Synthesis and in Vitro Anticancer Evaluation of (S)-2-Amino-3-(3-indolyl)propionic acid (L-Tryptophan) Pyrrole & Imidazole Polyamide Conjugates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The synthesis and in vitro anticancer evaluation of (S)-2-amino-3-(3-indolyl)propionic acid (Ltryptophan) pyrrole & imidazole polyamide conjugates are described.Development of sequence-specific DNA-binding drugs is an important pharmacological goal, given the fact that numerous existing DNA-directed chemotherapeutic drugs rely on the strength and selectivity of their DNA interactions for therapeutic activity.Among the DNA-binding drugs, polyamides, which are derived 1 from natural product antibiotics such as netropsin and distamycin, represent a class of small molecules that can practically bind any predetermined DNA sequence.DNA recognition by these ligands depends on their sideby-side hydrogen bond pairings in the DNA minor groove.Extensive studies have revealed that these molecules show extremely high affinity for sequence-directed, minor groove interaction.Polyamides containing aromatic α-amino-acids, jV-methylpyrrole, and N-methylimidazole moieties have an affinity and specificity for DNA comparable with naturally occurring DNA-binding proteins."3 Based on pairing rules for recognition in the minor groove, polyamides can be designed to target predetermined DNA sequences.2 3Carcinoids and small cell lung carcinomas stimulate their growth in an autocrine manner by releasing serotonin.This phenomenon exerts undesirable side effects on serotonergic central nervous function."Moreover, conventional chemotherapeutic agents, such as streptozocin, fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin, which target tumor cells directly, have produced disappointing results in the treatment of patients with these tumors in the advanced stage.Therefore there is a need for more specific and potent
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) | 0.001 | 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".