Evidence Hub

Thiazolidin-4-Ones as Potential Antimicrobial Agents: Experimental and In Silico Evaluation

Christophe Tratrat, Anthi Petrou, Athina A. Geronikaki, Marija Ivanov, Marina Kostić, Marina Sokóvić, Ioannis S. Vizirianakis, Nikoleta F. Theodoroula et al.

Molecules, 2022

46 citations

Abstract

Herein, we report computational and experimental evaluations of the antimicrobial activity of twenty one 2,3-diaryl-thiazolidin-4-ones. All synthesized compounds exhibited an antibacterial activity against six Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria to different extents. Thus, the MIC was in the range of 0.008–0.24 mg/mL, while the MBC was 0.0016–0.48 mg/mL. The most sensitive bacterium was S. Typhimurium, whereas S. aureus was the most resistant. The best antibacterial activity was observed for compound 5 (MIC at 0.008–0.06 mg/mL). The three most active compounds 5, 8, and 15, as well as compound 6, which were evaluated against three resistant strains, MRSA, P. aeruginosa, and E. coli, were more potent against all bacterial strains used than ampicillin. The antifungal activity of some compounds exceeded or were equipotent with those of the reference antifungal agents bifonazole and ketoconazole. The best activity was expressed by compound 5. All compounds exhibited moderate to good drug-likeness scores ranging from −0.39 to 0.39. The docking studies indicated a probable involvement of E. coli Mur B inhibition in the antibacterial action, while CYP51 inhibition is likely responsible for the antifungal activity of the tested compounds. Finally, the assessment of cellular cytotoxicity of the compounds in normal human MRC-5 cells revealed that the compounds were not toxic.

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