Development of pyrimidone D1 dopamine receptor positive allosteric modulators

Article abstract of DOI:10.1016/j.bmcl.2020.127696

MLS1082 is a structurally novel pyrimidone-based D1-like dopamine receptor positive allosteric modulator. Potentiation of D1 dopamine receptor (D1R) signaling is a therapeutic strategy for treating neurocognitive disorders. Here, we investigate the relationship between D1R potentiation and two prominent structural features of MLS1082, namely the pendant N-aryl and C-alkyl groups on the pyrimidone ring. To this end, we synthesized 24 new analogues and characterized their ability to potentiate dopamine signaling at the D1R and the closely related D5R. We identified structure–activity relationship trends for both aryl and alkyl modifications and our efforts afforded several analogues with improvements in activity. The most effective analogues demonstrated an approximately 8-fold amplification of dopamine-mediated D1R signaling. These findings advance the understanding of structural moieties underlying the activity of pyrimidone-based D1R positive allosteric modulators.

Full text of DOI:10.1016/j.bmcl.2020.127696

Journal Pre-proofs
Development of Pyrimidone D1 Dopamine Receptor Positive Allosteric Mod‐
ulators
Kathryn D. Luderman, Prashi Jain, R. Benjamin Free, Jennie L. Conroy,
Jeffrey Aubé, David R. Sibley, Kevin J. Frankowski
PII:
S0960-894X(20)30807-6
DOI:
Reference:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2020.127696
BMCL 127696
To appear in:
Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters
Received Date:
Revised Date:
Accepted Date:
19 September 2020
3 November 2020
13 November 2020
Please cite this article as: Luderman, K.D., Jain, P., Benjamin Free, R., Conroy, J.L., Aubé, J., Sibley, D.R.,
Frankowski, K.J., Development of Pyrimidone D1 Dopamine Receptor Positive Allosteric Modulators,
Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2020.127696
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover
page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version
will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are
providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors
may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Development of Pyrimidone D1 Dopamine Receptor Positive Allosteric
Modulators
Kathryn D. Ludermana, Prashi Jainb, R. Benjamin Freea, Jennie L. Conroya, Jeffrey Aubéb, c, David R.
Sibley*a, Kevin J. Frankowski*b, c
a Molecular Neuropharmacology Section, NINDS, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
b Specialized Chemistry Center, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS
c Center for Integrative Chemical Biology and Drug Discovery, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy,
Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7363
*to whom correspondence should be addressed: kevinf@unc.edu and sibleyd@ninds.nih.gov
ORCID: R. Benjamin Free (0000-0002-2428-0487), David R. Sibley (0000-0002-0624-962X) and Kevin
J. Frankowski (0000-0002-7173-6352)
ABSTRACT:
MLS1082 is a structurally novel pyrimidone-based D1-like dopamine receptor positive allosteric
modulator. Potentiation of D1 dopamine receptor (D1R) signaling is a therapeutic strategy for treating
neurocognitive disorders. Here, we investigate the relationship between D1R potentiation and two
prominent structural features of MLS1082, namely the pendant N-aryl and C-alkyl groups on the
pyrimidone ring. To this end, we synthesized 24 new analogues and characterized their ability to potentiate
dopamine signaling at the D1R and the closely related D5R. We identified structure–activity relationship
trends for both aryl and alkyl modifications and our efforts afforded several analogues with improvements
in activity. The most effective analogues demonstrated an approximately 8-fold amplification of dopamine-
mediated D1R signaling. These findings advance the understanding of structural moieties underlying the
activity of pyrimidone-based D1R positive allosteric modulators.
Keywords: Cognitive decline therapeutics, copper-mediated amidation, GPCR modulation

Graphical Abstract:
Endogenous
DA
With PAM
DA
PAM
Signal
Potentiated Signal

The D1 receptor (D1R) is a G protein-coupled receptor activated by the endogenous agonist
dopamine (DA) and a key regulator of dopaminergic signaling, As such, it is associated with numerous
neurological processes and is an attractive drug target for the treatment of a wide range of neuropsychiatric
disorders, including cognitive decline associated with Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia and Alzheimer’s
disease. D1R activation has demonstrated promising results for improving cognition and working memory
in mouse models.1 Work by Goldman-Rakic and colleagues has shown that an optimum level of D1R
activity in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is required for peak performance in learning and memory.1,2,3,4 This
has led to the inverted U hypothesis for the relationship of D1R activity in the PFC and cognitive function.5
At low levels of D1R signaling, such as in diseased states, cognitive function is depressed. At extremely
high levels of D1R activity, as observed during stress, cognitive function is also at suboptimal levels.
Suboptimal levels of D1R stimulation have been suggested to underlie age-associated learning deficits and
contribute to the decreased cognition observed in various pathophysiological states. Modulation of D1R
signaling has therefore become an attractive strategy for developing therapeutics to treat cognitive decline.
The traditional approach to influencing D1R signaling is through development of D1R orthosteric
compounds, which act at the DA binding site, however, this approach has proven therapeutically
problematic. D1R orthosteric agonists suffer from numerous drawbacks, including: (1) a narrow therapeutic
window for attaining optimal D1R activation, (2) rapid onset of tolerance and desensitization,6 (3) increased
potential for seizures,7 and (4) therapeutically limiting hypotensive side effects.8 In contrast to orthosteric
D1R agonists, D1R positive allosteric modulators (PAMs) could deliver the therapeutic benefits of
increased D1R activation while avoiding many of the pitfalls that have hindered the therapeutic
development of D1R agonists. PAMs have the potential to be a more useful approach since, rather than
directly activating the D1R, a PAM will potentiate the action of endogenous DA. As mentioned, the inverted
U-shaped curve describing the relationship between cortical D1R signaling and cognitive function may be
rather narrow,1,7,8 resulting in a restricted therapeutic window for an agonist. Thus, a PAM can be
advantageous as the available DA level provides a natural ceiling effect to PAM activity and the endogenous

spatial and temporal regulation of DA-mediated stimulation is maintained.9 Thus, D1R PAMs have recently
emerged as an alternative drug development strategy with the potential of enhanced clinical utility.10
To date, seven D1R PAM structural classes have been discovered (Figure 1).11,12,13,14,15 This
includes two (MLS1082 and MLS6585) recently reported and characterized by our group utilizing a high-
throughput screening (HTS) discovery approach.16 MLS1082 and MLS6585 are structurally unique from
each other16 and the D1R PAMs described in the research and patent literature11–15 (Figure 1).
Me
Me
OH
H2N
O
O
N
OH
O
O
Me
3
Cl
N
Cl
Cl
O
NH
NH
N
N
Me
2
N
S
Me
O
Me
Cl
MLS 1082
MLS 6585
BMS Compound B
DETQ
F
Me
H
OH
F
Cl
Br
O
N
Cl
N
N
N
O
N
NH
N
O
O
O
N
N
Me
O
N
Cl
lead UCB patent compound
CF3
BMS Compound A
lead Astellas patent compound
Figure 1. Structures of the D1 dopamine receptor positive allosteric modulators MLS1082, MLS6585,
BMS Compound B, DETQ, BMS Compound A, UCB patent lead and Astellas patent lead.
MLS1082 and MLS6585 are effective D1R PAMs, potentiating both agonist-stimulated G protein-
and β-arrestin-mediated signaling as well as increasing DA’s binding affinity for the D1R. Neither
compound has any intrinsic agonist activity in the absence of a D1R agonist (e.g., DA). Importantly, we
have demonstrated that MLS1082 and MLS6585 act at two distinct binding sites on the D1R.16 MLS1082
shares a similar binding site with at least two other D1R PAMs (Compound B and DETQ, Figure 1), which
engage a pocket in the second intracellular loop (IL2) of the D1R.17 As this IL2 interaction is shared by at
least three of the known D1R PAM scaffolds, we sought to develop a structure–activity relationship (SAR)
underlying D1R allosteric modulation around this PAM interaction site. To this end we investigated
structural modifications of MLS1082 and their effects on D1-like receptor potentiation. We focused efforts

on the two prominent side chains on the Eastern side of MLS1082 (C-2 and N-3, Figure 1), with the aim of
establishing the importance of these moieties to D1R PAM engagement as well as the potential to improve
efficacy and affinity of the parent (MLS1082) compound. A late-stage diversification strategy enabled the
independent replacement of pendant groups at both the N-3 and C-2 positions which were subsequently
tested for activity.
To access new MLS1082 analogues, we had envisioned that acylation of an appropriate
intermediate (e.g., quinolinone 4) could provide the penultimate precursor 2 that, following cyclization,
would afford the target analogues (Figure 2). However, all our initial efforts to access the target precursor
2 via intermediates 3, 4 or 5 were unsuccessful. We read with interest the reported copper-mediated nitrile
to amide conversion developed by Zhou and coworkers18 and initially sought to determine if this method
would be applicable to our scaffold. Though the application of the literature reaction conditions to nitrile 5
afforded only trace amounts of desired product, minor modifications led directly to preparatively useful
yields of the final, cyclized pyrimidones 1, likely through the unisolated intermediate 2. Our modified
conditions used increased equivalents of both nucleophile (aniline) and copper catalyst (Cu(OAc)2), while
eliminating the need for any added ligands (Scheme 1). Though we screened numerous combinations of
solvent (e.g., DMF, EtOH, DMSO, 1,2-dimethoxyethane, 1,4 dioxane, dichloromethane or HFIP), ligand
(e.g., 2-piperidinecarboxylic acid, propylenediamine, ethylene glycol, proline, cis- or trans-1,2-
cyclohexanediol, pyrido[3,2-g]quinoline and 2-indolecarboxylic acid) and copper catalyst (e.g., CuCl2, CuI,
Cu(OTf)2, Cu(BF4)2 or Cu(PF6)(MeCN)4), the preferred conditions remained very similar to those initially
reported. We used this modified route to resynthesize the HTS hit compound, MLS1082 (1a), and construct
24 diverse analogues. The requisite nitrile substrates 5a–5e for this reaction sequence was prepared by the
addition of malonontrile to N-methylisatoic anhydride19,20 and subsequent acylation of the amine group with
an appropriate acid chloride (Scheme 1). The analogues explored the effect of replacing both pendant
groups on the pyrimidone ring of the scaffold (i.e., the C-2 cyclohexyl and N-3 phenyl in the HTS hit
compound 1a (MLS1082, Table 1)).

O
O
OEt
N
H

3
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
R2
R2
R1
R2
N
N
N
H
H

N
NH
N
NH2
Me
Me
Me
O
R1
4
1
2
O
N
CN
NH
Me
O
R1
5
Figure 2. Proposed retrosynthetic cyclization strategy to pyrimidone analogues and potential synthetic
precursors to access key intermediate 2.
Scheme 1.a
O
O
N
O
O
O
N
CN
NH
CN
R2
R1
b
a
c
O
N
N
Me
O
N
Me
NH2
N
Me
Me
O
R1
6
7
5a 5e

1a 1z

a Reagents and conditions: (a) malononitrile, K2CO3, Et3N, DMF, 120 °C (MW), 45 min, 76% yield; (b)
R1COCl (2.0 equiv), pyridine, rt, 22–81% yield; (c) H2NR2 (5.0 equiv), Cu(OAc)2 (0.5 equiv), water, 100
°C (MW), 2 h, 1–26% yield.
Importantly, many of the MLS1082 analogues retain measurable PAM activity, validating this
overall scaffold as a D1-like receptor modulator. From this defined analogue set, we established several
general SAR trends and discovered analogues that showed enhanced D1R potentiation. Potential PAM
activities of the analogues were tested in two assays measuring D1R activation and signaling: cAMP
accumulation (a measure of G protein activation), and β-arrestin recruitment to the receptor. For illustrative
purposes the potentiation of DA-mediated recruitment of β-arrestin to the D1R by the parent compound,
MLS1082, is depicted in Figure 3. Cells expressing the D1R are incubated with increasing concentrations
of the endogenous agonist DA (black circles). Co-incubation with a single, maximally effective
concentration (50 μM) of MLS1082 potentiates the DA response, shifting the DA concentration-response

curve to the left, demonstrating an increase in potency (black arrow), and increasing the maximum response
(white arrow). These potentiation assays were performed for each of the novel analogues and their effects
on DA signaling at D1-like receptors are summarized in Table 1. In addition to DA EC50 and Emax values
in the presence of each analogue, we calculated the fold change in values (vs. DA alone, blue-shaded rows)
for these parameters to provide a clearer comparison of analogue PAM activity. DA EC50 fold change was
calculated by dividing the control DA EC50 by the DA EC50 observed in the presence of each given analog.
Fold change for Emax was calculated similarly, with the Emax in the presence of PAM divided by Emax of the
control dopamine curve. These values are reported in Table 1.
Figure 3. Depiction of the potentiation of D1R signaling by MLS1082. Increasing concentrations of
dopamine (black circles) stimulate recruitment of β-arrestin to the D1R. Inclusion of a single, maximally
effective (50 μM) concentration of MLS1082 potentiates this response by causing an increase in DA’s
potency (EC50; black arrow) and efficacy (Emax; white arrow).
Table 1. Structure–activity summary of pyrimidone analogues and D1R potentiation.
DA-stimulated G protein
DA-stimulated β-arrestin recruitmentb
signalinga
Compound
ID
D1 EC50
(nM)
[95% CI]
D1 Emax
(%)
± SEM
D1 EC50
(µM)
[95% CI]
D1 Emax
(%)
± SEM
D5 EC50
(nM)
[95% CI]
structure
DA
D5 Emax (%),
± SEM
fold potentiation vs. DA alone
214
[160-286]
—
1.4
81.7
[45.6-146]
—
100 ± 3.4
—
99.4 ± 0.5
[0.9-2.1]
102 ± 1.6
—
control
—
—
123
28.8
MLS1082
0.32
[84.3-
104 ± 4.7
118 ± 5.7**
[16.9-
152 ± 9.1***
1a
[0.18-0.55]*
180]**
49.0]****

O
O
N
N
1.74
1.04
4.34
1.19
2.84
1.50
N
Me
Me
163
[90.0-298]
0.51
27.4
O
N
O
N
O
104 ± 4.7
1.04
89.4 ± 3.1*
0.90
92.4 ± 11.1
0.91
[0.29-0.90]*
[8.9-84.1]*
1b
N
1.31
2.73
2.98
Me
Cl
158
[92.7-270]
0.80
[0.63-1.01]
44.1
[5.8-336]
O
97.4 ± 3.8
0.97
110 ± 6.4
1.11
93.9 ± 1.8*
0.92
N
N
1c
1d
1e
1f
N
N
O
1.35
1.74
1.85
Me
O
255
[181-361]
1.19
80.2
[23.0-280]
104 ± 2.8
1.04
113 ± 8.4
1.13
140 ± 12.9*
1.38
[0.58-2.42]*
Cl
N
N
O
0.84
1.17
1.02
Me
OMe
185
[110-309]
0.41
[0.10-1.75]
62.1
[18.0-214]
O
90.9 ± 3.8
0.91
87.5 ± 3.3*
0.88
155 ± 3.0
1.53
N
N
N
O
1.16
3.39
1.32
Me
OMe
Cl
199
[111-356]
0.83
[0.10-7.0]
58.5
[22.1-154]
O
96.9 ± 4.3
0.97
109 ± 9.9
1.10
101 ± 6.7
0.99
N
N
N
1.08
1.67
1.40
Me
55.9
[34.1-
O
O
0.18
103.
[36.6-290]
103 ± 3.3
92.1 ± 9.6
119 ± 10.3
[0.14-0.23]**
N
91.5]****
1g
N
N
Me
3.83
1.03
95.6 ± 4.7
0.96
7.72
0.93
103 ± 5.9
1.03
0.79
1.17
88.0 ± 1.3
0.87
Me
185
[96.1-356]
0.37
43.9
[4.8-703]
O
O
N
O
[0.17-0.82]*
N
1h
1i
N
1.16
3.76
1.86
Me
Cl
150
[84.2-268]
113.7 ±
4.7
0.38
56.1
[16.0-197]
O
86.2 ± 6.1
0.87
63.4 ± 1.8*
0.62
[0.28-0.53]**
N
N
N
N
O
1.43
1.14
101± 4.8
1.01
3.66
1.46
Me
O
423
[241-745]
0.63
[0.32-1.26]
63.1
[30.0-133]
106 ± 4.2
1.06
77.1 ± 7.0
0.76
Cl
1j
N
N
0.51
2.21
1.29
Me
OMe
83.0
[31.7-218]
0.15
33.7
[2.6-437]
O
O
N
O
N
122 ± 7.4
1.22
92.6 ± 5.0
0.93
145 ± 37.8
1.42
[ 0.05-0.47]*
N
1k
N
2.58
9.27
2.42
Me
OMe
Cl
233
[109-468]
0.51
57.7
[6.0-552]
O
104 ± 6.0
1.04
95.7 ± 2.6
0.96
131 ± 17.4
1.29
[0.32-0.81]**
N
1l
N
0.92
2.73
1.42
Me
43.1
[29.0-
64.0]**
0.32
80.4
[17.5-370]
1m
98.2 ± 2.7
109± 14.6
157 ± 15.0
[0.23-0.45]**

O
O
N
N
4.97
0.98
4.34
1.09
1.02
1.54
N
Me
Me
150
[68.7-324]
0.20
26.5
[3.4-209]
O
N
O
N
O
102 ± 5.1
1.02
116 ± 10.1
1.16
192 ± 20.0*
1.89
[ 0.07-0.47]*
N
1n
1o
1p
1q
1r
1.43
6.95
3.08
Me
Cl
137
0.32
42.5
O
94.4 ± 4.8
0.94
116± 10.3
1.17
196 ± 23.9*
1.93
[71.1-263]*
[0.24-0.43]**
[17.1-105]*
N
N
N
N
O
1.57
4.34
1.92
Me
167
[109-256]
0.16
43.0
[18.1-102]
O
104 ± 3.5
1.04
93.5 ± 7.2
0.94
130 ± 11.1*
1.28
[0.09-0.29]**
Cl
N
N
1.28
8.69
1.90
Me
OMe
122
[51.4-291]
0.15
25.4
[7.5-86.1]
O
O
N
O
N
107 ± 6.1
1.07
116 ± 9.1
1.17
192 ± 11.7**
1.89
[0.09-0.25]***
N
N
1.75
9.27
3.21
Me
OMe
Cl
117
[61.0-225]
0.58
[0.49-0.70]
27.5
[5.7-133]
O
106 ± 4.9
1.06
92.5 ± 3.5
0.93
124 ± 11.2*
1.22
N
N
1.83
2.40
2.97
Me
O
O
196
[123-313]
49.1
[22.8-106]
100± 3.5
1.6 [0.37-6.7] 120 ± 10.3
134 ± 19.5
N
1s
1t
N
N
Me
1.09
1.00
102 ± 3.5
1.02
0.89
1.21
95.3 ± 5.8
0.96
1.66
1.32
120 ± 15.4
1.18
Me
276
[180-422]
168
[57.0-496]
O
O
N
1.4 [0.6-2.3]
1.00
N
N
Me
0.77
0.49
Cl
431
73.5
[36.8-147]
O
O
N
111 ± 2.4
1.5 [1.2-1.8]
96.9 ± 9.2
98.3 ± 10.4
[334 -556]*
N
1u
1v
N
Me
0.5
1.11
0.95
0.97
1.11
0.97
O
O
N
245
[178-337]
1.5
[0.53-4.12]
94.8
[42.5-212]
103 ± 2.8
1.03
115 ± 10.5
1.16
110 ± 11.1
1.08
N
Cl
N
Me
0.87
0.94
0.86
OMe
Cl
O
O
N
295
[202-430]
94.4
[44.9-199]
105 ± 3.2 1.8 [0.94-3.4] 111 ± 2.7*
108 ± 8.7
N
1w
1x
N
Me
0.73
1.05
0.79
1.11
0.86
1.06
170
[104 -273]
0.65
[0.41-1.0]
81.9
[39.6-167]
101 ± 4.1
87.8 ± 5.7
122 ± 15.2

O
O
N
NH
1.27
1.01
2.14
0.88
1.00
1.20
N
Me
163
[115-231]
0.84
95.1
[23.8-383]
O
O
101 ± 2.8
1.01
105 ± 3.5
1.06
126 ± 16.2
1.24
[0.42-1.67]*
N
1y
N
N
1.32
1.65
0.86
Me
Concentration-response curves for DA-stimulated D1R signaling were generated in the absence (DA only) or presence of 50
μM test compound.
a G protein signaling measured by cAMP accumulation using the DiscoverX HitHunter assay.16
b β-arrestin recruitment measured using the DiscoverX Pathhunter assay.16
* DA vs. DA + PAM via paired Student’s t-test, *p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001
We prepared an array of analogues derived from the combination of four aliphatic sidechains (R1)
of various steric bulk at the C-2 position and six substituted phenyl groups (R2) at the N-3 position as well
as the two singleton analogues 1x and 1y. These efforts afforded 24 new analogues, which possessed a
range of D1R-like potentiation activities and revealed notable SAR trends. The strongest correlation related
to the steric bulk at the C-2 position, where replacing the cyclohexyl moiety found in the screening hit 1a
with the slightly smaller cyclopentyl (1m to 1r) afforded many of the most active analogues in this study
with these analogues either equally or more active than the corresponding cyclohexyl analogues. We used
fold potentiation of DA-stimulated β-arrestin recruitment as the primary SAR metric (except where
otherwise noted) as the DiscoverX Pathhunter assay provides a reliable read out for D1R activation over a
wide activity range. The isobutyl analogues (1g to 1l) were also more active than the cyclohexyl analogues,
to varying degrees. Comparison of the cyclopentyl and isobutyl analogues showed modestly better PAM
activity for the former with the most significant potentiation improvement for the cyclopentyl analogues 1n
and 1p over their isobutyl counterparts 1h and 1j. To survey the effect of increased steric bulk, the
cyclohexyl in 1a was replaced with a methylene-linked cyclohexyl group (1s to 1w). This replacement was
uniformly detrimental to the desired PAM activity with no analogues showing any appreciable D1R
potentiation. We examined a single cyclopropyl analogue (1y) and found only marginal D1R potentiation,
and thus this and other less bulky R1 groups were not explored further.

We surveyed six phenyl side chains at the R2 position, including unsubstituted phenyl, electron-
donating phenyl (4-methyl and 4-methoxy), electron-withdrawing phenyl (4-chloro and 3-chloro) and an
electronically mixed phenyl (3-chloro-4-methoxy) with the activity patterns for these R2 analogues being
less straightforward to interpret than for the R1 analogues. While for the cyclohexyl R1 series (1a–1f), the
unsubstituted phenyl (1a) showed the greatest D1R potentiation (4.3-fold for β-arrestin recruitment by
dopamine), for both the cyclopentyl (1m–1r) and isobutyl (1g–1l) analogues, it was the 4-methoxyphenyl
side chain at the R2 position that afforded the greatest potentiation of β-arrestin recruitment (analogues 1k
and 1q, 9.3-fold for both). The analogue 1q displayed barely measureable D1R potentiation of G protein
signaling (1.8-fold) though it was an active potentiator of D5R β-arrestin recruitment (3.2-fold). In the
cyclopentyl series, the most active G protein signaling (cAMP production) potentiation remained the
unsubstituted phenyl R2 group (4.9-fold, analogue 1m). Interestingly, in the cyclopentyl series, several R2
sidechains (4-methylphenyl, 4-chlorophenyl, 3-chlorophenyl and 4-methoxyphenyl) afforded D1R
potentiators for β-arrestin recruitment (1n to 1q). The electronically mixed 3-chloro-4-methoxyphenyl
analogues often demonstrated the lowest D1R potentiation across each R2 series, with the exception where
R2 was cyclopentyl, which afforded an analogue (1r) of modest D1R potentiation for both β-arrestin
recruitment and G protein signaling (2.4- and 1.8-fold, respectively). The requirement that R1 even be an
aryl group at all is countered by the modest activity of the desphenyl analogue 1x. Comprehensive SAR
exploration at this position may therefore be critical to afford a more efficacious and selective potentiator
of the D1R.
Our lead analogues illustrate the overall SAR trends identified using this compound set. The
potentiation of dopamine-stimulated β-arrestin recruitment to the D1R by a single, high concentration of
analogues 1k and 1q is depicted in Figure 4. Both analogues have a group with smaller steric bulk than the
parent compound at the R1 position, either a cyclopentyl (1q) or an isobutyl group (1k) and the electron
donating 4-methoxy group at the R2 position. Both 1k and 1q showed a more than two-fold increase in EC50
potentiation over the parent PAM 1a (9.3-fold for 1k and 1q vs. 4.3-fold for 1a). These data suggest that

the smaller group at R1 and additional electron donation at R2 increase the potentiation of agonist potency.
Interestingly, neither analogue increased the potentiation of dopamine’s Emax (1a = 1.2-fold increase, 1k =
0.9-fold and 1q = 1.2-fold). This may indicate that compound contributions to Emax potentiation occur
through different moieties of the scaffold with separate structure–activity relationships, as allosteric
modulators can affect agonist efficacy and potency through discrete mechanisms of action. Both analogues
have a smaller effect on the potentiation of the G-protein-mediated signaling assay, cAMP accumulation.
This type of assay can be confounded by signal amplification, due to both spare receptor phenomena and
signal amplification of second messenger (cAMP) generation, as evident by the significantly higher potency
observed with DA in the cAMP vs. β-arrestin recruitment assays. This tends to narrow the potentiation
windows, making the observed fold shifts in the cAMP responses relatively smaller than those observed
for β-arrestin recruitment.
Figure 4. Potentiation of DA-stimulated β-arrestin recruitment by analogues 1k (left) and 1q (right).
Increasing concentrations of dopamine (black circles) stimulate recruitment of β-arrestin to the D1R.This
effect is potentiated by including a single, high (50 μM) concentration of the analogues 1k (left, blue
triangles) and 1q (right, blue triangles). Both analogues potentiated dopamine’s potency to a similar or
greater extent than the parent compound MLS1082 (1a, red squares).
The largest improvement on the parent compounds was enhancement of the fold potentiation of
potency (EC50) for both D1-like receptors (D1R and D5R) rather than an increase in subtype selectivity.
The lack of subtype selectivity of the scaffold may not be surprising given that the interaction site for this

scaffold lies at least partially within the IL2 region of the receptor.15, 16 Comparing the D1R with the D5R
sequence in IL2 and the portions of transmembrane regions 3 and 4 (TM3 or TM4, respectively) closest to
IL2 shows that the two receptors are nearly identical with many of the sequence differences representing
conservative changes (e.g., an isoleucine residue instead of a valine). Only three of the fifteen residues in
TM4 closest to IL2 substantially differ between D1R and D5R, while sequence alignment for TM3 and
ICL2 shows only one amino acid difference in each region. This sequence homology may underly the
difficulty in improving D1R–D5R receptor selectivity on the MLS1082 PAM scaffold. One notable trend,
however, was that the methylenecyclohexyl analogues 1s and 1u demonstrated enhanced D5R potentiation.
It is also of note that a number of compounds lost PAM activity all together. These findings underlie
important implications for the homology of allosteric sites between closely related receptors.
Overall, we have established a number of SAR trends for this series of PAMs, most notably
concerning the steric bulk of the aliphatic group on the pyrimidone ring. During the course of the SAR
investigation, we identified several analogues with modestly improved potentiation of dopamine-induced
D1R activation and highlight the importance of groups on the pyrimidone ring in maintaining PAM activity.
Together these structural criteria can be applied to the future refinement of this class of D1R PAMs and
enhance our understanding of this allosteric site on the D1R.
Acknowledgments
We thank Benjamin Neuenswander at the University of Kansas for performing mass-directed HPLC
purification, purity analysis and HRMS determination of final analogues. We acknowledge financial
support from the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
Stroke, the Molecular Libraries Initiative funding to the University of Kansas Specialized Chemistry
Center (U54HG005031) and the generous support of the Eshelman Institute for Innovation at the UNC
Eshelman School of Pharmacy.
Supporting Information

Supporting Information associated with this article can be found, in the online version. These data include
MOL files of the final analogues described in this article and experimental details and characterization
data.
1 Goldman-Rakic, P. S.; Castner, S. A.; Svensson, T. H.; Siever, L. J.; Williams, G. V. Targeting the
dopamine D1 receptor in schizophrenia: insights for cognitive dysfunction. Psychopharmacology 2004,
174, 3–16.
2 Castner, S. A.; Goldman-Rakic, P. S. Enhancement of working memory in aged monkeys by a
sensitizing regimen of dopamine D1 receptor stimulation. J. Neurosci. 2004, 24, 1446–1450.
3 Robbins, T. W.; Arnsten, A. F. T. The neuropsychopharmacology of fronto-executive function:
monoaminergic modulation. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2009, 32, 267–287.
4 Arnsten, A. F. T.; Vijayragavan, S.; Wang, M.; Gamo, N. J.; Paspalas, C. D. Dopamine's Influence on
Prefrontal Cortical Cognition: Actions and Circuits in Behaving Primates, in Dopamine Handbook 2009,
(Iversen L.L. ISD, Dunnett S.B., Bjorklund A. ed) pp 230–248, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
5 Vijayraghavan, S.; Wang, M.; Birnbaum, S. G.; Williams, G. V.; Arnsten, A. F. T. Inverted-U dopamine
D1 receptor actions on prefrontal neurons engaged in working memory. Nat. Neurosci. 2007, 10, 376–
384.
6 Lewis, M. M.; Watts, V. J.; Lawler, C. P.; Nichols, D. E.; Mailman, R. B. Homologous desensitization
of the D1A dopamine receptor: efficacy in causing desensitization dissociates from both receptor
occupancy and functional potency. J. Pharmacol. Exper. Therapeut. 1998, 286, 345–353.
7 O'Sullivan, G. J.; Dunleavy, M.; Hakansson, K.; Clementi, M.; Kinsella, A.; Croke, D. T.; Drago, J.;
Fienberg, A. A.; Greengard, P.; Sibley, D. R.; Fisone, G.; Henshall, D.C. Waddington, J. L. Dopamine D1
vs. D5 receptor-dependent induction of seizures in relation to DARPP-32, ERK1/2 and GluR1-AMPA
signaling. Neuropharmacology 2008, 54, 1051–1061.
8 Zeng, C.; Zhang, M.; Asico, L. D.; Eisner, G. M. Jose, P. A. The dopaminergic system in hypertension.
Clin. Sci. 2007, 112, 583–597.
9 Wootten, D.; Christopoulos, A.; Sexton, P. M. Emerging paradigms in GPCR allostery: implications for
drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2013, 12, 630–644.
10 Hall, A.; Provins, L.; Valade, A. Novel strategies to activate the dopamine D1 receptor: recent advances
in orthosteric agonism and positive allosteric modulation. J. Med. Chem. 2019, 62, 128−140.
11 Beadle, C. D.; Coates, D. A.; Hao, J.; Krushinski, J. H.; Reinhard, M. R.; Schaus, J. M.; Wolfangel, C.
D. 3,4-Dihydroisoquinolin-2(1H)-yl compounds. 2014, WO 2014/193781 A1, 1–90.
12 Lewis, M. A.; Hunihan, L.; Watson, J.; Gentles, R. G.; Hu, S.; Huang, Y.; Bronson, J.; Macor, J. E.;
Beno, B. R.; Ferrante, M.; Hendricson, A.; Knox, R. J.; Molski, T. F.; Kong, Y.; Cvijic, M. E.; Rockwell,
K. L.; Weed, M. R.; Cacace, A. M.; Westphal, R. S.; Alt, A.; Brown, J. M. Discovery of D1 dopamine

receptor positive allosteric modulators: characterization of pharmacology and identification of residues
that regulate species selectivity. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2015, 354, 340–349.
13 Ates, A.; Jnoff, E.; Provins, L.; Valade, A.; Hall, A. Tetrahydroisoquinoline derivatives. PCT Int. Appl.
2017, WO2017178377.
14 Kawahami, S.; Imaizumi, T.; Masuda, N.; Kunikawa, S.; Morita, M.; Yarimizu, J. Imidazodiazepine
compounds. U.S. Patent 2018, 20180185383.
15 Hao, J.; Beck, J. P.; Schaus, J. M.; Krushinski, J. H.; Chen, Q.; Beadle, C. D.; Vidal, P.; Reinhard, M.
R.; Dressman, B. A.; Massey, S. M.; Boulet, S. L.; Cohen, M. P.; Watson, B. M.; Tupper, D.; Gardinier,
K. M.; Myers, J.; Johansson, A. M.; Richardson, J.; Richards, D. S.; Hembre, E. J.; Remick, D.
M.; Coates, D. A.; Bhardwaj, R. M.; Diseroad, B. A.; Bender, D.; Stephenson, G.; Wolfangel, C.
D.; Diaz, N.; Getman, B. G.; Wang, X. S.; Heinz, B. A.; Cramer, J. W.; Zhou, X.; Maren, D. L.; Falcone,
J. F.; Wright, R. A.; Mitchell, S. N.; Carter, G.; Yang, C. R.; Bruns, R. F.; Svensson, K. A. Synthesis and
Pharmacological Characterization of 2-(2,6-Dichlorophenyl)-1-((1S,3R)-5-(3-hydroxy-3-methylbutyl)-3-
(hydroxymethyl)-1-methyl-3,4-dihydroisoquinolin-2(1H)-yl)ethan-1-one (LY3154207), a Potent Subtype
Selective, and Orally Available Positive Allosteric Modulator of the Human Dopamine D1 Receptor. J
Med. Chem. 2019, 62, 8711–8732.
16 Luderman, K. D.; Conroy, J. L.; Free, R. B.; Southall, N.; Ferrer, M.; Sanchez-Soto, M.; Moritz, A. E.;
Willette, B. K. E.; Fyfe, T. J.; Jain, P.; Titus, S.; Hazelwood, L. A.; Aubé, J.; Lane, J. R.; Frankowski, K.
J.; Sibley, D. R. Identification of positive allosteric modulators of the D1 dopamine receptor that act at
diverse binding sites Mol. Pharmacol. 2018, 94, 1197–1209.
17 Wang, X.; Heinz, B. A.; Qian, Y.-W.; Carter, J. H.; Gadski, R. A.; Beavers, L. S.; Little, S. P.; Yang, C.
R.; Beck, J. P.; Hao, J.; Schaus, J. M.; Svensson, K. A.; Bruns, R.F. Intracellular binding site for a
positive allosteric modulator of the dopamine D1 receptor. Mol. Pharmacol. 2018, 94, 1232–1245.
18 Li, X.; Li, Z.; Deng, H.; Zhou, X. An efficient protocol for the preparation of amides by copper-
catalyzed reactions between nitriles and amines in water. Tetrahedron Lett. 2013, 54, 2212–2216.
19
Coppola, G. M.; Hardtmann, G. E.; Pfister, O. R. Chemistry of 2H-3,1-benzoxazine-2,4-(1H)-dione
(isatoic anhydride). 2. Reactions with thiopseudoureas and carbanions. J. Org. Chem. 1976, 41, 825–
831.
20 Khoramdelan, F.; Davoodnia, A.; Bozorgmehr, M. R.; Ebrahimi, M. Comparative study on
conventional heating, ultrasonication and microwave assisted synthesis of 2-amino-1-alkyl-4-oxo-1,4-
dihydroquinoline-3-carbonitriles. Heterocyclic Lett. 2017, 7, 947–952.