Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 14, 2026

Synthesis and Characterization of an Aspirin-fumarate Prodrug that Inhibits NFκB Activity and Breast Cancer Stem Cells
13:38

Synthesis and Characterization of an Aspirin-fumarate Prodrug that Inhibits NFκB Activity and Breast Cancer Stem Cells

Published on: January 18, 2017

Cancer chemopreventive activity of sulforamate derivatives

Robert M Moriarty1, Rajesh Naithani, Jerome Kosmeder

  • 14500, Department of Chemistry, SES Building, 845, W. Taylor Street, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago 60607, IL, USA.

European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
|November 23, 2005
PubMed

Insights

New sulforamate derivatives show promise as chemopreventive agents. These compounds effectively induce Phase II enzyme quinone reductase (QR) with reduced cytotoxicity compared to sulforaphane, offering a simpler, cost-effective alternative.

Area of Science:

  • Biochemistry
  • Pharmacology
  • Cancer Research

Background:

  • Chemoprevention involves using natural or synthetic substances to intervene in the carcinogenic process.
  • Induction of Phase II enzymes is a key mechanism in chemoprevention.
  • NAD(P)H: Quinone oxidoreductase (QR) is a crucial Phase II enzyme involved in detoxification.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To synthesize and evaluate novel sulforamate derivatives as monofunctional inducers of quinone reductase (QR).
  • To compare the chemopreventive potential and cytotoxicity of these derivatives against the known compound sulforaphane.

Main Methods:

  • Synthesis of several derivatives of (+)(-) 4-methylsulfinyl-1-(S-methyldithiocarbamyl)-butane (sulforamate).
  • Evaluation of the compounds' effectiveness as inducers of NAD(P)H: Quinone oxidoreductase (QR) in Hepa1c1c7 murine hepatoma cells.
  • Assessment of cytotoxicity of the synthesized derivatives.

Main Results:

  • Some sulforamate derivatives exhibited significantly reduced cytotoxicity compared to sulforaphane.
  • The induction potential of these novel derivatives was comparable to that of sulforaphane.
  • The compounds effectively induced the Phase II enzyme quinone reductase (QR).

Conclusions:

  • Sulforamate derivatives represent a promising class of chemopreventive agents.
  • These compounds offer a potentially simpler, more cost-effective, and readily available option for cancer chemoprevention.
  • The reduced cytotoxicity combined with potent QR induction supports their therapeutic potential.

More Related Videos

Functionalized Spirocyclic Heterocycle Synthesis and Cytotoxicity Assay05:17

Functionalized Spirocyclic Heterocycle Synthesis and Cytotoxicity Assay

Published on: February 9, 2021

Spectrophotometric Screening for Potential Inhibitors of Cytosolic Glutathione S-Transferases14:57

Spectrophotometric Screening for Potential Inhibitors of Cytosolic Glutathione S-Transferases

Published on: October 10, 2020

Related Concept Videos

Cancer Prevention02:59

Cancer Prevention

Several factors can increase the risk of cancer in an individual. About 50% of cancer cases can be prevented by adopting a healthy lifestyle, regular exercise, eating healthy, and following a modest cancer prevention diet. Epidemiological studies have consistently shown that populations with vegetable and fruit-rich diets have reduced the incidence of cancer. On the other hand, populations who have a diet rich in animal fat, red meat, junk food, or high calories are predisposed to cancer.
Some...
Pharmacogenetics of Drug Targets: β₂-Adrenergic Receptors, Apo E, Thymidylate Synthase01:11

Pharmacogenetics of Drug Targets: β₂-Adrenergic Receptors, Apo E, Thymidylate Synthase

Genetic polymorphisms in drug targets have emerged as critical determinants of interindividual variability in drug response and toxicity. Pharmacogenomic investigations increasingly focus on identifying these variations to personalize and optimize therapeutic interventions. A drug target may be a receptor, enzyme, or signaling protein involved in pharmacologic responses or disease-related pathways. While early pharmacogenetic studies focused primarily on drug metabolism, current research...
Pharmacogenetics of Phase II Enzymes: N-acetyltransferase, Thiopurine S-methyltransferase, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase01:27

Pharmacogenetics of Phase II Enzymes: N-acetyltransferase, Thiopurine S-methyltransferase, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase

Phase II biotransformation reactions are essential for detoxifying and eliminating xenobiotics, including many pharmaceutical compounds. These reactions typically involve conjugation, the covalent attachment of polar endogenous groups such as glucuronic acid, sulfate, methyl, or acetyl moieties to functional groups introduced during Phase I metabolism. The resulting conjugates are more water-soluble, enabling efficient renal or biliary excretion.The major classes of Phase II enzymes include...
Drug Metabolism: Phase II Reactions01:14

Drug Metabolism: Phase II Reactions

Phase II reactions are essential for the detoxification and elimination of drugs from the body. These reactions involve the conjugation of parent drugs or their phase I metabolites with endogenous molecules, resulting in more hydrophilic drug conjugates. The primary conjugation reactions in this phase are sulfation and glucuronidation. Both sulfation and glucuronidation typically produce biologically inactive metabolites. However, in some cases involving prodrugs, active metabolites may be...
Preparation and Reactions of Sulfides02:26

Preparation and Reactions of Sulfides

Sulfides are the sulfur analog of ethers, just as thiols are the sulfur analog of alcohol. Like ethers, sulfides also consist of two hydrocarbon groups bonded to the central sulfur atom. Depending upon the type of groups present, sulfides can be symmetrical or asymmetrical. Symmetrical sulfides can be prepared via an SN2 reaction between 2 equivalents of an alkyl halide and one equivalent of sodium sulfide.
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity01:25

Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity

Mutagenicity and carcinogenicity refer to the ability of drugs to cause genetic defects and induce cancer, respectively. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies agents into four groups based on their carcinogenic potential. Group 1 agents are known human carcinogens; group 2A agents are probably carcinogenic to humans; group 3 agents lack data to support their role in carcinogenesis; and group 4 includes agents for which data support that they are not likely to be...