Linear diarylheptanoids as potential anticancer therapeutics: synthesis, biological evaluation, and structure–activity relationship studies

A. F.M. Motiur Rahman, Yang Lu, Hwa Jong Lee, Hyunji Jo, Wencui Yin, Mohammad Sayed Alam, Hyochang Cha, Adnan A. Kadi, Youngjoo Kwon, Yurngdong Jahng

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

In efforts to develop effective anticancer therapeutics with greater selectivity toward cancerous cell and reduced side-effects, such as emetic effects due to detrimental action of the drug toward the intestinal flora, a series of linear diarylheptanoids (LDHs) were designed and synthesized in 7 steps with good-to-moderate yields. All synthesized compounds were evaluated for their antibacterial, antiproliferative, and topoisomerase-I and -IIα inhibitory activity. Overall, all compounds showed little to no activity against the bacterial strains tested. Most of the synthesized compounds showed good antiproliferative activity against human breast cancer cell lines (T47D); specifically, the IC50 values of compounds 6a, 6d, 7j, and 7e were 0.09, 0.64, 0.67, and 0.99 μM, respectively. Among the tested compounds, 7b inhibited topo-I by 9.3% (camptothecin 68.8%), 7e and 7h inhibited topo-IIα by 38.4 and 47.4% (etoposide 76.9%), respectively, at the concentration of 100 μM. These results suggest that a set of promising anticancer agents can be obtained by reducing inhibitory actions on different microbes to provide enhanced selectivity against cancerous cells.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1131-1148
Number of pages18
JournalArchives of Pharmacal Research
Volume41
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Dec 2018

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, The Pharmaceutical Society of Korea.

Keywords

  • Antiproliferative activity
  • Linear diarylheptanoids
  • Topoisomerase-I
  • Topoisomerase-IIα

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Linear diarylheptanoids as potential anticancer therapeutics: synthesis, biological evaluation, and structure–activity relationship studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this