4.4 Article

New arylidene-linked chromane-2,4-dione analogs as potential leads for diabetic management; syntheses, α-amylase inhibitory, and radical scavenging activities

期刊

CHEMICAL PAPERS
卷 77, 期 5, 页码 2581-2604

出版社

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s11696-022-02648-5

关键词

Coumarin; alpha-Amylase inhibitors; Kinetics; Docking studies; Radical scavengers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A range of new substituted arylidene chromane-2,4-dione derivatives were synthesized and characterized. These derivatives showed significant inhibitory activity against alpha-amylase enzyme and good radical scavenging activity. Docking studies revealed their significant binding interactions with the catalytic site of the enzyme.
A range of substituted arylidene chromane-2,4-dione derivatives 1-30 were synthesized by the condensation reaction between 6-chloro-4-hydroxycoumarin and different benzaldehydes in ethanol. All synthesized derivatives are structurally new and fully characterized by various spectroscopic approaches. Compounds were tested for alpha-amylase inhibitory and radical (DPPH and ABTS) scavenging activities in vitro. When compared to the standard acarbose (IC50 = 12.9 +/- 0.1 mu M), all derivatives showed significant inhibitory activity against the alpha-amylase enzyme, with IC50 values ranging from 7.7 +/-; 0.1 to 60.7 +/- 0.1 mu M. Compounds were also found to be good radical scavengers of DPPH (IC50 = 21.6 +/- 0.2 to 92.1 +/- 0.1 mu M) and ABTS (IC50 = 22.4 +/- 0.1 to 92.7 +/- 0.1 mu M), compared to standard ascorbic acid (DPPH, IC50 = 14.4 +/- 0.1; ABTS, IC50 = 14.9 & PLUSMN; 0.1 mu M). Kinetic studies performed on most active molecules revealed competitive-type inhibition mechanisms. The structure-activity relationship (SAR) has been studied to determine the effect of different substitutions of compounds on inhibitory potential. Docking studies of these synthesized coumarin derivatives revealed significant binding interactions with the alpha-amylase enzyme's catalytic site.

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