Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is one of the main human dementias around the world which is constantly increasing every year due to several factors (age, genetics, environment, etc.) and there are no prevention or treatment options to cure it. AD is characterized by memory loss associated with oxidative stress (OS) in brain cells (neurons, astrocytes, microglia, etc.). OS can be produced by amyloid beta (Aβ) protein aggregation and its interaction with metals, mitochondrial damage and alterations between antioxidants and oxidant enzymes such as nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) oxidase. NADPH oxidase produces reactive oxygen species (ROS) and it is overexpressed in AD, producing large amounts of superoxide anions and hydrogen peroxide which damage brain cells and the vasculature. In addition, it has been reported that NADPH oxidase causes an imbalance of pH which could also influence in the amyloid beta (Aβ) production. Therefore, NADPH oxidase had been proposed as a therapeutic target in AD. However, there are no drugs for AD treatment such as an NADPH oxidase inhibitor despite great efforts made to stabilize the ROS production using antioxidant molecules. So, in this work, we will focus our attention on NADPH oxidase (NOX2 and NOX4) in AD as well as in AD models and later discuss the use of NADPH oxidase inhibitor compounds in AD.

The amyloid-β 1-42 (Aβ1-42) peptide is produced by proteolytic cleavage of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) by sequential reactions that are catalyzed by γ and β secretases. Aβ1-42, together with the Tau protein are two principal hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) that are related to disease genesis and progression. Aβ1-42 possesses a higher aggregation propensity, and it is able to form fibrils via nucleated fibril formation. To date, there are compounds available that prevent Aβ1-42 aggregation, but none have been successful in clinical trials, possibly because the Aβ1-42 structure and aggregation mechanisms are not thoroughly understood. New molecules have been designed, employing knowledge of the Aβ1-42 structure and are based on preventing or breaking the ionic interactions that have been proposed for formation of the Aβ1-42 fibril U-shaped structure. Recently, a new Aβ1-42 fibril S-shaped structure was reported that, together with its aggregation and catalytic properties, could be helpful in the design of new inhibitor molecules. Therefore, in silico and in vitro methods have been employed to analyze the Aβ1-42 fibril S-shaped structure and its aggregation to obtain more accurate Aβ1-42 oligomerization data for the design and evaluation of new molecules that can prevent the fibrillation process.

N-(2′-hydroxyphenyl)-2-propylpentanamide (HO-AAVPA) is a VPA derivative designed to be a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor. HO-AAVPA has better antiproliferative effect than VPA in cancer cell lines. Therefore, in this work, the inhibitory effect of HO-AAVPA on HDAC1, HDAC6, and HDAC8 was determined by in silico and in vitro enzymatic assay. Furthermore, its antiproliferative effect on the cervical cancer cell line (SiHa) and the translocation of HMGB1 and ROS production were evaluated. The results showed that HO-AAVPA inhibits HDAC1, which could be related with HMGB1 translocation from the nucleus to the cytoplasm due to HDAC1 being involved in the deacetylation of HMGB1. Furthermore, an increase in ROS production was observed after the treatment with HO-AAVPA, which also could contribute to HMGB1 translocation. Therefore, the results suggest that one of the possible antiproliferative mechanisms of HO-AAVPA is by HDAC1 inhibition which entails HMGB1 translocation and ROS increased levels that could trigger the cell apoptosis.

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder. Inhibiting acetylcholinesterase (AChE), amyloid beta (Aβ_1-42) aggregation and avoiding the oxidative stress could prevent the progression of AD. Benzothiazole groups have shown neuroprotective activity whereas isothioureas groups act as AChE inhibitors and antioxidants. Therefore, 22 benzothiazole-isothiourea derivatives (3a–v) were evaluated by docking simulations as inhibitors of AChE and Aβ_1-42 aggregation. In silico studies showed that 3f, 3r and 3t had a delta G (ΔG) value better than curcumin and galantamine on Aβ_1-42 and AChE, respectively. The physicochemical and pharmacokinetics predictions showed that only 3t does not violate Lipinski’s rule of five, though it has moderated cytotoxicity activity. Then, 3f, 3r and 3t were synthetized and chemically characterized for their in vitro evaluation including their antioxidant activity and their cytotoxicity in PC12 cells. 3r was able to inhibit AChE, avoid Aβ_1-42 aggregation and exhibit antioxidant activity; nevertheless, it showed cytotoxic against PC12 cells. Compound 3t showed the best anti-Aβ_1-42 aggregation and inhibitory AChE activity and, despite that predictor, showed that it could be cytotoxic; in vitro with PC12 cell was negative. Therefore, 3t could be employed as a scaffold to develop new molecules with multitarget activity for AD and, due to physicochemical and pharmacokinetics predictions, it could be administered in vivo using liposomes due to is not able to cross the BBB.

Despite the great effort that has gone into developing new molecules as multitarget compounds to treat Alzheimer’s disease (AD), none of these have been approved to treat this disease. Therefore, it will be interesting to determine whether benzazoles such as benzimidazole, benzoxazole, and benzothiazole, employed as pharmacophores, could act as multitarget drugs. AD is a multifactorial disease in which several pharmacological targets have been identified—some are involved with amyloid beta (Aβ) production, such as beta secretase (BACE1) and beta amyloid aggregation, while others are involved with the cholinergic system as acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butirylcholinesterase (BChE) and nicotinic and muscarinic receptors, as well as the hyperphosphorylation of microtubule-associated protein (tau). In this review, we describe the in silico and in vitro evaluation of benzazoles on three important targets in AD: AChE, BACE1, and Aβ. Benzothiazoles and benzimidazoles could be the best benzazoles to act as multitarget drugs for AD because they have been widely evaluated as AChE inhibitors, forming π–π interactions with W286, W86, Y72, and F338, as well as in the AChE gorge and catalytic site. In addition, the sulfur atom from benzothiazol interacts with S286 and the aromatic ring from W84, with these compounds having an IC₅₀ value in the μM range. Also, benzimidazoles and benzothiazoles can inhibit Aβ aggregation. However, even though benzazoles have not been widely evaluated on BACE1, benzimidazoles evaluated in vitro showed an IC₅₀ value in the nM range. Therefore, important chemical modifications could be considered to improve multitarget benzazoles’ activity, such as substitutions in the aromatic ring with electron withdrawal at position five, or a linker 3 or 4 carbons in length, which would allow for better interaction with targets.

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) has broad biological functions when its ligands activate it; the non-binding interactions with AhR have not been fully elucidated due to the absence of a complete tridimensional (3D) structure. Therefore, utilization of the whole 3D structure from Homo sapiens AhR by in silico studies will allow us to better study and analyze the binding mode of its full and partial agonists, and antagonists, as well as its interaction with the HSP90 chaperone. The 3D AhR structure was obtained from I-TASSER and subjected to molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to obtain different structural conformations and determine the most populated AhR conformer by clustering analyses. The AhR-3D structures selected from MD simulations and those from clustering analyses were used to achieve docking studies with some of its ligands and protein–protein docking with HSP90. Once the AhR-3D structure was built, its Ramachandran maps and energy showed a well-qualified 3D model. MD simulations showed that the per-Arnt-Sim homology (PAS) PAS A, PAS B, and Q domains underwent conformational changes, identifying the conformation when agonists were binding also, and HSP90 was binding near the PAS A, PAS B, and Q domains. However, when antagonists are binding, HSP90 does not bind near the PAS A, PAS B, and Q domains. These studies show that the complex agonist-AhR-HSP90 can be formed, but this complex is not formed when an antagonist is binding. Knowing the conformations when the ligands bind to AHR and the behavior of HSP90 allows for an understanding of its activity. Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma