MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900199736 · doi:10.5539/ijc.v10n4p18

Synthesis and Evaluation of Triazolyl Dihydropyrimidines as Potential Anticancer Agents

2018· article· en· W2900199736 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rajanna Ajumeera, Ganapathi Thipparapu, Shireesha Boyapati, Bharath Singh Padya, Vijayalaxmi Venkatesan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemistry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and biological activity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndian Council of Medical Research
KeywordsChemistryIn vitroIC50Cell cultureCancer cellCell cycle checkpointMTT assayMCF-7Cell cycleStereochemistryCombinatorial chemistryCellHuman breastBiochemistryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel N – triazolyl 3(a-f) and O-triazolyl (4a-f) derivatives of 4, 6-diaryl-1, 4-dihydropyrimidines were synthesized through mannich reaction. All compounds were characterized by physical and spectral data. These compounds were screened for in vitro efficiency in human breast cancer cell (MCF-7&MDA-MB-231) lines and found to have very good anti-proliferative activity. Among all compounds of 4b, 3e, 4e endowed with lesser respective IC50 values of 31.94, 55.73, 55.03 µM in MCF-7 cells and 41.50, 35.28, 32.06 µM in MDA-MB 231 cells by MTT assay. In further studies, Compounds 4b, 3e, 4e were found to arrest cell growth at S phase in MCF-7 cells. In MDA-MB 231 cells, 4b, 4e were found to arrest the cells in S phase, and compound 3e found to arrest G2/M phase when compared to the standard drug tamoxifen, arrested S phase in MCF-7 cells and G0/G1 phase in MDA-MB 231 cells.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ChemistrySame topicSynthesis and biological activityFrench-language works237,207