Discovery of novel thiazole derivatives containing pyrazole scaffold as PPAR-γ Agonists, α-Glucosidase, α-Amylase and COX-2 inhibitors; Design, synthesis and in silico study
{"title":"Discovery of novel thiazole derivatives containing pyrazole scaffold as PPAR-γ Agonists, α-Glucosidase, α-Amylase and COX-2 inhibitors; Design, synthesis and in silico study","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.bioorg.2024.107760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A novel series of thiazole derivatives with pyrazole scaffold <strong>16a-l</strong> as hybrid rosiglitazone/celecoxib analogs was designed, synthesized and tested for its PPAR-γ activation, α-glucosidase, α-amylase and COX-2 inhibitory activities. Regarding the anti-diabetic activity, all compounds were assessed <em>in vitro</em> against PPAR-γ activation, α-glucosidase and α-amylase inhibition in addition to <em>in vivo</em> hypoglycemic activity (one day and 15 days studies). Compounds <strong>16b, 16c, 16e</strong> and <strong>16 k</strong> showed good PPAR-γ activation (activation % ≈ 72–79 %) compared to that of the reference drug rosiglitazone (74 %). In addition, the same derivatives <strong>16b, 16c, 16e</strong> and <strong>16 k</strong> showed the highest inhibitory activities against α-glucosidase (IC<sub>50</sub> = 0.158, 0.314, 0.305, 0.128 μM, respectively) and against α-amylase (IC<sub>50</sub> = 32.46, 23.21, 7.74, 35.85 μM, respectively) compared to the reference drug acarbose (IC<sub>50</sub> <strong>=</strong> 0.161 and 31.46 μM for α-glucosidase and α-amylase, respectively). The most active derivatives <strong>16b, 16c, 16e</strong> and <strong>16 k</strong> also revealed good <em>in vivo</em> hypoglycemic effect comparable to that of rosiglitazone. In addition, compounds <strong>16b</strong> and <strong>16c</strong> had the best COX-2 selectivity index (S.I. = 18.7, 31.7, respectively) compared to celecoxib (S.I. = 10.3). <em>In vivo</em> anti-inflammatory activity of the target derivatives <strong>16b, 16c, 16e</strong> and <strong>16 k</strong> supported the results of <em>in vitro</em> screening as the derivatives <strong>16b</strong> and <strong>16c</strong> (ED<sub>50</sub> = 8.2 and 24 mg/kg, respectively) were more potent than celecoxib (ED<sub>50</sub> = 30 mg/kg). <em>In silico</em> docking, ADME, toxicity, and molecular dynamic studies were carried out to explain the interactions of the most active anti-diabetic and anti-inflammatory compounds <strong>16b, 16c, 16e</strong> and <strong>16 k</strong> with the target enzymes in addition to their physiochemical parameters.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":257,"journal":{"name":"Bioorganic Chemistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioorganic Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045206824006655","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A novel series of thiazole derivatives with pyrazole scaffold 16a-l as hybrid rosiglitazone/celecoxib analogs was designed, synthesized and tested for its PPAR-γ activation, α-glucosidase, α-amylase and COX-2 inhibitory activities. Regarding the anti-diabetic activity, all compounds were assessed in vitro against PPAR-γ activation, α-glucosidase and α-amylase inhibition in addition to in vivo hypoglycemic activity (one day and 15 days studies). Compounds 16b, 16c, 16e and 16 k showed good PPAR-γ activation (activation % ≈ 72–79 %) compared to that of the reference drug rosiglitazone (74 %). In addition, the same derivatives 16b, 16c, 16e and 16 k showed the highest inhibitory activities against α-glucosidase (IC50 = 0.158, 0.314, 0.305, 0.128 μM, respectively) and against α-amylase (IC50 = 32.46, 23.21, 7.74, 35.85 μM, respectively) compared to the reference drug acarbose (IC50= 0.161 and 31.46 μM for α-glucosidase and α-amylase, respectively). The most active derivatives 16b, 16c, 16e and 16 k also revealed good in vivo hypoglycemic effect comparable to that of rosiglitazone. In addition, compounds 16b and 16c had the best COX-2 selectivity index (S.I. = 18.7, 31.7, respectively) compared to celecoxib (S.I. = 10.3). In vivo anti-inflammatory activity of the target derivatives 16b, 16c, 16e and 16 k supported the results of in vitro screening as the derivatives 16b and 16c (ED50 = 8.2 and 24 mg/kg, respectively) were more potent than celecoxib (ED50 = 30 mg/kg). In silico docking, ADME, toxicity, and molecular dynamic studies were carried out to explain the interactions of the most active anti-diabetic and anti-inflammatory compounds 16b, 16c, 16e and 16 k with the target enzymes in addition to their physiochemical parameters.
期刊介绍:
Bioorganic Chemistry publishes research that addresses biological questions at the molecular level, using organic chemistry and principles of physical organic chemistry. The scope of the journal covers a range of topics at the organic chemistry-biology interface, including: enzyme catalysis, biotransformation and enzyme inhibition; nucleic acids chemistry; medicinal chemistry; natural product chemistry, natural product synthesis and natural product biosynthesis; antimicrobial agents; lipid and peptide chemistry; biophysical chemistry; biological probes; bio-orthogonal chemistry and biomimetic chemistry.
For manuscripts dealing with synthetic bioactive compounds, the Journal requires that the molecular target of the compounds described must be known, and must be demonstrated experimentally in the manuscript. For studies involving natural products, if the molecular target is unknown, some data beyond simple cell-based toxicity studies to provide insight into the mechanism of action is required. Studies supported by molecular docking are welcome, but must be supported by experimental data. The Journal does not consider manuscripts that are purely theoretical or computational in nature.
The Journal publishes regular articles, short communications and reviews. Reviews are normally invited by Editors or Editorial Board members. Authors of unsolicited reviews should first contact an Editor or Editorial Board member to determine whether the proposed article is within the scope of the Journal.