3.8 Article

Antibacteria, Antiurease, and Antiproliferative Abruquinones from Abrus precatorius Roots

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/22311866.2022.2069154

关键词

Abrus precatorius; Abruquinone; Antibacterial; Antiurease; Breast cancer

资金

  1. World Academy of Sciences (TWAS), Trieste, Italy
  2. Research Institute of Chemistry, International Center for Chemical and Biological Sciences (ICCBS)
  3. University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study isolated four abruquinones from Abrus precatorius and evaluated their therapeutic effects. The compounds demonstrated significant antibacterial, antiurease, and anticancer activities, suggesting their potential as candidates for drug development.
Phytochemical studies of methanol soluble fractions of Abrus precatorius Linn (Fabaceae) led to the isolation of four abruquinones (abruquinones M, A, E, and B). Structures of the compounds were elucidated using spectroscopic analyses - 1D, 2D NMR, HRESI-MS. Evaluation of the therapeutic effects of A. precatorius fractions showed significant (p < 0.05) antibacterial and antiurease activities. Further therapeutic evaluation of the compounds showed that abruquinones M, A, E, and B demonstrated antibacterial activities by inhibiting significantly (p < 0.05) the growth of multidrug resistant S. aureus (MIC values ranged from 20 - 30 mu g/mL) (mu M) via induction of morphological damages with concomitant membrane segmentation. Abruquinones A and B showed significant (p < 0.05) urease inhibiting activity (IC50 values 35.2 and 37.7 mu M, respectively), docked tightly to the side chains of urease enzyme active site via pi-cation interactions, as well as showed cytotoxicity against AU565 and MDA-MB231 breast cancer cells (IC50 values 23.13 and 9.05 mu M, respectively). These findings suggest abruquinones (isoflavanquinones) from A. precatorius roots as viable candidates for further mechanistic studies on possible antibacterial, antiurease, and anticancer drug development.

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

3.8
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