Taxoid from the needles of the Himalayan yew Taxus wallichiana with cytotoxic and immunomodulatory activities

Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry Letters

Volumn 16, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 2446-2449

  Chattopadhyay, Sunil K ^a   Pal, Anirban ^a   Maulik, Prakas R ^b   Kaur, Tanpreet ^a   Garg, Ankur ^a   Khanuja, Suman Preet S ^a  

^a CSIR CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF MEDICINAL AND AROMATIC PLANTS   (India)

^b CENTRAL DRUG RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (India)

Author keywords

Cytotoxic; Immunomodulatory; Structure determination; Taxaceae; Taxoid; Taxus wallichiana; X ray analysis

Indexed keywords

1 HYDROXY 2 DEACETOXY 5 DECINNAMOYLTAXININE J; PLANT EXTRACT; TAXOID; TAXUS WALLICHIANA EXTRACT; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VINBLASTINE; VINCRISTINE;

ARTICLE; CYTOTOXICITY; DRUG MECHANISM; IMMUNOMODULATION; SPECTROSCOPY; TAXUS; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CELL LINE, TUMOR; CELL PROLIFERATION; CONCANAVALIN A; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG SCREENING ASSAYS, ANTITUMOR; HUMANS; IMMUNOLOGIC FACTORS; LYMPHOCYTES; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR CONFORMATION; TAXOIDS; TAXUS; VINBLASTINE; VINCRISTINE;

TAXACEAE; TAXUS; TAXUS WALLICHIANA;

EID: 33644967110     PISSN: 0960894X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2006.01.077     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. I.D. Kapoor Handbook of Ayurvedic Medicinal Plants 1990 CRC Boca Raton, FL p 317
2. E. Baloglu, and D.G.I. Kingston J. Nat. Prod. 62 1999 1448
3. G. Appendino Nat. Prod. Rep. 12 1995 349
4. L. Barboni, P. Gariboldi, E. Torregiani, G. Appendino, B. Gabetta, G. Zini, and E. Bombardelli Phytochemistry 33 1993 145
5. S.K. Chattopadhyay, R.P. Sharma, G. Appendino, and P. Gariboldi Phytochemistry 39 1995 869
6. S.K. Chattopadhyay, V. Tripathi, R.P. Sharma, A.S. Shawl, B.S. Joshi, and R. Roy Phytochemistry 50 1999 131
7. S.K. Chattopadhyay, V.K. Tripathi, R.S. Thakur, R.P. Sharma, and S.P. Jain Indian J. Chem. 33B 1994 409
8. S.K. Chattopadhyay, and R.P. Sharma Phytochemistry 39 1995 935
9. S.K. Chattopadhyay, G.C. Saha, R.P. Sharma, S. Kumar, and S. Roy Phytochemistry 42 1996 787
10. S.K. Chattopadhyay, M. Kulshrestha, G.C. Saha, R.P. Sharma, S.P. Jain, and S.. Kumar Planta Med. 62 1996 482
11. S.K. Chattopadhyay, G.C. Saha, M. Kulshrestha, V. Tripathi, R.P. Sharma, and V. Mehta Planta Med. 64 1998 287
12. S.K. Chattopadhyay, V. Tripathi, K.V. Sashidhara, and V.K. Mehta Indian J. Chem. 41B 2002 225
13. G. Appendino, L. Barboni, P. Gariboldi, E. Bombardelli, B. Gabetta, and D. Viterbo J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1993 1587
14. 3).
15. 2. All the non-hydrogen atoms were generated in the ideal positions and the parameters were constrained during the refinements. Programs: XSCANS [(Siemens Analytical X-ray Instrument Inc.: Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 1997) used for data collection and data processing] and SHELXTL-NT [(Bruker AXS: Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 1997) used for structure determination, refinements, and molecular graphics]. CCDC (Deposit No: 294564) contains the supplementary crystallographic data. These data can be obtained free of charge from www.ccdc.cam.uk/conts/retrieving.html or from the Cambridge crystallographic data Centre, 12, Union road, Cambridge, CB2 1EZ,U K; Fax (internat.): +44 1223 336 033; E-mail: deposit@ccdc.cam.ac.uk.
16. T. Mosmann J. Immunol. Methods 65 1983 55
17. A.C. Beekman, A.R.W. Barentsen, H.J. Woerdenbag, W.V. Uden, and N. Pras J. Nat. Prod. 60 1997 325
18. 50 values were expressed as micrograms of compound concentration per milliliter that caused a 50% inhibition of growth compared with controls. Vincristine sulfate (Sigma) and Vinblastine (Sigma) were used as positive controls in every experiment.
19. 50 values of the compound, that is, 50% inhibition concentration and was calculated as results of three assays in triplicate with at least five concentrations.
20. A. Nakamura, K. Nagai, S. Suzuki, K. Ando, and G. Tamura J. Antibiot. 1986 39
21. -5 μg/ml in triplicate wells. Cell activation and proliferation were carried out using the MTT tetrazolium assay as described above.
22. Statistical analysis: Student's t test was used to evaluate the presence of significant difference between control and treated test. Differences with P values <0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.