Antiproliferative activity of a series of 5‑(1H‑1,2,3‑triazolyl) methyl‑ and 5‑acetamidomethyl‑oxazolidinone derivatives

  • Authors:
    • Omar M. Hedaya
    • Princy M. Mathew
    • Fatima H. Mohamed
    • Oludotun A. Phillips
    • Yunus A. Luqmani
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: February 23, 2016     https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2016.4938
  • Pages: 3311-3318
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

In the face of increasing resistance to the existing antibiotics, oxazolidinones (exemplified by linezolid) have been developed as promising antibacterial agents, but may have other useful actions. In the present study, a series of 5‑(1H‑1,2,3‑triazoly) l‑methyl‑, 5‑acetamidomethyl‑morpholino and N‑substituted‑piperazino oxazolidinone derivatives were investigated to determine whether they are active against eukaryotic cells. An MTT assay, validated by cell counting, was used to assess the effect of nine oxazolidinone derivatives (concentrations 100 nM‑10 µM) on the proliferation of MCF7 human breast cancer cells. The three most active compounds were then tested on MDA231 breast cancer cells. Cytotoxicity of the selected derivatives was determined by assessing the extent of apoptosis by flow cytometry. The antimetastatic potential of these compounds was assessed on MDA231 cells using wound healing and agarose invasion assays. The 5‑triazolylmethyl piperazino‑oxazolidinone derivatives containing 4‑N‑(2‑chlorocinnamoyl), 4‑N‑(4‑nitrobenzoyl) and 4‑N‑methylsulfonyl moieties exhibited the most potent cytostatic activity against cancer, inhibiting proliferation by up to 70%, in the same order as their reported antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus, but at higher concentrations. Unexpectedly, several derivatives stimulated proliferation at 100 nM, well below their antibacterial minimum inhibitory concentrations. Certain compounds also retarded the motility and invasion of MDA231 cells. Three of the tested derivatives had no effect on the eukaryotic cell lines, demonstrating their preferential activity against bacteria. Two compounds actually stimulated eukaryotic cell proliferation. The remaining three exhibited potent cytostatic activity against and cancer cells, displaying differences in response at low and high concentrations, which may suggest multiple targets on eukaryotic cells. These latter compounds may be useful as anticancer agents.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

April-2016
Volume 13 Issue 4

Print ISSN: 1791-2997
Online ISSN:1791-3004

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Hedaya OM, Mathew PM, Mohamed FH, Phillips OA and Luqmani YA: Antiproliferative activity of a series of 5‑(1H‑1,2,3‑triazolyl) methyl‑ and 5‑acetamidomethyl‑oxazolidinone derivatives. Mol Med Rep 13: 3311-3318, 2016
APA
Hedaya, O.M., Mathew, P.M., Mohamed, F.H., Phillips, O.A., & Luqmani, Y.A. (2016). Antiproliferative activity of a series of 5‑(1H‑1,2,3‑triazolyl) methyl‑ and 5‑acetamidomethyl‑oxazolidinone derivatives. Molecular Medicine Reports, 13, 3311-3318. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2016.4938
MLA
Hedaya, O. M., Mathew, P. M., Mohamed, F. H., Phillips, O. A., Luqmani, Y. A."Antiproliferative activity of a series of 5‑(1H‑1,2,3‑triazolyl) methyl‑ and 5‑acetamidomethyl‑oxazolidinone derivatives". Molecular Medicine Reports 13.4 (2016): 3311-3318.
Chicago
Hedaya, O. M., Mathew, P. M., Mohamed, F. H., Phillips, O. A., Luqmani, Y. A."Antiproliferative activity of a series of 5‑(1H‑1,2,3‑triazolyl) methyl‑ and 5‑acetamidomethyl‑oxazolidinone derivatives". Molecular Medicine Reports 13, no. 4 (2016): 3311-3318. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2016.4938