SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Anti-Inflammatory Activities of 8-Benzylaminoxanthines Showing High Adenosine A<sub>2A</sub> and Dual A<sub>1</sub>/A<sub>2A</sub> Receptor Affinity.

Int J Mol Sci · 2023-09-05

DOI: 10.3390/ijms241813707PMID: 37762006

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Chronic inflammation plays an important role in the development of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson's disease (PD). In the present study, we synthesized 25 novel xanthine derivatives with variable substituents at the N1-, N3- and C8-position as adenosine receptor antagonists with potential anti-inflammatory activity. The compounds were investigated in radioligand binding studies at all four human adenosine receptor subtypes, A1, A2A, A2B and A3. Compounds showing nanomolar A2A and dual A1/A2A affinities were obtained. Three compounds, 19, 22 and 24, were selected for further studies. Docking and molecular dynamics simulation studies indicated binding poses and interactions within the orthosteric site of adenosine A1 and A2A receptors. In vitro studies confirmed the high metabolic stability of the compounds, and the absence of toxicity at concentrations of up to 12.5 µM in various cell lines (SH-SY5Y, HepG2 and BV2). Compounds 19 and 22 showed anti-inflammatory activity in vitro. In vivo studies in mice investigating carrageenan- and formalin-induced inflammation identified compound 24 as the most potent anti-inflammatory derivative. Future studies are warranted to further optimize the compounds and to explore their therapeutic potential in neurodegenerative diseases.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.