Department Of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Natural Products

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://kr.cup.edu.in/handle/32116/52

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.Drug

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    FDA approved fused pyrimidine-based drugs
    (Elsevier, 2022-10-14T00:00:00) Thakur, Shikha; Ansari, Arshad J.; Joshi, Gaurav
    The present chapter is a compilation and analysis of USFDA approved small drug candidates about fused pyrimidine pharmacophore. Out of 63 drugs approved so far, nearly 38% of drugs are approved for chemotherapeutic treatment of cancer. Further, antiviral category shares 19% followed by drugs for cardiovascular disorders (14%), inflammatory diseases (9%), respiratory disorders (6%), neurological disorders (5%), benign prostatic hypertrophy (3%), erectile dysfunction (2%), diabetes (2%) and thrombocytopenia (2%). The chapter further focuses on key biological targets affected by the reported drug and their pharmacological mechanism of action. We have also focused on elucidating key chemical taxonomy utilized in fused pharmacophores of pyrimidine. The analysis suggested purine nucleosides (11 drugs) and xanthines/hypoxanthines (11 drugs) share the major chunk utilized in drug development out of fused pyrimidine nucleus. � 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Toxicophore exploration as a screening technology for drug design and discovery: techniques, scope and limitations
    (Springer Verlag, 2016) Singh, Pankaj Kumar; Negi, Arvind; Gupta, Pawan Kumar; Chauhan, Monika; Kumar, Raj
    Toxicity is a common drawback of newly designed chemotherapeutic agents. With the exception of pharmacophore-induced toxicity (lack of selectivity at higher concentrations of a drug), the toxicity due to chemotherapeutic agents is based on the toxicophore moiety present in the drug. To date, methodologies implemented to determine toxicophores may be broadly classified into biological, bioanalytical and computational approaches. The biological approach involves analysis of bioactivated metabolites, whereas the computational approach involves a QSAR-based method, mapping techniques, an inverse docking technique and a few toxicophore identification/estimation tools. Being one of the major steps in drug discovery process, toxicophore identification has proven to be an essential screening step in drug design and development. The paper is first of its kind, attempting to cover and compare different methodologies employed in predicting and determining toxicophores with an emphasis on their scope and limitations. Such information may prove vital in the appropriate selection of methodology and can be used as screening technology by researchers to discover the toxicophoric potentials of their designed and synthesized moieties. Additionally, it can be utilized in the manipulation of molecules containing toxicophores in such a manner that their toxicities might be eliminated or removed. ? 2015, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.