4.5 Article

Synthesis and biological evaluation of indole-2-carbohydrazides and thiazolidinyl-indole-2-carboxamides as potent tubulin polymerization inhibitors

期刊

COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
卷 80, 期 -, 页码 512-523

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2019.05.002

关键词

Anticancer activity; Indole-2-carbohydrazides; Thiazolidinyl-indole; Tubulin polymerization; Molecular docking

资金

  1. Istanbul University Scientific Research Projects Unit [T-721/30062005]
  2. Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [115S208]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new series of N'-(substituted phenyl)-5-chloro/iodo-3-phenyl-1H-indole-2-carbohydrazide (5, 6) and N-[2-(substituted phenyl)-4-oxo-1,3-thiazolidin-3-yl]-5-iodo/chloro-3-phenyl-1H-indole-2-carboxamide (7, 8) derivatives were synthesized and evaluated for their anticancer properties. Compounds 5a and 6b, selected as prototypes by the National Cancer Institute for screening against the full panel of 60 human tumor cell lines at a minimum of five concentrations at 10-fold dilutions, demonstrated remarkable antiproliferative activity against leukemia, non-small cell lung cancer, colon cancer, central nervous system (CNS) cancer, melanoma, ovarian cancer, renal cancer, and breast cancer (MCF-7) cell lines with GI(50) values < 0.4 mu M. A subset of the compounds was then tested for their potential to inhibit tubulin polymerization. Compounds 6f and 6g showed significant cytotoxicity at the nM level on MCF-7 cells and exhibited significant inhibitory activity on tubulin assembly and colchicine binding at about the same level as combretastatin A-4. Finally, docking calculations were performed to identify the binding mode of these compounds. Group 5 and 6 compounds interacted with the colchicine binding site through hydrophobic interactions similar to those of colchicine. These compounds with antiproliferative activity at high nanomolar concentration can serve as scaffolds for the design of novel microtubule targeting agents.

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

4.5
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