2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2020.103972
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Antimicrobial evaluation and docking study of some new substituted benzimidazole-2yl derivatives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
29
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
1
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 7 shows a comet tail in all concentrations of pyrazol 13 compared to control cells. These results were also in good agreement with the literature reports in which pyrazoles induce apoptotic cell death via intercalation and subsequent DNA damage [28–31] …”
Section: Biologysupporting
confidence: 92%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Figure 7 shows a comet tail in all concentrations of pyrazol 13 compared to control cells. These results were also in good agreement with the literature reports in which pyrazoles induce apoptotic cell death via intercalation and subsequent DNA damage [28–31] …”
Section: Biologysupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Mounting evidence showed that cell cycle arrest induces apoptosis by localizing the phosphatidylserine on the extracellular surface, which was evaluated using Annexin-V in conjugation with propidium iodide. [28][29][30][31] Interestingly, pyrazole 13 was able to induce apoptosis in 4T1 cells in a dosedependent manner. Within this context, the early and late apoptotic 4T1 cells increased up to 9-and 18-folds in response to 25 μM of pyrazole 13 compared to vehicle, respectively (Figure 6).…”
Section: Apoptosis Inductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The cocrystal ligands DTQ for CDK2, and 13Q for P53-MDM2 complex were redocked to assure the validity of the docking parameters and methods to represent the position and orientation of the ligand detected in the crystal structure. The difference of RMSD value between cocrystal ligands to the original cocrystal ligand was <2Å which approved the accuracy of the docking protocols and parameters [56][57][58]. Figures 3 and 4 described the interaction of the most promising compound ( 16) with CDK2 and P53-MDM2 proteins compared to reference ligand (RL).…”
Section: Molecular Docking Studymentioning
confidence: 79%