Cited by 115Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsTea Polyphenols and EffectsGinkgo biloba and Cashew Applications

Green Tea Extracts EGCG and EGC Display Distinct Mechanisms in Disrupting Aβ42 Protofibril

Zhan, Chendi, Chen, Yujie, Tang, Yiming, Wei, Guanghong·2020·ACS Chemical Neuroscience

Abstract

The amyloid beta (Aβ) fibrillar aggregate is the hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Disassembling preformed fibril or inhibiting Aβ aggregation is considered as a therapeutic strategy for AD. Increasing evidence shows that green tea extracts, epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG, containing an extra gallic acid ester group compared to EGC) and epigallocatechin (EGC), can disassociate Aβ fibrils and attenuate Aβ toxicity. However, the underlying molecular mechanism is poorly understood. Herein, we performed microsecond all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to investigate the influences of EGCG/EGC on the newly cryo-EM resolved LS-shaped Aβ 42 protofibrils and their detailed interactions. MD simulations demonstrate that both EGCG and EGC can disrupt Aβ 42 protofibril and EGCG displays a higher disruptive capacity than EGC. EGCG alters the L-shape of Aβ 42 protofibril by breaking the hydrogen bond between H6 and E11 through π–π interactions with residues H14/Y10 and hydrogen-bonding interactions with E11, while EGC remodels the L-shape by inserting into the hydrophobic core formed by A2, F4, L34, and V36 and via aromatics interaction with H6/Y10. EGCG disrupts the salt bridges between the K28 side chain and A42 COO – through hydrogen-bonding interaction with A42 and cation−π interaction between its gallic acid ester group and K28, while EGC damages the salt bridges through hydrophobic interactions with V39 and I41 as well as with I32, M35, and V40 located in the C-terminal hydrophobic core. This study demonstrates the pivotal role of the gallic acid ester group of EGCG in disrupting Aβ 42 protofibril and provides atomic-level insights into the distinct mechanism by which EGCG and EGC disrupt Aβ protofibril, which could be useful for designing amyloid inhibitors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acschemneuro.0c00277

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhan, C., Chen, Y., Tang, Y., & Wei, G.
Affiliations
Fudan University (CN)
Corresponding author
Wei, Guanghong
Venue
ACS Chemical Neuroscience
Published
2020-05-22
Volume
11
Issue
12
Pages
1841-1851
ISSN
1948-7193 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3027841912
Cited by
115
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 3
FWCI
10.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • ACS Chemical Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China (2016YFA0501702)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (11674065)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Tea Polyphenols and Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Ginkgo biloba and Cashew Applications
Keywords
epigallocatechin gallate, epigallocatechin, amyloid-beta 42, Alzheimer's disease, green tea extract, gallic acid esters, salt bridges, hydrogen bonding, π-π stacking, cation-π interactions, hydrophobic core, amyloid inhibitors, molecular dynamics simulation
MeSH terms
Catechin, Peptide Fragments, Plant Extracts, Tea, Amyloid beta-Peptides

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review