Welcome to LookChem.com Sign In|Join Free

CAS

  • or

110224-69-6

Post Buying Request

110224-69-6 Suppliers

Recommended suppliersmore

  • Product
  • FOB Price
  • Min.Order
  • Supply Ability
  • Supplier
  • Contact Supplier

110224-69-6 Usage

Check Digit Verification of cas no

The CAS Registry Mumber 110224-69-6 includes 9 digits separated into 3 groups by hyphens. The first part of the number,starting from the left, has 6 digits, 1,1,0,2,2 and 4 respectively; the second part has 2 digits, 6 and 9 respectively.
Calculate Digit Verification of CAS Registry Number 110224-69:
(8*1)+(7*1)+(6*0)+(5*2)+(4*2)+(3*4)+(2*6)+(1*9)=66
66 % 10 = 6
So 110224-69-6 is a valid CAS Registry Number.

110224-69-6Downstream Products

110224-69-6Relevant articles and documents

2,4-Diamino-5-benzylpyrimidines as Antibacterial Agents. 8. The 3,4,5-Triethyl Isostere of Trimethoprim. A Study of Specificity

Roth, Barbara,Aig, Edward

, p. 1998 - 2004 (2007/10/02)

3,4,5-Triethylacetophenone was synthesized in 60percent yield by a Friedel-Crafts reaction from 4-ethylacetophenone and converted to 2,4-diamino-5-(3,4,5-triethylbenzyl)pyrimidine (2), a trimethoprim (1) isostere, by standard techniques.This compound is more lipophilic than 1 by three log units (log P, octanol/water).Compound 2 was approximately equipotent with 1 in inhibiting Escherichia coli dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR), 2-fold more potent against P. berghei and N. gonorrhoeae DHFR, and 10 and 25 times better an inhibitor of rat and chicken liver DHFR, respectively.Although the 3,4-dimethoxy analogue 19 was 10-fold less inhibitory to E. coli DHFR than 1, it was 3-4 times more potent on the vertebrate isozymes, whereas the diethyl congener 10 followed 19 in its E. coli DHFR binding but was less active on rat and chicken DHFR.Therefore, a significant portion of the selectivity of 1 for bacterial, as opposed to vertebrate, DHFR, involves the methoxy functions.An analysis of the X-ray data on 1 and 2 complexed with chicken DHFR, coupled with kinetic data, led to the conclusion that the differences in binding energies of the methoxy and ethyl compounds probably involve desolvation factors, as well as direct energies of interaction with protein atoms.Thus, one cannot invoke lipophilicity or shape alone in explaining the relationship in properties of 1 and 2.

Post a RFQ

Enter 15 to 2000 letters.Word count: 0 letters

Attach files(File Format: Jpeg, Jpg, Gif, Png, PDF, PPT, Zip, Rar,Word or Excel Maximum File Size: 3MB)

1

What can I do for you?
Get Best Price

Get Best Price for 110224-69-6