| Literature DB >> 26703554 |
Sobhi M Gomha1, Taher A Salaheldin2, Huwaida M E Hassaneen3, Hassan M Abdel-Aziz4, Mohammed A Khedr5,6.
Abstract
Reactions of class="Chemical">ethylidenethiocarbohydrazide withEntities:
Keywords: 1,3,4-thiadiazole; 1,3-thiazole; cytotoxic activity; ethylidenethiocarbohydrazide; ethylidenethiosemicarbazide; hydrazonoyl halides; molecular docking
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26703554 PMCID: PMC6272888 DOI: 10.3390/molecules21010003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Scheme 1Synthesis of ethylidenethiocarbohydrazide derivative 3a and ethylidenethiosemicarbazide derivative 3b.
Scheme 2Synthesis of 1,3-thiazole derivatives 6a–e.
Scheme 3Synthesis of 1,3,4-thiadiazole 11.
Scheme 4Synthesis of 5-hydrazono-thiazole derivatives 14a–f.
Scheme 5Synthesis of thiazolidin-4-one 17.
Figure 1Viability chart of tested Group 1 compounds against HEP G2 cell line.
Figure 2Viability chart of tested Group 2 compounds against HEP G2 cell line.
IC50 values of tested compounds ± standard deviation against HEP G2.
| Compound No. | IC50 (μM) | Compound No. | IC50 (μM) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doxorubicin | 0.68 ± 0.03 | 0.84 ± 0.04 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.08 | 0.52 ± 0.03 | ||
| 1.49 ± 0.1 | 1.19 ± 0.09 | ||
| 1.04 ± 0.07 | 0.50 ± 0.02 | ||
| 1.73 ± 0.12 | 1.28 ± 0.08 | ||
| 2.17 ± 0.13 | 1.07 ± 0.06 | ||
| 2.91 ± 0.15 |
Figure 3Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) image of HEP G2 cell line treated with 0.6 μM tested compounds (14e, 14c, 14a and untreated control). Stained by Acridine orange (green) and Rodamine 123 (Orange).
Figure 4CLSM image of HEP G2 cell line treated with 0.6 μM tested compounds (6a, 6c, 17, 14d and 14f). Stained by Acridine orange (green) and Rodamine 123 (Orange).
Figure 5CLSM image of HEP G2 cell line treated with 0.6 μM tested compounds (6b, 6d, 6e and 11). Stained by Acridine orange (green) and Rodamine 123 (Orange).
Docking Results of the active compounds using Leadit 2.1.5 software (software license was purchased from BioSolveIT GmbH, Germany).
| Compounds | Affinity Score kcal/mol | Lipophilic Contribution Score | Clash Score | Ligand Entropy Conformation Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −24.85 | −8.50 | 4.32 | 0.00 | |
| −24.23 | −8.56 | 4.54 | 0.00 | |
| −24.10 | −12.27 | 4.12 | 0.00 | |
| −23.50 | −8.31 | 5.82 | 1.40 | |
| −23.23 | −8.28 | 5.88 | 1.40 | |
| −22.68 | −6.36 | 3.85 | 1.40 | |
| −22.23 | −13.86 | 7.55 | 0.00 | |
| −21.66 | −6.91 | 8.23 | 0.00 | |
| −20.46 | −8.52 | 5.89 | 1.40 | |
| −20.27 | −8.31 | 5.88 | 1.40 | |
| −20.25 | −8.39 | 4.54 | 2.80 | |
| −18.80 | −9.23 | 5.11 | 0.00 |
Figure 6Correlation between the docking affinity and the IC50.
Figure 7Possible binding modes of compounds (A) 14e; (B) 14c; and (C) 14a.
Figure 8The possible binding mode of compound 11.