MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404304796 · doi:10.5267/j.ccl.2024.8.001

Design, synthesis and anticancer activity of novel 4-(5-amino-4-cyano-1,3-oxazol-2-yl)benzenesulfonamide derivative

2024· article· en· W4404304796 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oleksandr O. Severin, Stepan Pilyo, Ivan Semenyuta, Maryna Kachaeva, Victor Zhirnov, Volodymyr Brovaret

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Chemistry Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Characterization of Heterocyclic Compounds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteEnamine
KeywordsChemistryDerivative (finance)StereochemistryCombinatorial chemistryAnticancer drugMedicinal chemistryPharmacologyDrug

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fourteen novel 4-(5-amino-4-cyano-1,3-oxazol-2-yl)benzenesulfonamides have been designed, synthesized, and characterized by spectroscopy and spectrometry methods. They have also been investigated on the NCI-60 cancer cell lines. The most activity compounds, 2, 3, and 9, in concentration 10 µM demonstrated mean GI50 values of 77, 70, and 68%, respectively, against the tumor cells. The best activity compound 2 showed the following GI50 values: non-small cell lung cancer (HOP-92) - 4.56 µM, breast cancer (MDA-MB-468) - 21.0 µM, melanoma (SK-MEL-5) - 30.3 µM. Besides, this compound indicates low toxicity with TGI and LC50 values >100 µM against all cancer cell lines. The COMPARE analysis (NCI) of compound 2 showed a very high correlation (r=0.91) with Tamoxifen as a selective estrogen receptors modulator. Molecular docking studies of ligand 2 demonstrated the complexation with estrogen receptors as a possible antitumor mechanism. The ADMET analysis of compound 2 indicates an optimistic prediction as an antitumor agent.

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 score0.001
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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Chemistry LettersSame topicSynthesis and Characterization of Heterocyclic CompoundsFrench-language works237,207