3112
K. G. Liu et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 11 (2001) 3111–3113
ted that would add a small lipophilic substituent while
mimicking some of the effects of the intramolecular
hydrogen bond present in the benzophenone analogue.
Compounds were built within the PPARg binding site
by removal of the benzophenone group from farglita-
zar, and growth of alternative substituents onto the
tyrosine nitrogen, using the MVP program.5 The
growth process, which generates multiple energy-mini-
mized conformations, was carried out twice, once within
the protein binding site and once in aqueous solution. A
basicity adjustment was applied to the calculated bind-
ing energy to account for the fraction of the molecule in
the neutral ionization state at pH 7.6 The model build-
ing predicted that pyrrole, morpholino and n-alkyl
derivatives would bind to PPARg effectively at pH 7.
Other derivatives, such as amide, piperidine and
dimethylpyrrole, were predicted to be less potent due to
their polarity, basicity or poor steric fit, respectively.
aldehydes. N-Cycloalkyl groups (4b–d) were introduced
through alkylation with dibromoalkylating agents.
Compounds 3c and 3d were prepared through acylation
and sulfonylation, respectively. The pyrimidine com-
pound 3e was generated by aromatic nucleophilic sub-
stitution of 2-chloropyrimidine. Reaction of the free
amine from 2 with 2,5-dimethoxytetrahydrofuran or
with hexane-2,5-dione in acetic acid provided the
pyrrole compounds 4e and 4f, respectively (Scheme 1).
Presence of sodium acetate in the reaction mixture
was found to greatly accelerate pyrrole formation and
to be crucial for high yields. Unfortunately, significant
racemization (up to 10%) occurred when the pyrroles
were formed in acetic acid in the presence of sodium
acetate as determined by chiral HPLC. Gratefully, use
of a biphasic reaction conditions reported by Jefford8
led to pyrrole formation without racemization (Scheme
2). Saponification with aqueous LiOH in dioxane or
THF provided enantiomerically pure carboxylic acids.
The enantiomer of 4e was also synthesized from d-tyr-
osine. Use of pyrrole as a primary amine protecting
group was first introduced by Bruekelman.9 Pyrroles
have been shown to be stable to strong bases, nucleo-
philes, and to brief contact with strong acids. Consistent
with these reports, compounds 4e and 4f are stable to
aqueous LiOH, acidic workup, and storage at room
temperature. Notably, structurally related racemic
pyrroles have been claimed to show in vivo antidiabetic
activity.10
The synthesis of tyrosine analogues 3a–e and 4a–f is
depicted in Scheme 1. Mitsunobu reaction between
commercially available t-butoxycarbonyl (BOC)-pro-
tected l-tyrosine methyl ester 1 and 5-methyl-2-phenyl-
4-oxazolylethanol7 using triphenylphosphine and
diisopropylazodicarboxylate in toluene was followed
by removal of the BOC protecting group with 4 M
HCl in dioxane to afford the amine hydrochloride 2
in 70% overall yield. Intermediate 2 was derivatized
on the tyrosine nitrogen to provide the targeted set
of analogues following saponification with LiOH
(Scheme 1). N-Alkyl groups (3a–b and 4a) were
introduced by reductive alkylation with the requisite
Compounds 3a–e and 4a–f were screened against the
three human PPAR subtypes in binding and cell-based
reporter assays (Table 1). The details of both the bind-
ing2,11 and the functional assays2 have been reported
previously. The compounds (3–4) displayed subtype-
selectivity for PPARg over PPARa and PPARd. How-
ever, the selectivity ranged from 3.5-fold with alkyl
amine (3b) to >700-fold with pyrrole (4e) in the cell-
based assay. Variation in the polarity of the N-sub-
stituent was found to have a dramatic effect on the
PPARg activity. As predicted, the acetyl (3c) and sulfo-
nyl (3d) groups were weak PPARg agonists with EC50
>1 mM, suggesting that polar functionality is poorly
tolerated. The N-propyl amine (3b) and N,N-dimethyl
amine (4a) were more potent than the corresponding
mono-methyl analogue 3, showing that increased
lipophilicity was beneficial.
Scheme 1. Reagents and conditions: (a) 5-methyl-2-phenyl-4-oxazolyl-
ethanol, PPh3, DIAD, PhCH3, 79%; (b) 4 M HCl in dioxane, 100%;
(c) 3a: (i) 2-nitrobenzenesulfonyl chloride, Et3N, CH2Cl2, 98%; (ii)
MeI, Cs2CO3, DMF, 33%; (iii) thiophenol, K2CO3, acetonitrile, 62%;
3b: CH3CH2CHO, NaBH(OAc)3, CH2Cl2; 3c: CH3COCl, Et3N,
CH2Cl2, 98%; 3d: MeSO2Cl, Et3N, CH2Cl2, 46%; 3e: 2-chloropyr-
imidine, Na2CO3, EtOH, 15%; 4a: HCHO, NaCNBH3, HOAc,
CH3CN, 26%; 4b: 1,5-dibromopentane, Na2CO3, EtOH, 42%; 4c:
2-bromoethyl ether, Na2CO3, EtOH, 60%; 4d: 1,4-dibromobutane,
Na2CO3, EtOH, 47%; 4e: 2,5-dimethoxytetrahydrofuran, HOAc,
NaOAc, 61%; 4f: hexane-2,5-dione, HOAc, 36%; (d) LiOH, THF,
H2O, MeOH, 90–100%.
Scheme 2. Reagents and conditions: (a) 2,5-dimethoxytetrahydro-
furan, 1,2-dichloroethane, H2O, 77%; (b) LiOH, dioxane, H2O, 98%.