| Literature DB >> 29385071 |
Mohammad M Al-Sanea1, Mohammed Safwan Ali Khan2,3,4, Ahmed Z Abdelazem5, So Ha Lee6, Pooi Ling Mok7,8, Mohammed Gamal9,10, Mohamed E Shaker11,12, Muhammad Afzal13, Bahaa G M Youssif14,15, Nesreen Nabil Omar16.
Abstract
A new series of 1-phenyl-3-(4-(pyridin-3-yl)phenyl)urea derivatives were synthesized and subjected to in vitro antiproliferative screening against National Cancer Institute (NCI)-60 human cancer cell lines of nine different cancer types. Fourteen compounds 5a-n were synthesized with three different solvent exposure moieties (4-hydroxylmethylpiperidinyl and trimethoxyphenyloxy and 4-hydroxyethylpiperazine) attached to the core structure. Substituents with different π and σ values were added on the terminal phenyl group. Compounds 5a-e with a 4-hydroxymethylpiperidine moiety showed broad-spectrum antiproliferative activity with higher mean percentage inhibition values over the 60-cell line panel at 10 µM concentration. Compound 5a elicited lethal rather than inhibition effects on SK-MEL-5 melanoma cell line, 786-0, A498, RXF 393 renal cancer cell lines, and MDA-MB-468 breast cancer cell line. Two compounds, 5a and 5d showed promising mean growth inhibitions and thus were further tested at five-dose mode to determine median inhibitory concentration (IC50) values. The data revealed that urea compounds 5a and 5d are the most active derivatives, with significant efficacies and superior potencies than paclitaxel in 21 different cancer cell lines belonging particularly to renal cancer and melanoma cell lines. Moreover, 5a and 5d had superior potencies than gefitinib in 38 and 34 cancer cell lines, respectively, particularly colon cancer, breast cancer and melanoma cell lines.Entities:
Keywords: activity; antiproliferative; cancer; cell line; synthesis; urea derivatives
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29385071 PMCID: PMC6017049 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23020297
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Scheme 1Synthetic scheme of diarylurea derivatives 5a–n.
Percentage growth inhibition results exerted by compounds 5a–e over the most sensitive cell lines.
| Cell Lines | Percentage Inhibition (at 10 μM) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5a | 5b | 5c | 5d | 5e | ||
|
|
| 90.3 | 82.2 | |||
|
| 86.1 |
| 93.7 | |||
|
| 90.6 | 84.9 | 82.3 | |||
|
| 82.4 | 95.2 |
| |||
|
| 80.6 | 87.9 | 90.8 | |||
|
| 82.9 | 97.7 | 93.4 | |||
|
|
| 93.0 | ||||
|
| 96.0 | |||||
|
| 81.5 | |||||
|
| 90.7 | |||||
|
|
|
| 83.9 | |||
|
| 85.9 | 86.1 | ||||
|
| 91.6 | 87.5 | 88.2 | 81.9 | ||
|
| 85.2 | |||||
|
| 94.3 | 90.2 | 90.8 | |||
|
| ||||||
|
| 82.4 | |||||
|
|
| 82.2 | ||||
|
| 98.7 | 84.9 | 81.1 | |||
|
| 84.7 | |||||
|
| 88.7 | |||||
|
|
| 95.7 | 84.5 | |||
|
|
| |||||
|
| 90.6 | 81.3 | ||||
|
|
| 80.0 |
| 88.7 | ||
|
| 95.3 | |||||
|
|
| 95.3 | ||||
|
| 95.7 | |||||
|
|
|
| 84.4 | |||
|
|
| 90.9 | 85.7 | 93.6 | ||
|
| 82.7 | |||||
|
|
| |||||
|
| 83.5 | |||||
|
| 83.0 | |||||
|
|
| 87.6 | 83.4 | |||
|
|
| 90.2 | 83.8 | 80.0 | ||
|
| 90.7 |
| 86.4 | |||
|
| 89.4 | |||||
|
| 94.4 | 82.5 | ||||
|
|
| 87.4 | ||||
The bold figures indicate lethal effects in terms of percentage.
Mean percentage growth of the 60 cell lines after treatment with tested target compounds (10 µM).
| Comp. No. | Mean % Growth |
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| 59 |
|
| 53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 99 |
|
| 97 |
The bold figures indicate the most active compound.
Figure 1The percentage inhibition values of compounds 5a–d against SK-MEL-5, A498 and K-562 cell lines.
Figure 2Percentage growth of 60 cell line panel upon treatment with compounds 5a, 5d and 5e at 10 µM.
Figure 3Comparison of percentage inhibition values expressed by 5a, 5d, paclitaxel and gefitinib against the most sensitive cell lines.
Figure 4Dose–antiproliferative response of compound 5a against nine different cancer cell lines.