4.7 Article

11a-N-tosyl-5-carbapterocarpans: Synthesis, antineoplastic evaluation and in silico prediction of ADMETox properties

期刊

BIOORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 80, 期 -, 页码 585-590

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2018.07.004

关键词

Cancer; Multidrug resistant phenotype (MDR); N-tosyl-carbapterocarpans; Molecular descriptors; Druglikenes

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  2. Instituto Nacional de Ciencia e Tecnologia (INCT) para o Controle do Cancer
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)
  4. Fundacao Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

11a-N-tosyl-5-carbapterocarpans (5a-c and 6a-c), 9-N-tosyl-4,4a,9,9a-tetrahydro-3H-carbazole (7), 11a-N-tosyl-5-carbapterocarpen (8) analogues of LQB-223 (4a), were synthesized through palladium catalyzed azaarylation of substituted dihydronaphtalenes (14a-c) and cyclohexadiene (15), respectively, with N-tosyl-oiodoaniline (11). In order to understand the role of the N-tosyl moiety for the pharmacological activity, the azacarbapterocarpen (9) was also synthesized by Fischer indol reaction. The structural requirements at the A and D-rings for the antineoplastic activity toward human leukemias and breast cancer cells were evaluated as well. Substitutions on the A-ring of 4a and analogues alter the effect on different breast cancer subtypes. On the other hand, A-ring is not essential for antileukemic activity since compound 7, which does not contain the A-ring, showed efficacy with high selectivity indices for drug-resistant leukemias. On the other hand, substitutions on the D-ring of 4a for fluorine or iodine did not improve the antileukemic activity. In silico studies concerning Lipinski's rule of five, ADMET properties and drug scores of those compounds were performed, indicating good physicochemical properties for all compounds, in special for compound 7.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据