Discovery of ASP5878: synthesis and structure-activity relationships of pyrimidine derivatives as pan-FGFRs inhibitors with improved metabolic stability and suppressed hERG channel inhibitory activity

Current scenario of pyrazole hybrids with in vivo therapeutic potential against cancers

Chemotherapeutics occupy a pivotal role in the medication of different types of cancers, but the prevalence and mortality rates of cancer remain high. The drug resistance and low specificity of current available chemotherapeutics are the main barriers for the effective cancer chemotherapy, evoking an immediate need for the development of novel anticancer agents. Pyrazole is a highly versatile five-membered heterocycle with two adjacent nitrogen atoms and possesses remarkable therapeutic effects and robust pharmacological potency. The pyrazole derivatives especially pyrazole hybrids have demonstrated potent in vitro and in vivo efficacies against cancers through multiple mechanisms, inclusive of apoptosis induction, autophagy regulation, and cell cycle disruption. Moreover, several pyrazole hybrids such as crizotanib (pyrazole-pyridine hybrid), erdafitinib (pyrazole-quinoxaline hybrid) and ruxolitinib (pyrazole-pyrrolo [2,3-d]pyrimidine hybrid) have already been approved for the cancer therapy, revealing that pyrazole hybrids are useful scaffolds to develop novel anticancer agents. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current scenario of pyrazole hybrids with potential in vivo anticancer efficacy along with mechanisms of action, toxicity, and pharmacokinetics, covering papers published in recent 5 years (2018-present), to facilitate further rational exploitation of more effective candidates.

N-Derivatives of (Z)-Methyl 3-(4-Oxo-2-thioxothiazolidin-5-ylidene)methyl)-1H-indole-2-carboxylates as Antimicrobial Agents-In Silico and In Vitro Evaluation

Herein, we report the experimental evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of seventeen new (Z)-methyl 3-(4-oxo-2-thioxothiazolidin-5-ylidene)methyl)-1H-indole-2-carboxylate derivatives. All tested compounds exhibited antibacterial activity against eight Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Their activity exceeded those of ampicillin as well as streptomycin by 10-50 fold. The most sensitive bacterium was En. Cloacae, while E. coli was the most resistant one, followed by M. flavus. The most active compound appeared to be compound 8 with MIC at 0.004-0.03 mg/mL and MBC at 0.008-0.06 mg/mL. The antifungal activity of tested compounds was good to excellent with MIC in the range of 0.004-0.06 mg/mL, with compound 15 being the most potent. T. viride was the most sensitive fungal, while A. fumigatus was the most resistant one. Docking studies revealed that the inhibition of E. coli MurB is probably responsible for their antibacterial activity, while 14a-lanosterol demethylase of CYP51Ca is involved in the mechanism of antifungal activity. Furthermore, drug-likeness and ADMET profile prediction were performed. Finally, the cytotoxicity studies were performed for the most active compounds using MTT assay against normal MRC5 cells.

Patient Selection Approaches in FGFR Inhibitor Trials-Many Paths to the Same End?

Inhibitors of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) signaling have been investigated in various human cancer diseases. Recently, the first compounds received FDA approval in biomarker-selected patient populations. Different approaches and technologies have been applied in clinical trials, ranging from protein (immunohistochemistry) to mRNA expression (e.g., RNA in situ hybridization) and to detection of various DNA alterations (e.g., copy number variations, mutations, gene fusions). We review, here, the advantages and limitations of the different technologies and discuss the importance of tissue and disease context in identifying the best predictive biomarker for FGFR targeting therapies.