| Literature DB >> 26903774 |
Asif Husain1, Aftab Ahmad2, Shah Alam Khan3, Mohd Asif4, Rubina Bhutani1, Fahad A Al-Abbasi5.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to design and synthesize pharmaceutical agents containing imidazolidine heterocyclic ring in the hope of developing potent, safe and orally active anti-inflammatory agents. A number of substituted-imidazolidine derivatives (3a-k) were synthesized starting from ethylene diamine and aromatic aldehydes. The imidazolidine derivatives (3a-k) were investigated for their anticipated anti-inflammatory, and analgesic activity in Wistar albino rats and Swiss albino mice, respectively. Bioactivity score, molecular and pharmacokinetic properties of the imidazolidine derivatives were calculated by online computer software programs viz. Molinspiration and Osiris property explorer. The results of biological testing indicated that among the synthesized compounds only three imidazolidine derivatives namely 4-[1,3-Bis(2,6-dichlorobenzyl)-2-imidazolidinyl]phenyl-diethylamine (3g), 4-[1,3-Bis(3-hydroxy-4-methoxybenzyl)-2-imidazolidinyl]phenyl-diethylamine (3i) and 4-(1,3-Bis(4-methoxybenzyl)-4-methylimidazolidin-2-yl)-phenyl-diethylamine (3j) possess promising anti-inflammatory and analgesic actions. Additionally these derivatives displayed superior GI safety profile (low severity index) with respect to the positive control, Indomethacin. All synthesized compounds showed promising bioactivity score for drug targets by Molinspiration software. Almost all the compounds were predicted to have very low toxicity risk by Osiris online software. Compound number (3i) emerged as a potential candidate for further research as it obeyed Lipinski's rule of five for drug likeness, exhibited promising biological activity in-vivo and showed no risk of toxicity in computer aided screening.Entities:
Keywords: Analgesic; Anti-inflammatory; Imidazolidine; Indomethacin
Year: 2015 PMID: 26903774 PMCID: PMC4720031 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2015.02.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi Pharm J ISSN: 1319-0164 Impact factor: 4.330
Scheme 1Protocol for synthesis of title compounds (3a–k).
Drug likeness score for the synthesized imidazolidine derivatives (3a–k).
| Compound | miLog P | TPSA | % ABS | MW | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.256 | 9.71 | 32 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 105.65 | 427.64 | |
| 5.276 | 101.36 | 36 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 74.03 | 489.58 | |
| 5.324 | 101.36 | 36 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 74.03 | 489.58 | |
| 7.025 | 9.71 | 32 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 105.65 | 557.37 | |
| 4.448 | 50.17 | 32 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 91.69 | 431.58 | |
| 8.022 | 9.71 | 34 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 105.65 | 537.36 | |
| 7.974 | 9.71 | 34 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 105.65 | 537.36 | |
| 4.748 | 46.65 | 38 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 92.96 | 519.67 | |
| 4.133 | 68.64 | 36 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 10 | 85.32 | 491.63 | |
| 5.898 | 28.18 | 35 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 99.28 | 473.66 | |
| 5.146 | 28.18 | 33 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 99.28 | 445.61 | |
| Indomethacin | 3.986 | 68.54 | 25 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 85.35 | 357.79 |
| Aspirin | 1.434 | 63.60 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 87.057 | 180.16 |
Logarithm of partition coefficient between n-octanol and water (miLogP).
Topological polar surface area (TPSA).
Number of hydrogen bond acceptors (n-ON).
Number of hydrogen bond donors (n-OHNH).
Number of rotatable bonds (n-rotb).
Percentage of absorption (%ABS).
Molecular weight (MW).
Bioactivity score of the synthesized compounds (3a-k) according to Molinspiration cheminformatics software.
| Compound | GPCR ligand | Ion channel modulator | Kinase inhibitor | Nuclear receptor ligand | Protease inhibitor | Enzyme inhibitor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −0.10 | −0.35 | −0.26 | −0.30 | −0.18 | −0.22 | |
| −0.16 | −0.31 | −0.31 | −0.33 | −0.20 | −0.22 | |
| −0.18 | −0.34 | −0.31 | −0.32 | −0.22 | −0.24 | |
| −0.17 | −0.36 | −0.29 | −0.39 | −0.24 | −0.24 | |
| −0.05 | −0.27 | −0.21 | −0.17 | −0.13 | −0.14 | |
| −0.09 | −0.30 | −0.25 | −0.28 | −0.18 | −0.23 | |
| −0.07 | −0.29 | −0.21 | −0.32 | −0.16 | −0.22 | |
| −0.11 | −0.42 | −0.23 | −0.28 | −0.18 | −0.20 | |
| −0.09 | −0.33 | −0.20 | −0.23 | −0.18 | −0.16 | |
| −0.06 | −0.37 | −0.27 | −0.17 | −0.09 | −0.19 | |
| −0.07 | −0.37 | −0.27 | −0.17 | −0.06 | −0.17 | |
| Indomethacin | 0.24 | −0.31 | −0.11 | 0.42 | −0.11 | 0.30 |
| Aspirin | −0.76 | −0.32 | −1.06 | −0.44 | −0.82 | −0.28 |
Drug-likeness/scores and toxicity calculations of imidazolidine derivatives (3a-k) based on Osiris property explorer.
| Compound | Solubility | Drug-likeness | Drug score | Tumorigenic | Reproductive effect | Irritant effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −4.56 | −3.18 | 0.12 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −4.79 | −10.3 | 0.13 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −4.79 | −8.31 | 0.13 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −5.54 | −6.27 | .07 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −3.28 | −2.96 | 0.17 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −6.81 | −1.97 | 0.06 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −6.81 | −2.6 | 0.06 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −3.94 | −1.16 | 0.15 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −3.31 | −2.07 | 0.16 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −4.28 | −1.69 | 0.14 | Yellow | Green | Green | |
| −3.68 | 3.23 | 0.37 | Red | Green | Green | |
| Indomethacin | −5.4 | 9.41 | 0.56 | Green | Green | Green |
| Aspirin | −1.93 | −0.48 | 0.14 | Red | Red | Green |
Anti-inflammatory, analgesic and ulcerogenic activities of the compounds (3a–k).
| Compound | Anti-inflammatory activity % Inhibition | Analgesic activity % Protection | Ulcerogenic effect (Severity index |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34.18 ± 3.97 | nt | nt | |
| 42.46 ± 2.93 | nt | nt | |
| 45.43 ± 3.54 | nt | nt | |
| 38.85 ± 1.97 | nt | nt | |
| 29.72 ± 2.01 | nt | nt | |
| 53.92 ± 2.14 | 40.94 ± 2.05 | 0.58 ± 0.23 | |
| 57.53 ± 2.89 | 51.44 ± 2.73 | 0.91 ± 0.30 | |
| 52.22 ± 3.36 | 36.23 ± 1.55 | 0.67 ± 0.16 | |
| 64.11 ± 2.19 | 56.88 ± 3.04 | 1.08 ± 0.24 | |
| 61.35 ± 3.18 | 45.65 ± 3.32 | 0.75 ± 0.21 | |
| 54.35 ± 3.00 | 42.39 ± 3.21 | 0.42 ± 0.15 | |
| Control | – | – | 0.00 ± 0.0 |
| Standard 1 | 67.09 ± 2.74 | nt | 2.08 ± 0.39 |
| Standard 2 | nt | 59.78 ± 2.55 | nt |
p < 0.05.
p < 0.01.
Standard 1 = Indomethacin; †Standard 2 = Aspirin; nt = not tested.
Relative to the standard and data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for n = 6.
Relative to control and data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for n = 6.