# Introduction ancer is not a contagious neither infectious disease, but it has become a second leading cause of death worldwide and travels from one end to the other via bloodstream within the body system 1,2 . It can be caused by both external and internal factors, e.g. tobacco, infectious organisms, chemicals, and radiation are for outside while inherited mutations, hormones, and immune conditions for internal factor. Moreover, all of these factors may work together or in series to start or enhance carcinogenesis 3 . The cure for cancer remain surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy and adult, as well as, children can be affected. However, cases of children having cancer are limited 4 . Colon cancer as a worldwide known health problem forays more than a million people every year, which has been the cause of death to over 600,000 people 5 . It is found to be the usual cause of death in comparison to other types of cancer that exist 6,7 . Several features that may cause an increment in colon cancer risks comprise diet, diabetes, aging, obesity, genomic instability, etc. Over the last half-century, the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) has approved more than one hundred drugs for clinical treatment of cancers. Nevertheless the search for new and/or improved chemical compounds as potential anticancer agents continues with the hope that better efficacy and more manageable adverse side effects of pharmaceutical drugs may be achieved. Molecular modeling, screening and mimicking of natural compound derivatives have been among several drug discovery approaches to rationally design and modified structures that may confer a better therapeutic index 8 or that can cure cancer in the human race 9 . Among such compounds are pyrazole and its derivatives, pyrazoles are class of heterocyclic compounds used for the development of drugs, and they have attracted the attention of several researchers due to their extensive biotic actions such as anticancer 10 , antifungal 11 , antiviral 12 , antiinflammatory 14,15 . More so, pyrazole derivatives such as Pyrazolopyrimidine and pyrazolo [4,3-d]pyrimdin-7-one perform some pharmacological activities which can never be put aside in the medical world, for example as antihypertensive 15 , antiviral 16,17 , tuberculostatic 18 , herbicidal agents 19 , antileishmanial 20 and treatment of heart diseases 21 . Therefore, the structural features of the Pyrazoles have been recognized as vital parameters due to their bioactivity as therapeutic aids. Several pyrazoles have been commercialized such as omeprazole, Albendazole, mebendazole, candesartan, telmisartan, astemizole [22][23][24] . Quantitative Structural Activity Relationship (QSAR) as a statistical model embroils the relationship between physicochemical parameters of a chemical compound to its biological activity 25 . It has attracted vast usefulness for linking molecular evidence with biotic activities and many other physicochemical properties as well as its helpfulness for drug design, discovery, and development 26 . QSAR helps in the prediction of toxicity of materials in bulk system, for instance, drug-like compounds and are very useful in case of the classic chemicals [27][28][29][30] . The use of molecular descriptors calculated from quantum chemical methods for development of QSAR models has been described to be sufficient for generating comprehensive QSAR. Thus the use of quantum chemical descriptors has countless potential [31][32][33][34] . Molecular docking studies divulge information on the interaction between the drug-like compound known as a ligand and an enzyme/receptor through recognizing the active positions within the enzyme along with the binding energy calculation 34 . In molecular docking, scoring is a statistical way of predicting the strength of the interactions which are non-covalent in between a ligand and a receptor. Therefore, the calculations of interaction energy can be offered in the form of "dock score" 35 . Consequently, in this research, twenty pyrazole derivatives with known anti-colon cancer activities 21 as displayed in Figure 1 were optimized using Density Functional Theory (DFT) method so as to obtain molecular descriptors for the compounds. These , b). Thus, the major objectives of this work are: (i) to calculate molecular descriptors with the use of quantum chemical method via Density Functional Theory (DFT), (ii) to develop QSAR model which probe into biological activity of the studied compounds, and (iii) to calculate the free energy of interactions (binding affinity, Î?"G) of the ligand with the receptor in the binding site through molecular docking. Figure 1: The schematic structures of the pyrazole derivatives, the compounds were numbered as used in [20] II. # Computational Details a) Ligand optimization and molecular descriptors The equilibrium geometries for the twenty optimized at Density Functional Theory (DFT). The use of DFT method entails three-parameter density functional, which comprises Becke's gradient exchange correction 37 and the Lee, Yang, Parr correlation functional (i.e., B3LYP) 38 . The accuracy of DFT calculations depends on the particular functional chosen and basis sets. However, 6-31G** basis set has been found to be appropriate for the confirmation search and calculation of drug-like compounds 39 . Therefore 6-31G** basis set was used in this work. Also, the optimized compounds were used to calculate molecular parameters/descriptors that described the bioactivity (IC 50 ) of the compounds. The optimized molecular structures were used for the docking study to estimate the binding affinity of the compounds to the colon cancer cell line, HT29 receptor (PDB ID: 2N8A). The optimization of the compounds was carried out using quantum chemical software Spartan '14 by wavefunctionInc 40 . (S = 1/?) eV -1 Electro negativity [µ = 1/2 (E HOMO -E LUMO )] eV Nucleophilicity (? = µ 2 /2?) eV DM P HOMO LUMO SE (N+N)/2 BD ? S µ ? # b) Data processing and QSAR modeling Furthermore, the chosen calculated parameters were engaged to develop quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) model to link the bioactivity to the calculated molecular descriptors obtained from the studied compounds 41 . This was achieved using multiple linear regression (MLR) method which is a recurrent statistical technique used in developing QSAR model. MLR and correlation analyses were carried out by the statistics software SPSS 13.0 version. Before MLR analysis, the person correlation table was used to examine collinearity among the descriptors (r > 0.90). The descriptors with higher correlation with the dependent variable (IC 50 ] were retained, and the others were removed from the descriptor data matrix. The remaining descriptors were used to construct the MLR model, by the stepwise method. Moreover, the QSAR model was validated using some statistical equations such as cross validation (R 2 ) and adjusted R 2 . Cross validation is a mathematical method which oversees the reliability of QSAR model that can be used for a set of facts as shown in equation 1. CV. R 2 = 1 ? ?(? obs ?? cal ) 2 ?(? obs ?? obs ) 2 (1) The adjusted R 2 could be calculated using equation ( 2) R a 2 = (N?I)×R 2 ?P N?P?1 (2) where N is number of observations (compounds), p is number of descriptors, Also, for a good model, the standard error of estimate (s) of a set of data should be low, and this is defined as follows: ?? = ? ?(?? ?????? ??? ?????? ) 2 ??????1 (3) To judge the overall significance of the regression coefficients, the variance ratio (F) which is the ration of regression mean square to deviations mean square can be defined as follows: The F value has two degrees of freedom: p, N ? p ? 1. The computed F value of a model should be significant at p < 0.05; thus for overall significance of the regression coefficients, the F value should be high. # c) Molecular Docking and binding affinity The downloaded HT29 receptor (PDB ID: 2N8A 42 ) from protein data bank was treated i.e., removal of water molecules, ligand, and cofactors from the receptor with the use of discovery studio. Then, both the receptor and ligand were converted to the acceptable format (pdbqt) for AutoDockvina programme. The grid dimension used for all the 2N8A protein was are 50 × 40 ×40 Å (grid size) with point separated by 1.000 Å (grid-point spacing). The docking was done using autodock vina which was inspired by Darwinian evolution theory to be iterative optimization method 43 which involves search Algorithm. At the completion of the docking runs, ligand showing different conformations known as Binding modes were obtained with their respective binding affinity. The stable pattern was assumed to be the one with the lowest binding affinity and was taken for post-docking analysis using Edupymol version 1.7.4.4. # III. Result and Discussion a) QSAR modeling The molecular descriptors calculated for the twenty pyrazole compounds served as independent variables, while the observed inhibitory actions (IC 50, µM) against cancer cells line as the dependent variable in the development of QSAR model via multiple linear regression (MLR). These molecular descriptors used for QSAR model were displayed in Tables 2 and 3. In QSAR study, the quality of a model is evaluated by its fitting and prediction abilities; however, for a model to be acceptable, its predictability power is of paramount important. Therefore, Pearson's matrix was used for the selection of suitable descriptors for the QSAR study (Table 4). The selected descriptors were used to build a linear QSAR model to understand how multiple linear regression (MLR) equations can explain the structural key points correlating to differential behavior in bioactivity against colon cancer cell (HT29) as shown in equation 4. This model was validated statistically by using the squared fitting factor (R 2 ), cross validation (CV.R 2 ), adjusted fitting factor ( adj R 2 ) and variation ratio (F). The developed model was very robust in predicting satisfactory the experimental values. The high values of F, R 2 , CV.R 2 and adj R 2 as shown in Table 5 indicated that the models are statistically acceptable and also have good external predictability 44,45 . The calculated R 2 is 0.9564; this revealed a reasonable fitness, and it also uncovered the efficiency of the model as displayed in equation 4. The value for CV.R 2 was calculated to be 0.9542 which is greater than 0.5 (standard) 46 , and this showed the reliability and acceptability of the model as well as the adjusted R 2 with 0.9247 which was greater than 0.6 (Table 5) IC The QSAR model contained eight descriptors in different combinations; each descriptor with either positive or negative coefficient attached to it. However, the magnitudes of the coefficients as well as, the values of descriptors have significant roles in deciding the overall biological activity of the molecule. The descriptors with negative coefficients in the model were very significant because they contributed towards increasing the value of the biological activity of anti-colon cancer agents. Therefore, the descriptors with a negative coefficients were most significant followed by descriptors with low weight positive coefficients and lastly the parameters with high weight positive coefficients. The predicted anti-colon cancer activity of the ligands using the QSAR model as well as deviation from the experimental values was displayed in Table 6 and graphically presented in Figures 2 and 3. Observed IC 50 (?M) Predicted IC 50 (?M) The molecular docking studies were performed on the twenty pyrazole derivatives together with colon cancer cells line (PDB ID: 2N8A) 42 obtained from protein data bank. This was achieved with the use of several software such as Discovery studio, Autodock tool, Autodock vina and Pymol as post-dock software. Docking of each compound was carried using autodock vina and conformations obtained varies in number but ranged from 8 -15 conformations for compounds 3a-19b. The structure with lowest binding energy (i.e., highest negative free energy of binding, Î?"G) in each docking simulation was taken to be most stable and analyzed for detailed interactions using Discovery Studio Visualizer4.0 software. Docking simulations can be understood by comparing the values of the free energy of binding (Gibbs energy, Î?"G) of the ligands to the protein receptor. Î?"G is an indicator to show the stability interaction between ligand and receptor, and it can be used to explain the strength of binding energies of different docking conformation 47,48 . The poses of the lowest conformation of each ligand were examined based on Î?"G, and interaction of the ligand with the 2N8A protein structure in ligandreceptor complex. The free binding energy (Î?"G) calculated for the docked twenty pyrazole derivatives ranged from -6.10 kcal/mol (ligand 7a) to -8.20 kcal/mol (ligand 19b) as displayed in Table 7. The interaction of ligand with the 2N8A protein structure was discussed by of H-bonding between the ligand and the receptor molecule as shown in Figure 4. Analysis of the ligandreceptor complex showed that H-bonds played a prominent role in the binding and posed stability of the ligand in the ligand-receptor complex; thus affect the potency/function of biological molecules. The number of H-bonds present in the ligand-protein complex as well as H-bonds distances was shown in Table 7 IV. # Conclusion In this study, the quantum chemical method via density functional theory (DFT) method was used for calculation of molecular descriptors relating to the anticancer activity of pyrazole derivatives. The QSAR analysis revealed the efficiency of the model developed using multiple linear regression (MLR), and that the QSAR model replicated the observed bioactivities of the studied compounds against colon cancer cells line (ID: 2N8A). Furthermore, the simulated molecular docking predicted stable conformations of the drug-like molecules (Pyrazolederiatives) in the active gouge of the receptor. Also, the binding energy as well as, nature of electrostatic interactions of the ligands in the ligandreceptor complexes were obtained for the twenty compounds. 4![amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-1Hpyrazolyl-5-yl-(3,5-dimethyl-1Hpyrazol-1 yl) derivatives) methanone (3a, b), 2-{[4-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-1Hpyrazol-5-yl]carbonyl}-5-methyl-2,4-dihydro-3H-pyrazol-3-one (4), 1-{[4-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl-1H-pyrazol-5yl]carbonyl} pyrazolidine-3,5-dione (5), 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-5-(1,3,4-oxa/thiadiazol-2yl)-1H-pyrazol-4-amine (7a, b), 6-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-5-methyl-1,6-dihydro-7H-pyrazolo-[4,3-d]pyrimidin-7-one (9), 4amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-N'-[arylmethylidene]-1Hpyrazole-5-carbhydrazide (10 a-d), 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-5methyl-1,6-dihydro-7H-pyrazolo[4,3-d]pyrimidine-7-one (12), 7-chloropyrazolo [4,3-d] pyrimidine (13), 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-7-(3,6-dihydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-5-methyl-1H-pyrazolo[4,3-d]pyrimidine (14),7-(4-chlorophenyl)-5methyl -9H-pyrazolo[3,4-e]tetrazolo[1,5-c]pyrimidine (15), Ethyl{[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-5-methyl-1H-pyrazolo [4,3-d]pyrimidine-7-yl]oxy} acetate (16), 6-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-5-thioxo-1,4,5,6-tetrahydro-7Hpyrazolo[4,3-d] pyrimidin-7-one (17), 2-{[4-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl] carbonyl} hydrazinecarbothioamide (18), 4-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-N'-(4-methyl/ or 4-phenyl-1,3-thiazol-2yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carbohydrazide (19a](image-2.png "compounds are 4 -") ![Bond length between two Nitrogen atoms of the pyrazole ring Bond length between Nitrogen and the hydrogen atom of pyrazole ring Natural charge population on Hydrogen atoms of the pyrazole ring Hydrogen bond](image-3.png "") ![Based QSAR and Molecular Docking Studies on Potent Anti-Colon Cancer Activity of Pyrazole Derivatives pyrazole derivatives as reflected in this paper were ?? = ???? ?????? ??"®obs ? 2 ?? ???? ?????? ??? ?????? ? 2 ?? ??? ?1](image-4.png "") ![50 = -2677.65 -38.6214(BG) + 0.864947(DM) + 257.863(NNBL) + 2353.57(NHBL) -190.240(HHET4r) -39.6798(HOMO) + 37.8067(LUMO) + 0.0699416(PSA)](image-5.png "") 1DescriptorsSymbolAbbreviationQuantumMolecular dipole momentchemicalMolecular polarizabilitydescriptorsHighest occupied molecular orbital, eVLowest unoccupied molecular orbital, eVSolvation energy (au) 2MOLHOMOLUMOBGDMSE (au)(N+N)/2 Het?µ?3a-5.54-1.663.985.26-0.01389-0.3793.600-1.9400.52273b-5.66-1.853.813.33-0.01208-0.3793.755-1.9050.48324-5.87-1.604.276.35-0.02134-0.3533.735-2.1350.61025-6.58-1.944.642.54-0.03482-0.3554.260-2.4550.70747a-5.74-1.414.333.51-0.02187-0.3983.575-2.1650.65567b-5.66-1.803.863.76-0.01747-0.3993.730-1.9300.49939-5.96-1.364.604.23-0.01815-0.4053.660-2.3000.722710a-5.84-0.825.025.19-0.01575-0.3683.330-2.5100.946010b-5.84-1.654.331.68-0.01442-0.3683.815-2.1650.614310c-6.07-1.804.271.81-0.01671-0.3773.935-2.1350.579210d-5.56-1.444.122.91-0.01841-0.3683.500-3.1281.397312-5.99-1.314.684.11-0.01977-0.4013.650-2.3400.750113-6.23-2.094.142.26-0.01402-0.4134.160-2.0700.515014-5.91-2.093.824.67-0.01784-0.4274.000-1.9100.456015-5.91-1.994.390.76-0.01789-0.4244.185-2.1950.575616-5.88-1.454.436.68-0.01861-0.4183.665-2.2150.669317-6.18-1.894.293.02-0.02548-0.3914.035-2.1450.570118-5.79-1.414.384.84-0.03355-0.3963.600-2.1900.666119a-5.73-1.244.494.68-0.02043-0.3723.485-2.2450.723119b-5.70-1.304.404.39-0.02085-0.3713.485-2.2000.6914 3H HET4r HBD HBA0.294 2 60.294 2 60.296 3 70.300 3 80.285 2 60.282 2 60.292 2 50.292 3 60.294 3 60.295 3 60.293 3 70.294 1 40.292 1 40.277 1 50.297 1 60.287 1 60.300 3 70.287 5 80.292 3 70.293 3 7NHBL1.0121.0111.0101.0101.0081.0081.0081.0101.0101.0101.0101.0081.0081.0061.0081.0071.0091.0091.0091.009Year 2018NNBL1.3221.3221.3201.3291.3331.3341.3451.3291.3341.3361.3331.3451.3541.3521.3521.3511.3391.3351.3271.32713Log P PSA Pol0.07 63.211 64.57-0.06 63.228 65.69-1.01 85.752 63.71-1.52 100.075 62.610.26 74.597 58.950.83 64.537 59.82-0.15 72.744 60.290.60 88.836 66.901.62 79.201 66.942.02 79.118 67.711.34 86.232 68.820.10 56.316 59.331.55 37.704 59.981.67 42.724 65.701.83 68.584 60.370.76 64.473 64.950.15 74.925 60.23-0.96 106.292 61.960.09 89.093 65.421.49 88.388 70.75Volume XVIII Issue II Version IOva1.481.511.481.461.391.401.421.551.451.551.571.391.401.471.401.521.411.491.531.59( D D D D )MOL MW Vol3a 315.764 297.323b 350.209 310.904 317.736 287.795 319.708 275.327a 261.672 229.287b 277.739 238.689 275.699 246.6210a 341.802 329.2810b 357.776 327.8410c 374.231 337.1310d 369.812 350.3512 260.684 235.0113 279.130 241.3814 326.787 311.0715 285.698 246.9316 332.747 303.5217 293.738 244.9218 310.679 266.5419a 348.818 309.4719b 410.889 374.88Global Journal of Medical Research 4HT29 HOMO LUMO BG DM SE N+N/2HET CP CH GN MW VOL OVA LOGP PSA POL NNBL NHBL HHET4r HBD HBAHT29 1.000HOMO -0.009 1.000LUMO 0.306 0.476 1.000BG 0.334 -0.349 0.655 1.000DM 0.280 0.520 0.506 0.102 1.000SE -0.370 0.372 -0.028 -0.342 -0.064 1.000N+N/2HET 0.274 0.152 0.320 0.219 0.060 -0.173 1.000CP -0.434 0.005 -0.448 -0.472 0.092 0.229 -0.343 1.000CH -0.191 -0.828 -0.888 -0.235 -0.596 -0.177 -0.284 0.283 1.000GN 0.423 0.230 0.567 0.397 0.039 -0.111 0.356 -0.970 -0.482 1.000MW 0.283 0.285 0.195 -0.044 0.044 0.125 0.533 -0.225 -0.274 0.284 1.000VOL 0.295 0.365 0.272 -0.027 0.130 0.233 0.499 -0.272 -0.365 0.355 0.973 1.000OVALITY 0.456 0.419 0.414 0.078 0.303 0.061 0.501 -0.349 -0.484 0.442 0.913 0.921 1.000LOGP -0.292 0.049 -0.199 -0.266 -0.375 0.587 -0.434 0.018 0.101 0.015 0.257 0.299 0.152 1.000PSA 0.524 0.033 0.483 0.482 0.081 -0.631 0.672 -0.459 -0.325 0.439 0.392 0.311 0.457 -0.488 1.000POL 0.288 0.372 0.258 -0.047 0.128 0.240 0.494 -0.262 -0.360 0.347 0.973 1.000 0.918 0.304 0.300 1.000NNBL -0.095 -0.463 -0.331 0.031 -0.245 0.078 -0.861 0.044 0.454 -0.137 -0.422 -0.394 -0.446 0.488 -0.580 -0.395 1.000NHBL 0.240 0.221 0.135 -0.013 -0.074 0.098 0.787 -0.137 -0.202 0.174 0.402 0.380 0.386 -0.334 0.435 0.381 -0.802 1.000HHET4r 0.088 -0.447 -0.027 0.374 -0.354 -0.135 0.527 -0.289 0.251 0.164 0.143 0.058 0.059 -0.260 0.347 0.050 -0.293 0.606 1.000HBD 0.565 0.168 0.346 0.219 0.066 -0.541 0.655 -0.273 -0.308 0.294 0.417 0.328 0.445 -0.432 0.873 0.323 -0.600 0.501 0.234 1.000HBA 0.416 0.048 0.131 0.097 0.096 -0.658 0.579 -0.263 -0.109 0.241 0.422 0.308 0.442 -0.451 0.861 0.305 -0.583 0.410 0.267 0.787 1.000 5NpR 2CV.R 2R 2adjsF2080.95640.95420.92470.414130.168 6CompObservedPredictedResidualCompObservedPredictedResidual3A1.451.45-0.0010D3.573.050.523B1.101.57-0.47120.780.540.2442.782.530.25131.521.230.2952.992.820.17140.880.96-0.087A0.28-0.260.54150.290.70-0.417B0.200.31-0.11163.883.860.0291.772.19-0.42171.331.240.0910A4.084.16-0.08185.595.65-0.0610B2.102.18-0.0819A0.421.09-0.6710C2.922.830.0919B0.780.620.16 7Year 201817 © 2018 Global JournalsB A DFT-Based QSAR and Molecular Docking Studies on Potent Anti-Colon Cancer Activity of Pyrazole Derivatives * LIG:O (ii) GLN-40, LIG:H (i)2.5 (ii) 1.8 4 -7.1 (i) ALA-106 LIG:O 2.3 3b -7.4 (i) GLN-40 LIG: H (ii) THR-109 LIG:O (i) 2.5 (ii) 1.9 5 -6.9 (i) ALA-89, LIG:O (ii) ILE-64, LIG: O (iii) GLU-107, LIG: O (iv * (i) MET-38, LIG: H (ii) GLN-40, LIG:H (i) 2.4 (i) 2.3 9 -6.8 (i) THH-109, LIG:N (ii) GLU-107, LIG:H(iii) GLU-107, LIG:H (iv) GLU-107, LIG: O (v) ALA-89, LIG: O (vi) ILE-64 LIG: O (vii) ILE-64, LIG: H (i) 3.0 (ii) 2.9 (iii) 2.1 (iv) 3.4 (v) 3.2 (vi) 3.6 (vii) 2.5 10a -7.4 (i) THR-109 LIG: H (i) 3.3 (ii) 2.1 (iii) 2.7 (iv) 2.0 10b -7.2 (i) THR-88 H (i) 2.8 (ii) 2.5 10c -7.2 (i) THR-176, LIG: H (ii) THR-109, LIG: H (iii) GLU-107, LIG:H (iv) GLU-107 )Lig:O (ii Gly-111 )Lig:O (iii Thr-109 )Lig:H (iv Glu-107 Lig:H (v) Glu-107 Lig: N LIG: H, (ii) ALA-91, LIG LIG: O (ii) THR-109. LIG:H (i) 3.3 (ii) 2.2 13 -6.4 MET-38, LIG:H (i) 2.2 14 -7.0 (i) ASP-6, LIG: H (ii) THR-109, LIG:H (i) 2.4 (ii) 2.5 15 -7.3 (i) GLU-107, LIG:H (ii) THR-109, LIG: N (iii) THR-109, LIG: N (iv) LYS-108, LIG: N (v) LYS-108, LIG: N (i) 2.5 (ii) 2.0 (iii) 2.7 (iv * (ii) 2.5 (iii) 2.2 (iv) 2.1 (v) 2.2 (vi) 2.6 (vii) 2.4 (viii) 2.5 (ix) 2.5 (x) 2.5 (xi) 2.8 19a -7.2 (i) ALA-106 LIG: H (viii) GLU-90 LIG: O (ii) THR-109, LIG:O (iii) LYS-108, LIG: O (iv) GLU-107, LIG:H (v) GLU-107 )Lig:H (ix Ala-89 Lig:H (x) Glu-107 )Lig:H (xi Glu-107 Lig: H (i) 3.5 LIG:N (ii) GLU-90,LIG:H (iii) GLU-90. LIG: H (i) 2.3 (ii) 2.8 (iii) 2.0 (iv) 2.9 (v) 2.4 (vi) 2.5 (vii) 2.5 (viii) 2.0 * (H-amino group of pyrazole ring) and ALA-89/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring). Two H-bonds were observed in docked complex of ligand 10b and receptor; THR-88/LI G: H (H-amino group of pyrazole ring) and ALA-91/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring). For ligand 10c, five H-bonds were observed via THR-176/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of carboxamide However GLU-107/LIG:H one H-bond was observed between LYR-47 and LIG:N (amino group of pyrazole ring); whereas two H-bonds for 7b with GLU-107/LIG:H (H-amino group of pyrazole ring), GLU-107/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring), GLU-107/LIG: O (Carbonyl oxygen of pyrimidinone). Others were ALA-89/LIG: O (Carbonyl oxygen of pyrimidinone. hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring), GLU-107/LIG:O (pyrazole-carbonyl oxygen) and ARG-65/LIG:O (pyrazole-carbonyl oxygen * GLU-107/LIG: N Also, five H-bonds were recorded for ligand 10d; ARG-65/LIG:O (pyrazole-carbonyl oxygen GLY-111/LIG:O (pyrazole-carbonyl oxygen. amino group of pyrazole ring * Likewise ligand 12receptor complex presented two H-bonds * THR-109/LIG:O THR-109/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring); whereas MET-38 was H-bonded with hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring of the ligand 13 with bond distance of 2.2 Å. For ligand 14, two H-bonds were observed in the ligand-receptor complex; ASP- * LYS-108/LIG: N (one of N of triazolyl ring) and LYS-108/LIG: N (one of N of triazolyl ring). Moreover, one H-bond was observed for ligand 16-receptor complex viaLYS-47/LIG:O(carboxylic-group) with Hbond distance of 2.4 Å; whereas for ligand 17-receptor complex, six H-bonds were detected. The H-bonds were ALA-89/ LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring GLU-107/LIG:H /LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring) with the distance of 2.4 Å and THR-109/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring) with of distance 2.5 Å. Also, for ligand 15, five H-bonds were identified through GLU-107/LIG:H (hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring First ketonic-group of pyrimidine-dione ring ; Second Ketonic-group of pyrimidinedione ring ; First ketonic-group of pyrimidine-dione ring THR-109/LIG: N (N of N-H of pyrazole ring). hydrogen of N-H of pyrazole ring) and THR-109/LIG:N (N of N-H of pyrazole ring * Similarly, for ligand 19a formed six H-bonds with 2N8A Also receptor residues vis- à-vis GLY-93/LIG:N, GLU-90/LIG ALA-106/LIG: N, ALA-106/LIG:H, GLU-107/LIG: H, GLU-107/LIG:H, GLU-90/LIG:H, GLY-93/LIG:H. However 18 for ligand 19b, eight H-bonds were observed between the ligand and 2N8A residues. These were THR-109/LIG:O, THR-109/LIG:O, LYS-108/LIG:O, GLU-107/LIG:H, GLU-107/LIG:H, GLU-107/LIG:H, ALA-106/LIG:H and GLU-90/LIG: H. Some selected ligandreceptor (2N8A) * Design, synthesis, broadspectrum antiproliferative activity, and kinase inhibitory effect of triarlpyazole derivatives possessing arylamides or arylureas moieties GamalEl-Din MMEl-Gamal MI Abdel-Maksoud MSYoo KHOh CH Eur J Med 119 Chem2016 * Mechanism-based target dentification and drug discovery in cancer research Gibbsjb Science 287 2000 * Influence of Far Infrared Radiation on cytotoxicity of Human Breast Cancer (MCF7) cells: experimental evaluation RavisPanteap Elenap IWBBIO Proceedings 2013 * Global cancer statistics EtJemala AcanJ for 61 2 clin2011 * Colon cancer and apoptosis Huertas EJGoulet EHLivingston Am J 191 Surg2006 * Inca 628 2008 INCA -Institutonacional de câncerAções de prevençãoprimáriaesecundária no controle do câncer. Rio de Janeiro * Effects of synbiotic fermentation products on primary chemoprevention in human colon cells Steink Borowickia Scharlaud ScheukSchettlera JNutrBiochem2012 23 * Copper saltcatalyzed formation of a novel series of triazolespirodienone conjugates with potent anticancer activity WangpGul Zhongq Dengy Xiej Liuf Xiaof Zhengs WanggandCheny Hel RSC 7 Adv2017 * Colon Cancer Prevention through Probiotics: An Overview KSKumar Sastryn MishravPolakih doi: 10.4172/ 1948-5956.1000329 J Cancer SciTher 7 2015 * Synthesis and preliminary evaluation of new 5-pyrazolinone derivatives as analgesic agents DemirayaksGursoya Capang Erolk Vuralk Eur J Med 35 Chem2000 * Synthesis and antifungal activity of some new 3-hydroxy-2-(1-phenyl-3-aryl-4-pyrazolyl) OPrakash Kumarr Parkashv Prakasho ParkashvKumarr * Eur J Med 43 435 Chem2008 * The synthesis and antiviral activity of 4-fluoro-1-beta-Dribofuranosyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide AshtonCjStorerr ADBaxter MMHann ClpMarr A MMason CLMo PLMyers SANoble CRPenn NGWeir JMWoods PLCoe Nucleosides 18 203 Nucleotides1999 * Novel 1, 5-Diphenylpyrazole Nonnucleoside HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitors with enhanced activity versus the delavirdine-resistant P236L mutant: Lead identification and SAR of 3-and 4-substituted derivatives Geninmj CBiles BJKeiser SMPoppe SMSwaney WGTarpley Yagiy DLRomero J Med 43 5 Chem2000 * Synthesis and SAR of heteroaryl-phenyl-substituted pyrazole derivatives as highly selective and potent canine COX-2 inhibitors DemelloChengh Kml Lij SMSakya KAndo Bioorg Med ChemLett 16 2006 * Synthesis and biological evaluation of some thiazolyl and thiadiazolyl derivatives of 1H-pyrazole as anti-inflammatory antimicrobial agents AABekhit HmaAshour YsaGhany AeaBekhit Barakaa Eur J Med 43 Chem2008 * Synthesis and antihypertensive activity of novel 1-(4-benzyl-1-phthalazinyl)-pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidines SAEi-Feky AbdEi-Samiizk Pharmazie1996 51 * Discovery of FR166124, a novel water-soluble pyrazolo-[1, 5-?] pridine adenosine A 1 receptor antagonist AkahaneaKurodas Itanih Nishimuras Kinoshitat Tenday Sakanek Bioorg Med 9 14 ChemLett1999 * Antimicrobial activity of amino acid, imidazole, and sulfonamide derivatives of pyrazolo [3,4-d]pyrimidine MGMoustafa HIZeinab MASoad AAAnhar HeteroatChem2004 15 * The design and synthesis of inhiitors of adenosine 5`-monophosphate deaminase SDLindell BAMoloney BDHewitt CGEarnhaw PJPhilip JEDancer Bioorg Med 9 ChemLett1999 * Novel pyrazole derivatives with oxa/ thiadiazolyl, pyrazolyl moieties and pyrazolo[4,3-d]-pyrimidine derivatives as potential antimicrobial and anticancer agents NHHend BAEl-Gazzar Abdel-Rhman Al-HussainSami A 10.1016/j.bmcl.2016.03.117 Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Lett2016 * Inhibitors of cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase 3 and 5 as therapeutic agents in hearts in heart failure MovsesianStehlikj Ma Expert Opin Invest 15 Drugs2006 * Review: Synthesis & Biological Activity of Benzimidazole Derivatives PandeyasnandRaip J SciRes 1 4 Phar2012 * Benzimidazole: a versatile chemical entity PCSantosh Pandeyasn AKPathak IJRAP2011 2 * A quantitative approach to biochemical structure-activity relationships Hanschc Acc of Chem 2 Res1969 * Quantitative Drug Design of comprehensive Medicinal Chemistry CARamsden 1990 4 Oxford * GEDahl SalakhutdinovrJaitlyn Multitask Neural Networks for QSAR Predictions. arXiv preprint arXiv 2014 1231 * Studies of antihypertensive activity of 1, 4dihydropyridine derivatives: combinations of DFT-QSAR and docking approaches AKOyebamiji Semireb Bulletin of Pharmaceutical 6 3 Research2016 * Studies of 1, 4-Dihydropyridine Derivatives for Anti-Breast Cancer (MCF-7) Activities: Combinations of DFT-QSAR and Docking Methods Oyebamijika Semireb Journal2016 New York Science * 10.7537/marsnys09061610 9 * DFT-QSAR model and docking studies of anti liver cancer (HEPG-2) activities of 1, 4-diydropyridine based derivatives AKOyebamiji Semireb doi:10.7537/ marscbj06021610 Cancer 6 2 Bio2016 * Structure-activity relationships for the toxicity of polychhorinateddibenzofurans: approach through density functional theory-based descriptors SArulmozhiraja MMorita Chem 17 ResToxicol2004 * QSARs for congener-specific toxicity of polyhalogenateddibenzo-p-dioxins with DFT and WHIM theory CGu Jiangx XHJu Yangxl YRBian Sunc Ecotoxicol EnvironSaf 72 2009 * A DFT-based quantum theoretic QSAR study of aromatic and heterocyclic sulfonamides as carbominc anhydrase inhibitors against isozymeCA-II TurkmenhEroglue J. Mol. Graph.Model 26 2007 * A DFTbased QSAR study of the toxicity of quaternary ammonium compounds on Chlorella vulgaris GefZhum WangxZhur Zhengx Chemosphere2010 80 * Scoring functions for protein-ligand docking. Current Protein Peptide science ANJain 2006 7 * A review of protein-small molecule docking methods RDTaylor PJJewsbury JWEssex Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 16 2002 * Density functional thermo chemistry. III. The role of exact exchange Beckead Jof phy 98 Chem1993 * Development of the Colle-Salvetti correlation-energy formula into a functional of the electron density YangwLeec RGParr Phys Rev 37 B1988 * Accurate simulation of optical properties in dyes PerpeteeaJacquemind AdamocCiofinii Acc of chem 42 Res2008 * Spartan 14 wave function Inc Irvine, CA 92612, USA * Features selection methods in QSAR studies Goodarzim BDejaegher VanderHeydeny J AOACInt2012 3 * Structural Basis of Detection and Signaling of DNA Single-Strand Breaks by Human PARP-1 Eustermanns WFWu MFLangelier JCYang LEEaston AARiccio PascalJm Neuhausd Molecular 60 Cell2015 * Designing of Sulfanilamide/ Sulfacetamide Derivatives as Human Topoisomerase II Inhibitor: A Docking Approach AjeetSapnar Arvind * Ame J OfPharm Sci2014 * Real external predictivity of QSAR models: How to evaluate it? Comparison of Different validation criteria and proposal of using the concordance correlation coefficients GramaticapChiricon J ChemInf 51 9 Model2011 * Real external predictivity of QSAR models. Part 2. New intercomparable thresholds for different validation criteria and the need for scatter plot inspection NChirico GramaticaP J Chem Inf 52 8 Model2012 * Atom, atom-type, and total linear indices of the molecular pseudograph's atom adjacency matrix": application to QSPR/QSAR studies of organic compounds PYMarrero GjaCastillo Torrensf ZVRomero EACastro Molecules 9 12 2004 * Silico Docking Studies of Alkyl Esters Derivative of Gallic Acid on Bcl-xL Anti-apoptotic Protein of Breast Cancer ArsiantiaParamitari Radjim International Journal of Chem Tech 10 1 Res2017 * Molecular Docking Studies of Lonchocarpuscyanescens Triterpenoids as Inhibitors for Malaria WaheedAdejoroia So OOAdeboye 10.4172/2161-0398.1000213 J Phys ChemBiophys 6 213 2016