Evidence Hub

Synthesis, Characterization, Molecular Docking, and Preliminary Antimicrobial Evaluation of Thiazolidinone Derivatives

Sarmad Saadi Hussein, Karima Fadhil Ali, Fouad Abdulameer Al-Saady

Palestinian medical and pharmaceutical journal/Palestinian medical & pharmaceutical journal, 2024

5 citations

Abstract

Several derivatives carrying thiazolidine-4-one pharmacophore were prepared to evaluate their antimicrobial activities. The set of compounds were shown to possess potential activities as determined by molecular docking studies for both candidal (14-alpha demethylase) and bacterial enzymes (Penicillin binding protein of E. coli). In vitro antimicrobial activities were also performed to confirm the molecular docking results. Molecular characterization by spec-tral techniques (FT-IR, 13C NMR and 1H NMR) was carried out to confirm the identity of the synthesized compounds. The synthesized compounds were evaluated for antibacterial and anticandidal activity by comparing them with the reference drugs (positive controls) ceftriax-one and fluconazole respectively. Four bacterial species (Klebsiella pneumonia, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus epidermis, Staphylococcus aureus) and one fungal species (Candida albicans) were inoculated into petri dishes and were expose to the synthesized compounds by well diffusion method. The series of the proposed compounds were successfully synthesized and some of them were proven to have antibacterial activities comparable to the reference drug. Particularly, the compounds 2c and 2a posessed activities against K. pneumomia being higher than ceftriaxone with average inhibition zone diameters of 17 mm and 16 mm at highest concentration respectively. Compound 2b was effective against E. Coli also yielding higher activity than ceftriaxone achieving an…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a experimental / empirical study, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free