4.0 Article

Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of antimalarial activity of new derivatives of 2,4,6-s-triazine

期刊

CHEMISTRY CENTRAL JOURNAL
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s13065-017-0362-5

关键词

Antimalarial; DHFR inhibitors; Molecular docking; s-Triazine; 3D7 strain

资金

  1. UGC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) is an important enzyme for de novo synthesis of nucleotides in Plasmodium falciparum and it is essential for cell proliferation. DHFR is a well known antimalarial target for drugs like cycloguanil and pyrimethamine which target its inhibition for their pharmacological actions. However, the clinical efficacies of these antimalarial drugs have been compromising due to multiple mutations occurring in DHFR that lead to drug resistance. In this background, we have designed 22 s-triazine compounds using the best five parameters based 3D-QSAR model built by using genetic function approximation. In-silico designed compounds were further filtered to 6 compounds based upon their ADME properties, docking studies and predicted minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC). Out of 6 compounds, 3 compounds were synthesized in good yield over 95% and characterized using IR, (HNMR)-H-1, (CNMR)-C-13 and mass spectroscopic techniques. Parasitemia inhibition assay was used to evaluate the antimalarial activity of s-triazine compounds against 3D7 strain of P. falciparum. All the three compounds (7, 13 and 18) showed 30 times higher potency than cycloguanil (standard drug). It was observed that compound 18 was the most active while the compound 13 was the least active. On the closer inspection of physicochemical properties and SAR, it was observed that the presence of electron donating groups, number of hydrogen bond formation, lipophilicity of ligands and coulson charge of nitrogen atom present in the triazine ring enhances the DHFR inhibition significantly. This study will contribute to further endeavours of more potent DHFR inhibitors.

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

4.0
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