S. Pecchi et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 20 (2010) 6895–6898
6897
Table 3
Position 2- SAR in the 2-morpholino-6-(30-hydroxyphenyl) pyrimidine series (IC50 in
M)
The proposed binding mode of compound 25 in p110
a
is shown
in Figure 2. The model was built based on literature data and a co-
structure of the compound in p110c 17
Given the high homology
between the and isoforms a similar binding mode was ex-
l
.
H
N
a
c
N
pected and this assumption was supported by SAR data. In fact,
biochemical assay data showed only about a 10-fold potency dif-
ference of 25 against the two isoforms.18 The model of 25 in the
HN
N
N
R2
p110a ATP binding site provides a rationale for the observed SAR
trends and especially for the key role of the 2-position substituent.
The morpholine oxygen forms a key productive hydrogen bond
interaction with V851 in the hinge domain of the ATP binding site.
This interaction has been described previously.19,20 The pyrimidine
core provides the appropriate scaffolding to place the phenolic
moiety near the catalytic region, where the OH binds tightly be-
tween D810 and Y836. These interactions achieve maximum effi-
ciency through a nearly coplanar conformation of the central
pyrimidine ring and the position 4- and 6-substituents. Substitu-
ents in position 4- reach toward a partially solvent exposed area,
hence the higher tolerability.
OH
IC50 (n) Ex # R2
Ex # R2
PI3K
a
PI3Ka IC50 (n)
N
N
1
0.031 (11)
5.6 (5)
34
35
16 (4)
15 (7)
O
N
H
N
N
N
N
32
S
S
OMe
O
33
7.8 (3)
36
11 (10)
O
Compounds in this series inhibit class I PI3 kinases and are in
general approximately equipotent against the
a and d isoforms,
while they are about 10-fold less potent against the b and
c
isoforms.
Modulation of the PI3K pathway is confirmed by inhibition of
AKT phosphorylation on S473 in the A2780 cell line (ovarian carci-
noma, PTEN deleted) and by the resulting inhibition of cell prolif-
eration in the same cell line, as shown in Table 4.
In conclusion, we have identified a series of 2-morpholino-6-
hydroxyphenyl pyrimidines which are potent and selective class I
PI3K kinase inhibitors, showing cellular activity both as mecha-
nism modulation (inhibition of AKTS473 phosphorylation) and inhi-
bition of cell proliferation in a cell line with PI3K pathway
deregulation. Additional SAR, especially focused on identifying het-
erocyclic alternatives to the phenol in the 6-position will be re-
ported in due course.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge Yasuki Yamada for the syn-
thesis of the original solid phase library, John Nuss and Alex Harris
for guidance and advice during the early stage of the program.
Figure 2. The proposed binding mode of compound 25 in the class 1A PI3K-
isoform is shown. Key binding interactions with V851, D810, and Y836 are shown
by dotted red lines.
a
Supplementary data
Table 4
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in
Biochemical selectivity profile, cell mechanism modulation and functional effects of
selected PI3K inhibitors from the morpholino pyrimidine scaffold
Ex#
PI3K
IC50
a
PI3Kb
IC50
PI3Kd
IC50
PI3K
IC50
c
pAKT
EC50
Prolif.
EC50
References and notes
1. Vanhaesebroeck, B.; Leevers, S. J.; Ahmadi, K.; Timms, J.; Katso, R.; Driscoll, P.
C.; Woscholski, R.; Parker, P. J.; Waterfield, M. D. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2001, 70,
535.
1
26
0.031 (11)
0.017 (9)
0.24 (18)
0.24 (23)
0.029 (5)
0.006 (1)
0.57 (2)
nd
0.44 (1)
0.073 (1)
0.94 (4)
0.37 (2)
2. Katso, R.; Okkenhaug, K.; Ahmadi, K., et al Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2001, 17,
615.
IC50 and EC50 in lM. Cell line: A2780 ovarian carcinoma, PTEN deleted.
3. Wymann, M. P.; Zvelebil, M.; Laffargue, M. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2003, 24, 366.
4. Kohn, A. D.; Takeuchi, F.; Roth, R. A. J. Biol. Chem. 1996, 271, 21920.
5. Andjelkovic, M.; Alessi, D. R.; Meier, R., et al J. Biol. Chem. 1997, 272, 31515.
6. Liu, P.; Cheng, H.; Roberts, T. M.; Zhao, J. J. Nat. Rev. Drug Disc. 2009, 8, 627.
7. Ali, I. U.; Schriml, L. M.; Dean, M. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1999, 91, 1922.
8. Cross, D. A.; Alessi, D. R.; Cohen, P., et al Nature 1995, 378, 785.
9. Samuels, Y.; Wang, Z.; Bardelli, A., et al Science 2004, 304, 554.
10. Kong, D.; Yamori, T. Cancer Sci. 2008, 99, 1734.
11. Nuss, J. M.; Tsuhako, A. L.; Anand, N. K. In Annu. Rep. Med. Chem.; Macor, J. E.,
Ed.; Academic Press: Oxford, 2009; Vol. 44, pp 339–351.
12. Workman, P.; Clarke, P. A.; Raynaud, F. I.; Van Montfort, R. L. M. Cancer Res.
2010, 70, 2146.
13. Gordeev, M. F.; Patel, D. V.; Wu, J.; Gordon, E. M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37,
4643.
14. Kim, J.-W. PCT Int. Appl. WO04048369, 2004.
15. Gueremy, C.; Audiau, F.; Renault, C.; Benavides, J.; Uzan, A.; Le Fur, G. J. Med.
Chem. 1986, 29, 1394.
compound 1. Although, in general, this series suffered from poor
solubility, 4-position variations allowed some modulation of the
physicochemical properties. As an example, compared to com-
pound 1 (<0.1 lM), compounds 26, 29, and 31 were at least 50-fold
more soluble.
SAR around position 2- (Table 3) underlined the unique role of
morpholine in binding.
The replacement with S, SO, or NH (e.g., 32–34) or removal of
the cyclic constraint (e.g., 35) were, in fact, not tolerated and steric
bulk on both sides of the morpholine oxygen also caused a signif-
icant (>300-fold, e.g., 36) potency loss.