4.7 Article

Synthesis and biological evaluation of new naphthalene substituted thiosemicarbazone derivatives as potent antifungal and anticancer agents

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 108, Issue -, Pages 406-414

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2015.11.041

Keywords

Thiosemicarbazone; Naphthalene; Fluorine; Antifungal activity; Cytotoxicity; Genotoxicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

New thiosemicarbazone derivatives (1-10) were obtained via the reaction of 4-(naphthalen-1-yl)thiosemicarbazide with fluoro-substituted aromatic aldehydes. The synthesized compounds were evaluated for their in vitro antifungal effects against pathogenic yeasts and molds using broth microdilution assay. Ames and umuC assays were carried out to determine the genotoxicity of the most effective antifungal derivatives. Furthermore, all compounds were evaluated for their cytotoxic effects on A549 human lung adenocarcinoma and NIH/3T3 mouse embryonic fibroblast cell lines using KIT test. Among these derivatives, 4-(naphthalen-1-yl)-1-(2,3-difluorobenzylidene)thiosemicarbazide (1) and 4-(naphthalen-1-yl)-1-(2,5-difluorobenzylidene)thiosemicarbazide (3) can be identified as the most promising anti fungal derivatives due to their notable inhibitory effects on Candida species and no cytotoxicity against NIH/3T3 mouse embryonic fibroblast cell line. According to Ames and umuC assays, compounds 1 and 3 were classified as non-mutagenic compounds. On the other hand, 4-(naphthalen-1-yI)-1-(2,4-difluorobenzylidene)thiosemicarbazide (2) can be considered as the most promising anticancer agent against A549 cell line owing to its notable inhibitory effect on A549 cells with an IC50 value of 31.25 mu g/mL when compared with cisplatin (IC50 = 16.28 mu g/mL) and no cytotoxicity against NIH/3T3 cells. (C) 2015 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available