M. Odan et al. / Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 22 (2012) 2898–2901
2901
Table 2 (continued)
Compd
X
Kia (hCB1) (nM)
Kia (hCB2) (nM)
IC50 (nM) CB1 (cAMP)b
398
IC50 (nM) CB2 (cAMP)b
O
S
HO
19
20
425
22
11
N
O
HO
235
580
4.6
18
23
3.5
S
N
HO
S
21
454
15
O
N
a
See Ref. 16 for assay protocol.
See Ref. 17 for assay protocol.
b
References and notes
200
150
100
250
200
150
100
50
1. Matsuda, L. A.; Lolait, S. J.; Brownstein, M. J.; Young, A. C.; Bonner, T. I. Nature
1990, 346, 561.
2. Munro, S.; Thomas, K. L.; Abu-Shaar, M. Nature 1993, 365, 61.
3. Herkenham, M.; Lynn, A. B.; Little, M. D.; Johnson, M. R.; Melvin, L. S.; de Costa,
B. R.; Rice, K. C. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1990, 87, 1932.
4. Mailleux, P.; Vanderhaeghen, J. J. Neuroscience 1992, 48, 655.
5. Steiner, H.; Bonner, T. I.; Zimmer, A. M.; Kitai, S. T.; Zimmer, A. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 5786.
6. Galiegue, S.; Mary, S.; Marchand, J.; Dussossoy, D.; Carriere, D.; Carayon, P.;
Bouaboula, M.; Shire, D.; Le; Fur, G.; Casellas, P. Eur. J. Biochem. 1995, 232, 54.
7. Ashton, J. C. Curr. Opin. Investig. Drugs 2007, 8, 373.
**
**
50
0
8. Pertwee, R. G. Addict. Biol. 2008, 13, 147.
9. Pertwee, R. G. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2009, 156, 397.
10. Guindon, J.; Hohmann, A. G. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2008, 153, 319.
11. Lu, D.; Vemuri, K.; Duclos, R. I., Jr.; Makriyannis, A. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2006,
6, 1401.
12. Fride, E.; Ponde, D.; Breuer, A.; Hanus, L. Neuropharmacology 2005, 48, 1117.
13. Fride, E.; Feigin, C.; Ponde, D. E.; Breuer, A.; Hanus, L.; Arshavsky, N.;
Mechoulam, R. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2004, 506, 179.
14. Odan, M.; Ishizuka, N.; Hiramatsu, Y.; Inagaki, N.;Hashizume, H.; Fujii, Y.;
Mitsumori, S.; Morioka, Y.; Soga, M.; Deguchi, M.; Yasui, K.; Arimura, A. Bioorg.
0
Control Vehicle 19
Control Vehicle
21
Figure 2. Antipruritic effects of compounds 19 and 21. ⁄P <0.01, ⁄⁄P <0.05, control:
n = 29, vehicle: n = 5 (mice).
the activities (13–15). In a similar manner, while compounds 17
and 18 having a thiazole linker led to an essentially inactive com-
pound, the insertion of a methylene linker led to significant
improvement (19–21). Unfortunately, compound 20 was found to
be a partial agonist, which was not suitable for our research target.
On the basis of these results, we selected compounds 19 and 21
as CB1/2 dual agonists for further in vivo profiling. In order to inves-
tigate the CB1-induced CNS side effects, compounds 19 and 21 were
tested by in vivo psychoactive testing.18 These compounds were
administered by injection at 1.0 and 0.1 mg/kg into test mice and
no CNS side effects such as sedation or catalepsy were observed.
Next, these compounds were subjected to the painting test in our
pruritic mouse model (Fig. 2).19 Compounds 19 and 21 showed sig-
nificant antipruritic effects in mice at 1.0% painting, with the inhibi-
tion of 109% and 99%, respectively. The data indicated that CB 1/2
dual agonists having carboxylic acid had the efficacy for the anti-
pruritics without CNS side effects induced by CB1 agonistic activity.
In summary, we explored the SAR of 3-carbamoyl 2-pyridone
derivatives having carboxylic acid as CB receptor agonists. Optimi-
zation was focused on the substituent at the 3-position of pyridone.
Among them, compounds 19 and 21 showed potent affinities for CB
receptors and displayed the strong inhibition of scratching induced
by compound 48/80 without CNS side effects caused from activat-
ing CB1 receptor. These efforts led to the discovery of clinical can-
didate 21, S-444823, as the agent for atopic diseases.
15. Bondavalli, F.; Bruno, O.; Presti, E. L.; Menozzi, G.; Mosti, L. Synthesis 1999, 7,
1169.
16. Binding assay: CB receptor binding assay was carried out using the membrane;
recombinant human CB1 (hCB1), CB2 (hCB2), radioligand [3H]-CP55940.
Membrane fractions, used for the measurement of binding activity, were
prepared as reported elsewhere and stored in a deep freezer (À80 °C). In brief,
confluent cultures of the hCB1 and hCB2 cells were harvested. The harvested
cells were sonicated in a buffer for membrane suspensions (membrane buffer:
20 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.4, 2 mM EDTA, 0.25 M sucrose containing protease
inhibitor) on ice, and centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 min at 4 °C. The
supernatants were centrifuged at 100,000 g for 60 min at 4 °C. The pelleted
membrane fractions were homogenized in the membrane buffer, and stored in
a deep freezer (À80 °C). The Kd values of [3H]-CP55940 for each membrane
fraction were determined by Scatchard plot analysis.
17. Cyclic AMP assay method: The CHO cells expressing hCB1 or hCB2 were seeded
into 24-well plates. The cells were incubated at 37 °C for 20 min with
compounds in the cAMP assay buffer (Hanks’ solution with 20 mM HEPES,
0.1 mM IBMX, 0.2 mM Ro20-1724, 0.1% BSA). The cells were stimulated with
4 lM forskolin at 37 °C for 25 min (hCB1 cells) or 45 min (hCB2 cells). The
cAMP concentrations in the cells were measured using cAMP kits (CIS Bio
International).
18. Estimation of in vivo psychoactivity: In order to qualitatively estimate the level
of CB1 induced CNS side effects, test compounds were dissolved in MDAA and
PEG solution and intravenously injected into the tail of the ICR mice (0.1 and
1.0 mg/kg, n = 3 each). The apparent behavior of each mouse was observed at
15 min after injection and the score (5: Tonic convulsion; 4: Catalepsy; 3:
Prone position, Sedation; 2: Crawling; 1: Decrease in locomotor activity; 0:
Normal) was determined. The higher the score, the more potent are the CNS
side effects.
19. In vivo assay (pruritic model): Crj:CD-1 (ICR) (Japan Charles River Lab.) mice
were used for scratching test to investigate the antipruritic effect. Test
compounds were dissolved in acetone (Sigma). Compound 48/80 as
pruritogen was dissolved at 60 g/mL in isotonic saline (Otsuka Pharma.).
Test compounds were painted on the shaved back of the mice. After 15 min,
50 l of pruritogen was injected intradermally into the back of the mice. Their
behavior was then videotaped to count the scratching behavior for 30 min. The
inhibition value was calculated by the equation:
a
l
Acknowledgments
l
%
%
The authors thank Drs. Hiroki Sato and Yutaka Yoshida of this
manuscript for many helpful suggestions.
inhibition = (B À A) À (C À A)/(B À A/100); scratching of control (n = 29) as A,
scratching of vehicle (n = 6) as B, scratching of test mice (n = 6) as C.