide benzenesulfonates as potent and selective inhibitors of MMP-2. RSC Adv. 4, 39214–39225 (2014).
CASGoogle Scholar
116. Turra KM, Diogo RP, De Moraes Barros S, Pasqualoto KFM. Predicting novel antitumor agents: 3D-pharmacophore mapping of b-N-biaryl ether sulfonamide-based hydroxamates as potentially MMP-2 inhibitors. Mol. Inf. 33, 573–587 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
117. Abbasi M, Fatemeh R, Elyasi MF, Sadeghi-Aliabadi H, Amanlou M. A study on quantitative structure–activity relationship and molecular docking of metalloproteinase inhibitors based on L-tyrosine scaffold. DARU J. Pharm. Sci. 23, 29–39 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
118. Hyper (2019). http://www.hyper.com/
Google Scholar
119. Gaussian 16 (2021). https://gaussian.com/gaussian16/
Google Scholar
120. The Scripps Research Institute. AutoDock. http://autodock.scripps.edu/
Google Scholar
121. Yan XQ, Wang CZ, Li Z et al. Sulfonamide derivatives containing dihydropyrazole moieties selectively and potently inhibit MMP-2/MMP-9: design, synthesis, inhibitory activity and 3D-QSAR analysis. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 25, 4664–4671 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
122. Zheng J, Wen R, Guillaume D. Three-dimensional quantitative structure–activity relationship (CoMFA and CoMSIA) studies on galardin derivatives as gelatinase A (matrix metalloproteinase 2) inhibitors. J. Enz. Inhib. Med. Chem. 23, 445–453 (2017).
Google Scholar

Vol. 13, No. 22

Metrics

Downloaded 244 times

History

Received 14 May 2020

Accepted 8 September 2021

Published online 12 October 2021

Published in print November 2021

Information

Keywords

Acknowledgments

SA Amin sincerely acknowledges the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi, India for awarding the Senior Research Fellowship and Jadavpur University, Kolkata for awarding a Junior Research Fellowship under State Government Fellowship Scheme of Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India. T Jha is thankful for the financial support from University with Potential for Excellence (UPE), Phase II Program of UGC, New Delhi to Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India. The authors also heartily thank S Baidya, S Das, S Banerjee, R Sarkar and S Mondal for their multimodal inputs in creation of this manuscript. The authors thank the support from Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India for providing research facilities.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download

Ligand-based design of anticancer MMP2 inhibitors: a review

Abstract

References