1764
N. Sato et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 14 (2004) 1761–1764
examined. Branching was found to be effective to
enhance potency. The 1-ethylpropoxy derivative 2m was
3-fold more potent than the parent propoxy derivative
2c. The cyclization strategy was not found to result in
significant improvement with respect to potency; how-
ever, the pyranyloxy derivative 2q was found to have a
high binding affinity (IC50=4.4 nM), a 7-fold improve-
ment over the cyclohexyloxy derivative 2p. The sig-
nificantly improved binding affinity is attributed to the
oxygen atom of the pyranyl ring that is probably acting
as a hydrogen bonding acceptor. Finally phenyl sub-
stituted derivatives were examined. It is important to
note that phenoxy derivatives could not be prepared
since phenoxide anions did not participate in the current
substitution reaction. Substitution in the phenyl moiety
was not observed to contribute to the enhanced binding
affinity (2r–t); however, the binding affinity of the pyr-
idyl derivative 2u was relatively higher than the corres-
ponding phenyl derivative 2t. This slight increase in
binding affinity is probably ascribed to electrostatic
effects, rather than the hydrogen bonding acceptor
property of the pyridine ring. The antagonisticactivities
of the selected high-affinity compounds were mea-
sured by their ability to inhibit NPY-induced [Ca2+]i
increases in CHO/dhFrÀ cells, which expressed the
recombinant human Y1 receptor.16 In this [Ca2+]i
functional assay, 2h, j, m, q, and u dose-dependently
inhibited the [Ca2+]i increase (See Table 1 for their IC50
values).
4. Stanley, B. G.; Kyrkouli, S. E.; Lampert, S.; Leibowitz,
S. F. Peptides 1986, 7, 1189.
5. Zarjevski, N.; Cusin, I.; Vettor, R.; Rohner-Jeanrenaud,
F.; Jeanrenaud, B. Endocrinology 1993, 133, 1753.
6. Erickson, J. C.; Hollopeter, G.; Palmiter, R. D. Science
1996, 274, 1704.
7. Gerald, C.; Walker, M. W.; Criscione, L.; Gustafson,
E. L.; Batzl-Hartmann, C.; Smith, K. E.; Vaysse, P.;
Durkin, M. M.; Laz, T. M.; Linemeyer, D. L.; Schaff-
hauser, A. O.; Whitebread, S.; Hofbauer, K. G.; Taber,
R. I.; Branchek, T. A.; Weinshank, R. L. Nature 1996,
382, 168.
8. Marsh, D. J.; Hollopeter, G.; Kafer, K. E.; Palmiter, R. D.
Nat. Med. 1998, 4, 718.
9. Petruzzelli, R.; Barra, D.; Bossa, F.; Condo, S. G.; Brix,
O.; Nuutinen, M.; Giardina, B. Biochim. Biophys. Acta.
Protein Struct. Mol. Enzymol. 1991, 1076, 221.
10. Inui, A. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 1999, 20, 43.
11. Kanatani, A.; Mashiko, S.; Murai, N.; Sugimoto, N.; Ito,
J.; Fukuroda, T.; Fukami, T.; Morin, N.; MacNeil, D. J.;
Van der Ploeg, L. H. T.; Saga, Y.; Nishimura, S.; Ihara,
M. Endocrinology 2000, 41, 1011.
12. Kanatani, A.; Kanno, T.; Ishihara, A.; Hata, M.; Sakur-
aba, A.; Tanaka, T.; Tsuchiya, Y.; Mase, T.; Fukuroda,
T.; Fukami, T.; Ihara, M. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Com-
mun. 1999, 266, 88.
13. Kanatani, A.; Hata, M.; Mashiko, S.; Ishihara, A.; Oka-
moto, O.; Haga, Y.; Ohe, T.; Kanno, T.; Murai, N.; Ishii,
Y.; Fukuroda, T.; Fukami, T.; Ihara, M. Mol. Pharmcol.
2001, 59, 501.
14. Fukami, T.; Mase, T.; Tsuchiya, Y.; Kanatani, A.;
Fukuroda, T. PCT WO 97/34873.
15. Niiyama, K.; Nagase, T.; Fukami, T.; Takezawa, Y.;
Takezawa, H.; Hioki, Y.; Takeshita, H.; Ishikawa, K.
Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 1997, 7, 527.
16. See ref 13 for the experimental conditions for the binding
and functional assays described herein.
In summary, a number of substituted 4-alkoxy-2-ami-
nopyridine derivatives 2 were synthesized and evaluated
for their binding affinities to the human NPY Y1
receptor. Several potent antagonists were identified
among them. The primary SAR was elucidated, reveal-
ing that a number of alkoxy substituents are capable of
replacing the morpholino portion of compound 1. In
addition, the activities of the potent derivatives 2h, j, m,
q, and u are of interest for use in in vivo studies. The
pharmacokinetics and brain penetrability of these deri-
vatives in rodents remain to be addressed for further in
vivo evaluation of the present alkoxy type of Y1
antagonists.
17. All of the compounds tested for Y1 binding are >95%
pure. Analytical HPLC analyses were performed under
the following conditions: Wakopak combi ODS fast
(30Â2.0 mmI.D.) with liner gradient system of H2O–
CH3CN–TFA 95:5:0.1 to 5:95:0.1 over 6 min and at a
flow rate of 0.8 mL/min.
1
18. Selected spectral data: 2q TFA salt: H NMR (400 MHz,
CDCl3) d 1.26 (3H, t, J=7.4 Hz), 1.30 (6H, d, J=6.3 Hz),
1.70 (2H, m), 1.87 (2H, m), 2.34 (3H, s), 2.74 (2H, q,
J=7.4 Hz), 3.19 (2H, t, J=7.6 Hz), 3.43 (2H, t, J=7.6
Hz), 3.54 (2H, ddd, J=2.8, 8.8, 12.2 Hz), 3.91 (2H, td,
J=4.4, 12.2 Hz), 4.37 (2H, d, J=5.4 Hz), 4.46 (1H, m),
4.99 (1H, sept, J=6.3 Hz), 5.69 (1H, d, J=2.2 Hz), 6.23
(1H, d, J=2.2 Hz), 6.97 (1H, s), 7.22 (1H, s), 7.28 (1H, s),
7.54 (1H, s), 10.38 (1H, t, J=5.4 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z 573.2
[M+H]+. 2u TFA salt: 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) d
1.28 (6H, d, J=6.3 Hz), 1.33 (3H, t, J=7.4 Hz), 2.14 (2H,
m), 2.23 (3H, s), 2.80 (2H, q, J=7.4 Hz), 2.98 (2H, t,
J=7.2 Hz), 3.21 (2H, dd, J=6.7, 9.1 Hz), 3.63 (2H, dd,
J=6.7, 9.1 Hz), 4.06 (2H, t, J=6.0 Hz), 4.41 (2H, d,
J=5.6 Hz), 4.97 (1H, sept, J=6.3 Hz), 5.71 (1H, d, J=2.2
Hz), 6.37 (1H, d, J=2.2 Hz), 6.97 (1H, s), 7.25 (1H, s),
7.40 (1H, s), 7.52 (1H, s), 7.77 (1H, dd, J=5.6, 8.0 Hz),
8.13 (1H, d, J=8.0 Hz), 8.66 (1H, dd, J=1.4, 5.6 Hz),
8.74 (1H, d, J=1.4 Hz), 10.24 (1H, t, J=5.6 Hz); MS
(ESI) m/z 608.2 [M+H]+.
Acknowledgements
We thank Dr. Steven A. Weissman (Merck Research
Laboratories) for critical review of the manuscript.
References and notes
1. Tatemoto, K.; Carlquist, M.; Mutt, V. Nature 1982, 269,
659.
2. Clark, J. T.; Kalra, P. S.; Crowley, W. R.; Kalra, S. P.
Endocrinology 1984, 115, 427.
3. Stanley, B. G.; Leibowitz, S. F. Life Sci. 1984, 35, 2635.