J.-U. Peters et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 14 (2004) 3575–3578
3577
NH2
NH2 NH2
CN
Ar
CN
Ar
CN
N
N
a
b
NH
+
R
N
R
N
Ar
R
NH2
5
6
7
1-3, 4a
NH2 NH2
NH2
NH2
NH2
N
CN
Ar
CN
Ar
CN
Ar
N
N
N
N
d
c
b
O
R
R
S
N
S
N
R
N
N
R
N
Ar
O
7-SMe
7-SO2Me
7b-h
4b-h
Scheme 1. Ar ¼ 2,4-dichlorophenyl. Reagents and conditions: (a) K2CO3, MeOH, 50 ꢁC, 3 h, then, after evaporation of solvent, KMnO4, acetone, rt,
3 h (e.g., 7-Ph 52%; 7-SMe 88%); (b) LiAlH4, THF, 40 ꢁC, 3 h (e.g., 1 40%; 4h 18%); (c) MCPBA, CH2Cl2, 15 min 0 ꢁC fi rt (quant.); (d) R2NH,
dioxane, 2 h, rt (e.g., 7h 84%).
13. Measurements were performed according to: Stresser, D.
M.; Turner, S. D.; Blanchard, A. P.; Miller, V. P.; Crespi,
C. L. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2002, 30, 845 (BFC was used as
a substrate).
ity might be superior in terms of CYP3A4 inhibition and
phospholipidosis potential. Predictive computational
tools guided us in the synthesis of a series of such
compounds. From this series we identified a low
nanomolar DPP-IV inhibitor, 4h, that did not induce
phospholipidosis and showed a reduced CYP3A4 inhi-
bition. Additionally, sub-nanomolar inhibitors of DPP-
IV (4c,g, Table 3) were found in the course of our work.
€
14. (a) Handrock, K.; Lullmann-Rauch, R.; Vogt, R. D.
Toxicology 1993, 85, 199; (b) Lullmann-Rauch, R.; Pods,
€
R.; von Witzendorff, B. Toxicology 1996, 110, 27; (c)
Mason, R. J.; Walker, S. R.; Shields, B. A.; Henson, J. E.;
Williams, M. C. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1985, 131, 786.
15. Dresser, G. K.; Spence, J. D.; Bailey, D. G. Clin.
Pharmacokinet. 2000, 38, 41.
16. Reasor, M. J.; Kacew, S. Exp. Biol. Med. 2001, 226, 825.
17. Measurements were performed according to an in-house
developed miniaturized method to measure the shake flask
octanol–water partition coefficient at pH 7.4 (log D).
18. Measurements were performed according to: Allen, R. I.;
Box, K. J.; Comer, J.; Peake, C.; Tam, K. Y. J. Pharm.
Biomed. Anal. 1998, 17, 699.
19. An amphiphilic molecule comprises a hydrophobic and a
hydrophilic part. Such molecules have an inherent ten-
dency to orient themselves in a suitable environment, for
example, a phospholipid bilayer.
20. (a) Riley, R. J.; Parker, A. J.; Trigg, S.; Manners, C. N.
Pharm. Res. 2001, 18, 652; (b) Smith, A. D.; van de
Waterbeemd, H.; Walker, D. K. In Pharmacokinetics and
Metabolism in Drug Design; Mannhold, R., Kubinyi, H.,
Timmermann, H., Eds.; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2001.
21. Fischer, H.; Kansy, M.; Potthast, M.; Csato, M. In
Proceedings of the 13th European Symposium on Quanti-
tative Structure–Activity Relationships, Duesseldorf, Ger-
many, Aug 27–Sept 1, 2000; Prous Science: Barcelona,
Spain, 2001.
References and notes
1. For reviews, see: (a) Drucker, D. J. Diabetes Care 2003,
26, 2929; (b) Augustyns, K.; Van der Veken, P.; Senten,
K.; Haerners, A. Exp. Opin. Ther. Patents 2003, 13, 499.
2. For a review, see: Holst, J. J.; Orskov, C. Scand. J. Clin.
Lab. Invest. 2001, 61(Suppl. 234), 75.
3. Rachman, J.; Barrow, B. A.; Levy, J. C.; Turner, R. C.
Diabetologica 1997, 40, 205.
4. Nauck, M. A.; Wollschlager, D.; Werner, J.; Holst, J. J.;
Orskov, C.; Creutzfeldt, W. Diabetologica 1996, 39, 1546.
5. Knudsen, L. B.; Pridal, L. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 1996, 318,
429.
6. For a review, see: Rosenblum, J. S.; Kozarich, J. W. Curr.
Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003, 7, 496.
7. Pauly, R. P.; Demuth, H. U.; Rosche, F.; Schmidt, J.;
White, H. A.; Lynn, F.; McIntosh, C. H.; Pederson, R. A.
Metab.: Clin. Exp. 1999, 48, 385.
8. For a review, see: Drucker, D. J. Exp. Opin. Invest. Drugs
2003, 12, 87.
9. Peters, J.-U.; Weber, S.; Kritter, S.; Weiss, P.; Wallier, A.;
Boehringer, M.; Hennig, M.; Kuhn, B.; Loeffler, B.-M.
Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2004, 14, 1491.
10. Measurements were performed according to an in-house
developed method to assess solubility from a 10 mM
DMSO stock solution. This method is similar to the
classical thermodynamic shake-flask solubility with the
only difference that DMSO is removed in the beginning by
an additional lyophilization step. Therefore this assay is
called lyophilizated solubility assay (LYSA).
11. Measurements were performed according to: Kansy, M.;
Senner, F.; Gubernator, K. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41, 1007.
12. Measurements were performed according to: Obach, R. S.;
Baxter, J. G.; Liston, T. E.; Silber, B. M.; Jones, B. C.;
MacIntyre, F.; Rance, D. J.; Wastall, P. J. Pharm. Exp.
Ther. 1997, 283, 46.
22. DPP-IV inhibitors were measured for their ability to
inhibit DPP-IV mediated cleavage of Ala-Pro-7-amido-4-
trifluoromethylcoumarin in a fluorogenic assay. All com-
pounds were measured in triplicate at 5–7 concentrations
in the range of 100 lM to 100 pM. IC50 values were
calculated with a nonlinear best fit regression model. All
assays were calibrated with NVP-DPP728 as internal
standard inhibitor. NVP-DPP728 under the conditions of
the assay showed an IC50 of 15 4 nM (M SD, n ¼ 12) at
50 lM substrate concentration and a Ki of 11 3 nM
determined at substrate concentration range of 10–
600 lM. IC50 values of unknown compounds were
accepted when the IC50 (x) measured for NVP-DPP728
in the assay was 11 < x < 19 nM.
23. Meylan, W. M.; Howard, P. H. J. Pharm. Sci. 1995, 84,
83.