Facile synthesis of C6‐substituted benz[4,5]imidazo[1,2‐<i>a</i>]quinoxaline derivatives and their anticancer evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, resulting in continuous efforts to discover and develop highly efficacious anticancer drugs. High‐throughput screening of heterocyclic compound libraries is one of the promising approaches that provided several new lead molecules with a novel mechanism of action. On the basis of the promising anticancer potential of imidazoquinoxaline as well as the structurally similar imidazoquinoline‐derived scaffold, we prepared a set of C6‐substituted benzimidazo[1,2‐a]quinoxaline derivatives via two novel synthetic routes using commercially available starting materials, with good to excellent yields and evaluated their anticancer activity against the NCI‐60 cancer cell lines. The one‐dose (10 µM) anticancer screening of the synthesized compounds in the NCI‐60 cell line panel revealed that the substituents have a significant role in the activity. In particular, the indole (7f), imidazole (7g), and benzimidazole (7h) derivatives showed significant activity against the triple‐negative breast cancer cell line, MDA‐MB‐468. The lead compounds also exhibited notable IC50 values against another breast cancer cell line, MCF‐7. Furthermore, it was observed that these compounds were relatively nontoxic to normal cell lines: HEK293 (human embryonic kidney cell line) and MCF12A (nontumorigenic human breast epithelial cell line). The IC50 values against healthy cells were at least 5‐ to 11‐fold higher, offering a new class of heterocycles that can be further developed as promising therapeutics for cancer treatment.
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) | 0.002 | 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".