• D Giles Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Acharya and BM Reddy College of Pharmacy, Soladevanahalli, ACHIT Nagar Post, Bangalore-107
  • Sai Prabha Acharya and BM Reddy College of Pharmacy
  • Guru Basavarajaswamy Pm Acharya and BM Reddy College of Pharmacy


Objective: The aim of the present work was to design the novel series of chalcone derivatives of indane-1,3-dione for its inhibition towards COX-2.

Methods: COX-2 inhibitors were designed on the binding ability of the compounds with the target. Docking analysis was performed using Acclerys discovery studio 3.5. Molecular properties, ADME parameters, Toxicity parameters were analysed using the same in-silico tool.

Results: Most of the designed compounds were possessing good binding affinity towards the COX-2. Other in-silico parameters such as ADMET and TOPKAT were within the appreciable range. Among all the designed compounds several compounds possess good CDOCKER energy and CDOCKER interaction energy with specific amino acid indicating that it could possess good binding with the target. Most of the design compounds could act as COX-2 because it forms hydrogen bonding with ARG120.

Conclusion: Compound l possess good binding affinity indicating that the presence of hydroxyl group in the phenyl ring possess good activity which can be further optimized for its druggabality after its pharmacological activity.


Keywords: Anti-inflammatory, Docking, CDOCKER, Cyclooxygenase


Download data is not yet available.


1. Mantovani A, Allavena P, Sica A, Balkwill F. Cancer-related inflammation. Natur 2008;454:436-44.
2. Libby P, Ridker PM, Maseri A. Inflammation and atherosclerosis. Circulation 2002;105:1135-43.
3. Tricarico C, Pinzani P, Bianchi S, Paglieriani M, Distante V, Pazzagli M, et al. Quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction: normalization to rRNA or single housekeeping genes is inappropriate for human tissue biopsies. Anal Biochem 2002;309:293-300.
4. Hawkey C. COX-2 inhibitors. Lancet 1999;353:307-14.
5. Vane JR, Mitchell JA, Appleton I, Tomlinson A, Baiely DB, Croxtall J, et al. Inducible isoforms of cyclooxygenase and nitric-oxide synthase in inflammation. PNAS 1994:91:2046-50.
6. Bertolini A, Ottani A, Sandrini M. Selective COX-2 inhibitors and dual acting anti-inflammatory drugs: critical remarks. Frontiers Med Chem 2004:1:85-95.
7. Gane PJ, DeanPM. Recent advances in structure-based rational drug design. Curr Opin Biol 2000:10:401-4.
8. Lackey KE. Lessons from the drug discovery of lapatinib, a dual ErbB1/2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Curr Top Med Chem 2006:6:435-60.
9. Hopkins AL, Groom CR. The druggable genome. Nat Rev Drug Discovery 2002:1:727-30.
10. Kurumbail RG, Stevens AM, Gierse JK, McDonald JJ, Stegeman RA, Pak JY, et al. Structural basis for selective inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 by anti-inflammatory agents. Nat 1996:384:644-8.
11. Momany FA, Rone R. Validation of the general purpose QUANTA® 3.2/CHARMm® force field. J Comp Chem 1992:13:888-900.
12. Chen KC, Chen CYC. Stroke prevention by traditional Chinese medicine? A genetic algorithm, support vector machine and molecular dynamics approach. Soft Matter 2011:7:4001-8.
13. Sousa SF, Fernandes PA, Ramos MJ. Protein–ligand docking: current status and future challenges. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinf 2006:65:15-26.
14. Ekins S, RoseJ. In silico ADME/Tox: the state of the art. J Mol Graphics Modell 2002:20:305-9.
15. Venkataramana CHS, Sravani KMR, Singh S, Madhavan V. Insilico ADME and toxcity studies of some novel indole derivatives. JAPS 2011:1:159-62.
322 Views | 532 Downloads
How to Cite
Giles, D., S. Prabha, and G. B. Pm. “DESIGN OF COX-2 INHIBITORS–AN IN-SILICO APPROACH”. International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vol. 7, no. 9, July 2015, pp. 46-50,
Original Article(s)