4.5 Article

Carbonic anhydrase inhibitors: Novel sulfonamides incorporating 1,3,5-triazine moieties as inhibitors of the cytosolic and tumour-associated carbonic anhydrase isozymes I, II and IX

期刊

BIOORGANIC & MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS
卷 15, 期 12, 页码 3102-3108

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2005.04.056

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new series of aromatic benzenesulfonamides incorporating 1,3,5-triazine moieties in their molecules is reported. This series was obtained by reaction of cyanuric chloride with sulfanilamide, homosulfanilamide or 4-aminoethylbenzenesulfonamide. The prepared dichlorotriazinyl-benzenesulfonamides were subsequently derivatized by reacting them with various nucleophiles, such as ammonia, hydrazine, primary and secondary amines, amino acid derivatives or phenol. The library of sulfonamides incorporating triazinyl moieties was tested for the inhibition of three physiologically relevant carbonic anhydrase (CA, EC 4.2. 1.1) isozymes, the cytosolic hCA I and II, and the transmembrane, tumour-associated hCA IX. The new compounds inhibited hCA I with inhibition constants in the range of 31-8500 nM, hCA 11 with inhibition constants in the range of 14-765 nM and hCA IX with inhibition constants in the range of 1.0-640 nM. Structure-activity relationship was straightforward and rather simple in this class of CA inhibitors, with the compounds incorporating compact moieties at the triazine ring (such as amino, hydrazino, ethylamino, dimethylamino, or amino acyl) being the most active ones, and the derivatives incorporating such bulky moieties (n-propyl, n-butyl, diethylaminoethyl, piperazinylethyl, pyridoxal amine or phenoxy) being less effective hCA 1, 11 and IX inhibitors. Some of the new derivatives also showed selectivity for inhibition of hCA IX over hCA 11 (selectivity ratios of 23.33-32.00), thus constituting excellent leads for the development of novel approaches for the management of hypoxic tumours. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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