The mitotic indices for both CEM and AKB4 cells were acquired in the presence and absence of 4 mM ZM447439 and no significant differences were seen either in basal levels or drug addressed levels. Collectively, these results claim that despite decreased expression levels, localization and catalytic topical Hedgehog inhibitor function of Aurora B isn’t reduced in resistant CEM/AKB4 cells in comparison to CEM. CEM/AKB4 cells express a point mutation in Aurora T Point mutations in the catalytic domain are recognized to confer resistance of cancer cells so we sought to find out whether kinase domain or other mutations are causing the resistant phenotype in cells to kinase inhibitors. Accordingly the entire length sequence of the Aurora B gene was acquired and compared between CEM/AKB4 and CEM cells. As ZM447439 is known to inhibit Aurora A the total length sequence of the gene was also determined. The resistant CEM/AKB4 cells included an individual point mutation in the kinase domain of Aurora B that gives rise to a G160E amino-acid substitution. This residue lies within the hinge area of the catalytic domain of Extispicy the protein, an essential site associated with Aurora B inhibitor binding. On the other hand, no mutations were detected within the Aurora A gene were detected. G160E substitution affects Aurora W chemical binding Interestingly the G160E substitution has also been explained in ZM resistant colorectal cancer cells suggesting that this can be an important residue in ZM binding. The mutation has been presumed to mediate resistance by hindrance of drug binding through steric interactions using the bigger glutamate residue. To help elucidate the role of the mutation we used a molecular Cyclopamine solubility modelling technique with docking studies to explore the influence of the substitution on resistance mechanisms and Aurora B inhibitor binding. In our methodology the initial templates were based on available crystal structures of inhibitors bound to xenopus laevis Aurora T from whence we applied docking measurements with the corresponding inhibitor as described in the Materials and Methods section. The three inhibitors and their corresponding crystal structure PDB articles were ZM447439, hesperadin and an aminothiazole inhibitor with the themes prepared by removing the drug molecule from the crystal structure and substituting glycine at the 160 place for glutamate for the case of the docking calculations. Each drug was then docked into the ATP binding pocket with calculations glowing several docked poses. Examination of the poses in wild type Aurora B showed that the drug molecules adopted similar conformations and binding modes to those seen in the corresponding crystal structures, validating the models and our methodology. These measurements showed that hesperadin and ZM shaped hydrogen bonds to the Ala173 and Lys122 deposits of Aurora B that have already been previously proven to be crucial connections for efficient Aurora B inhibition.