Home › Research › Treatments
Synthesis, biological evaluation, and molecular modeling of donepezil and N-[(5-(benzyloxy)-1-methyl-1H-indol-2-yl)methyl]-N-methylprop-2-yn-1-amine hybrids as new multipotent cholinesterase/monoamine oxidase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease
Bolea I, Juárez-Jiménez J, de Los Ríos C, Chioua M, Pouplana R, Luque FJ, Unzeta M, Marco-Contelles J et al.. Journal of medicinal chemistry, 2011-11-15
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
A new family of multitarget molecules able to interact with acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE), as well as with monoamino oxidase (MAO) A and B, has been synthesized. Novel compounds (3-9) have been designed using a conjunctive approach that combines the benzylpiperidine moiety of the AChE inhibitor donepezil (1) and the indolyl propargylamino moiety of the MAO inhibitor N-[(5-benzyloxy-1-methyl-1H-indol-2-yl)methyl]-N-methylprop-2-yn-1-amine (2), connected through an oligomethylene linker. The most promising hybrid (5) is a potent inhibitor of both MAO-A (IC50=5.2±1.1 nM) and MAO-B (IC50=43±8.0 nM) and is a moderately potent inhibitor of AChE (IC50=0.35±0.01 μM) and BuChE (IC50=0.46±0.06 μM). Moreover, molecular modeling and kinetic studies support the dual binding site to AChE, which explains the inhibitory effect exerted on Aβ aggregation. Overall, the results suggest that the new compounds are promising multitarget drug candidates with potential impact for Alzheimer's disease therapy.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Bolea, I., Juárez-Jiménez, J., de Los Ríos, C., Chioua, M., Pouplana, R., Luque, F. J., et al. (2011). Synthesis, biological evaluation, and molecular modeling of donepezil and N-[(5-(benzyloxy)-1-methyl-1H-indol-2-yl)methyl]-N-methylprop-2-yn-1-amine hybrids as new multipotent cholinesterase/monoamine oxidase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Journal of medicinal chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1021/jm200853t
Vancouver
Bolea I, Juárez-Jiménez J, de Los Ríos C, Chioua M, Pouplana R, Luque FJ, et al. Synthesis, biological evaluation, and molecular modeling of donepezil and N-[(5-(benzyloxy)-1-methyl-1H-indol-2-yl)methyl]-N-methylprop-2-yn-1-amine hybrids as new multipotent cholinesterase/monoamine oxidase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Journal of medicinal chemistry. 2011. doi:10.1021/jm200853t. PMID: 22023459.
BibTeX
@article{bolea2011-22023459,
author = {Bolea, I. and Juárez-Jiménez, J. and de Los Ríos, C. and Chioua, M. and Pouplana, R. and Luque, F. J. and Unzeta, M. and Marco-Contelles, J. and others},
title = {{Synthesis, biological evaluation, and molecular modeling of donepezil and N-[(5-(benzyloxy)-1-methyl-1H-indol-2-yl)methyl]-N-methylprop-2-yn-1-amine hybrids as new multipotent cholinesterase/monoamine oxidase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Journal of medicinal chemistry},
year = {2011},
doi = {10.1021/jm200853t},
pmid = {22023459},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/jm200853t}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Overall, the results suggest that the new compounds are promising multitarget drug candidates with potential impact for Alzheimer's disease therapy.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of medicinal chemistry) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22023459) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “repurposing”
234 studies in the library carry the topic tag “repurposing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 234 tagged studies.