3D-QSAR CoMFA study of some heteroarylpyrroles as possible anticandida agents

Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 154-158

  Sharma, P ^a   Sharma, S ^b   Sharma, Archana ^a   Suresh, B ^c  

^a KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITY   (India)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c JSS COLLEGE OF PHARMACY   (India)

Author keywords

3D QSAR; Anticandida activity; CoMFA; Pyrroles

Indexed keywords

HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUND; POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON DERIVATIVE; PYRROLE DERIVATIVE;

ARTICLE; BOOTSTRAPPING; CANDIDIASIS; COMPARATIVE MOLECULAR FIELD ANALYSIS; DRUG CONFORMATION; DRUG STRUCTURE; MOLECULAR MODEL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

EID: 46349108660     PISSN: 0250474X     EISSN: 19983743     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/0250-474X.41447     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Diamond RD. The growing problem of mycoses in patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. Rev Infect Dis 1991;3:480-6.
2. Georgopapadakou NH, Walsh TJ. Human mycoses: Drugs and targets for emerging pathogens. Science 1994;15:371-3.
3. Beck-Sague CM, Jarvis WR. Secular trends in the epidemiology of nosocomial fungal infections in the United States, 1980-1990. J Inf Dis 1993;167:1247-51.
4. Koltin Y. Targets for antifungal drug discovery. Annu Rep Med Chem 1990;25:141-8.
5. Gokhale VM, Kulkarni VM. Understanding the Antifungal Activity of Terbinafine Analogues Using Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) Models. Bioorg Med Chem 2000;8:2487-99.
6. Karki RG, Kulkarni VM. Three-dimensional Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (3D-QSAR) of 3-Aryloxazolidin-2-one Antibacterials. Bioorg Med Chem 2001;9:3153-60.
7. Artico M, Santo RD, Costi R, Massa S, Retico A, Artico M, et al. Antifungal Agents. 3-Aryl-4-[a-1(H -imidazol-l-yl)arylmethyl]pyrroles:A New Class of Potent Anticandida Agents. J Med Chem 1995;38:4223-33.
8. Cramer RD, Patterson DE, Bunce JD. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA): Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J Am Chem Soc 1988;110:5959-67.
9. Clark M, Cramer RD 3rd, Jones DM, Patterson DE, Simeroth PE. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) Toward its use with 3D structural databases. Tetrahedron Comput Met 1990;3:47-59.
10. Bhongade BA, Gadad AK. 3D-QSAR CoMFA/CoMSIA studies on Urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) inhibitors: A strategic design in novel anticancer agents. Bioorg Med Chem 2004;12:2797-805.
11. Wold S, Ruhe A, Wold H, Dunn III. The collinearity problem in linear regression: The partial least square approach to generalized inverse. J Sci Stat Comput 1984;5:735-43.
12. Cramer RD, Bunce JD, Patterson DE, Crossvalidation, Bootstrapping, and Partial Least Squares Compared with Multiple Regression in Conventional QSAR Studies. Quant Str Act Relat 1988;7:18-25.
13. Wold S, Albano C, Dunn WJ, Edlund U, Esbensen K, Geladi P, et al. Multivariate data analysis in chemistry. In: Kowalski BR, editor. Chemometrics - Mathematics and Statistics in Chemistry, Reidel, Dordrecht; 1984. p. 17-95.
14. Puntambekar D, Giridhar R, Yadav MR. 3D-QSAR studies of farnesyltransferase inhibitors: A comparative molecular field analysis approach. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2006;16:1821-7.
15. Sybyl 6.7, Tripos Associates, 1699 South Hanley Road, St. Louis, USA, MO 63144.
16. Matthew C, Cramer RD, Opdenbosch NV. Validation of the general purpose tripos 5.2 force field. J Comput Chem 1989;10:982-1012.
17. Gasteiger J, Marsili M. Iterative partial equalization of orbital electronegativity-a rapid access to atomic charges. Tetrahedron 1980;36:3219-28.
18. Geladi P, Notes on the history and nature of partial least squares (PLS) modeling. J Chemom 1988;2:231-46.