48
M. Haddach et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 22 (2012) 45–48
presence of a sulfur atom at C5 position close to the sulfur atom
of Met163 of the enzyme, leading to a favorable sulfur–sulfur
interaction.
Cl
Cl
X
In conclusion, we have described the design and synthesis of
novel tricyclic potent CK2 protein kinase inhibitors. According to
the SAR of rigid derivatives, we found, as previously observed with
compound 1, that the ionic interaction between the carboxylate at
C8 and Lys68 of the protein is crucial for potency. In addition, we
discovered that the loss of activity caused by the removal of the
hydrogen bond between the NH of the aniline at C5 and water mol-
ecule in the crystal lattice could be compensated by a lipophilic
interaction with the backbone region or by increasing the co-pla-
narity of the tricyclic core and the aromatic substituents at C5.
These novel structures constitute good starting points for the
development of novel CK2 inhibitors.
N
RX
Cl
N
N
N
a, b
CO2Me
CO2H
4a
RX=
HN(Me)-
HO-
14 X = NMe
15 X = O
HS-
16 X = S
ClZnCH2-
17 X = CH2
Scheme 3. Reagents and conditions: (a) 3-chloro-N-methylaniline, DMF, 80 °C, 2 h;
(a) 3-chlorophenol and 3-chlorobenzene, K2CO3, DMF, 70 °C; (a) (3-chloro-
phenyl)zinc(II) chloride, THF, 60 °C; (b) 6 N NaOH, EtOH, rt (compounds 14,
15and 17); (b) LiOH, THF/H2O, rt (compound 16)
References and notes
Table 4
1. Litchfield, D. W. Biochem. J. 2003, 369, 1.
2. Sarno, S.; Pinna, L. A. Mol. Biosyst. 2008, 4, 889.
SAR of non-rigid analogs 1 and 14–1729
3. Guerra, B.; Issinger, O. G. Curr. Med. Chem. 2008, 15, 1870.
4. Landesman-Bollag, E.; Romieu-Mourez, R.; Song, D. H.; Sonenshein, G. E.;
Cardiff, R. D.; Seldin, D. C. Oncogene 2001, 20, 3247.
5. O-charoenrat, P.; Rusch, V.; Talbot, S. G. Clin. Cancer Res. 2004, 10, 5792.
6. Laramas, M.; Pasquier, D.; Filhol, O.; Ringeisen, F.; Descotes, J. L. Eur. J. Cancer
2007, 43, 928.
7. Pistorius, K.; Seitz, G.; Remberger, K.; Issinger, O. G. Onkologie 1991, 14, 256.
8. Stalter, G.; Siemer, S.; Becht, E.; Ziegler, M.; Remberger, K.; Issinger, O. G.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1994, 202, 141.
X
Cl
N
N
9. Kim, J. S.; Eom, J. I.; Cheong, J. W. Clin. Cancer Res. 2007, 13, 1019.
10. Li, X.; Shi, X.; Liang, D. Y.; Clark, J. D. Pain 2005, 115, 182.
11. Lieberman, D. N.; Mody, I. Nat. Neurosci. 1999, 2, 125.
12. Quadroni, M.; L’Hostis, E. L.; Corti, C.; Myagkikh, I.; Durussel, I.; Cox, J.; James,
P.; Carafoli, E. Biochemistry 1998, 37, 6523.
CO2H
13. Harada, S.; Haneda, E.; Maekawa, T.; Morikawa, Y.; Funayama, S.; Nagata, N.;
Ohtsuki, K.; Nagata, N.; Ohtsuki, K. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 1999, 22, 1122.
14. Haneda, E.; Furuya, T.; Asai, S.; Morikawa, Y.; Ohtsuki, K. Biochem. Biophys. Res.
Commun. 2000, 275, 434.
15. Caples, M. J.; Clements, J. E.; Barber, S. A. Virology 2006, 348, 156.
16. Critchfield, J. W.; Coligan, J. E.; Folks, T. M.; Butera, S. T. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 1997, 94, 6110.
17. Prudent, R.; Moucadel, V.; Nguyen, C.-H.; Barette, C.; Schmidt, F.; Florent, J.-C.;
Lafanechere, L.; Sautel, C. F.; Duchemin-Pelletier, E.; Spreux, E.; Filhol, O.;
Reiser, J.-B.; Cochet, C. Cancer Res. 2010, 70, 9865.
Compound
X
CK2 IC50 (nM)
1
NH
NMe
O
S
CH2
0.3
8.9
3.7
1.0
2.1
14
15
16
17
18. Sandholt, I. S.; Olsen, B. B.; Guerra, B.; Issinger, O. G. Anticancer Drugs 2009, 20,
238.
(Table 3). Derivatives bearing a methyl ester at R2 position (com-
pound 5), a methoxyamide 9b or a nitrile 10 afforded a loss of
activity greater than 700-fold, whereas, the analog bearing amide
9a restored some of the lost activity. Comparison of derivatives
12 and 13 versus 6m indicated that the presence of a carboxylate
group at C7 position or C9 position yielded significantly less potent
inhibitors of CK2, showing that the carboxylate group on C8 posi-
tion was optimal. Bioisosteric tetrazole 11 was 40-fold less potent
than 6m.
19. Najda-Bernatowicz, A.; Lebska, M.; Orzeszko, A.; Kopanska, K.; Krzywinska, E.;
Muszynska, G.; Bretner, M. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2009, 17, 1573.
20. Cozza, G.; Bortolato, A.; Moro, S. Med. Res. Rev. 2009, 30, 419.
21. Sarno, S.; Ruzzene, M.; Frascella, P.; Pagano, M. A.; Meggio, F.; Zambon, A.;
Mazzorana, M.; Di Maira, G.; Lucchini, V.; Pinna, L. A. Mol. Cell Biochem. 2005,
274, 69.
22. Zhu, D.; Hensel, J.; Hilgraf, R.; Abbasian, M.; Pornillos, O.; Deyanat-Yazdi, G.;
Hua, X. H.; Cox, S. Mol. Cell Biochem. 2009, 333, 159.
23. Prudent, R.; Cochet, C. Chem. Biol. 2009, 16, 112.
24. Siddiqui-Jain, A.; Drygin, D.; Streiner, N.; Chua, P. C.; Pierre, F.; O’Brien, S.;
Bliesath, J.; Omori, M.; Ho, C.; Proffitt, C.; Schwaebe, M. K.; Ryckman, D. M.;
Rice, W. G.; Anderes, K. Cancer Res. 2010, 70, 10288.
Further modifications at C5 were carried out as described in
Scheme 3. The synthesis of these analogs started with the substitu-
tion of the chlorine in 4a with a variety of nucleophiles. Intermedi-
ate 4a readily reacted with 3-chloro-N-methylaniline, 3-
chlorophenol and 3-chlorobenzenethiol. Subsequent ester hydroly-
sis provided compounds 14, 15 and 16. The carbon analog 17 was
synthesized via a Negishi coupling of 4a and 3-chlorobenylzinc
chloride. Ester hydrolysis provided carboxylate inhibitor 17.
As shown in Table 4, the removal of a H-bond donor effect of the
NH of the aniline in compound 1 at C5 resulted in a loss of activity.
This loss of activity was more pronounced (ca. 30-fold) when a
methyl replaced the hydrogen of the NH aniline (compound 14),
demonstrating that the addition of this group perturbed the opti-
mal geometry of the lipophilic interaction of the 3-chloroaniline.
Derivatives 15 and 17 showed a loss of activity of 12-fold and sev-
enfold, respectively. However, when the NH of the 3-chloroaniline
was replaced with a sulfur (16), only a threefold loss of activity was
observed. This gain of activity in 16 could be related to the
25. Pierre, F.; Chua, P. C.; O’Brien, S.; Siddiqui-Jain, A.; Bourbon, P.; Haddach, M.;
Michaux, J.; Nagasawa, J.; Schwaebe, M. K.; Stefan, E.; Vialettes, A.; Whitten, J.
P.; Chen, T. K.; Darjania, L.; Stansfield, R.; Anderes, K.; Bliesath, J.; Drygin, D.;
Ho, C.; Omori, M.; Proffitt, C.; Streiner, N.; Trent, K.; Rice, W. G.; Ryckman, D. M.
J. Med. Chem. 2011, 54, 635.
26. Marschke, R. F.; Borad, M. J; McFarland R. W.; Alvarez, R. H.; Lim, J. K.; Padgett,
C. S.; Von Hoff, D. D.; O’Brien, S. E.; Northfelt, D. W.; ASCO Annual Meeting 2011;
Abstract No.: 3087.
27. Pierre, F.; O’Brien, S.; Haddach, M.; Bourbon, Pauline; Schwaebe, M. K.; Stefan,
E.; Darjania, L.; Stansfield, R.; Ho, C.; Siddiqui-Jain, A.; Streiner, N.; Rice, W. G.;
Anderes, K.; Ryckman, D. M. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 21, 1687.
28. Battistutta, R.; Cozza, G.; Pierre, F.; Papinutto, E.; Lolli, G.; Sarno, S.; O’Brien, S.;
Siddiqui-Jain, A.; Haddach, M.; Anderes, K.; Ryckman, D. M.; Meggio, F.; Pinna,
L. A. Biochemistry 2011, 50, 8474.
29. All compounds were characterized by LCMS (P95% pure). CK2 inhibition was
measured in
holoenzyme) at [ATP] = 15
IC50 values were derived from eight concentrations of test inhibitors.
30. Molecules were manually placed in the binding pocket based on a structural
overlay with CK2 inhibitor 1 (PDB structure 3PE1 of human CK2 ). They were
a
radiometric assay using human recombinant CK2
(aabb-
l
M, using the substrate peptide RRRDDDSDDD. The
a
subjected to constrained in situ minimization using the CHARMm forcefield as
implemented in Discovery Studio 3.0 from Accelrys Inc.