SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

A molecular analysis of substituted phenylethylamines as potential microtubule targeting agents through in silico methods and in vitro microtubule-polymerization activity.

Sci Rep · 2023-09-01

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-41600-9PMID: 37658096

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Natural phenethylamines are trace amine neurotransmitters associated with dopamine transmission and related illnesses such Parkinson's disease, and addiction. Synthetic phenethylamines can have psychoactive and hallucinogenic effects due to their high affinity with the 5-HT2A receptor. Evidence indicates phenethylamines can directly alter the microtubule cytoskeleton being structurally similar to the microtubule destabilizing agent colchicine, however little work has been done on this interaction. As microtubules provide neuron structure, intracellular transport, and influence synaptic plasticity the interaction of phenethylamines with microtubules is important for understanding the potential harms, or potential pharmaceutical use of phenethylamines. We investigated 110 phenethylamines and their interaction with microtubules. Here we performed molecular docking of these compounds at the colchicine binding site and ranked them via binding energy. The top 10% of phenethylamines were further screened based on pharmacokinetic and physicochemical properties derived from SwissADME and LightBBB. Based on these properties 25B-NBF, 25C-NBF, and DMBMPP were tested in in vitro microtubule polymerization assays showing that they alter microtubule polymerization dynamics in a dose dependent manner. As these compounds can rapidly cross the blood brain barrier and directly affect cytoskeletal dynamics, they have the potential to modulate cytoskeletal based neural plasticity. Further investigations into these mechanisms are warranted.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.