K. W. Hering et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 16 (2006) 618–621
621
YC-1. The latter result is particularly important since
References and notes
it shows that there are distinct sites on sGC for small
molecule activators that could be exploited in drug
design.
1. Warner, T. D.; Mitchell, J. A.; Sheng, H.; Murad, F. Adv.
Pharmacol. 1994, 26, 171.
2. Buechler, W. A.; Ivanova, K.; Wolfram, G.; Drummer, C.;
Heim, J. M.; Gerzer, R. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1994, 714,
151.
3. Ko, F. N.; Wu, C. C.; Kuo, S. C.; Lee, F. Y.; Teng, C. M.
Blood 1994, 84, 4226.
4. Friebe, A.; Schultz, G.; Koesling, D. EMBO J. 1996, 15,
6863.
5. Stone, J. R.; Marletta, M. A. Chem. Biol. 1998, 5, 255.
6. Friebe, A.; Russwurm, M.; Mergia, E.; Koesling, D.
Biochemistry 1999, 38, 15253.
7. Denninger, J. W.; Shelvis, J. P. M.; Brandish, P. E.; Zhao,
Y.; Babcock, G. T.; Marletta, M. A. Biochemistry 2000,
39, 4191.
In conclusion, a number of photolabile compounds
structurally related to YC-1 were synthesized and their
activation of sGC was determined. Although, none of
the synthesized analogues were as effective as YC-1 in
terms of activity toward sGC–CO, compound 2 was
identified as the best activator of sGC–CO (29-fold)
among those tested. Competition binding experiments
with 2 and YC-1 indicated that 2 was a relatively
weak binder or was binding to a different site than
YC-1. In order to further examine the interaction
between 2 and sGC, the tritium-labeled analogue
[3H]2 was prepared and utilized in a photoaffinity
labeling experiment. It was found that this analogue
was covalently bound primarily to the a-subunit of
sGC. However, the photoaffinity labeling experiment
failed to show that this compound was competitive
with YC-1. These data support a conclusion that the
sGC-activating YC-1 derivative 2 may be binding in
a distinct pocket and further suggest the existence of
novel activators of sGC distinct from YC-1. Current-
ly, further studies are under way to specify the [3H]2
binding site in the a-subunit of sGC and to further
characterize its mechanism of action.
8. Makino, R.; Obayashi, E.; Homma, N.; Shiro, Y.; Hori,
H. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 11130.
9. Stasch, J. P.; Becker, E. M.; Alonso-Alija, C.; Apeler, H.;
Dembowsky, K.; Feurer, A.; Gerzer, R.; Minuth, T.;
Perzborn, E.; Pleiß, U.; Schroder, H.; Schroeder, W.;
Stahl, E.; Steinke, W.; Straub, A.; Schramm, M. Nature
2001, 410, 212.
10. Koglin, M.; Behrends, S. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 12590.
11. Bayley, H.; Knowles, J. R. Methods Enzymol. 1977, 46, 69.
12. Mullock, E. B.; Suschitzky, H. J. Chem. Soc. (C) 1968,
1937.
13. Collot, V.; Dallemagne, P.; Bovy, P. R.; Rault, S.
Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 6917.
14. Mornet, R. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1984, 1, 879.
15. Farina, V.; Roth, G. P. Advances in Metal-Organic
Chemistry 1996, 5, 1.
16. Cadogan, J. I. G.; Gosney, I. J. Chem. Soc. Chem.
Commun. 1973, 586.
Supplementary data
17. Kharitonov, V. G.; Sharma, V. S.; Magde, D.; Koesling,
D. Biochemistry 1999, 38, 10699.
18. Brandish, P. E.; Buechler, W. A.; Marletta, M. A.
Biochemistry 1998, 37, 16898.
Supplementary data associated with this article can be