4.7 Article

Synthesis and Biological Activity of Triterpene-Coumarin Conjugates

期刊

JOURNAL OF NATURAL PRODUCTS
卷 84, 期 5, 页码 1587-1597

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.1c00128

关键词

-

资金

  1. Consejeria de Economia, Conocimiento, Empresas y Universidad. Junta de Andalucia [B1-FQM-217-UGR18, B1-BIO-281-UGR18]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A set of 12 maslinic acid-coumarin conjugates were synthesized, with one conjugate showing the most potent anticancer effects while maintaining high cell viability for non-tumor cells. Four conjugates demonstrated apoptotic effects in cancer cells, and most compounds caused cell-cycle arrest in the G0/G1 phase in all tested cancer cell lines.
A set of 12 maslinic acid-coumarin conjugates was synthesized, with 9 being maslinic acid-diamine-coumarin conjugates at the C-28 carboxylic acid group of triterpene acid and the other three being maslinic acid-coumarin conjugates at C-2/C-3 and/or C-28 of the triterpene skeleton. The cytotoxic effects of these 12 triterpene conjugates were evaluated in three cancer cell lines (B16-F10, HT29, and Hep G2) and compared, respectively, with three nontumor cell lines from the same or similar tissue (HPF, IEC-18, and WRL68). The most potent cytotoxic results were achieved by a conjugate with two molecules of coumarin-3-carboxylic acid coupled through the C-2 and C-3 hydroxy groups of maslinic acid. This conjugate showed submicromolar IC50 values in two of the three cancer cell lines tested (0.6, 1.1, and 0.9 mu M), being between 110- and 30-fold more effective than its corresponding precursor. Furthermore, this conjugate (10) showed percentages of cell viability for the three nontumor lines of 90%. Four maslinic acid-coumarin conjugates displayed apoptotic effects in the treated cells, with total apoptosis rates of between 40 and 85%, relative to the control. Almost all the compounds assayed caused cell-cycle arrest in all cancer cell lines, increasing the number of these cells in the G0/G1 phase.

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