Search

Poor mood, lack of pleasure, reduced focus, remorse, unpleasant thoughts, and sleep difficulties are all symptoms of depression. The only approved treatment for children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD) is fluoxetine hydrochloride (FXN), a serotonin selective reuptake inhibitor antidepressant. MDD is the most common cause of disability worldwide. In the present research, picric acid (PA); dinitrobenzene; p-nitro benzoic acid; 2,6-dichloroquinone-4-chloroimide; 2,6-dibromoquinone-4-chloroimide; and 7,7′,8,8′-tetracyanoquinodimethane were used to make 1:1 FXN charge-transfer compounds in solid and liquid forms. The isolated complexes were then characterized by elemental analysis, conductivity, infrared, Raman, and 1H-NMR spectra, thermogravimetric analysis, scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray powder diffraction. Additionally, a molecular docking investigation was conducted on the donor moiety using FXN alone and the resulting charge transfer complex [(FXN)(PA)] as an acceptor to examine the interactions against two protein receptors (serotonin or dopamine). Interestingly, the [(FXN)(PA)] complex binds to both serotonin and dopamine more effectively than the FXN drug alone. Furthermore, [(FXN)(PA)]–serotonin had a greater binding energy than [FXN]–serotonin. Theoretical data were also generated by density functional theory simulations, which aided the molecular geometry investigation and could be beneficial to researchers in the future.

The charge transfer interactions between the seproxetine (SRX) donor and π-electron acceptors [picric acid (PA), dinitrobenzene (DNB), p-nitrobenzoic acid (p-NBA), 2,6-dichloroquinone-4-chloroimide (DCQ), 2,6-dibromoquinone-4-chloroimide (DBQ), and 7,7′,8,8′-tetracyanoquinodi methane (TCNQ)] were studied in a liquid medium, and the solid form was isolated and characterized. The spectrophotometric analysis confirmed that the charge–transfer interactions between the electrons of the donor and acceptors were 1:1 (SRX: π-acceptor). To study the comparative interactions between SRX and the other π-electron acceptors, molecular docking calculations were performed between SRX and the charge transfer (CT) complexes against three receptors (serotonin, dopamine, and TrkB kinase receptor). According to molecular docking, the CT complex [(SRX)(TCNQ)] binds with all three receptors more efficiently than SRX alone, and [(SRX)(TCNQ)]-dopamine (CTcD) has the highest binding energy value. The results of AutoDock Vina revealed that the molecular dynamics simulation of the 100 ns run revealed that both the SRX-dopamine and CTcD complexes had a stable conformation; however, the CTcD complex was more stable. The optimized structure of the CT complexes was obtained using density functional theory (B-3LYP/6-311G++) and was compared.

Haloperidol (HPL) is a typical antipsychotic drug used to treat acute psychotic conditions, delirium, and schizophrenia. Solid charge transfer (CT) products of HPL with 7,7,8,8-tetracyanoquinodimethane (TCNQ) and picric acid (PA) have not been reported till date. Therefore, we conducted this study to investigate the donor–acceptor CT interactions between HPL (donor) and TCNQ and PA (π-acceptors) in liquid and solid states. The complete spectroscopic and analytical analyses deduced that the stoichiometry of these synthesized complexes was 1:1 molar ratio. Molecular docking calculations were performed for HPL as a donor and the resulting CT complexes with TCNQ and PA as acceptors with two protein receptors, serotonin and dopamine, to study the comparative interactions among them, as they are important neurotransmitters that play a large role in mental health. A molecular dynamics simulation was ran for 100 ns with the output from AutoDock Vina to refine docking results and better examine the molecular processes of receptor–ligand interactions. When compared to the reactant donor, the CT complex [(HPL)(TCNQ)] interacted with serotonin and dopamine more efficiently than HPL only. CT complex [(HPL)(TCNQ)] with dopamine (CTtD) showed the greatest binding energy value among all. Additionally, CTtD complex established more a stable interaction with dopamine than HPL–dopamine.

The aim of this study was to assess the utility of inexpensive techniques in evaluating the interactions of risperidone (Ris) with different traditional π-acceptors, with subsequent application of the findings into a Ris pharmaceutical formulation with improved therapeutic properties. Molecular docking calculations were performed using Ris and its different charge-transfer complexes (CT) with picric acid (PA), 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyanop-benzoquinon (DDQ), tetracyanoquinodimethane (TCNQ), tetracyano ethylene (TCNE), tetrabromo-pquinon (BL), and tetrachloro-p-quinon (CL), as donors, and three receptors (serotonin, dopamine, and adrenergic) as acceptors to study the comparative interactions among them. To refine the docking results and further investigate the molecular processes of receptor–ligand interactions, a molecular dynamics simulation was run with output obtained from AutoDock Vina. Among all investigated complexes, the [(Ris) (PA)]-serotonin (CTcS) complex showed the highest binding energy. Molecular dynamics simulation of the 100 ns run revealed that both the Ris-serotonin (RisS) and CTcS complexes had a stable conformation; however, the CTcS complex was more stable.