Single and multiple inhibitors of the biosynthesis of 5‐, 12‐, 15‐lipoxygenase products derived from cinnamyl‐3,4‐dihydroxy‐α‐cyanocinnamate: Synthesis and structure–activity relationship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The involvement of lipoxygenases in various pathologies, combined with the unavailability of safe and effective inhibitors of the biosynthesis of their products, is a source of inspiration for the development of new inhibitors. Based on a structural analysis of known inhibitors of lipoxygenase products biosynthesis, a comprehensive structure-activity study was carried out, which led to the discovery of several novel compounds (16a-c, 17a) demonstrating promising potency to inhibit the biosynthesis of products of 5-, 12- and 15-LO. Compounds 16b and 16c outperformed zileuton (1), the only FDA-approved 5-LO inhibitor, as well as known inhibitors such as caffeic acid phenethyl ester (CAPE (2)) and cinnamyl-3,4-dihydroxy-α-cyanocinnamate (CDC (4)). However, the introduction of a cyano group at the α-position of the carbonyl abolished the activity. Compounds 16a and 17a also inhibited the biosynthesis of 12- and 15-LO products. Compounds 16a, 17a far surpassed baicalein, a known 12-LO inhibitor, as inhibitors of 12-LO products biosynthesis. Compound 17a and CDC (4) showed equivalent inhibition of LO products, proposing that the double bond in the ester moiety is not necessary for the inhibitory activity. The introduction of the cyano group, as in compound 17a, at the α-position of the carbonyl in compound 16a significantly reduced the inhibitory activity against the biosynthesis of 15-LO products. In addition to the interactions with residues His372 and Phe421 also found with zileuton and CAPE, compounds 16a and 16c each interact with residue His367 as shown by molecular docking. This new interaction may explain their high affinity with the 5-LO active site.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".