Synthesis and analgesic‐antiinflammatory activities of ethyl 2‐[3‐(1‐phenoxy(methoxy)carbonyl‐4‐aryl‐(alkyl)‐1,4‐dihydropyridyl)]acetates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reaction of ethyl 2‐(3‐pyridyl)acetate 4a or ethyl 2‐methyl‐2‐(3‐pyridyl)acetate 4b, with phenyl chloroformate or methyl chloroform ate, afforded the intermediate pyridinium salt 5 which undergoes regioselective nucleophilic attack at C‐4 upon reaction with a Grignard reagent in the presence of a cuprous iodide catalyst at −23° to yield the corresponding ethyl 2‐[3‐(1‐phenoxy(methoxy)carbonyl‐4‐aryl(alkyl)‐1,4‐dihydropyridyl)]acetates 6a‐f in 64–96% chemical yield. No product arising from reaction of the ester substituent of the pyridinium salt 5 with the Grignard reagent was observed. The 1H nmr spectra of 6a‐f exhibited dual resonances for the 1,4‐dihydropyridyl H‐2, H‐5 and H‐6 protons at 25° in deuteriochloroform. These dual resonaces were attributed to two different rotameric configurations resulting from restricted rotation about the nitrogen‐to‐carbonyl carbamate bond due to its double bond character. Compound 6 generally exhibited superior analgesic and antiinflammatory activities, compared to the reference drugs aspirin and ibuprofen, respectively. These structure‐activity correlations indicate the 1,4‐dihydropyridyl ring system present in 6 is a suitable bioisostere for the aryl (heteroaryl) ring present in aryl(heteroaryl)acetic acid non‐steroidal antiinflammatory drugs.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".