4.4 Article

Uracil-coumarin based hybrid molecules as potent anti-cancer and anti-bacterial agents

期刊

JOURNAL OF SAUDI CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 24, 期 2, 页码 251-266

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jscs.2019.12.001

关键词

Uracil; Coumarin; Hybrids; Anti-cancer; Anti-bacterial; Cell cycle analysis; Molecular docking

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the current report, we have rationally designed a series of uracil-coumarin based bifunctional molecular hybrids roped by 1,2,3-triazole moiety. The designed compounds were synthesized and tested against a panel of six human cancer cell lines namely Colo-205, MCF-7, A-549, PA-1, PC-3 and Hela cells by Sulforhodamine B assay. The results indicated that the hybrid molecules can specifically inhibit the MCF-7 cancer cell proliferation amongst which A-2 was found to be most potent hybrid (GI(50) = 1.55 mu M) with fluorine atom as R with two carbon chain length between triazole and coumarin moieties. Cell cycle analysis revealed that A-2 significantly arrest the G2/M phase to inhibit proliferation of MCF-7 cells. Due to its mitotic arrest, A-2 was further analyzed to predict its various binding interactions within the active site of tubulin, which revealed its best binding pattern within the vinblastine binding site. In addition to this, antibacterial potential of all the synthetics was also evaluated which resulted in two hit lead molecules A-2 (MIC = 11. 7 mu g/mL) and A-3 (MIC = 7.23 mu g/mL) that can significantly inhibit the bacterial strain Staphylococcus aureus comparable to that of standard drug levofloxacin (MIC = 3.12 mu g/mL). Binding interactions within the active site of dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) were also streamlined by using molecular docking studies. Overall studies revealed some interesting features of synthetics to be active which stated that, the compounds with electronegative atom on R and compounds with two carbon chain length between triazole and coumarin showed best results. (C) 2019 King Saud University. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.4
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