Molecular docking and glucosidase inhibition studies of novel N-arylthiazole-2-amines and Ethyl 2-[aryl(thiazol-2-yl)amino]acetates
- 267 Downloads
This study describes an efficient synthesis of a series of novel ethyl 2-[aryl(thiazol-2-yl)amino]acetates (4a–l) from N-arylthiazole-2-amines (3a–l). The reaction conditions were optimized and the best results were obtained when ethyl chloroacetate was used as alkylating agent and NaH as base in THF. α-glucosidase and β-glucosidase inhibition activities of N-arylthiazole-2-amines (3a–l) and ethyl 2-[aryl(thiazol-2-yl)amino]acetates (4a–l) were determined, which revealed that most of the compounds showed high percentage inhibition towards the enzymes. Among the synthesized compounds, 4e appeared to have the highest inhibition towards α-glucosidase having IC50 value of 150.4 ± 1.9 μM which was almost two folds as compared to acarbose (336.9 ± 9.0 μM) taken as standard. Molecular docking of the compounds 3g, 3f, 4a, and 4e was also performed which showed their bonding modes to the enzyme’s active sites via amino and acetate groups, respectively.
keywordsα- and β-glucosidase inhibition Thiazoles Molecular docking
A.F. Khan is thankful to Higher Education Commission, Pakistan for providing funding under NRPU project No. 1690 for this research.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- Babar A, Munawar MA, Tahir MN, Khan AF, Tariq MI (2012a) N-(2, 4, 6-Trimethylphenyl)-1, 3-thiazol-2-amine Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports Online 68:o2441–o2441Google Scholar
- Babar A, Munawar MA, Tahir MN, Ullah F, Tariq MI (2012b) N-(2, 4-Dichlorophenyl)-1, 3-thiazol-2-amine Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports Online 68:o2704–o2704Google Scholar
- Eswar N et al. (2006) Curr Protoc Bioinformatics Chapter 5. UnitGoogle Scholar
- Trott O, Olson AJ (2010) AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J Computational Chem 31:455–461Google Scholar