MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404419027 · doi:10.3390/molecules29225382

Unveiling the Anticancer Potential of a New Ciprofloxacin-Chalcone Hybrid as an Inhibitor of Topoisomerases I & II and Apoptotic Inducer

2024· article· en· W4404419027 on OpenAlexaff
Doaa Mohamed Elroby Ali, Hossameldin A. Aziz, Stefan Braese, Areej Al Bahir, Abdullah Alkhammash, Gamal El‐Din A. Abuo‐Rahma, Ali M. Elshamsy, Hamada Hashem, Walid M. Abdelmagid

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
FundersKing Khalid University
KeywordsChalconeTopoisomeraseInducerApoptosisCiprofloxacinChemistryPharmacologyTopoisomerase inhibitorTopotecanStereochemistryBiologyBiochemistryDNAAntibioticsChemotherapyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study has yielded promising results in the evaluation of a new ciprofloxacin-chalcone hybrid (CP derivative) for its anticancer activity as potential Topoisomerases (Topo) I and II inhibitors. The in vitro results showed that the CP derivative significantly suppressed the growth of HCT-116 and LOX IMVI cells, with IC50 values of 5.0 μM and 1.3 μM, respectively, outperforming Staurosporine, which had IC50 values of 8.4 μM and 1.6 μM, respectively. Flow cytometry analysis revealed that the new CP derivative triggered apoptosis and cell cycle arrest at the G2/M phase, associated with the up-regulation of pro-apoptotic genes (Bax and Caspase 9) and downregulation of the anti-apoptotic gene (Bcl-2). Further investigations showed that the CP derivative inhibited Topo I and II enzymes, as expected molecular targets; docking studies further supported its dual inhibitory action on Topo I and II. These findings suggest that the ciprofloxacin-chalcone hybrid could be a promising lead compound for developing new anticancer therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations19
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207