4.6 Article

Screening a Natural Product-Based Library against Kinetoplastid Parasites

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 22, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/molecules22101715

关键词

natural products; kinetoplastids; neglected tropical disease; drug discovery; leishmaniasis; human African trypanosomiasis; Chagas disease

资金

  1. Griffith University International Postgraduate Research Scholarship (GUIPRS)
  2. Griffith University Postgraduate Research Scholarship (GUPRS)
  3. NHMRC [APP1067728]
  4. ARC [LP140100560]
  5. Australian Research Council [LP140100560] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Kinetoplastid parasites cause vector-borne parasitic diseases including leishmaniasis, human African trypanosomiasis (HAT) and Chagas disease. These Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) impact on some of the world's lowest socioeconomic communities. Current treatments for these diseases cause severe toxicity and have limited efficacy, highlighting the need to identify new treatments. In this study, the Davis open access natural product-based library was screened against kinetoplastids (Leishmania donovani DD8, Trypanosoma brucei brucei and Trypanosoma cruzi) using phenotypic assays. The aim of this study was to identify hit compounds, with a focus on improved efficacy, selectivity and potential to target several kinetoplastid parasites. The IC50 values of the natural products were obtained for L. donovani DD8, T. b. brucei and T. cruzi in addition to cytotoxicity against the mammalian cell lines, HEK-293, 3T3 and THP-1 cell lines were determined to ascertain parasite selectivity. Thirty-one compounds were identified with IC50 values of <= 10 mu M against the kinetoplastid parasites tested. Lissoclinotoxin E (1) was the only compound identified with activity across all three investigated parasites, exhibiting IC50 values <5 mu M. In this study, natural products with the potential to be new chemical starting points for drug discovery efforts for kinetoplastid diseases were identified.

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

4.6
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