5866
A. J. Bojarski et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 14 (2004) 5863–5866
Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
References and notes
1. Bard, J. A.; Zgombick, J.; Adham, N.; Vaysse, P.;
Branchek, T. A.; Weinshank, R. L. J. Biol. Chem. 1993,
268, 23422.
2. Lovenberg, T. W.; Baron, B. M.; de Lecea, L.; Miller, J.
D.; Prosser, R. A.; Rea, M. A.; Foye, P. E.; Racke, M.;
Slone, A. L.; Siegel, B. W.; Danielson, P. E.; Sutcliffe, J.
G.; Erlander, M. G. Neuron 1993, 11, 449.
3. Tsou, A. P.; Kosaka, A.; Bach, C.; Zuppan, P.; Yee, C.;
Tom, L.; Alvarez, R.; Ramsey, S.; Bonhaus, D. W.;
Stefanich, E.; Jakeman, L.; Eglen, R. M.; Chan, H. J.
Neurochem. 1994, 63, 456.
Figure 4. Superimposition of MM-77, 2 and 3 in the extended
conformation on rigid cyclohexane derivative 5 (orthogonal view)––a
bioactive LCAP conformation for the 5-HT1A receptor (A). Superpo-
sition of MM-77 and 3 on the global energy minimum conformation of
2––a proposed geometry of the investigated ligands during interactions
with the 5-HT7 receptor; the rigid compound 5 added for comparison
(B).
4. Lovell, P. J.; Bromidge, S. M.; Dabbs, S.; Duckworth, D.
M.; Forbes, I. T.; Jennings, A. J.; King, F. D.; Middle-
miss, D. N.; Rahman, S. K.; Saunders, D. V.; Collin, L.
L.; Hagan, J. J.; Riley, G. J.; Thomas, D. R. J. Med.
Chem. 2000, 43, 342.
when fit to bent conformation of 2, presumed as bioac-
tive, may explain their lower 5-HT7 receptor activity.
5. Forbes, I. T.; Douglas, S.; Gribble, A. D.; Ife, R. J.;
Lightfoot, A. P.; Garner, A. E.; Riley, G. J.; Jeffrey, P.;
Stevens, A. J.; Stean, T. O.; Thomas, D. R. Bioorg. Med.
Chem. Lett. 2002, 12, 3341.
6. Leopoldo, M. Curr. Med. Chem. 2004, 11, 629.
7. Thomas, D. R.; Hagan, J. J. Curr. Drug Targets CNS.
Neurol. Disord. 2004, 3, 81.
8. Lopez-Rodriguez, M. L.; Porras, E.; Morcillo, M. J.;
Benhamu, B.; Soto, L. J.; Lavandera, J. L.; Ramos, J. A.;
Olivella, M.; Campillo, M.; Pardo, L. J. Med. Chem. 2003,
46, 5638.
Since the cis isomers are geometrically similar to cyclo-
hexane derivatives, their lower affinity for the 5-HT1A
receptor may rather be due to the negative influence of
the exposed p-electrons in the spacer region (defined as
hydrophobic for 5-HT1A receptor), than to conforma-
tional requirements. The enlargement of the p-electron
system to benzene ring caused a further decrease in 5-
HT1A affinity (3 vs 4, and 8 vs 9), but had no effect in
the case of the 5-HT7 receptor.
9. Perrone, R.; Berardi, F.; Colabufo, N. A.; Lacivita, E.;
Leopoldo, M.; Tortorella, V. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 646.
10. Wilcox, R. E.; Ragan, J. E.; Pearlman, R. S.; Brusniak, M.
Y.; Eglen, R. M.; Bonhaus, D. W.; Tenner, T. E., Jr.;
Miller, J. D. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2001, 15, 883.
In conclusion, based on the results discussed above, bio-
active conformations of LCAPs for the 5-HT7 receptor,
different from those established for 5-HT1A, were pro-
posed. The low-energy conformers of the investigated
ligands, superimposed on the rigid template of 5 illus-
trate their geometry at the 5-HT1A receptor (Fig. 4A).
´
11. Mokrosz, M. J.; Chojnacka-Wojcik, E.; Tatarczyn˜ska, E.;
Kłodzin˜ ska, A.; Filip, M.; Boksa, J.; Charakchieva-
Minol, S.; Mokrosz, J. L. Med. Chem. Res. 1994, 4, 161.
12. Glennon, R. A.; Naiman, N. A.; Pierson, M. E.; Titeler,
M.; Lyon, R. A.; Weisberg, E. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 1988,
154, 339.
13. Paluchowska, M. H.; Bojarski, A. J.; Charakchieva-
Minol, S.; Wesołowska, A. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 37,
273.
In the case of the 5-HT7 receptor, a global energy min-
imum of 2 was used as a template (Fig. 4B). Flexible bu-
tyl derivatives can easily adopt a similarly bent geometry
(DE < 1kcal/mol), whereas the superposition of the par-
tially constrained cis isomers is connected with a higher
increase in internal energy, thus results in their lower 5-
HT7 affinity. It is worth to note that the proposed bioac-
tive conformation of LCAPs is close to the pharmaco-
phore model for 5-HT7 receptor antagonism,
developed recently by Lopez-Rodriguez et al. using a
CATALYST approach.8
14. Paluchowska, M. H.; Mokrosz, M. J.; Bojarski, A. J.;
Wesołowska, A.; Borycz, J.; Charakchieva-Minol, S.;
´
Chojnacka-Wojcik, E. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 4952.
15. Aguirre, N.; Ballaz, S.; Lasheras, B.; Del Rio, J. Eur. J.
Pharmacol. 1998, 346, 181.
16. Bojarski, A. J.; Cegła, M. T.; Charakchieva-Minol, S.;
´
Mokrosz, M. J.; Mackowiak, M.; Mokrosz, J. L. Phar-
mazie 1993, 48, 289.
17. Norman, M. H.; Minick, D. J.; Rigdon, G. C. J. Med.
Chem. 1996, 39, 149.
18. Lopez-Rodriguez, M. L.; Morcillo, M. J.; Rovat, T. K.;
Fernandez, E.; Vicente, B.; Sanz, A. M.; Hernandez, M.;
Orensanz, L. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42, 36.
19. Perrone, R.; Berardi, F.; Colabufo, N. A.; Leopoldo, M.;
Lacivita, E.; Tortorella, V.; Leonardi, A.; Poggesi, E.;
Testa, R. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 4431.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the research Grant no. 012/
2002 from the Polish Pharmacy and Medicine Develop-
ment Foundation, given by the POLPHARMA Phar-
maceutical Works, as well as by the Polish State
Committee for Scientific Research (KBN, Grant no. 3-
P05F 012-23).
20. Klamt, A.; Schuurmann, G. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2
1993, 799.
¨ ¨