4.7 Article

Design and synthesis of mono-and di-pyrazolyl-s-triazine derivatives, their anticancer profile in human cancer cell lines, and in vivo toxicity in zebrafish embryos

期刊

BIOORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 87, 期 -, 页码 457-464

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2019.03.063

关键词

s-Triazine; Pyrazole; Anticancer activity; Zebrafish embryos

资金

  1. International Scientific Partnership Program ISPP at King Saud University (Saudi Arabia) [0061]
  2. National Research Foundation (NRF) (Blue Sky's Research Programme) [110960]
  3. University of KwaZuluNatal (South Africa)
  4. Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities [CTQ2015-67870-P]
  5. Generalitat de Catalunya (Spain) [2017 SGR 1439]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

s-Triazine is considered a privileged structure, as it is found in several FDA-approved drugs. In the framework of our ongoing medicinal chemistry project based on the use of s-triazine as a scaffold, we synthesized a series of mono- and di-pyrazolyl-s-triazine derivatives and tested them against four human cancer cell lines, namely Human breast carcinoma (MCF 7 and MDA-MB-231), hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2), colorectal carcinoma (LoVo), and leukemia (K562). The cell viability assay revealed that most of the s-triazine compounds induced cytotoxicity in all four types of human cancer cell lines, however, compounds 4a, and 6g, both of them have a piperidine moiety in their structure were most effective. These two compounds affected the cell viability of cancer cells, with IC50 values within the range between 5 to 9 mu M. The cell cycle analysis showed that 4a and 6g induced S and G2/M phase cell cycle arrest in K562 cells. This could be the mechanism by which these molecules induced cytotoxicity in tested cancer cells. The prepared compounds were tested in zebrafish embryos to evaluate in vivo and developmental toxicity of the pyrazolyl-s-triazine derivatives in animals. None of the derivatives were lethal in the concentration range tested.

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