Design, Molecular Docking, Synthesis, and Pharmacological Evaluation of Nabumetone-Derived Oxadiazole and Thiadiazole Schiff Bases as Potential EGFR Inhibitors for NSCLC
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32947/ajps.v25i5.1318Keywords:
Non-small cell lung cancer, Epidermal growth factor receptor, 1,3,4-Oxadiazole, 1,3,4-Thiadiazole, Schiff base, Cytotoxicity AssayAbstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) making up about 85%. Overexpression or mutation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) drives tumor proliferation in NSCLC. Although first-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) like gefitinib and erlotinib showing a rapid acquired resistance, often via the T790M mutation, limits their long-term effectiveness.
This study synthesized two new nabumetone-based Schiff base derivatives with either a 1,3,4-oxadiazole ring (compounds 5a-c) or a 1,3,4-thiadiazole ring (compounds 6a-e). Characterization was conducted via FT-IR and NMR spectroscopy, and In vitro cytotoxicity assays using the MTT method were conducted on A549 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells at different time intervals (e.g., 24 and 48 hours) to evaluate the antiproliferative effect. The 1,3,4-thiadiazole series (6a-e) was more potent than the oxadiazoles (5a-c), with compounds 6b and 6e showing the lowest 48-hour IC50 values (~40.9 µM and ~30.2 µM, respectively), outperforming erlotinib (IC50 ~51.3 µM). These results suggest that thiadiazole sulfur substituents (e.g., 6b, 6e) enhance anticancer activity through stronger interactions. This work introduces new nabumetone-derived compounds with promising antiproliferative activity against NSCLC, identifying compounds 6b and 6e as potent lead candidates for further in vivo and pharmacokinetic evaluation to advance EGFR-targeted cancer therapies. Molecular docking investigations further validated these results, demonstrating that all compounds have stronger interactions within the EGFR binding pocket, achieving superior PLP fitness scores range from 90.61 to 78.46 compared to erlotinib 77.62. These computational findings support the experimental data, indicating the promising potential of these derivatives as EGFR inhibitors.
References
1- Boloker G, Wang C, Zhang J. Updated statistics of lung and bronchus cancer in United States (2018). Journal of thoracic disease. 2018;10(3):1158.
2- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2019;69(1):7-34.
3- Howlader N, Noone A, Krapcho M, Miller D, Brest A, Yu M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2017. National Cancer Institute. 2020;4.
4- K. Bhanumathy K, Balagopal A, Vizeacoumar FS, Vizeacoumar FJ, Freywald A, Giambra V. Protein tyrosine kinases: their roles and their targeting in leukemia. Cancers. 2021;13(2):184.
5- Park K, Tan E-H, O'Byrne K, Zhang L, Boyer M, Mok T, et al. Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Oncology. 2016;17(5):577-89.
6- Shepherd F, Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, Tan E, Hirsh V, Thongprasert S, et al. A randomized placebo-controlled trial of erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following failure of 1st line or 2nd line chemotherapy. A National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2004;22(14_suppl):7022-.
7- Cohen MH, Williams GA, Sridhara R, Chen G, McGuinn Jr WD, Morse D, et al. United States Food and Drug Administration drug approval summary: gefitinib (ZD1839; Iressa) tablets. Clinical Cancer Research. 2004;10(4):1212-8.
8- Blencke S, Zech B, Engkvist O, Greff Z, Őrfi L, Horváth Z, et al. Characterization of a conserved structural determinant controlling protein kinase sensitivity to selective inhibitors. Chemistry & biology. 2004;11(5):691-701.
9- Zeng Y, Yu D, Tian W, Wu F. Resistance mechanisms to osimertinib and emerging therapeutic strategies in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Current opinion in oncology. 2022;34(1):54-65.
10- Kerru N, Gummidi L, Maddila S, Gangu KK, Jonnalagadda SB. A review on recent advances in nitrogen-containing molecules and their biological applications. Molecules. 2020;25(8):1909.
11- Glomb T, Szymankiewicz K, Świątek P. Anti-Cancer Activity of Derivatives of 1,3,4-Oxadiazole. Molecules. 2018;23(12):3361.
12- Ali YS, Mahdi MF, Abd Razik BM, Aburjai T. Design, Molecular Docking, Synthesis, Characterization and Preliminary Evaluation of Novel 1, 3, 4-Oxadiazole Derivatives as Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 2 Inhibitors. Al Mustansiriyah Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2025;25(1):94-109.
13- Janowska S, Paneth A, Wujec M. Cytotoxic properties of 1, 3, 4-thiadiazole derivatives—A review. Molecules. 2020;25(18):4309.
14- Alawad KM, Mahdi MF, Raauf AM. Molecular Docking study, and In vitro Evaluation of Antitumor Activity of Some New Isoxazoline and Pyrazoline Derivatives of Nabumetone against breast cancer cell line (MCF-7). Al Mustansiriyah Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2022;22(3):24-34.
15- Stanzione F, Giangreco I, Cole JC. Use of molecular docking computational tools in drug discovery. Progress in medicinal chemistry. 2021;60:273-343.
16- Coumar MS. Molecular docking for computer-aided drug design: Fundamentals, techniques, resources and applications: Academic Press; 2021.
17- Niu P, Kang J, Tian X, Song L, Liu H, Wu J, et al. Synthesis of 2-amino-1, 3, 4-oxadiazoles and 2-amino-1, 3, 4-thiadiazoles via sequential condensation and I2-mediated oxidative C–O/C–S bond formation. The Journal of organic chemistry. 2015;80(2):1018-24.
18- Dutta B, Das K, Goswami B. Cycloaddition Reaction: Synthesis of 5-Substituted 1, 3, 4-Thiadiazolo [3, 2-a] pyrimidin-6-one. Journal of Chemical Research, Synopses. 1999(1):36-7.
19- Fu Y, Zhao J, Chen Z. Insights into the molecular mechanisms of protein‐ligand interactions by molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation: a case of oligopeptide binding protein. Computational and mathematical methods in medicine. 2018;2018(1):3502514.
20- Patil R, Das S, Stanley A, Yadav L, Sudhakar A, Varma AK. Optimized hydrophobic interactions and hydrogen bonding at the target-ligand interface leads the pathways of drug-designing. PloS one. 2010;5(8):e12029.
21- Gao Q, Liu S, Wu X, Zhang J, Wu A. Direct annulation of hydrazides to 1, 3, 4-oxadiazoles via oxidative C (CO)–C (methyl) bond cleavage of methyl ketones. Organic letters. 2015;17(12):2960-3.
22- Xavier A, Srividhya N. Synthesis and study of Schiff base ligands. IOSR Journal of Applied Chemistry. 2014;7(11):06-15.
23- Abid OH. Preparation and Identification of Novel 1, 3-Oxazepine Derivatives by Cycloaddition Reactions [2+ 5] of Selected Carboxylic Acid Anhydrides with Imines Derived from 4-methyl aniline. Al-Mustansiriyah Journal of Science. 2018;29(2):93-100.
24- Yu W, Huang G, Zhang Y, Liu H, Dong L, Yu X, et al. I2-mediated oxidative C–O bond formation for the synthesis of 1, 3, 4-oxadiazoles from aldehydes and hydrazides. The Journal of Organic Chemistry. 2013;78(20):10337-43.
25- Majeed RHA, Hussein HA, Abdullah MA. Preparation and characterization of novel schiff base derived from 4-nitro benzaldehyde and its cytotoxic activities. International Journal of Molecular and Cellular Medicine. 2022;11(4):285.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ahmed Haloob Kadhim, Monther Faisal Mahdi, Ayad M.R. Raauf
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
