Arch. Pharm. Chem. Life Sci. 2006, 339, 32–40
Anti-inflammatory 1,2,4-triazole derivatives
39
with the internationally accepted principles for laboratory ani-
mal use and care as found in the European community guide-
lines. The test compounds were dissolved in 0.5% w/v carboxy
methyl cellulose (CMC) in water.
References
[1] A. A. Abd-Elhafez, H. M. Mohamed, H. Y. Hassan, G. S. El-
Karamany, N. A. El-Koussi, A. F. Youssef., Bull. Pharm. Sci.;
Assiut University 1997, 20, 47–61.
[2] H. Y. Hassan, A. A. El-Shorbagi, N. A. El-Koussi, A. O.
Abdel-Zaher, Bull. Pharm. Sci.; Assiut University 1994, 17,
27–39.
Anti-inflammatory activity
Anti-inflammatory activity of the compounds under investiga-
tion was studied in rats using carrageenan. A suspension of the
tested compounds and reference drugs Indomethacin and Cele-
coxib in carboxy methyl cellulose (CMC) solution (0.5% w/v in
water) was administrated orally to rats in two dose levels (5,
10 mg/kg). Control animals were similarly treated with CMC
(0.5% w/v in water).
[3] L. Czollner, G. Szilagyi, J. Lango, J. Janaky, Arch. Pharm.
(Weinheim) 1990, 323, 221–223.
[4] L. Czollner, G. Szilagyi, J. Lango, J. Janaky, Arch. Pharm.
(Weinheim) 1990, 323, 225–227.
After 30 min, 0.1 mL of freshly prepared 1% carrageenan solu-
tion in normal saline was injected into the subplantar region of
the right hind paw according to the method of Hernandez-Perez
et al. [26]. The right paw volume was measured by Digital
plethysmometer LE7500 (Panlab S.L., Cornella, Barcelona,
Spain). directly before and at 1, 2, 3 h intervals after administra-
tion of the tested compounds.
The anti-inflammatory activity of the tested compound and
reference drugs was determined with the following formula
[29]:
[5] E. Boz, G. Szilagyi, J. Janaky, Arch. Pharm. (Weinheim)
1989, 322, 583–587.
[6] G. Szilagyi, T. Somoroi, E. Bozo, J. Longo, G. Nagy, J.
Reiter, J. Janaky, F. Andrasi, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 1990, 25,
95–101.
[7] M. Tandon, J. P. Barthwal, T. N. Bhalla, K. P. Bhargava,
Indian J. Chem. 1981, 20B, 1017–1018.
[8] A. R. Bhat, G. V. Bhat, G. G. Shenoy, J. Pharm. Pharmacol.
2000, 53, 267–272.
[9] M. Amir, S. Kumar, Arch. Pharm, Chem. Life Sci. 2005, 338,
% Anti-inflammatory activity = (Vc – Vt/Vc) N 100
24–31.
[10] E. Palaska, G. Sahin, P. Kelicen, N. T. Durlu, G. Altinok,
where Vc represents the mean increase in paw volume in the
control group of rats. Vt represents the mean increase in paw
volume in rats treated with test compounds and data are
expressed as mean l S.E.M., the Students t-test was applied to
determine the significance of the difference between the control
group and rats treated with the test compounds.
Farmaco 2002, 57, 101–107.
[11] L. Labanauskas, V. Kalcas, E. Udrenaite, P. Gaidelis, A.
BrukÐtus, Farmaco 2004, 59, 255–259.
[12] K. C. Ragenovic, V. Dimora, A. Buzarovska, Molecule 2001,
6, 815–824.
[13] S. Demirayak, K. Benkli, K. Guven, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2000,
35, 1037–1040.
Ulcerogenic activity [27]
Albino rats have been divided into different groups consisting of
six animals in each group. Ulcerogenic activity was evaluated
after p. o. administration of the tested compounds or Indometha-
cin at doses of 10, 50, and 100 mg/kg, control rats received p.o.
administration of vehicle (suspension of 0.5% w/v CMC). Food
but not water was removed 24 h before administration of the
tested compounds. After 6 h, the rats were sacrified and the sto-
mach was removed, and opened along the greater curvature,
washed with distilled water and cleaned gently by dipping in sal-
ine. The mucosed damage for each stomach was examined using
a Stereoscopic microscope (Nikon SMZ 1B stereoscopic micro-
scope, Montana, USA), the mucosal damage was compared with
Indomethacin. The mean score of each treated group minus the
mean score of control group was regarded as severity index of
gastric mucosal damage. Data are expresses as mean l S.E.M., the
Students t-test was applied to determine the significance of the
difference between the standard group and rats treated with the
test compounds.
[14] F. P. Invidiata, G. Fuurno, Eur. J. Med.Chem. 2000, 35, 715–
720.
[15] A. Tasaka, N. Tamura, Y. Matsushita, K. Teranishi, R.
Hayashi, K. Okongi, K. Itoh, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1993, 41,
1035–1042.
[16] A. Tasaka, N. Tamura, Y. Matsushita, K. Teranishi, R.
Hayashi, K. Okongi, K. Itoh, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1993, 41,
1043–1048.
[17] L. Meerpoel, L. Backx, L. Veken, J. Heeres, D. Corens, A.
Groot, F. Odds, F. Gerven, F. Woestenborghs, A. Breda, M.
Oris, P. Dorsselaer, G. Willemsens, K. Vermuyten, P. Mari-
chal, H. Bossche, J. Ausma, M. Borgers, J. Med. Chem. 2005,
48, 2184–2193.
[18] I. A. Shehata, Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal 2003, 11, 87–
96.
[19] P. Fei Xu, Z. Zhang, X. Ping Hui, Z. Yi Zhang, R. Liang
Zheng, J. Chin. Chem. Soc. 2004, 51, 315–319.
Acute toxicity (LD50) [28]
[20] J .T. Witkowski, R. K. Kobins, R. W. Sidwell, L. N. Simon, J.
Med. Chem. 1972, 15, 1150–1154.
The median lethal doses (LD50) of the most active compounds 4
and 8 were determined in mice. Groups of male adult albino
mice, each of six animals, were injected i.p. with graded doses of
each of the test compounds. The percentage of mortality in each
group of animals was determined 24 h after injection. Computa-
tion of LD50 was processed by a graphical method.
[21] R. Bꢀhm, C. Karow, Pharmazie 1981, 36, 243–247.
[22] C. A. Lipinski, J. L. Lamattina, L. A. Hohnke, J. Med Chem.
1985, 28, 1628–1636.
[23] G. W. Sawdey, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1957, 79, 1955–1960.
i 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim