MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362639631 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2022-0276

Synthesis, anticancer evaluation, and molecular docking study of some arylidenehydrazono analogues

2023· article· en· W4362639631 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed H. A. Soliman, Nashwa M. Mahmoud, Aml B. Mohamed, Howayda E. Khaled

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and biological activity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryMCF-7Docking (animal)In vitroApoptosisCytotoxic T cellStereochemistryCell cultureCancer cellEnzymeHuman breastCytotoxicityStructure–activity relationshipBiochemistryCombinatorial chemistryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of 2-(arylidenehydrazono)-5-(2-oxo-2-arylethyl)thiazolidin-4-one derivatives was synthesized, characterized by spectral analyses and evaluated for their in vitro antitumor activity. The IC 50 determination of compounds was investigated on the human breast cancer cell line MCF-7. Among the series, compounds 3, 6, 10, 16, 17, and 24 showed remarkable anticancer activity with mean IC 50 values 2.34, 0.73, 2.69, 3.40, 1.18, and 1.76 µg/mL, respectively, against MCF-7 cancer cells. Compound 16 enhanced the concentration of caspase-9, inhibited the concentration of Ki67 and showed a profound reduction in the amount of MMP9 secreted into the medium of MCF-7-treated cells. Furthermore, compound 16 revealed anti-angiogenic activity through downregulation of the concentration of VEGF in the medium of MCF-7-treated cells. Compound 16 exerted cytotoxic effects on MCF-7 tumor cells via antiproliferative, apoptotic, anti-angiogenic, and antimetastatic activities. Molecular docking methodology was performed for the most effective anticancer compounds to rationalize the possible interactions with active site of VEGFR-2 enzyme.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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