{"title":"Tetrazolo[1,5-c]quinazolines as anti-Klebsiella pneumoniae scaffolds: Bridging in vitro activity and multi-target docking prediction.","authors":"Lyudmyla Antypenko, Oleksii Antypenko, Lyudmyla Lyashko, Alina Fominichenko, Valentyna Kozyrieva, Serhii Kovalenko, Mieko Arisawa","doi":"10.1016/j.bioorg.2026.110155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The emergence of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) represents a significant challenge in antimicrobial chemotherapy, with mortality rates reaching 50% in bloodstream infections. Building on prior disk diffusion evidence of K. pneumoniae inhibition by N-acetamide tetrazoloquinazoline compounds and a cross-series analysis of >60 published derivatives across seven structural subclasses, this study presents the first MIC-quantified antibacterial evaluation against a clinically isolated, multidrug-resistant K. pneumoniae strain. Twenty-one synthetic tetrazolo[1,5-c]quinazoline derivatives were evaluated, with molecular docking performed against five bacterial enzyme targets: FabI (fatty acid synthesis), MurA (cell wall biosynthesis), DNA gyrase (DNA replication), KPC-2 (β-lactam resistance), and LpxC (lipopolysaccharide synthesis). Two compounds demonstrated antibacterial activity, both with MIC values of 64 mg/L: the thiol derivative 63sh (315 μM) and 2-chlorobenzyl acetamide 102 (166 μM). No inhibition was observed against Escherichia coli or Staphylococcus aureus at concentrations up to 512 mg/L. Computational docking against five bacterial enzyme targets revealed FabI enoyl-ACP reductase as the most favorable binding target. Under conventional medicinal chemistry criteria, MIC values of 64 mg/L correspond to hit-level rather than lead-level potency; substantial structural optimization is required before preclinical consideration. In silico ADMET profiling (admetSAR3.0) indicates that the computationally favored but experimentally inactive/weak compounds (96, 97, 109, 112) possess lower predicted membrane permeability (Caco-2: -5.07 to -5.41 vs. -4.36 to -4.98 log nm/s) and higher P-glycoprotein inhibition probabilities (0.741-0.795), consistent with impaired membrane permeation as the primary mechanistic explanation for this discordance.</p>","PeriodicalId":257,"journal":{"name":"Bioorganic Chemistry","volume":"180 ","pages":"110155"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioorganic Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioorg.2026.110155","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The emergence of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) represents a significant challenge in antimicrobial chemotherapy, with mortality rates reaching 50% in bloodstream infections. Building on prior disk diffusion evidence of K. pneumoniae inhibition by N-acetamide tetrazoloquinazoline compounds and a cross-series analysis of >60 published derivatives across seven structural subclasses, this study presents the first MIC-quantified antibacterial evaluation against a clinically isolated, multidrug-resistant K. pneumoniae strain. Twenty-one synthetic tetrazolo[1,5-c]quinazoline derivatives were evaluated, with molecular docking performed against five bacterial enzyme targets: FabI (fatty acid synthesis), MurA (cell wall biosynthesis), DNA gyrase (DNA replication), KPC-2 (β-lactam resistance), and LpxC (lipopolysaccharide synthesis). Two compounds demonstrated antibacterial activity, both with MIC values of 64 mg/L: the thiol derivative 63sh (315 μM) and 2-chlorobenzyl acetamide 102 (166 μM). No inhibition was observed against Escherichia coli or Staphylococcus aureus at concentrations up to 512 mg/L. Computational docking against five bacterial enzyme targets revealed FabI enoyl-ACP reductase as the most favorable binding target. Under conventional medicinal chemistry criteria, MIC values of 64 mg/L correspond to hit-level rather than lead-level potency; substantial structural optimization is required before preclinical consideration. In silico ADMET profiling (admetSAR3.0) indicates that the computationally favored but experimentally inactive/weak compounds (96, 97, 109, 112) possess lower predicted membrane permeability (Caco-2: -5.07 to -5.41 vs. -4.36 to -4.98 log nm/s) and higher P-glycoprotein inhibition probabilities (0.741-0.795), consistent with impaired membrane permeation as the primary mechanistic explanation for this discordance.
期刊介绍:
Bioorganic Chemistry publishes research that addresses biological questions at the molecular level, using organic chemistry and principles of physical organic chemistry. The scope of the journal covers a range of topics at the organic chemistry-biology interface, including: enzyme catalysis, biotransformation and enzyme inhibition; nucleic acids chemistry; medicinal chemistry; natural product chemistry, natural product synthesis and natural product biosynthesis; antimicrobial agents; lipid and peptide chemistry; biophysical chemistry; biological probes; bio-orthogonal chemistry and biomimetic chemistry.
For manuscripts dealing with synthetic bioactive compounds, the Journal requires that the molecular target of the compounds described must be known, and must be demonstrated experimentally in the manuscript. For studies involving natural products, if the molecular target is unknown, some data beyond simple cell-based toxicity studies to provide insight into the mechanism of action is required. Studies supported by molecular docking are welcome, but must be supported by experimental data. The Journal does not consider manuscripts that are purely theoretical or computational in nature.
The Journal publishes regular articles, short communications and reviews. Reviews are normally invited by Editors or Editorial Board members. Authors of unsolicited reviews should first contact an Editor or Editorial Board member to determine whether the proposed article is within the scope of the Journal.