Thiazolidin-4-Ones as Potential Antimicrobial Agents: Experimental and In Silico Evaluation
Christophe Tratrat,
Anthi Petrou,
Athina Geronikaki,
Marija Ivanov,
Marina Kostić,
Marina Soković,
Ioannis S. Vizirianakis,
Nikoleta F. Theodoroula,
Michelyne Haroun
Affiliations
Christophe Tratrat
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Clinical Pharmacy, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
Anthi Petrou
Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
Athina Geronikaki
Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
Marija Ivanov
Mycological Laboratory, Department of Plant Physiology, Institute for Biological Research, Siniša Stankovic-National Institute of Republic of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Bulevar despota Stefana 142, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
Marina Kostić
Mycological Laboratory, Department of Plant Physiology, Institute for Biological Research, Siniša Stankovic-National Institute of Republic of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Bulevar despota Stefana 142, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
Marina Soković
Mycological Laboratory, Department of Plant Physiology, Institute for Biological Research, Siniša Stankovic-National Institute of Republic of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Bulevar despota Stefana 142, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
Ioannis S. Vizirianakis
Laboratory of Pharmacology, School of Pharmacy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
Nikoleta F. Theodoroula
Laboratory of Pharmacology, School of Pharmacy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
Michelyne Haroun
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Clinical Pharmacy, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
Herein, we report computational and experimental evaluations of the antimicrobial activity of twenty one 2,3-diaryl-thiazolidin-4-ones. All synthesized compounds exhibited an antibacterial activity against six Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria to different extents. Thus, the MIC was in the range of 0.008–0.24 mg/mL, while the MBC was 0.0016–0.48 mg/mL. The most sensitive bacterium was S. Typhimurium, whereas S. aureus was the most resistant. The best antibacterial activity was observed for compound 5 (MIC at 0.008–0.06 mg/mL). The three most active compounds 5, 8, and 15, as well as compound 6, which were evaluated against three resistant strains, MRSA, P. aeruginosa, and E. coli, were more potent against all bacterial strains used than ampicillin. The antifungal activity of some compounds exceeded or were equipotent with those of the reference antifungal agents bifonazole and ketoconazole. The best activity was expressed by compound 5. All compounds exhibited moderate to good drug-likeness scores ranging from −0.39 to 0.39. The docking studies indicated a probable involvement of E. coli Mur B inhibition in the antibacterial action, while CYP51 inhibition is likely responsible for the antifungal activity of the tested compounds. Finally, the assessment of cellular cytotoxicity of the compounds in normal human MRC-5 cells revealed that the compounds were not toxic.