4134
Y.-M. Cui et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 15 (2005) 4130–4135
pockets in which MetAP1 accommodates its inhibitor.
Therefore, we did not attempt to prepare analogues con-
taining substituents of increased chain length.
still depend on the exact match of in vitro data and
their in vivo antibacterial activity.
Although the in vitro potency could not match the in
vivo activity, the present compounds are representative
of specific Co(II)–MetAP1 inhibitors. Before the physi-
ologically relevant metal ions for MetAPs are estab-
lished, these small molecular compounds could be used
as tools for detailed biological studies.
Of the above TCAT inhibitors, we tested several typi-
cal compounds for antibacterial activity against Staph-
ylococcus aureus, Enteropathogenic Escherichia coli,
and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and the activity is poor
(MIC > 16 lg/mL, data not shown). We also tested
the compounds more active in inhibiting ScMetAP1
for antifungal activity. Most of the inhibitors tested
showed no antifungal activity against Candida albicans,
Aspergillus niger, Trichophyton rubrum, Saccharomyces
cerevisiae, Epidermophyton floccosum, and Microsporum
canis (MIC > 128 lg/mL, data not shown). Although
we have obtained very potent inhibitors of S. cerevisiae
MetAP1 through rational structural modification, it
seemed that there was little relationship between the
in vitro inhibitory potencies for the Co(II)–ScMetAP1
and in vivo efficacy in antifungal activity. One possibil-
ity is that the poor antifungal activity may be derived
from poor penetration of the fungus wall. However,
in the case of these in vitro Co(II)–ScMetAP1 inhibi-
tors, the lack of antifungal activity might also be relat-
ed to the metal ion present in physiological situations.
The physiological metal ions for MetAPs have not
been established and are controversial at the moment.
MetAPs of bacteria and yeast have been categorized
as cobalt-dependent metalloenzymes, based on the
observations that the purified enzymes show highest
activity in the presence of cobalt as compared with that
of other divalent metal ions.2 A more recent study
showed that Zn(II) was a superior cofactor to Co(II)
for yeast MetAP1 because Co(II) did not stimulate
yeast MetAP1 activity in the presence of physiological
concentrations of reduced glutathione.16 Another study
demonstrated that the physiologically relevant metal
ion for E. coli MetAP1 was probably Fe(II), on the ba-
sis of whole cell metal analyses.17 Most recently, DÕsou-
za et al. showed the kinetic and structural
characterization of manganese-loaded MetAPs from
E. coli and the hyperthermophilic archaeon Pyrococcus
furiosis, and implicated manganese as a metal cofactor
for MetAPs.18 Identification of physiological metal
cofactors for MetAPs is critical for discovery of small
molecule therapeutic inhibitors because their potency
may vary for different metal ions. In a study on yeast
MetAP1 that argues for Zn(II) as the cofactor, manga-
nese is also shown to induce enzyme activity both in
the absence and in the presence of glutathione. Manga-
nese is shown to be concentrated in bacteria over-
expressing E. coli MetAP1 by a factor of 2.2, similar
to the increase of iron, and it also induced E. coli Me-
tAP1 enzyme activity.2 More recently, Ye et al. report-
ed the discovery and characterization of two groups of
potent and highly metallo form-selective inhibitors of
the Co(II)-form, and of the Mn(II)-form, and an X-
ray structure of a di-Mn(II)-form of E. coli MetAP
complexed with the Mn(II)-form selective inhibitor
was also obtained.19 These results partially supported
the contention that Mn(II) ions could be physiological
metal cofactors for MetAPs. However, the relevant de-
tails of physiological metal cofactors for MetAPs will
In summary, we obtained a new series of potent Me-
tAP1 inhibitors through simple bioisosteric replacement
from the PCAT series of compounds. The detailed SAR
showed that these TCAT series of compounds showed
different activity and selectivity compared with the cor-
responding PCAT compounds. These differences may
reflect subtle differences in the active sites of EcMetAP1
and ScMetAP1. Further efforts in modifying these and
other lead structures with the aim of improving potency
as well as specificity in vitro, and efficacy in vivo, are in
progress.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Sci-
ence Foundation of China Grants 30271528 (F.-J.N.),
the Qi Ming Xing Foundation of Shanghai Ministry of
Science and Technology Grant 02QB14013 (F.-J.N.).
References and notes
1. Bradshaw, R. A.; Brickey, W. W.; Walker, K. W. Trends
Biochem. Sci. 1998, 23, 263.
2. Arfin, S. M.; Kendall, R. L.; Hall, L.; Weaver, L. H.;
Stewart, A. E.; Matthews, B. W.; Bradshaw, R. A. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 7714.
3. Lowther, W. T.; Matthews, B. W. Chem. Rev. 2002, 102,
4581.
4. Prchal, J. T.; Cashman, D. P.; Kan, Y. W. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1986, 83, 24.
5. Boissel, J. P.; Kasper, T. J.; Shah, S. C.; Malone, J. I.;
Bunn, H. F. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1985, 82, 8448.
6. Tso, J. Y.; Hermodson, M. A.; Zalkin, H. J. Biol. Chem.
1982, 257, 3532.
7. Chang, S. Y.; McGary, E. C.; Chang, S. J. Bacteriol. 1989,
171, 4071.
8. Miller, C. G.; Kukral, A. M.; Miller, J. L.; Movva, N. R.
J. Bacteriol. 1989, 171, 5215.
9. Li, X.; Chang, Y. H. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995,
92, 12357.
10. (a) Griffith, E. C.; Su, Z.; Niwayama, S.; Ramsay, C. A.;
Chang, Y. H.; Liu, O. J. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
1998, 95, 15183; (b) Sin, N.; Meng, L.; Wang, M. Q.; Wen,
J. J.; Bornmann, W. G.; Crews, C. M. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 6099.
11. Vaughan, M. D.; Sampson, P. B.; Honek, J. F. Curr. Med.
Chem. 2002, 9, 385.
12. (a) Luo, Q. L.; Li, J. Y.; Liu, Z. Y.; Chen, L. L.; Li, J.;
Qian, Z.; Shen, Q.; Li, Y.; Livingston, G. H.; Ye, Q. Z.;
Nan, F. J. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 2631; (b) Luo, Q. L.;
Li, J. Y.; Liu, Z. Y.; Chen, L. L.; Li, J.; Ye, Q. Z.; Nan, F.
J. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2005, 15, 635; (c) Luo, Q. L.;
Li, J. Y.; Chen, L. L.; Li, J.; Ye, Q. Z.; Nan, F. J. Bioorg.
Med. Chem. Lett. 2005, 15, 639.