Design, Synthesis, and Biological Evaluation of 3,4-Dihydroquinolin-2(1<i>H</i>)-one and 1,2,3,4-Tetrahydroquinoline-Based Selective Human Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase (nNOS) Inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS) inhibitors are effective in preclinical models of many neurological disorders. In this study, two related series of compounds, 3,4-dihydroquinolin-2(1H)-one and 1,2,3,4-tetrahydroquinoline, containing a 6-substituted thiophene amidine group were synthesized and evaluated as inhibitors of human nitric oxide synthase (NOS). A structure-activity relationship (SAR) study led to the identification of a number of potent and selective nNOS inhibitors. Furthermore, a few representative compounds were shown to possess druglike properties, features that are often difficult to achieve when designing nNOS inhibitors. Compound (S)-35, with excellent potency and selectivity for nNOS, was shown to fully reverse thermal hyperalgesia when given to rats at a dose of 30 mg/kg intraperitonieally (ip) in the L5/L6 spinal nerve ligation model of neuropathic pain (Chung model). In addition, this compound reduced tactile hyperesthesia (allodynia) after oral administration (30 mg/kg) in a rat model of dural inflammation relevant to migraine pain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".