| Literature DB >> 24355111 |
Arezou Lari, Isaac Karimi, Hadi Adibi, Alireza Aliabadi, Loghman Firoozpour, Alireza Foroumadi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Modafinil, a novel wake-promoting agent with low potential for abuse and dependence, has a reliable structure to find some novel derivatives with better activity and lower potential for abuse and risk of dependency. This study was designed to evaluate psychobiological activity of some novel N-aryl modafinil derivatives.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24355111 PMCID: PMC3897940 DOI: 10.1186/2008-2231-21-67
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Daru ISSN: 1560-8115 Impact factor: 3.117
Figure 1Chemical structure of modafinil.
Scheme 1Synthesis of target compounds 4a-4g (R: (a) = H, (b) = 3-Cl, (c) = 4-Cl, (d) = 4-Et, (e) = 3,4-Cl, (f) = 4-NO , (g) = 4-Br), Reagents and conditions: (a) Thioglycolic acid, TFA, 3 h; (b) appropriate amine, EDC, HOBt; (c) appropriate amide, H O , acetic acid.
Synthesis of target compounds 4a-4g (R: (a) = H, (b) = 3-Cl, (c) = 4-Cl, (d) = 4-Et, (e) = 3,4-Cl, (f) = 4-NO , (g) = 4-Br), Reagents and conditions: (a) Thioglycolic acid, TFA, 3 h; (b) appropriate amine, EDC, HOBt; (c) appropriate amide, H O , acetic acid.
Effects of -aryl derivatives of modafinil on behavior of albino mice in the elevated plus-maze
| Modafinil | 8.25(2.17) | 71.7(10.5) | 11.75(3.88) | 228.2(10.5) |
| 1.00(1.00)a | 1.5(1.5)aab | 8.00(3.82) | 221.2(23.8)aa | |
| 7.25(1.25) | 84.5(19.3) | 6.25(0.47) | 215.5(19.3) | |
| 0.00(0.00)aab | 0.0(0.0)aab | 2.00(0.00) | 285.0(6.4)aa | |
| 3.50(1.50) | 57.5(17.5) | 4.50(1.50) | 242.5(17.5) | |
| 0.00(0.00)a | 0.0(0.0)aa | 1.50(0.50) | 300.0(0.0)aa | |
| 6.00(1.00) | 120.0(10.0) | 6.50(1.50) | 180.0(10.0) | |
| 2.50(1.190) a | 16.75(10.0)aa | 8.25(2.59) | 216.2(26.7)aa | |
| Control | 12.25(2.86) | 123.5(19.5) | 10.50(3.92) | 175.5(19.1) |
Data are presented as mean ± S.E.M.
aP < 0.05 vs. control group, aaP < 0.001 vs. control group, bP < 0.05 vs. modafinil group.
Figure 2Exploratory activity (mean ± S.E.M.) in albino mice in the open field test.aP < 0.05, aaP < .001 vs. control and bP < 0.05, bbP < 0.001 vs. modafinil groups.
Figure 3Effects of different derivatives in open field test in mice. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM of the latency to enter the central part. aP < 0.05 vs. control, bP < 0.05 vs. modafinil.
Figure 4Effect of different derivatives of modafinil on the immobility response in forced swimming test ( P < .05, P < .001 control and P < 0.001 modafinil groups).