Synthesis and cytotoxicity evaluation of DOTA-conjugates of ursolic acid

Article abstract of DOI:10.3390/molecules24122254

In this study, we report the synthesis of several amine-spacered conjugates of ursolic acid (UA) and 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid (DOTA). Thus, a total of 11 UA-DOTA conjugates were prepared holding various oligo-methylene diamine spacers as well as different substituents at the acetate units of DOTA including tert-butyl, benzyl, and allyl esters. Furthermore, three synthetic approaches were compared for the ethylenediamine-spacered conjugate 29 regarding reaction steps, yields, and precursor availability. The prepared conjugates were investigated regarding cytotoxicity using SRB assays and a set of human tumor cell lines. The highest cytotoxicity was observed for piperazinyl spacered compound 22. Thereby, EC₅₀ values of 1.5 μM (for A375 melanoma) and 1.7 μM (for A2780 ovarian carcinoma) were determined. Conjugates 22 and 24 were selected for further cytotoxicity investigations including fluorescence microscopy, annexin V assays and cell cycle analysis.

Full text of DOI:10.3390/molecules24122254

molecules
Article
Synthesis and Cytotoxicity Evaluation of
DOTA-Conjugates of Ursolic Acid
Michael Kahnt 1 , Sophie Hoenke 1, Lucie Fischer 1, Ahmed Al-Harrasi 2 and René Csuk 1,
*
1
Organic Chemistry, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Kurt-Mothes-Str. 2, D-06120 Halle (Saale),
Germany; michael.kahnt@chemie.uni-halle.de (M.K.); sophie.hoenke@chemie.uni-halle.de (S.H.);
lucie.fischer2018@gmx.de (L.F.)
Natural and Medical Sciences Research Center, University of Nizwa, PO Box 33, Birkat Al-Mauz,
Nizwa 616, Oman; aharrasi@unizwa.edu.om
2
*
Correspondence: rene.csuk@chemie.uni-halle.de; Tel.: +49-345-55-25660
ꢀꢁꢂꢀꢃꢄꢅꢆꢇ
Academic Editor: Kyoko Nakagawa-Goto
Received: 12 May 2019; Accepted: 14 June 2019; Published: 17 June 2019
ꢀꢁꢂꢃꢄꢅꢆ
Abstract: In this study, we report the synthesis of several amine-spacered conjugates of ursolic acid
(UA) and 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid (DOTA). Thus, a total of 11 UA-DOTA
conjugates were prepared holding various oligo-methylene diamine spacers as well as different
substituents at the acetate units of DOTA including tert-butyl, benzyl, and allyl esters. Furthermore,
three synthetic approaches were compared for the ethylenediamine-spacered conjugate 29 regarding
reaction steps, yields, and precursor availability. The prepared conjugates were investigated regarding
cytotoxicity using SRB assays and a set of human tumor cell lines. The highest cytotoxicity was
observed for piperazinyl spacered compound 22. Thereby, EC50 values of 1.5
µM (for A375 melanoma)
and 1.7 M (for A2780 ovarian carcinoma) were determined. Conjugates 22 and 24 were selected
µ
for further cytotoxicity investigations including fluorescence microscopy, annexin V assays and cell
cycle analysis.
Keywords: ursolic acid; DOTA; triterpenoids; cytotoxicity
1. Introduction
Despite all medical advances in tumor therapy, cancer is still one of the most prevalent diseases
worldwide, with 9.6 million cancer-related deaths counted in 2018 [1]. The research of novel therapeutic
approaches and potent chemotherapeutic agents are important contributions in the battle against
cancer. However, diagnosis is a prerequisite for successful treatment since an early detection of
cancer cells can often significantly reduce the pathogenicity of a tumor and increase the healing
rate. One molecule, which made significant impact on the field of diagnostic imaging in the past
decades, is the EDTA-related macrocyclic chelator 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic
acid (DOTA, Figure 1) [2,3].
DOTA-derivatives and complexes thereof are widely used for molecular imaging, especially for
the medical diagnosis of cancer [
applicable for a number of imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [
positron emission tomography (PET) [ ] and single photon emission computed tomography
(SPECT) [ ]. Because of this versatility, a crossover application of DOTA-derivatives as multimodal
2,
3]. By variation of the coordinated metal ion or substituents, they are
2–4],
2,3,5,6
2,3,7
contrast agents for combined imaging modalities such as PET/MRI or PET/CT is possible and has
already been described in the literature [2,3].
Although DOTA and derivatives thereof have a wide range of uses in diagnostic imaging,
there are virtually no references for applications in the therapy of cancer. Therefore, we decided to
prepare possible cytotoxic DOTA-derivatives by linkage with an ursolic acid backbone. Ursolic
Molecules 2019, 24, 2254; doi:10.3390/molecules24122254
www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
2 of 19
acid (UA, Figure 1) is a natural occurring triterpenoic acid with promising pharmacological
properties, being widely distributed in various plants and fruits, such as rosemary [ ], sage [ ],
oleander [ ], and apples [10,11]. A wide range of biological activities, including antidiabetic,
8
8
9
anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and anticancer effects have been credited to UA and structurally-related
derivatives [12–14]. Many structural modifications have been described in the literature starting from
ursolic acid with various impacts on cytotoxic properties [12,15–18]. Structure activity investigations
concerning modifications at C-3 of UA revealed the presence of an acetyloxy group to be beneficial for
obtaining high anti-tumor activity [18]. Furthermore, it has been shown that the modification of C-28
with a piperazine moiety had a positive influence on the cytotoxic properties of ursolic acid [19,20].
Previously, we also have shown oligo-methylene diamine derived carboxamides of ursolic acid to
be of high cytotoxicity [21]. Keeping these structure activity relationships in mind, we considered
3-acetyloxy protected and C-28 modified UA derivatives a convenient starting point for the preparation
of cytotoxic oligo-methylene diamine spacered DOTA conjugates.
Figure 1. Structures of ursolic acid (UA) and 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic
acid (DOTA).
2. Results and Discussion
The synthesis of UA-DOTA conjugates started with the structural modification of cyclen (
as illustrated in Scheme 1. Treatment of with 3 equiv. of sodium bicarbonate and 3 equiv. of the
respective bromoacetic ester ( ) in dry acetonitrile yielded triple substituted cyclen derivatives 6–8,
2)
2
3–
5
being ready to be coupled with ursolic acid. We decided to use tert-butyl, benzyl and allyl esters as
protecting groups. Benzyl, as well as tert-butyl bromoacetate, were bought from commercial suppliers.
Allyl bromoacetate was prepared from allylic alcohol and bromoacetyl bromide.
Scheme 1. Synthesis of DOTA precursors
63% (8).
6–8 6), 68% (7),
: (a) NaHCO3, MeCN, 25 ◦C, 48 h, yield: 50% (
Ursolic acid has also been modified before coupling with the DOTA precursors (Scheme 2).
Derivatization started with the attachment of a spacer moiety using oxalyl chloride and
1-(2-aminoethyl)piperazine in dry dichloromethane affording compound 10. The terminal amino
moiety was further substituted with chloroacetyl chloride in dry dichloromethane to furnish the
ursolic acid precursor 11 in excellent yield. Linkage of both precursors was performed in dry
acetonitrile in the presence of potassium carbonate and potassium iodide yielding UA-DOTA conjugates
12–14. Allylic esters of the acetate groups were removed by treating compound 14 with [(PPh3)4Pd],

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
3 of 19
◦
triphenylphosphane and pyrrolidine in acetonitrile at 25 C for 3 days; this procedure gave 15 in
almost quantitative yield. Purification of 15 was performed by reversed phase chromatography using
MeOH/MeCN/TFA as eluent since the compound was difficult to eluate from normal silica phases.
Furthermore, a synthetic approach for 15 starting from either 12 or 13 failed. Hydrogenation of 13
employing palladium catalysis retained the benzyl esters, and the deprotection of tert-butyl esters
(as in compound 12) using TFA/DCM resulted in a partial degradation of the triterpenoic backbone.
Scheme 2. Synthesis of ursolic acid chelator conjugates 12–15: (a) Ac2O, CH2Cl2, NEt3, 25 ◦C, 2 days,
82%; (
2 h, yield: 82%; (
(for 12) or (for 13) or
(e) [(PPh3)4Pd], PPh3, pyrrolidine, MeCN, 25 ◦C, 3 days, yield: 96%.
b
) oxalyl chloride, CH2Cl2, DMF, 0–25 ◦C, 1 h, then 1-(2-Aminoethyl)piperazine, CH2Cl2, 25 ◦C,
c
) chloroacetyl chloride, CH2Cl2, NEt3, 25 ◦C, 30 min, yield: 91%; (
(for 14), MeCN, 25 ◦C, 48 h, yield: 54% (12), 82% (13), and 80% (14);
d) K2CO3, KI,
6
7
8
The synthetic approach summarized in Scheme 2 can also be applied to various other spacer units.
Thus, we decided to alter the amino component. Therefore, ursolic acid was treated with piperazine,
ethylene diamine and 2,20-oxybis(ethylamine), to furnish ursolic carboxamides 16
–
18 (Scheme 3),
respectively. Chloroacetyl derivatives 19–21 and UA-DOTA conjugates 22–27 were prepared analogous
to Scheme 2.
Scheme 3. Synthesis of ursolic acid DOTA conjugates 22
1 h, then amine, CH2Cl2, 25 ◦C, 2 h, yield: 80% (16 and 17), and 78% (18); (
CH2Cl2, NEt3, 25 ◦C, 0.5–4 h, yield: 94% (19), and 91% (20 and 21); (
) K2CO3, KI,
or (for 23
25 and 27), MeCN, 25 ◦C, 5 days, yield: 88% (22), 72% (23), 73% (24), 75% (25), 74% (26),
and 62% (27).
–
27: (
a
) oxalyl chloride, CH2Cl2, DMF, 0–25 ◦C,
) chloroacetyl chloride,
(for 22 24 and 26
b
c
6
,
)
7
,

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
4 of 19
Additionally, an alternative synthetic approach was established for the preparation of the ethylene
diamine-spacered UA-DOTA conjugate 29 (Scheme 4). Therefore carboxamide 28 was prepared either
by deacetylation of 17 or directly from UA by amidation with ethylene diamine using EDC and HOBt in
dry DMF. In the next step, DOTA-tris(tert-butyl ester) (DOTA-3T) was activated by preparing its HOBt
ester. Adding 28 to this freshly prepared ester furnished UA-DOTA conjugate 29. For comparison,
compound 29 was also synthesized from 24 by removing the C-3 acetyloxy moiety. Due to the presence
of an unprotected hydroxyl moiety at this position, compound 29 offers the possibility for a set of
modifications and is therefore considered to be a good starting material for further modifications.
Scheme 4. Synthesis of ursolic acid derivative 29: (
a
) KOH, MeOH, 25 ◦C, 48 h (for 28) or 24 h (for 29),
) ethylene diamine, HOBt H2O, EDC
HCl, DMF, 25 ◦C, 24 h, yield: 46%
yield: 85% (28) or 86% (29); (
b
·
·
(c) DOTA-3T, HOBt·H2O, EDC·HCl, DMF, 25 ◦C, 5 days, yield: 49%.
Both synthetic approaches for the preparation of 29 (Figure 2) hold advantages but also some
disadvantages. Although route A (5 steps) is significantly longer than B, but the former route
gave the highest overall yield (44%). Approach B is a rather short and quick way to synthesize 29
(2 steps only), but the overall yield (23%) is barely half as high as in route A. Combining routes A
and B, as shown in approach C led to compound 29 in 4 steps with an overall yield of 32%. A major
difference between the approaches A and B is the availability and preparation of the DOTA precursors.
Both, DOTA-tris(tert-butyl ester) and DO3A-tert-butyl ester (
with DOTA-3T being almost twice as expensive as . Most advantageous is the one-step synthesis of
is commercially available for a price, being almost tenfold lower than
6) are available from commercial suppliers,
6
6
starting from cylcen (2), since 2
that of 6.
Figure 2. Comparison of synthetic routes A, B, and C for the preparation of UA-DOTA conjugate 29.
Due to cytotoxicity evaluation, the prepared UA-DOTA conjugates were screened in rhodamine B
assays employing a series of human tumor cell lines and non-malignant mouse fibroblasts (NIH 3T3).
Results of this investigation are summarized in Table 1.

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
5 of 19
Table 1. Cytotoxicity of UA-DOTA conjugates (12
(UA), and doxorubicin hydrochloride (DRC): EC50 values from SRB assays after 72 h of treatment are
given in M (n.d. not detected; n.s. not soluble); the values are averaged from three independent
experiments each performed in triplicate; confidence interval CI = 95%.
–15, 22–27, 29), DOTA precursors (6,7), ursolic acid
µ
A375
A2780
HT29
MCF-7
FaDu
NIH 3T3
UA
6
7
13
n.d.
12.4 ± 2.7
4.7 ± 0.3
n.d.
11.7 ± 0.6
10.5 ± 3.0
3.8 ± 0.3
2.1 ± 0.4
>60
10.6 ± 0.7
8.7 ± 2.7
2.0 ± 0.2
4.0 ± 0.4
>60
12.7 ± 0.1
11.3 ± 2.3
4.1 ± 0.5
3.3 ± 0.2
>60
n.d.
13.1 ± 1.1
17.3 ± 0.1
4.5 ± 0.3
3.6 ± 0.5
>60
9.5 ± 0.9
3.9 ± 0.7
6.0 ± 0.1
>60
15
>60
22
24
29
1.5 ± 0.4
2.0 ± 0.1
2.0 ± 0.3
n.s.
1.9 ± 0.3
1.7 ± 0.1
1.6 ± 0.5
n.s
5.7 ± 0.5
2.3 ± 0.3
1.7 ± 0.4
n.s
4.4 ± 0.7
1.8 ± 0.1
n.d.
n.s.
1.1 ± 0.3
3.7 ± 0.6
2.0 ± 0.2
2.9 ± 0.4
n.s.
4.6 ± 1.0
1.4 ± 0.1
2.3 ± 0.7
n.s.
12, 14, 23, 25–27
DRC
n.d.
0.01 ± 0.01
0.9 ± 0.2
n.d.
0.06 ± 0.03
The DO3A-tert-butyl ester (
M and 14 M, while DO3A-benzyl ester (
most of the UA-DOTA conjugates were not soluble in solvents suitable for SRB assays. However,
combining with ursolic acid gave cytotoxic conjugate 13, showing EC50 values below 6 M. Removal
of ester units (as in 15) resulted in a complete loss of cytotoxicity (EC50 >60 M for all tumor cells).
6) showed moderate cytotoxicity as indicated by EC50 values between
10
µ
µ
7
) showed EC50 values lower than 5 M. Unfortunately,
µ
7
µ
µ
Compounds 22 and 24, both holding tert-butyl esters but different spacer units were also highly
cytotoxic. Piperazine-spacered conjugate 22 showed the highest cytotoxicity observed in this screening
for A375 tumor cells (EC50 = 1.5
Table 2). EC50 values of ethylenediamine-spacered conjugate 24 were below 2.5
lines. The highest cytotoxicity was observed for ovarian carcinoma (A2780, EC50 = 1.7
Removal of the acetyloxy moiety of 24 (as in 29) had almost no significant impact on cytotoxicity.
±
0.4
µ
M), while being quite selective, too (SI (NIH 3T3/A375) = 3.07,
M for all tumor cell
0.1 M).
µ
±
µ
Table 2. Selectivity of selected UA-DOTA conjugates (13, 22, 24, and 29), DOTA precursors (6, 7),
ursolic acid (UA) and doxorubicin hydrochloride (DRC): Selectivity index (SI) is defined as: SI = EC50
(NIH 3T3)/EC50 (tumor cell line).
A375
A2780
HT29
MCF-7
FaDu
UA
6
7
13
22
24
29
DRC
-
1.12
1.65
1.18
1.71
2.42
0.82
1.44
6.00
1.24
1.99
2.25
0.90
0.81
0.61
1.35
0.07
1.03
1.53
1.10
1.09
1.05
0.78
-
-
1.40
0.96
-
3.07
0.70
1.15
-
1.82
1.15
0.60
1.24
0.70
0.79
-
0.05
Because UA-DOTA conjugates 22 and 24 were the most active compounds of this study, these
compounds were selected for further cytotoxicity investigations including fluorescence microscopy,
annexin V assays, and cell cycle evaluation employing melanoma cells (A375). Microscopic images of
A375 cells treated with compound 24 for 24 h showed vital cells (green staining) with some of them
having ruptured cell membranes (Figure 3A, white arrows). Further indications of apoptosis have
been detected employing flow cytometry and annexin V-FITC/PI staining. After 24 h 63% of the tumor
cells treated with 24 were annexin V-FITC-positive, and 51.9% of all cells having died by apoptosis.
Additionally, the number of vital cells decreased in comparison to the control from 86.1% to 36.7 %
(Figure 3B). An extra investigation of the cell cycle showed a decreased number of cells in G1/G0, G2/M,
as well as in S phase. Additionally, a large population of cells has been shifted into the subG1 region
(Figure 3C).

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
6 of 19
Figure 3. Extended cytotoxicity investigation after treatment of A375 cells with 24 (4.0 µM) for 24 h:
(A) Fluorescence microscopic images (scale bar 20 µm), AO and PI were used; (B) Annexin V-FITC/PI
assay. Examples of density plots determined by flow cytometry (Attune® Cytometric Software v 1.2.5),
R1: necrotic, R2: secondary necrotic/late stage apoptotic, R3: vital, R4: apoptotic; (C) Representative
examples for cell cycle evaluation via ModFit LT 5.0.
Fluorescence microscopic images and density plots of A375 cells treated with 22 for 24 h showed
no significant differences in comparison to the control (Supplementary material, Figure S1). Therefore,
further investigations were performed with a prolonged incubation time of 48 h. After treating
A375 cells with compound 22 for 48 h, subsequent fluorescence microscopic investigations using
AO/PI staining showed ruptures of the plasma membrane (Figure 4A, white arrows). Additionally,
some necrotic/late stage apoptotic cells were observed, indicated by slightly orange stained nuclei
(Figure 4 A, orange arrow). The density plot of A375 cells treated with 22 for 48 h showed a decreased
number of vital cells (66.3%) compared to the control (86.0%), while 32.9% of the cells were considered
annexin V-FITC-positive. Nearly half of them (17.4% of all cells) have died by apoptosis, and the
remaining cells (15.5% of all cells) were secondary necrotic/late stage apoptotic (Figure 4 B). During
extra investigations of the cell cycle, some differences compared to the control have been observed.
Cells treated with 22 for 48 h showed a quite broad and flat DNA distribution. G1/G0, G2/M, and S
phase were drastically reduced, while an increased population of cells with reduced DNA content has
been observed in the subG1 region (Figure 4C).

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
7 of 19
Figure 4. Extended cytotoxicity investigation after treatment of A375 cells with 22 (3.0 µM) for 48 h:
(A) Fluorescence microscopic images (scale bar 20 µm), AO and PI were used; (B) Annexin V-FITC/PI
assay. Examples of density plots determined by flow cytometry (Attune® Cytometric Software vl 1.2.5),
R1: necrotic, R2: secondary necrotic/late stage apoptotic, R3: vital, R4: apoptotic; (C) Representative
examples for cell cycle evaluation via ModFit LT 5.0.
3. Conclusions
In this study, a series of overall 11 amine-spacered UA-DOTA conjugates have been prepared
starting from the natural occurring triterpenoid ursolic acid (UA). We hereby report a synthetic approach
to UA-DOTA conjugates, which is applicable for several amine spacers and other triterpenoic backbones,
too. Additionally, we compared three synthetic approaches for the preparation of compound 29 in
terms of yield, number of steps and precursor availability. This conjugate offers the possibility for
further modifications at the C-3 hydroxylic group, which is known to influence cytotoxicity. All of the
prepared DOTA conjugates were screened in SRB assays showing some compounds to be of good
cytotoxicity. EC50 values were determined to range from 17.3
of this series was a piperazinyl spacered conjugate 22 showing low EC50 values such as 1.5 ± 0.4 µM for
A375 tumor cells and 1.9 0.3 M for A2780 tumor cells, respectively, while showing good selectivity
µM to 1.4 µM. The most active compound
±
µ
(SI (NIH 3T3(A375) = 3.07), too. Unfortunately, the selectivity of the other screened conjugates was quite
low. Additional cytotoxicity investigations such as fluorescence microscopy, annexin V assays, and cell
cycle analyses were performed employing the UA-DOTA conjugates 22 and 24 to gain information
about their mode of action. The results of these extended biological testing indicate 24 to induce
death of A375 cancer cells by apoptosis. These results hold some starting points for further studies.
Conjugate 15 and structural related compounds (holding free carboxylic acids at the DOTA unit) are
currently subjects of ongoing investigations regarding their ability to form complexes with metal
ions or radioactive isotopes like 68Ga to examine possible future uses as tracer or contrast agents in
molecular imaging techniques, such as positron emission tomography (PET) [22].
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. General
NMR spectra were recorded using the Varian spectrometers Gemini 2000 or Unity 500
(Varian GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany)
δ given in ppm, J in Hz; typical experiments: APT, H-H-COSY,

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
8 of 19
HMBC, HSQC, NOESY), MS spectra were taken on a Finnigan MAT LCQ 7000 (ThermoFisher Scientific,
Braunschweig, Germany) electrospray, voltage 4.1 kV, sheath gas nitrogen) instrument. The optical
rotations were measured on a Perkin-Elmer polarimeter (Perkin Elmer LAS, Rodgau, Germany) or on
a Jasco P-2000 polarimeter (Jasco Germany, Pfungstadt, Germany) at 20 ◦C; TLC was performed on NP or
RP18 silica gel (Macherey-Nagel, detection with cerium molybdate or Dragendorff’s reagent). Melting
points are uncorrected (Leica hot stage microscope, or BUCHI melting point M-565), and elemental
analyses were performed on a Foss-Heraeus Vario EL (CHNS, Elementar Analysensysteme GmbH,
Langenselbold, Germany) unit. IR spectra were recorded on a Perkin Elmer FT-IR spectrometer
Spectrum 1000 or on a Perkin-Elmer Spectrum Two (UATR Two Unit; both instruments from Perkin
Elmer LAS, Rodgau, Germany). UV-VIS spectra were taken on a Perkin-Elmer Lambda 14 spectrometer
or on a Perkin-Elmer Lambda 750 S (UV/VIS/NIR) spectrometer (both instruments from Perkin Elmer
LAS, Rodgau, Germany). The solvents were dried according to usual procedures. The purity of the
compounds was determined by HPLC and found to be >96%.
4.2. Cytotoxicity
4.2.1. Cell Lines and Culture Conditions
The cell lines used are human cancer cell lines: A2780 (ovarian carcinoma), HT29
(colon adenocarcinoma), MCF-7 (breast adenocarcinoma), A375 (melanoma), FaDu (pharynx squamous
cell carcinoma) and non-malignant mouse fibroblasts NIH 3T3; all cell lines were obtained from the
Department of Oncology (Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg). Cultures were maintained as
monolayers in RPMI 1640 medium with l-glutamine (Capricorn Scientific GmbH, Ebsdorfergrund,
Germany) supplemented with 10% heat inactivated fetal bovine serum (Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH,
Steinheim, Germany) and penicillin/streptomycin (Capricorn Scientific GmbH, Ebsdorfergrund,
Germany) at 37 ◦C in a humidified atmosphere with 5% CO2.
4.2.2. Cytotoxic Assay (SRB)
The cytotoxicity of the compounds was evaluated using the sulforhodamine-B (Kiton-Red S,
ABCR) micro culture colorimetric assay. Cells were seeded into 96-well plates on day 0 at appropriate
cell densities to prevent confluence of the cells during the period of experiment. After 24 h, the cells
were treated with six different concentrations (1, 3, 7, 12, 20, and 30
µM) minimum. The final
concentration of DMSO/DMF never exceeded 0.5%, which was non-toxic to the cells. After a 72-h
treatment, the supernatant medium from the 96-well plates was discarded, the cells were fixed with
10% trichloroacetic acid (TCA) and allowed to rest at 4 ◦C. After 24 h fixation, the cells were washed
in a strip washer and dyed with SRB solution (100
After dying, the plates were washed four times with 1% acetic acid to remove the excess of the dye
and allowed to air-dry overnight. Tris base solution (200 L, 10 mM) was added to each well and
absorbance was measured at = 570 nm using a 96 well plate reader (Tecan Spectra, Crailsheim,
µL, 0.4%, in 1% acetic acid) for about 20 min.
µ
λ
Germany). The EC50 values were averaged from three independent experiments performed each in
triplicate calculated from semi logarithmic dose response curves applying a non-linear 4P Hills-slope
equation (GraphPad Prism5; variables top and bottom were set to 100 and 0, respectively).
4.2.3. AO/PI Dye Exclusion Test
Morphological characteristics of cell death were analyzed employing an AO/PI assay using human
cancer cell line A375. Approx. 2
×
105 cells were seeded in cell culture flasks (25 cm2), and the cells were
allowed to grow up for 24 h. After removing of the used medium, the substance loaded fresh medium
was reloaded (or a blank new medium as a control). After 24 h and 48 h, the content of the flask was
collected and centrifuged (1200 rpm, 4 ◦C), the pellet was gently suspended in phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS (w/Ca2+ and Mg2+), 1 mL) and centrifuged again. The PBS was removed, and the pellet

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
9 of 19
gently suspended in PBS (150
µL) again. The analysis of the cells was performed using a fluorescence
microscope after having mixed the cell suspension (10 µL) with a solution of AO/PI (5 µg/mL, 10 µL).
4.2.4. Annexin V-FITC/PI Assay
Approximately 2
×
105 cells (A375) were seeded in cell culture flasks (25 cm2), and the cells were
allowed to grow up for 24 h. After removing of the used medium, the substance loaded fresh medium
was reloaded (or a blank fresh medium as a control). After 24 h and 48 h, the cells were harvested,
centrifuged (1200 rpm, 4 ◦C), and washed twice with PBS (w/Ca2+ and Mg2+, 1 mL). The cells were
counted and approximately 1
San Diego, USA) and treated with propidium iodide solution (3
(5
L, BioLegend®, San Diego, CA, USA) for 15 min in the dark at room temperature. After adding
Annexin V binding buffer (400
L) the suspension was analyzed using Attune® FACS machine.
·
106 cells were washed with Annexin V binding buffer (BioLegend®,
L, 1 mg/mL) and Annexin V-FITC
µ
µ
µ
After gating for living cells, the data from detectors BL-1A and BL-3A were collected (20,000 events) in
technical triplicates. The assay was performed in duplicates; cell distribution was calculated using
Attune® Software (ThermoFisher Scientific, Braunschweig, Germany).
4.2.5. Cell Cycle Investigations
Approximately 2
×
105 cells (A375) were seeded in cell culture flasks (25 cm2), and the cells
were allowed to grow up for 24 h. After removing of the used medium, the substance loaded fresh
medium was reloaded (or a blank fresh medium as a control). After 24 h or 48 h, respectively, only
the adherent cells were harvested, centrifuged (1200 rpm, 4 ◦C), and washed twice with PBS ((w/w),
1 mL). The cells were counted and approximately 1
After centrifugation (4500 rpm, 4 ◦C) the cells were washed with PBS ((w/w), 1 mL) and centrifuged.
The pellet was resuspended in 1 mL RNAse A containing PI buffer (100 L RNAse (100 mg/mL), 15
×
106 cells were fixed with ethanol (70%, 4 ◦C, 24 h).
µ
µL
PI solution (1 mg/mL)) and after incubating for 30 min at room temperature in the dark, cells were
analyzed using the Attune® FACS machine; collecting data from the BL-2A channel. Doublet cells were
excluded from the measurements by plotting BL-2A against BL-2H. For each cell cycle distribution
20,000 events were collected in technical triplicates, each sample was measured in duplicates. Cell cycle
distribution was calculated using ModFitLT™ (Verity Software House, Topsham, ME, USA).
4.3. Syntheses
4.3.1. General
Ursolic acid (
1
) was obtained from betulinines (Strˇíbrná Skalice, Czech Republic).
1,4,7,10-Tetraazacyclododecane (cyclen,
2
) was bought from abcr GmbH (Karlsruhe, Germany) in
95% purity. Benzyl bromoacetate (96%) and tert-Butyl bromoacetate (98%) were both purchased from
Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH (Steinheim, Germany). DOTA-tris(tert-butyl ester) was obtained from
TCI Deutschland GmbH (Eschborn, Germany) in 97% purity. Ursolic acid derivatives 10
, 16–18 and 28
have been synthesized as previously reported [20 21]. Experimental procedures and full analytical
,
data of these compounds can be found in the supplementary material [23,24].
4.3.2. General Procedure A for the Synthesis of DOTA Precursors (6–8)
To a suspension of cyclen (5.81 mmol) and sodium bicarbonate (17.43 mmol) in dry acetonitrile
(100 mL), a solution of the respective bromoacetate (
3
–
5
, 17.43 mmol) in dry acetonitrile (10 mL) was
◦
added dropwise under argon atmosphere. The mixture was stirred for 48 h at 25 C. After usual
aqueous work-up, the solvent was removed under reduced pressure, and the crude products were
subjected to column chromatography (silica gel, chloroform/methanol mixtures) affording DOTA
precursors 6–8 (50–68%).

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
10 of 19
4.3.3. General Procedure B for the Synthesis of Carboxamides (10, 16–18)
Compound
(3.2 mmol) and dry DMF (2 drops) were added. After warming to 25 ◦C, the mixture was stirred for 1 h.
The solvent was removed under reduced pressure, re-evaporated with dry THF (4 15 mL), and the
9
(0.5 mmol) was dissolved in dry DCM (10 mL), cooled to 0 ◦C and oxalyl chloride
×
residue was immediately resolved in dry DCM (10 mL). This mixture was then added dropwise to
a solution of the amine (3.0 mmol) in dry DCM (2 mL) and stirred at 25 ◦C for 2 h. After usual aqueous
work-up, the solvent was removed under reduced pressure, and the crude products were subjected to
column chromatography (silica gel, chloroform/methanol mixtures). Compounds 10 and 16–18 were
each obtained as colorless solids (78–82%).
4.3.4. General Procedure C for the Alkylation with Chloroacetyl Chloride (11, 19–21)
Chloroacetyl chloride (2.20 mmol) was added dropwise to a solution of the respective carboxamide
(
10
,
16
–
18; 1.43 mmol) and triethylamine (0.71 mmol) in dry dichloromethane (75 mL). The mixture
◦
was stirred at 25 C for 0.5–4 h. After usual aqueous work-up, the solvent was removed under
reduced pressure, and the crude products were subjected to column chromatography (silica gel,
chloroform/acetone mixtures). Compounds 11 and 19–21 were each obtained as colorless solids
(91%–94%).
4.3.5. General Procedure D for the Synthesis of Ursolic Acid Chelator Conjugates (12–14, 22–27)
To a solution of the respective chloroacetyl derivative (11, 19 21; 0.44 mmol) and freshly grounded
potassium carbonate (0.83 mmol) in dry acetonitrile (15 mL) was added potassium iodide (0.35 mmol)
–
and the respective DOTA precursor (6–8, 0.41 mmol in 5 mL dry acetonitrile). The mixture was stirred
for 2–5 days at 25 ◦C. After completion of the reaction (as indicated by TLC) the mixture was filtered,
and the solvent was removed under reduced pressure. The crude products were subjected to column
chromatography (silica gel, chloroform/methanol mixtures) to afford compounds 12–14 and 22–27
(yield: 54–88%), respectively.
Allyl bromoacetate (5), To a solution of allyl alcohol (0.62 mol), bromo acetylbromide (0.1 mol) was added
dropwise over a period of 30 min at 0 ◦C under argon atmosphere. The mixture was stirred for 1 h at
0 ◦C, warmed to 25 ◦C and stirred for another 3 h. The solvent was removed under reduced pressure
and the residue was dissolved in dichloromethane. After usual aqueous work-up, the solvent was
removed under reduced pressure, and the crude product was purified by vacuum distillation affording
allyl bromoacetate as colorless oil (68%). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 5.88 (ddt, J = 16.5, 11.0,
5.8 Hz, 1H, CH=CH2), 5.38–5.17 (m, 2H, CH=CH2), 4.61 (dt, J = 5.8, 1.4 Hz, 2H, CH2CH=CH2), 3.82
(s, 2H, BrCH2) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
66.6 (CH2CH=CH2), 25.8 (BrCH2) ppm.
δ = 166.8 (C=O), 131.2 (CH=CH2), 119.0 (CH=CH2),
Tri-tert-butyl 2,20,2”-(1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl)triacetate (
from according to general procedure A using tert-butyl bromoacetate (
6
), Compound
6 was prepared
2
3
). Column chromatography
◦
◦
(SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 9:1) gave
(CHCl3/MeOH 95:5); IR (ATR):
6
ν
(yield: 50%); m.p. 180–182 C (lit.: 181–183 C [25]); Rf = 0.27
= 2974w, 2943w, 2912w, 2853w, 2736w, 1718s, 1576w, 1466w, 1453w,
1412w, 1392w, 1368m, 1330w, 1255m, 1218w, 1147s, 1117m, 1099m, 1050w, 935m, 873m, 848m cm−1
;
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
(m, 4H, 2 CH2 (cyclen)), 2.95–2.84 (m, 12H, 6
δ
= 3.36 (s, 4H, 2
×
CH2 (acetate)), 3.28 (s, 2H, CH2 (acetate)), 3.12–3.06
CH2 (cyclen)), 1.45 (s, 18H, 6
×
×
×
CH3 (t-butyl)), 1.45 (s, 9H,
3
×
CH3 (t-butyl)) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 170.6 (2
×
CO, acetate), 169.8 (CO, acetate),
CH2, cyclen), 51.4 (2 CH2,
81.9 (Cq, t-butyl), 81.8 (2
cyclen), 49.4 (2
×
Cq, t-butyl), 58.4 (2
×
CH2, acetate), 51.5 (2
×
×
×
CH2, cyclen), 49.0 (CH2, acetate), 47.7 (2
× CH2, cyclen), 28.4 (3 × CH3, t-butyl),
28.3 (6 × CH3, t-butyl) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 515.3 (100%, [M + H]+), 537.3 (10%, [M + Na]+)
;
analysis calcd for C26H50N4O6 (514.71): C 60.67, H 9.79, N 10.89; found: C 60.51, H 9.98, N 10.67.

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
11 of 19
Tribenzyl 2,2’,2”-(1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl)triacetate (
7). Compound
7
was prepared
from
(SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 9:1) gave
2738w, 1732s, 1586w, 1498w, 1455m, 1418w, 1381w, 1314w, 1169s, 1096m, 1049m, 994m, 739s, 697s cm−1
UV-Vis (CHCl3): (log
) = 251 nm (2.87), 258 nm (2.86), 263 nm (2.76); 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 7.40–7.29 (m, 15H, 15 CH (Bn)), 5.13 (s, 4H, 2 CH2 (Bn)), 5.13 (s, 2H, CH2 (Bn)), 3.48 (s, 4H,
CH2 (cyclen)), 2.93–2.79 (m, 12H,
CO, acetate), 170.3 (CO, acetate)
2
according to general procedure A using benzyl bromoacetate (
4
). Column chromatography
7
(yield: 68%); Rf = 0.32 (CHCl3/MeOH 95:5); IR (KBr):
ν
= 2948w, 2857w,
;
λ
max
ε
δ
×
×
2 × CH2 (acetate)), 3.41 (s, 2H, CH2 (acetate)), 3.12–3.05 (m, 4H, 2
×
6 × CH2 (cyclen)) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 171.1 (2
×
,
135.5 (Ci, Bn), 128.8 (CH, Bn), 128.8 (CH, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.6 (CH, Bn), 66.8
(CH2, Bn), 57.4 (2
48.8 (CH2, acetate), 47.5 (2
(100%, [M + H]+), 639.3 (10%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for C35H44N4O6 (616.76): C 68.16, H 7.19,
×
CH2, acetate), 51.9 (2
×
CH2, cyclen), 51.7 (2
× CH2, cyclen), 49.6 (2 × CH2, cyclen),
×
CH2, cyclen) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 309.0 (10%, [M + 2H]2+
), 617.4
N 9.08; found: C 67.84, H 7.39, N 8.81.
Triallyl 2,2’,2”-(1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl)triacetate (
from according to general procedure A using allyl bromoacetate (
(SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) gave (yield: 63%); Rf = 0.27 (CHCl3/MeOH 95:5); IR (KBr):
2858w, 2743w, 1731s, 1673w, 1648w, 1455w, 1420w, 1364w, 1314w, 1179s, 1095m, 985s, 928s cm−1
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 5.93–5.81 (m, 3H, 3 CH (allyl)), 5.32–5.20 (m, 6H, 3 CH2 (allyl)),
4.60–4.53 (m, 6H, 3 CH2 (allyl)), 3.49 (s, 4H, 2 CH2 (acetate)), 3.41 (s, 2H, CH2 (acetate)), 3.12–3.06
(m, 4H, 2 × CH2 (cyclen)), 2.96–2.81 (m, 12H, 6
CH2 (cyclen)) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 170.8 (2 × CO, acetate), 170.0 (CO, acetate), 131.7 (2 CH, allyl), 131.7 (CH, allyl), 119.2 (CH2, allyl),
119.0 (2 × CH2, allyl), 65.5 (2 CH2, allyl), 65.4 (CH2, allyl), 57.3 (2 CH2, acetate), 51.7 (2 CH2,
cyclen), 51.6 (2
8
), Compound
). Column chromatography
= 2945w,
8 was prepared
2
5
8
ν
;
δ
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
CH2, cyclen), 49.4 (2
×
CH2, cyclen), 48.5 (CH2, acetate), 47.4 (CH2, cyclen) ppm;
MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 234.1 (18%, [M + 2H]2+), 467.3 (100%, [M + H]+), 489.3 (10%, [M + Na]+);
analysis calcd for C23H38N4O6 (466.6): C 59.21, H 8.21, N 12.01; found: C 59.03, H 8.44, N 11.78.
(3β) 3-Acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oic acid (9), Compound 1 was prepared from ursolic acid according to the
procedure given in the literature [26]. Yield: 96%; m.p. 287–290 ◦C (lit.: 289–290 ◦C [27]).
(3β) N-(2-(4-(2-Chloroacetyl)piperazin-1-yl)ethyl)-3-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-amide (11). Compound 11 was
synthesized from 10 according to general procedure C. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/acetone
◦
4:1) furnished compound 11 (91%); m.p. 124–129 C; [
(CHCl3/acetone 4:1); IR (KBr): = 3423s, 2947s, 1734m, 1654s, 1522m, 1458m, 1370m, 1247s, 1150w,
1027m cm−1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 6.32 (t, J = 5.0 Hz, 1H, NH), 5.28 (t, J = 3.6 Hz, 1H, 12-H),
α
]
= +32.3◦ (c 0.320, CHCl3); Rf = 0.38
D
ν
δ
4.49 (dd, J = 10.4, 5.4 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 4.06 (s, 2H, 36-H), 3.72–3.47 (m, 4H, 34-H, 340-H), 3.47–3.36 (m, 1H,
31-Ha), 3.25–3.15 (m, 1H, 31-Hb), 2.58–2.39 (m, 6H, 33-H, 32-H, 330-H), 2.04 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.02–1.80 (m, 5H,
11-Ha, 11-Hb, 16-Ha, 22-Ha, 18-H), 1.79–1.70 (m, 1H, 16-Hb), 1.69–1.21 (m, 13H, 15-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb,
9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.09 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.08–1.01 (m, 2H, 1-Hb,
15-Hb), 0.96–0.94 (m, 4H, 20-H, 30-H), 0.93 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.89–0.86 (m, 3H, 29-H), 0.86 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.85
(s, 3H, 24-H), 0.84–0.79 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.78 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 178.1
(C-28), 171.1 (Ac), 165.2 (C-35), 140.0 (C-13), 125.3 (C-12), 80.9 (C-3), 56.7 (C-32), 55.4 (C-5), 54.2 (C-18),
53.0 (C-33), 52.5 (C-330), 48.0 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 46.5 (C-34), 42.6 (C-14), 42.4 (C-340), 40.9 (C-36), 39.9
(C-19), 39.7 (C-8), 39.3 (C-20) 38.4 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.5 (C-22), 37.0 (C-10), 35.9 (C-31), 32.8 (C-7), 31.0
(C-21), 28.2 (C-23), 28.0 (C-15), 25.0 (C-16), 23.6 (C-2), 23.6 (C-11), 23.4 (C-27), 21.4 (Ac), 21.3 (C-30),
18.3 (C-6), 17.5 (C-29), 17.1 (C-26), 16.9 (C-24), 15.8 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 686.5 (100%,
[M + H]+); analysis calcd for C40H64ClN3O4 (686.42): C 69.99, H 9.40, N 6.12; found: C 69.70, H 9.63,
N 6.02.
Tris-t-butyl 2’,2”-[10-[2-[4-[2-(3
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (12), Compound 12 was synthesized from
to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 9:1) furnished compound
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]piperazin-1-yl]-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
6
and 11 according

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
12 of 19
12 (54%). m.p. 247–250 ◦C (decomp.); [
α
]D = +18.9◦ (c 0.345, CHCl3); Rf = 0.30 (CHCl3/MeOH 9:1);
IR (KBr):
ν
= 2931m, 1727s, 1644s, 1529w, 1455m, 1425w, 1368s, 1306m, 1228s, 1159s, 1105s, 1005m,
755m cm−1; H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 6.38 (s, 1H, NH), 5.26 (t, J = 3.4 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 4.46
CH2 (acetate), 31-Ha, 31-Hb,
CH2 (cyclen), 32-H, 33-H, 330-H), 2.01 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.00–1.68 (m, 4H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 18-H),
1.69–1.14 (m, 14H, 16-Hb, 22-Hb, 15-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb,
7-Hb), 1.42 (s, 27H, 9 CH3 (t-Butyl)), 1.05 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.11–0.95 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.91
(d, J = 6.1 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.90 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.85 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.83 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.82 (s, 3H,
24-H), 0.80–0.75 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.74 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3):
= 178.0 (C-28),
172.8 (CO, acetate), 171.0 (Ac), 169.8 (C-35), 139.8 (C-13), 125.3 (C-12), 81.9 (Cq, t-Butyl), 81.7 (2 Cq,
CH2,
1
(dd, J = 10.5, 5.2 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.92–2.04 (m, 36H, 34-H, 340-H, 36-H, 3
×
8
×
×
δ
×
t-Butyl), 80.9 (C-3), 56.8 (C-32), 55.8 (3
×
CH2, acetate), 55.3 (C-5), 55.2 (C-36), 53.9 (C-18), 53.4 (8
×
cyclen), 52.2 (C-33, C-330), 47.8 (C-17), 47.5 (C-9), 44.3 (C-34, C-340), 42.5 (C-14), 39.8 (C-19), 39.7 (C-8),
39.1 (C-20), 38.4 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.4 (C-22), 36.9 (C-10), 35.7 (C-31), 32.8 (C-7), 31.0 (C-21), 28.2 (C-23),
28.0 (9
×
CH3, t-Butyl), 27.9 (C-15), 24.8 (C-16), 23.6 (C-2), 23.5 (C-11), 23.4 (C-27), 21.4 (Ac), 21.3 (C-30),
18.3 (C-6), 17.4 (C-29), 17.1 (C-26), 16.8 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 593.9 (100%,
[M + Na + H]+), 1186.7 (95%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for C66H113N7O10 (1164.67): C 68.06, H 9.78,
N 8.42; found: C 67.75, H 9.97, N 8.51.
Tribenzyl 2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[4-[2-(3
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (13). Compound 13 was synthesized from
to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished compound
β-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]piperazin-1-yl]-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
7
and 11 according
13 (82%). m.p. 142–146 ◦C; [ = +14.5◦ (c 0.300, CHCl3); Rf = 0.50 (CHCl3/MeOH 9:1); IR (KBr):
α]
D
ν = 3440s, 2947m, 1734s, 1641s, 1456m, 1371m, 1310w, 1247m, 1197s, 1105m, 1006w, 750m cm−1; UV-Vis
1
(CHCl3):
λ
(log
ε
) = 257 nm (3.99); H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 7.36–7.24 (m, 15H, CHAr),
CH2Bn), 5.12–5.05 (m, 2H,
CH2Bn), 4.47 (dd, J = 10.7, 5.1 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.72–2.81 (m, 12H, 34-H, 340-H, 36-H, 3
CH2 (acetate)),
3.40–3.30 (m, 1H, 31-Ha), 3.22–3.14 (m, 1H, 31-Hb), 2.46–2.33 (m, 6H, 32-H, 33-H, 330-H), 2.81–2.06
(m, 16H, CH2 (cyclen)), 2.03 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.00–1.68 (m, 6H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 18-H, 22-Ha, 16-Hb),
max
6.36–6.28 (m, 1H, NH), 5.27 (t, J = 3.7 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 5.21–5.13 (m, 4H, 2
×
×
8
×
1.68–1.20 (m, 13H, 15-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb),
1.06 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.05–0.94 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.93 (brs, 3H, 30-H), 0.91 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.85
(d, J = 5.7 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.85 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.83 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.82–0.77 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.76 (s, 3H, 26-H)
ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 177.9 (C-28), 173.5 (CO, acetate), 170.9 (Ac), 170.0 (C-35), 139.7
(C-13), 135.4 (CAr), 135.3 (CAr), 135.2 (CAr), 128.7 (CHAr), 128.6 (CHAr), 128.5 (CHAr), 128.3 (CHAr),
128.3 (CHAr), 128.2 (CHAr), 125.3 (CHAr), 80.8 (C-3), 67.0 (CH2, Bn), 66.8 (CH2, Bn), 56.7 (C-32), 55.4
(C-36), 55.3 (CH2, acetate), 55.2 (C-5), 53.9 (C-18), 53.4 (CH2, cyclen), 52.7 (C-33, C-330), 47.7 (C-17), 47.4
(C-9), 42.4 (C-14), 39.7 (C-19), 39.5 (C-8), 39.0 (C-20), 38.3 (C-1), 37.6 (C-4), 37.3 (C-22), 36.8 (C-10), 35.8
(C-31), 32.7 (C-7), 30.9 (C-21), 28.0 (C-23), 27.8 (C-15), 24.8 (C-16), 23.5 (C-2), 23.4 (C-11), 23.2 (C-27),
21.3 (Ac), 21.2 (C-30), 18.1 (C-6), 17.3 (C-29), 17.0 (C-26), 16.7 (C-24), 15.6 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH):
m/z = 634 (20%, [M + 2H]2+), 645 (100%, [M + H + Na]2+), 1289 (62%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for
C75H107N7O10 (1266.72): C 71.11, H 8.51, N 7.74; found: C 70.73, H 8.70, N 7.49.
Triallyl 2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[4-[2-(3
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (14). Compound 14 was synthesized from
to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished compound 14
(80%); m.p. 159–163 ◦C (decomp.); [ = +14.8◦ (c 0.310, CHCl3); Rf = 0.35 (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 9:1);
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]piperazin-1-yl]-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
8
and 11 according
α
]
D
IR (KBr):
ν
= 3342s, 2946m, 2852w, 1734s, 1642s, 1522w, 1456m, 1386w, 1310w, 1246m, 1202m, 1106m,
1026w cm−1; H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 6.35 (s, 1H, NH), 5.97 – 5.83 (m, 3H, 3
CH2 (allyl)), 4.67–4.55 (m, 6H, 3 CH2 (allyl)), 4.47 (dd, J = 10.6, 5.3 Hz,
CH2 (acetate), 31-Ha, 31-Hb), 2.97–2.14 (m, 22H,
×
CH (allyl)),
1
5.34–5.19 (m, 7H, 12-H, 3
1H, 3-H), 3.72–2.97 (m, 14H, 34-H, 340-H, 36-H, 3
8 × CH2 (cyclen), 32-H, 33-H, 330-H), 2.03 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.01–1.68 (m, 6H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 18-H,
22-Ha, 16-Hb), 1.68–1.19 (m, 13H, 15-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb,
×
×
×

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
13 of 19
21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.07 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.06–0.94 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.94 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H, 30-H),
0.92 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.87 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.85 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.83 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.82–0.78 (m, 1H,
5-H), 0.76 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 178.0 (C-28), 173.4 (2
173.3 (CO, acetate), 171.1 (Ac), 170.0 (C-35), 139.8 (C-13), 131.9 (2 CH, allyl), 131.7 (CH, allyl), 125.4
(C-12), 119.0 (CH2, allyl), 118.8 (2 CH2, allyl), 80.9 (C-3), 66.0 (CH2, allyl), 65.9 (2 CH2, allyl), 56.8
(C-32), 55.4 (C-36), 55.3 (C-5), 55.2 (3 CH2, acetate), 53.9 (C-18), 53.6 (8 x CH2, cyclen), 52.7 (C-33,
×
CO, acetate),
×
×
×
×
C-330), 47.9 (C-17), 47.5 (C-9), 45.0 (C-34, C-340), 42.6 (C-24), 39.8 (C-19), 39.7 (C-8), 39.1 (C-20), 38.4
(C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.4 (C-22), 37.0 (C-10), 35.9 (C-31), 32.8 (C-7), 31.0 (C-21), 28.2 (C-23), 27.9 (C-15), 24.9
(C-16), 23.6 (C-2), 23.6 (C-11), 23.3 (C-27), 21.4 (Ac), 21.3 (C-30), 18.3 (C-6), 17.4 (C-29), 17.1 (C-26), 16.8
(C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 569.8 (100%, [M + Na + H]+), 1138.8 (52%, [M + Na]+);
analysis calcd for C63H101N7O10 (1116.54): C 67.77, H 9.12, N 8.78; found: C 67.50, H 9.37, N 8.43.
2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[4-[2-(3β-Acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]piperazin-1-yl]-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetic acid (15). Triphenylphosphane (0.038 mmol), [(PPh3)4Pd]
(0.013 mmol) and pyrrolidine (0.290 mmol) were added to a solution of compound 14 (0.128 mmol) in
acetonitrile (4 mL), and the mixture was stirred for 6 days at 25 ◦C. After filtration, the solvent was
removed under reduced pressure, and the crude product was subjected to column chromatography
(RP18, MeCN/MeOH/TFA 60:40:0.1) affording compound 15 as colorless solid (96%); m.p. 206–210 ◦C
(decomp.); [
α
]
D = +17.1◦ (c 0.315, MeOH); Rf = 0.35 (RP18, ACN/TFA 100:1); IR (ATR):
ν
= 2925w, 1634s,
1371m, 1245s, 1199s, 1127s, 1026m, 829m, 800m, 719m cm−1; H NMR (400 MHz, CD3OD): δ = 5.35
1
(t, J = 3.6 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 4.47 (dd, J = 11.0, 5.3 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.72–2.93 (m, 14H, 34-H, 34‘-H, 36-H, 31-Ha,
31-Hb, 3
×
CH2 (acetate)), 2.91–2.20 (m, 22H, 32-H, 33-H, 33‘-H, 8
×
CH2 (cyclen)), 2.09–2.06 (m, 1H,
18-H), 2.03 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.02–1.93 (m, 3H, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 16-Ha), 1.84–1.23 (m, 15H, 15-Ha, 22-Ha, 1-Ha,
16-Hb, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 9-H, 7-Ha, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.15 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.12–0.96
(m, 3H, 15-Hb, 1-Hb, 20-H), 0.99 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.97 (brs, 3H, 30-H), 0.92 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.89
(s, 3H, 24-H), 0.88 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.87–0.84 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.83 (s, 3H,26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz,
CD3OD):
(C-13), 127.0 (C-12), 82.4 (C-3), 59.8 (CH2, acetate), 59.7 (CH2, acetate), 59.1 (CH2, acetate), 57.7 (C-32),
56.7 (C-5), 55.3 (C-36), 54.4 (C-18), 54.2 (8 CH2, cyclen), 53.8 (C-33, C-33‘), 49.0 (C-17), 48.8 (C-9), 46.2
δ
= 180.1 (C-28), 172.8 (Ac), 172.5 (CO, acetate), 172.1 (2
×
CO, acetate), 171.2 (C-35), 140.2
×
(C-34. C-34‘), 43.4 (C-14), 40.9 (C-8), 40.9 (C-19), 40.3 (C-20), 39.4 (C-1), 38.7 (C-4), 38.7 (C-22), 38.1
(C-10), 37.3 (C-31), 34.0 (C-7), 31.9 (C-21), 29.0 (C-15), 28.6 (C-23), 25.4 (C-16), 24.6 (C-2), 24.5 (C-11),
24.0 (C-27), 21.6 (C-30), 21.1 (Ac), 19.3 (C-6), 18.0 (C-26), 17.8 (C-29), 17.2 (C-24), 16.1 (C-25) ppm;
MS (ESI, MeOH, positive ion mode): m/z = 1018.6 (27%, [M + Na]+), 1034.7 (100%, [M + K]+); MS
(ESI, MeOH, negative ion mode): m/z = 1017.7 (13%, [M
analysis calcd for C54H89N7O10 (996.35): C 65.10, H 9.00, N 9.84; found: C 64.82, H 9.21, N 9.61.
−
2H + Na]–), 1032.6 (100%, [M – 2H + K]–);
1-(3 -Acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oyl)-4-(2-chloroacetyl) piperazine (19). Compound 19 has been synthesized
from 16 according to general procedure C. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/acetone/hexanes
95:5:20) furnished compound 19 (94%); m.p. 155–158 ◦C; [ = +34.3◦ (c 0.370, CHCl3); Rf = 0.66
β
α
]
D
(CHCl3/acetone 9:1); IR (ATR):
ν
= 2924m, 2871w, 1731m, 1658s, 1455m, 1392m, 1370m, 1243s, 1200m,
1145m, 1025m, 985m, 752m cm−1; H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 5.21 (t, J = 3.6 Hz, 1H, 12-H),
1
4.52–4.45 (m, 1H, 3-H), 4.06 (s, 2H, 34-H), 3.73–3.46 (m, 8H, 31-H, 310-H, 32-H, 320-H), 2.41 (d, J = 11.6
Hz, 1H, 18-H), 2.24–2.11 (m, 1H, 16-Ha), 2.03 (s, 3H, Ac), 1.91 (dd, J = 8.9, 3.6 Hz, 2H, 11-Ha, 11-Hb),
1.80–1.24 (m, 15H, 15-Ha, 16-Hb, 22-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 22-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 19-H, 6-Hb,
21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.07 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.12–0.98 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.95 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 3H, 30-H),
0.93 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.88 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.85 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.84 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.84–0.77 (m, 1H,
5-H), 0.73 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 175.8 (C-28), 171.1 (Ac), 165.5 (C-33),
138.6 (C-13), 125.5 (C-12), 81.0 (C-3), 55.5 (C-5), 55.1 (C-18), 48.8 (C-17), 47.7 (C-9), 46.3 (C-31), 45.5
(C-310), 45.1 (C-32), 42.3 (C-320, C-14), 40.9 (C-34), 39.6 (C-19), 39.6 (C-8), 38.9 (C-20), 38.4 (C-1), 37.8
(C-4), 37.1 (C-10), 34.6 (C-22), 33.1 (C-7), 30.6 (C-21), 28.3 (C-15), 28.2 (C-23), 23.9 (C-27), 23.7 (C-2, C-16),
23.4 (C-11), 21.4 (Ac), 21.4 (C-30), 18.3 (C-6), 17.6 (C-29), 17.0 (C-26), 16.9 (C-24), 15.6 (C-25) ppm; MS

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
14 of 19
(ESI, MeOH): m/z = 643.5 (100%, [M + H]+), 665.4 (56%, [M + Na]+), 1307.3 78%, [2M + Na]+); analysis
calcd for C38H59ClN2O4 (643.4): C 70.94, H 9.24, N 4.35; found: C 70.72, H 9.51, N 4.09.
(3
from 17 according to general procedure C. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/acetone/hexanes
95:5:20) furnished compound 20 (91%); m.p. 103–107 ◦C; [ = +25.2◦ (c 0.300, CHCl3); Rf = 0.40
(CHCl3/acetone 9:1); IR (KBr): = 3422br s, 2948s, 2872m, 1734s, 1640s, 1532s, 1456m, 1370m, 1246s,
1148w, 1092w, 1028m, 756m cm−1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 7.43 (t, J = 5.1 Hz, 1H, NH), 6.28
β) N-(2-(2-Chloroacetyl)aminoethyl)-3-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-amide (20). Compound 20 was synthesized
α
]
D
ν
δ
(t, J = 5.7 Hz, 1H, NH), 5.32 (t, J = 3.6 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 4.48 (dd, J = 9.7, 6.1 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 4.00 (s, 2H, 34-H),
3.56–3.46 (m, 1H, 31-Ha), 3.41–3.35 (m, 2H, 32-H), 3.26–3.18 (m, 1H, 31-Hb), 2.04 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.03–1.80
(m, 5H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 18-H, 22-Ha), 1.80–1.22 (m, 14H, 16-Hb, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 1-Ha, 15-Ha, 9-H, 6-Ha,
21-Ha, 7-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.08 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.08–0.95 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H),
0.94 (s, 3H, 30-H), 0.93 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.87 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.86 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.84 (s, 3H, 24-H),
0.84–0.79 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.75 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 180.0 (C-28), 171.1
(Ac), 167.0 (C-33), 139.7 (C-13), 125.9 (C-12), 81.0 (C-3), 55.4 (C-5), 53.8 (C-18), 48.0 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9),
42.6 (C-14), 42.6 (C-34), 41.3 (C-32), 39.9 (C-19), 39.7 (C-8), 39.2 (C-31), 39.2 (C-20), 38.4 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4),
37.4 (C-22), 37.0 (C-10), 32.8 (C-7), 31.0 (C-21), 28.2 (C-23), 27.9 (C-15), 24.9 (C-16), 23.7 (C-2), 23.5 (C-11),
23.4 (C-27), 21.4 (Ac), 21.3 (C-30), 18.3 (C-6), 17.4 (C-29), 17.0 (C-26), 16.8 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS
(ESI, MeOH): m/z = 617.3 (48%, [M + H]+), 639.5 (52%, [M + Na]+), 1255.4 (100%, [2M + Na]+); analysis
calcd for C36H57ClN2O4 (617.31): C 70.04, H 9.31, N 4.54; found: C 69.83, H 9.52, N 4.11.
(3
has been synthesized from 18 according to general procedure C. Column chromatography
(SiO2, CHCl3/acetone/hexanes 95:5:20) furnished compound 21 (91%); m.p. 94–97 ◦C; [ ]D = +33.7◦
(c 0.335, CHCl3); Rf = 0.35 (CHCl3/acetone 9:1); IR (KBr): = 3426br s, 2928m, 2872m, 1734m, 1638s,
1528m, 1458w, 1386w, 1248s, 1124w, 1028m cm−1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 7.00–6.90 (m, 1H,
β) N-(2-(2-(2-Chloroacetyl)aminoethoxy)ethyl)-3-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-amide (21). Compound 21
α
ν
δ
NH), 6.22 (t, J = 5.0 Hz, 1H, NH), 5.30 (t, J = 3.6 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 4.49 (dd, J = 10.0, 5.7 Hz, 1H, 3-H),
4.06 (s, 2H, 36-H), 3.57–3.47 (m, 7H, 32-H, 31-Ha, 33-H, 34-H), 3.31–3.21 (m, 1H, 31-Hb), 2.04 (s, 3H,
Ac), 2.02–1.76 (m, 5H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 18-H, 22-Ha), 1.77–1.21 (m, 14H, 16-Hb, 15-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha,
2-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.09 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.08–0.95 (m, 3H,
1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.94 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.93 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.88 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.86
(s, 3H, 23-H), 0.85 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.84–0.80 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.78 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz,
CDCl3): δ = 178.4 (C-28), 171.1 (Ac), 166.1 (C-35), 139.9 (C-13), 125.6 (C-12), 80.9 (C-3), 70.0 (C-33), 69.4
(C-32), 55.4 (C-5), 54.0 (C-18), 48.0 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 42.8 (C-36), 42.6 (C-14), 39.9 (C-29), 39.8 (C-34),
39.7 (C-8), 39.2 (C-31), 39.2 (C-20), 38.5 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.4 (C-22), 37.0 (C-10), 32.8 (C-7), 31.0 (C-21),
28.2 (C-23), 28.0 (C-15), 25.0 (C-16), 23.7 (C-2), 23.6 (C-11), 23.4 (C-27), 21.4 (Ac), 21.4 (C-30), 18.3 (C-6),
17.4 (C-29), 17.1 (C-26), 16.9 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 661.4 (60%, [M + H]+),
685.5 (86%, [M + Na]+), 1343.3 (100%, [2M + Na]+); analysis calcd for C38H61ClN2O5 (661.37): C 69.01,
H 9.30, N 4.24, Cl 5.36; found: C 68.80, H 9.61, N 4.01.
Tri-tert-butyl
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (22). Compound 22 was synthesized from
according to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished
compound 22 (88%); m.p. 237–240 ◦C (decomp.); [ D = +15.0◦ (c 0.3, CHCl3); Rf = 0.42 (CHCl3/MeOH
9:1); IR (ATR): = 2927w, 2928w, 2871w, 2829w, 1726s, 1646m, 1453m, 1424w, 1368s, 1305m, 1227s,
1160s, 1105s, 1004m, 975m, 754m cm−1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 5.19 (t, J = 3.5 Hz, 1H, 12-H),
4.47 (dd, J = 9.8, 6.0 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.93 – 2.05 (m, 32H, 31-H, 310-H, 32-H, 320-H, 8
CH2 (cyclen),
2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[4-(3
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oyl)piperazin-1-yl]-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
6
and 19
α
]
ν
δ
×
3 × CH2 (acetate), 34-H), 2.40 (d, J = 11.0 Hz, 1H, 18-H), 2.19–2.09 (m, 1H, 16-Ha), 2.02 (s, 3H, Ac),
1.93–1.85 (m, 2H, 11-Ha, 11-Hb), 1.82–1.67 (m, 3H, 15-Ha, 16-Hb, 22-Ha), 1.65–1.21 (m, 12H, 2-Ha, 2-Hb,
22-Hb, 1-Ha, 9-H, 21-Ha, 6-Ha, 7-Ha, 19-H, 21-Hb, 6-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.43 (s, 9H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.42 (s, 9H;
CH3 (tButyl)), 1.42 (s, 9H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.10–0.96 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 1.05 (s, 3H, 27-H),
0.92 (d, J = 6.3 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.91 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.86 (d, J = 6.3 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.84 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.82

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
15 of 19
(s, 3H, 24-H), 0.82–0.76 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.71 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 175.9
(C-28), 172.8 (CO, acetate), 172.7 (CO, acetate), 171.0 (Ac), 170.7 (C-33), 138.7 (C-13), 125.1 (C-12), 81.9
(Cq, tButyl), 81.7 (Cq, tButyl), 81.7 (Cq, tButyl), 81.0 (C-3), 55.8 (CH2, acetate), 55.8 (CH2, acetate), 55.7
(CH2, cyclen), 55.4 (C-5), 55.1 (C-18), 48.8 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 44.6 (C-31, C-310, C-32, C-320), 42.3 (C-14),
41.7 (C-34), 39.5 (C-8), 39.4 (C-19), 38.8 (C-20), 38.3 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.0 (C-10), 34.4 (C-22), 33.1 (C-7),
30.5 (C-21), 28.3 (C-15), 28.2 (C-23), 28.1 (CH3, tButyl), 28.0 (CH3, tButyl), 23.8 (C-27), 23.6 (C-2, C-16),
23.4 (C-11), 21.4 (Ac), 21.3 (C-30), 18.2 (C-6), 17.5 (C-29), 17.0 (C-26), 16.8 (C-24), 15.6 (C-25) ppm; MS
(ESI, MeOH): m/z = 1143.7 (100%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for C64H108N6O10 (1121.60): C 68.54,
H 9.71, N 7.49; found: C 68.31, H 10.03, N 7.27.
Tribenzyl
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (23). Compound 23 was synthesized from 19 and
according to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished
compound 23 (72%); m.p. 157–161 ◦C; [ = +4.2◦ (c 0.300, CHCl3); Rf = 0.37 (CHCl3/MeOH 9:1);
2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[4-(3β-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oyl)piperazin-1-yl]-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
7
α
]
D
IR (ATR):
ν = 2945w, 2836w, 1730s, 1638m, 1454m, 1424w, 1392m, 1370m, 1302m, 1243s, 1194s, 1105s,
1005m, 966m, 743m, 697s cm−1; UV-Vis (CHCl3):
λ
(log
ε
) = 246 nm (3.96), 294 nm (3.47), 364 nm
CH (Bn)), 5.33–4.97 (m, 7H, 12-H,
max
1
(3.23); H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ
= 7.39–7.26 (m, 15H, 15
×
3 × CH2 (Bn)), 4.45 (dd, J = 10.1, 5.9 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 4.02–2.05 (m, 34H, 31-H, 31‘-H, 32-H, 32‘-H, 8 × CH2
(cyclen), 3 × CH2 (acetate), 34-H, 16-Ha, 18-H), 2.02 (s, 3H, Ac), 1.95–1.65 (m, 5H, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 15-Ha,
16-Hb, 22-Ha), 1.65–1.09 (m, 12H, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 22-Hb, 1-Ha, 9-H, 21-Ha, 6-Ha, 7-Ha, 19-H, 21-Hb, 6-Hb,
7-Hb), 1.03 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.08–0.95 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.93 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.85
(d, J = 6.3 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.85 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.82 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.79 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.79–0.71 (m, 1H, 5-H),
0.66 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 175.9 (C-28), 173.6 (CO, acetate), 171.0 (Ac),
170.8 (C-33), 138.6 (C-13), 135.5 (Ci, Bn), 135.3 (Ci, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.6 (CH, Bn),
128.6 (CH, Bn), 128.4 (CH, Bn), 128.4 (CH, Bn), 125.1 (C-12), 81.0 (C-3), 67.1 (CH2, Bn), 66.9 (CH2, Bn),
55.7 (CH2, acetate), 55.4 (CH2, cyclen), 55.2 (C-5), 55.1 (C-18), 48.7 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 44.8 (C-31, C-31‘,
C-32, C-32‘), 42.2 (C-14), 42.0 (C-34), 39.5 (C-19), 39.5 (C-8), 38.8 (C-20), 38.3 (C-1), 37.7 (C-4), 36.9 (C-10),
34.5 (C-22), 33.1 (C-7), 30.6 (C-21), 28.2 (C-15), 28.1 (C-23), 23.6 (C-2, C-16), 23.5 (C-27), 23.4 (C-11), 21.4
(Ac), 21.3 (C-30), 18.2 (C-6), 17.5 (C-29), 17.0 (C-26), 16.8 (C-24), 15.5 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH):
m/z = 1245.8 (100%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for C73H102N6O10 (1223.65): C 71.65, H 8.40, N 6.87;
found: C 71.42, H 8.69, N 6.56.
Tri-tert-butyl
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (24). Compound 24 was synthesized from 20 and
to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished compound
24 (73%); m.p. 254–257 ◦C (decomp.); [ = +33.8◦ (c 0.300, CHCl3); Rf = 0.40 (CHCl3/MeOH 9:1);
IR (KBr): = 2971m, 2929m, 2829w, 1727s, 1668m, 1520m, 1454m, 1426w, 1368s, 1307m, 1228s, 1159s,
1106s, 1027m, 1006m, 975m, 755m cm−1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 8.03 (s, 1H, NH), 7.08 (s, 1H,
NH), 5.46 (t, J = 3.4 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 4.47 (dd, J = 9.8, 6.1 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.80–2.05 (m, 28H, 31-H, 32-H,
34-H, 3 CH2 (acetate), 8 CH2 (cyclen)), 2.44–2.38 (m, 1H, 18-H), 2.02 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.00–1.67 (m, 6H,
2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[2-(3
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]amino-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
6
according
α
]
D
ν
δ
×
×
15-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 16-Ha, 16-Hb, 22-Ha), 1.66–1.19 (m, 12H, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 22-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 7-Ha,
21-Ha, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.44 (s, 9H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.43 (s, 9H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.43 (s, 9H, CH3
(tButyl)), 1.15–0.98 (m, 3H, 20-H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb), 1.04 (s, 3H, 27-H), 0.91 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.90 (d, J = 6.1 Hz,
3H, 30-H), 0.88 (d, J = 6.1 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.84 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.83 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.82–0.77 (m, 1H, 5-H),
0.74 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
171.1 (Ac), 139.0 (C-13), 125.5 (C-12), 82.1 (Cq, tButyl), 82.1 (Cq, tButyl), 82.1 (Cq, tButyl), 81.1 (C-3),
56.4 (3 CH2, acetate), 55.8 (C-34), 55.8 (CH2, cyclen), 55.4 (C-5), 52.3 (C-18), 47.7 (C-9), 47.6 (C-17),
δ = 178.7 (C-28), 172.4 (CO, acetate), 171.7 (C-33),
×
42.2 (C-14), 40.0 (C-32), 39.7 (C-19), 39.7 (C-8), 38.5 (C-20), 38.4 (C-31, C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.4 (C-22), 37.0
(C-10), 32.9 (C-7), 31.2 (C-21), 28.2 (C-23), 28.2 (CH3, tButyl), 28.1 (CH3, tButyl), 28.1 (CH3, tButyl), 27.9
(C-15), 24.4 (C-16), 23.7 (C-2), 23.5 (C-27), 23.4 (C-11), 21.5 (C-30), 21.4 (Ac), 18.4 (C-6), 17.2 (C-29), 17.0

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
16 of 19
(C-26), 16.9 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 1117.7 (100%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd
for C62H106N6O10 (1095.56): C 67.97, H 9.75, N 7.67; found: C 67.68, H 10.02, N 7.41.
Tribenzyl
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (25). Compound 25 was synthesized from
according to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished
2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[2-(3
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]amino-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
7
and 20
◦
compound 25 (75%); m.p. 142–146 C; [
9:1); IR (ATR): = 2945w, 2832w, 1732s, 1663m, 1519w, 1454m, 1370m, 1305m, 1245s, 1194s, 1176s,
1105s, 1007m, 965m, 747m, 697s cm−1; UV-Vis (CHCl3):
(log ) = 241 nm (3.89), 295 nm (3.29),
364 nm (3.08); 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
= 8.20 (t, J = 4.5 Hz, 1H, NH), 7.39–7.27 (m, 15H, CH
(Bn)), 7.01 (t, J = 4.9 Hz, 1H, NH), 5.48 (s, 1H, 12-H), 5.26–5.05 (m, 6H, CH2 (Bn)), 4.47 (dd, J = 10.0,
5.7 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.77–2.07 (m, 28H, 31-Ha, 31-Hb, 32-H, 34-H, 3 CH2 (acetate),8 CH2 (cyclen)),
α]
= +20.5◦ (c 0.390, CHCl3); Rf = 0.36 (CHCl3/MeOH
D
ν
λ
max
ε
δ
×
×
2.41 (d, J = 10.7 Hz, 1H, 18-H), 2.02 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.00–1.64 (m, 6H, 16-Ha, 16-Hb, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 22-Ha,
15-Ha), 1.64–1.19 (m, 12H, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 22-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 7-Ha, 21-Ha, 6-Hb, 19-H, 21-Hb, 7-Hb),
1.17–0.97 (m, 3H, 20-H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb), 1.04 (s, 3H, 27-H), 0.89 (d, J = 6.3 Hz, 6H, 29-H, 30-H), 0.87 (s, 3H,
25-H), 0.83 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.81 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.80–0.76 (m, 1H, 5-H), 0.72 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR
(101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 178.8 (C-28), 173.2 (CO, acetate), 172.0 (C-33), 171.0 (Ac), 139.0 (C-13), 135.4
(Ci, Bn), 135.4 (Ci, Bn), 135.3 (Ci, Bn), 128.8 (CH, Bn), 128.8 (CH, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.6 (CH, Bn),
125.6 (12-H), 81.0 (3-H), 67.3 (CH2, Bn), 67.3 (CH2, Bn), 67.2 (CH2, Bn), 56.8 (CH2, acetate), 55.4 (C-34),
55.3 (C-5), 55.3 (CH2, cyclen), 52.3 (C-18), 47.7 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 42.2 (C-14), 40.1 (C-32), 39.8 (C-19),
39.7 (C-8), 38.5 (C-20), 38.5 (C-31, C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.4 (C-22), 37.0 (C-10), 32.9 (C-7), 31.2 (C-21), 28.2
(C-23), 28.0 (C-15), 24.5 (C-16), 23.7 (C-2), 23.5 (C-27), 23.4 (C-11), 21.4 (Ac), 21.4 (C-30), 18.4 (C-6), 17.2
(C-29), 17.1 (C-26), 16.8 (C-24), 15.6 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 1219.8 (100%, [M + Na]+);
analysis calcd for C71H100N6O10 (1197.61): C 71.21, H 8.42, N 7.02; found: 70.93, H 8.56, N 6.82.
Tri-tert-butyl 2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[2-[2-(3
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (26). Compound 26 was synthesized from
to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished compound 26
(74%); m.p. 263–266 ◦C (decomp.); [ ]D = +21.9◦ (c 0.315, CHCl3); Rf = 0.38 (CHCl3/MeOH 9:1); IR
(ATR): = 2972m, 2930m, 1726s, 1166m, 1523w, 1453m, 1368s, 1307m, 1228s, 1160s, 1106s, 1026m, 1006m,
975m, 755m cm−1; H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
1H, NH), 5.33 (t, J = 3.7 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 4.47 (dd, J = 10.2, 5.9 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.56–3.30 (m, 9H, 32-H,
31-Ha, 33-H, 36-H, 34-H), 3.28–3.16 (m, 1H, 31-Hb), 3.15–2.05 (m, 22H, 3 CH2 (acetate), 8 CH2
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethoxy]ethyl]amino-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
6
and 21 according
α
ν
1
δ
= 7.82 (t, J = 5.6 Hz, 1H, NH), 6.46 (t, J = 5.1 Hz,
×
×
(cyclen)), 2.02 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.02–1.21 (m, 19H, 18-H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 22-Hb, 16-Hb, 15-Ha, 1-Ha,
2-Ha, 2-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 21-Ha, 7-Ha, 22-Hb, 19-H, 6-Hb, 21-Hb, 7-Hb), 1.44 (s, 9H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.43
(s, 18H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.06 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.05–0.94 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.92 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.92
(d, J = 6.2 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.86 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.84 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.83 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.82–0.77
(m, 1H, 5-H), 0.76 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 178.3 (C-28), 173.0 (CO, acetate),
172.5 (CO, acetate), 172.1 (C-35), 171.1 (Ac), 139.3 (C-13), 125.7 (C-12), 82.1 (Cq, tButyl), 82.0 (Cq, tButyl),
81.9 (Cq, tButyl), 81.0 (C-3), 69.5 (C-33), 69.0 (C-32), 56.5 (C-36), 55.9 (CH2, acetate), 55.8 (CH2, acetate),
55.7 (CH2, cyclen), 55.4 (C-5), 53.4 (C-18), 47.8 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 42.4 (C-14), 39.8 (C-19), 39.7 (C-8), 39.2
(C-31), 39.0 (C-34), 39.0 (C-20), 38.4 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.3 (C-22), 37.0 (C-10), 32.9 (C-7), 31.1 (C-21), 28.2
(CH3, tButyl), 28.0 (CH3, tButyl), 28.0 (C-23), 28.0 (C-15), 24.9 (C-16), 23.7 (C-2), 23.5 (C-11), 23.4 (C-27),
21.4 (Ac), 21.4 (C-30), 18.3 (C-6), 17.3 (C-29), 17.0 (C-26), 16.8 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH):
m/z = 1161.7 (100%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for C64H110N6O11 (1139.6): C 67.45, H 9.73, N 7.37;
found: C 67.31, H 9.87, N 7.09.
Tribenzyl 2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[2-[2-(3
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (27). Compound 27 has been synthesized from
according to general procedure D. Column chromatography (SiO2, CHCl3/MeOH 95:5) furnished
compound 27 (62%); m.p. 137–141 ◦C; [ ]D = +15.4◦ (c 0.350, CHCl3); Rf = 0.35 (CHCl3/MeOH 9:1);
IR (ATR): = 2945w, 2830w, 1731s, 1662m, 1523w, 1454m, 1390m, 1370m, 1305m, 1245s, 1193s, 1105s,
β
-acetyloxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethoxy]ethyl]amino-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
7
and 21
α
ν

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
17 of 19
1026m, 1008m, 967m, 747m, 697m cm−1; UV-Vis (CHCl3):
λ
max
(logε
) = 244 nm (3.73), 294 nm (3.36),
363 nm (3.12); 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 8.02 (t, J = 5.4 Hz, 1H, NH), 7.37–7.27 (m, 15H, CH
(Bn)), 6.48 (t, J = 5.1 Hz, 1H, NH), 5.32 (t, J = 3.5 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 5.24–5.14 (m, 4H, CH2 (Bn)), 5.14–5.05
(m, 2H, CH2 (Bn)), 4.46 (dd, J = 10.2, 5.7 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 3.59–3.33 (m, 9H, 32-H, 33-H, 31-Ha, 34-H, 36-H),
3.33–2.01 (m, 23H, 31-Hb, 8
×
CH2 (cyclen), 3
×
CH2 (acetate)), 2.02 (s, 3H, Ac), 2.00–1.17 (m, 19H,
18-H, 16-Ha, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 22-Ha, 16-Hb, 15-Ha, 1-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 9-H, 6-Ha, 22-Hb, 7-Ha, 21-Ha, 19-H,
6-Hb, 7-Hb, 21-Hb), 1.05 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.04 – 0.94 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.90 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.90
(d, J = 5.8 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.85 (d, J = 6.6 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.84 (s, 3H, 23-H), 0.82 (s, 3H, 24-H), 0.81–0.76
(m, 1H, 5-H), 0.75 (s, 3H, 26-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 178.3 (C-28), 173.3 (CO, acetate),
173.1 (CO, acetate), 172.3 (C-35), 171.1 (Ac), 139.3 (C-13), 135.4 (Ci, Bn), 135.3 (Ci, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn),
128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.7 (CH, Bn), 128.6 (CH, Bn), 128.5 (CH, Bn), 125.7 (C-12), 81.0 (C-3), 69.6 (C-33), 68.9
(C-32), 67.2 (CH2, Bn), 67.2 (CH2, Bn), 56.9 (C-36), 55.4 (3
×
CH2, acetate), 55.4 (C-5), 55.3 (8
×
CH2,
cyclen), 53.3 (C-18), 47.8 (C-17), 47.6 (C-9), 42.4 (C-14), 39.8 (C-19), 39.7 (C-8), 39.2 (C-31, C-34), 38.9
(C-20), 38.4 (C-1), 37.8 (C-4), 37.3 (C-22), 36.9 (C-10), 32.9 (C-7), 31.1 (C-21), 28.2 (C-23), 28.0 (C-15),
24.8 (C-16), 23.6 (C-2), 23.5 (C-11), 23.4 (C-27), 21.4 (Ac), 21.4 (C-30), 18.3 (C-6), 17.3 (C-29), 17.1 (C-26),
16.8 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 1263.9 (100%, [M + Na]+); analysis calcd for
C73H104N6O11 (1241.67): C 70.62, H 8.44, N 6.77; found: C 70.41, H 8.69, N 6.41.
(3
according to the procedure given in the Supplementary material in 82%. Method B: Ursolic acid (100 mg,
0.20 mmol), HOBt H2O (37 mg, 0.24 mmol) and EDC HCl (46 mg, 0.24 mmol) were dissolved in dry
DMF (5 mL), and the mixture was stirred for 30 min at 25 ◦C. Ethylene diamine (55
L, 0.82 mmol) was
β) N-(2-Aminoethyl)-3-hydroxy-urs-12-en-28-amide (28). Method A: The synthesis was performed
·
·
µ
added to the mixture, and stirring was continued for 24 h at 25 ◦C. Usual aqueous work-up followed
by column chromatography (silica gel, CHCl3/MeOH/NH4OH 90:10:0.1) gave 28 (46%). Analytical
data of this compound can be found in the supplementary material.
Tri-tert-butyl
tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7-triyl]triacetate (29). Method A: To a solution of DOTA-tris(tert-butyl ester)
(58 mg, 0.10 mmol) in dry DMF (8 mL) were added HOBt H2O (29 mg, 0.19 mmol) and EDC HCl
2,2’,2”-[10-[2-[2-(3β-hydroxy-urs-12-en-28-oylamino)ethyl]amino-2-oxoethyl]-1,4,7,10-
·
·
(29 mg, 0.15 mmol). After stirring for 30 min at 25 ◦C, a solution of 28 (71 mg, 0.14 mmol) in dry DMF
(2 mL) was added and stirring was continued for 5 days. After usual aqueous work-up, the solvent
was removed under reduced pressure and the crude product was subjected to column chromatography
(silica gel, CHCl3/MeOH 9:1) yielding compound 29 as colorless solid. Yield: 49%. Method B:
Compound 24 (50 mg, 0.10 mmol) was dissolved in methanol (7 mL) and a solution of potassium
hydroxide (12 mg, 0.21 mmol) in methanol (1 mL) was added. The mixture was stirred at 25 ◦C for
24 h. After completion of the reaction (as indicated by TLC) and usual work-up, the solvent was
removed under reduced pressure, and the residue was subjected to column chromatography (silica gel,
CHCl3/MeOH 9:1) affording 29 (yield: 86%); m.p. 136–139 ◦C; [
α
]
=
−
44.4◦ (c 0.330, MeOH); Rf = 0.29
D
(CHCl3/MeOH 9:1); IR (KBr): = 3300br w, 2973w, 2928m, 2869w, 1728s, 1668m, 1525m, 1455m, 1425w,
ν
1368s, 1307m, 1227s, 1159s, 1121m, 1106s, 1047w, 1006w cm−1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ = 8.84
(s, 1H, NH), 7.55 (s, 1H, NH), 5.36 (t, J = 3.5 Hz, 1H, 12-H), 3.59–2.05 (m, 28H, 31-H, 32-H, 33-H,
3 × CH2 (acetate), 8 × CH2 (cyclen)), 3.20 (dd, J = 11.1, 4.8 Hz, 1H, 3-H), 2.34 (d, J = 11.0 Hz, 2H, 18-H),
2.03–1.96 (m, 1H, 16-Ha), 1.95–1.83 (m, 3H, 11-Ha, 11-Hb, 16-Hb), 1.83–1.72 (m, 1H, 22-Ha), 1.64–1.21
(m, 13H, 1-Ha, 15-Ha, 2-Ha, 2-Hb, 22-Hb, 6-Ha, 9-H, 7-Ha, 21-Ha, 19-H, 6-Hb, 7-Hb, 21-Hb), 1.45 (s, 9H,
CH3 (tButyl)), 1.43 (s, 18H, CH3 (tButyl)), 1.05 (s, 3H, 27-H), 1.04–0.97 (m, 3H, 1-Hb, 15-Hb, 20-H), 0.97
(s, 3H, 23-H), 0.89 (d, J = 6.3 Hz, 3H, 30-H), 0.89 (s, 3H, 25-H), 0.85 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 3H, 29-H), 0.76 (s, 3H,
24-H), 0.75 (s, 3H, 26-H), 0.72–0.68 (m, 1H, 5-H) ppm; 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3):
δ = 178.4 (C-28),
172.4 (CO, acetate), 171.8 (C-33), 138.9 (C-13), 125.3 (C-12), 82.2 (Cq, tButyl), 82.1 (Cq, tButyl), 82.1 (Cq,
tButyl), 79.2 (C-3), 56.0 (CH2, acetate), 55.9 (C-34), 55.8 (CH2, cyclen), 55.3 (C-5), 52.5 (C-18), 47.8 (C-9),
47.5 (C-17), 42.2 (C-14), 40.0 (C-32), 39.7 (C-8), 39.6 (C-19), 38.9 (C-4), 38.7 (C-20), 38.7 (C-31, C-1), 37.4
(C-22), 37.1 (C-10), 33.2 (C-7), 31.3 (C-21), 28.3 (C-23), 28.2 (CH3, tButyl), 28.2 (CH3, tButyl), 28.1 (CH3,

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
18 of 19
tButyl), 28.0 (C-15), 27.4 (C-2), 24.2 (C-16), 23.6 (C-27), 23.5 (C-11), 21.5 (C-30), 18.6 (C-6), 17.2 (C-29),
17.1 (C-26), 15.8 (C-24), 15.7 (C-25) ppm; MS (ESI, MeOH): m/z = 1075.7 (100%, [M + Na]+); analysis
calcd for C60H104N6O9 (1053.53): C 68.40, H 9.95, N 7.98; found: C 60.09, H 10.11, N 7.83.
Supplementary Materials: Supplementary data related to this article including experimental procedures for
compounds 10, 17, 18, and 28, Figure S1: Extended cytotoxicity investigation after treatment of A375 cells with 22
(3.0 µM) for 24 h, representative NMR spectra and calculation of ADMET parameters for compounds 22 and 24
can be found online.
Author Contributions: M.K.; and R.C. conceived and designed the experiments; M.K. performed the experiments;
S.H. and L.F. performed the biological assays and experiments; M.K.; A.A-H.; and R.C. analyzed the data and
wrote the paper.
Funding: We acknowledge the financial support within the funding program Open Access Publishing by the
German Research Foundation (DFG).
Acknowledgments: We would like to thank R. Kluge for measuring the ESI-MS spectra and D. Ströhl and his
team for the NMR spectra. Thanks are also due to V. Simon for measuring the IR an UV-VIS spectra and optical
rotations. The cell lines were kindly provided by Th. Müller (Dept. of Haematology/Oncology, Martin-Luther
Universität Halle-Wittenberg).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Bray, F.; Ferlay, J.; Soerjomataram, I.; Siegel, R.L.; Torre, L.A.; Jemal, A. Global cancer statistics 2018:
GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. Ca-Cancer J. Clin.
2018, 68, 394–424. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2.
Stasiuk, G.J.; Long, N.J. The ubiquitous DOTA and its derivatives: The impact of 1, 4, 7,
10-tetraazacyclododecane-1, 4, 7, 10-tetraacetic acid on biomedical imaging. Chem. Commun. 2013, 49,
2732–2746. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3.
4.
Chilla, S.N.M.; Henoumont, C.; Elst, L.V.; Muller, R.N.; Laurent, S. Importance of DOTA derivatives in
bimodal imaging. Isr. J. Chem. 2017, 57, 800–808. [CrossRef]
Magerstädt, M.; Gansow, O.A.; Brechbiel, M.W.; Colcher, D.; Baltzer, L.; Knop, R.H.; Girton, M.E.; Naegele, M.
Gd (DOTA): An alternative to Gd (DTPA) as a T1, 2 relaxation agent for NMR imaging or spectroscopy.
Magn. Reson. Med. 1986, 3, 808–812. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5.
6.
Jones-Wilson, T.M.; Deal, K.A.; Anderson, C.J.; McCarthy, D.W.; Kovacs, Z.; Motekaitis, R.J.; Sherry, A.D.;
Martell, A.E.; Welch, M.J. The in vivo behavior of copper-64-labeled azamacrocyclic complexes. Nucl. Med. Biol.
1998, 25, 523–530. [CrossRef]
Wu, A.M.; Yazaki, P.J.; Tsai, S.-w.; Nguyen, K.; Anderson, A.-L.; McCarthy, D.W.; Welch, M.J.; Shively, J.E.;
Williams, L.E.; Raubitschek, A.A. High-resolution microPET imaging of carcinoembryonic antigen-positive
xenografts by using a copper-64-labeled engineered antibody fragment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97,
8495–8500. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7.
8.
9.
Deshpande, S.V.; DeNardo, S.J.; Kukis, D.L.; Moi, M.K.; McCall, M.J.; DeNardo, G.L.; Meares, C.F.
Yttrium-90-labeled monoclonal antibody for therapy: Labeling by a new macrocyclic bifunctional chelating
agent. J. Nucl. Med. 1990, 31, 473–479.
Razboršek, M.I.; Voncˇina, D.B.; Dolecˇek, V.; Voncˇina, E. Determination of Oleanolic, Betulinic and Ursolic
Acid in Lamiaceae and Mass Spectral Fragmentation of Their Trimethylsilylated Derivatives. Chromatographia
2008, 67, 433–440. [CrossRef]
Fu, L.; Zhang, S.; Li, N.; Wang, J.; Zhao, M.; Sakai, J.; Hasegawa, T.; Mitsui, T.; Kataoka, T.; Oka, S.; et al.
Three New Triterpenes from Nerium oleander and Biological Activity of the Isolated Compounds. J. Nat. Prod.
2005, 68, 198–206. [CrossRef]
10. Cargnin, S.T.; Gnoatto, S.B. Ursolic acid from apple pomace and traditional plants: A valuable triterpenoid
with functional properties. Food Chem. 2017, 220, 477–489. [CrossRef]
11. Yamaguchi, H.; Noshita, T.; Kidachi, Y.; Umetsu, H.; Hayashi, M.; Komiyama, K.; Funayama, S.; Ryoyama, K.
Isolation of Ursolic Acid from Apple Peels and Its Specific Efficacy as a Potent Antitumor Agent. J. Health Sci.
2008, 54, 654–660. [CrossRef]

Molecules 2019, 24, 2254
19 of 19
12. Chen, H.; Gao, Y.; Wang, A.; Zhou, X.; Zheng, Y.; Zhou, J. Evolution in medicinal chemistry of ursolic acid
derivatives as anticancer agents. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2015, 92, 648–655. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Hussain, H.; Green, I.R.; Ali, I.; Khan, I.A.; Ali, Z.; Al-Sadi, A.M.; Ahmed, I. Ursolic acid derivatives for
pharmaceutical use: A patent review (2012-2016). Expert Opin. Pat. 2017, 27, 1061–1072. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Seo, D.Y.; Lee, S.R.; Heo, J.-W.; No, M.-H.; Rhee, B.D.; Ko, K.S.; Kwak, H.-B.; Han, J. Ursolic acid in health
and disease. Korean J. Physiol. Pharm. 2018, 22, 235–248. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Zou, J.; Lin, J.; Li, C.; Zhao, R.; Fan, L.; Yu, J.; Shao, J. Ursolic Acid in Cancer Treatment and Metastatic
Chemoprevention: From Synthesized Derivatives to Nanoformulations in Preclinical Studies. Curr. Cancer
Drug Targets 2019, 19, 245–256. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Ma, C.-M.; Cai, S.-Q.; Cui, J.-R.; Wang, R.-Q.; Tu, P.-F.; Hattori, M.; Daneshtalab, M. The cytotoxic activity of
ursolic acid derivatives. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 40, 582–589. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Liu, D.; Meng, Y.-q.; Zhao, J.; Chen, L.-g. Synthesis and Anti-tumor Activity of Novel Amide Derivatives of
Ursolic Acid. Chem. Res. Chin. Univ. 2008, 24, 42–46. [CrossRef]
18. Meng, Y.-Q.; Liu, D.; Cai, L.-L.; Chen, H.; Cao, B.; Wang, Y.-Z. The synthesis of ursolic acid derivatives with
cytotoxic activity and the investigation of their preliminary mechanism of action. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2009
17, 848–854. [CrossRef]
,
19. Liu, M.-C.; Yang, S.-J.; Jin, L.-H.; Hu, D.-Y.; Xue, W.; Song, B.-A.; Yang, S. Synthesis and cytotoxicity of
novel ursolic acid derivatives containing an acyl piperazine moiety. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2012, 58, 128–135.
[CrossRef]
20. Sommerwerk, S.; Heller, L.; Kerzig, C.; Kramell, A.E.; Csuk, R. Rhodamine B conjugates of triterpenoic acids
are cytotoxic mitocans even at nanomolar concentrations. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2017, 127, 1–9. [CrossRef]
21. Kahnt, M.; Fischer, L.; Al-Harrasi, A.; Csuk, R. Ethylenediamine Derived Carboxamides of Betulinic and
Ursolic Acid as Potential Cytotoxic Agents. Molecules 2018, 23, 2558. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Kim, S.-M.; Jeong, I.H.; Yim, M.S.; Chae, M.K.; Kim, H.N.; Kim, D.K.; Kang, C.M.; Choe, Y.S.; Lee, C.; Ryu, E.K.
Characterization of oleanolic acid derivative for colon cancer targeting with positron emission tomography.
J. Drug Target. 2014, 22, 191–199. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Yang, X.; Li, Y.; Jiang, W.; Ou, M.; Chen, Y.; Xu, Y.; Wu, Q.; Zheng, Q.; Wu, F.; Wang, L. Synthesis and
biological evaluation of novel ursolic acid derivatives as potential anticancer prodrugs. Chem. Biol. Drug
Des. 2015, 86, 1397–1404. [CrossRef]
24. Bai, K.-K.; Yu, Z.; Chen, F.-L.; Li, F.; Li, W.-Y.; Guo, Y.-H. Synthesis and evaluation of ursolic acid derivatives
as potent cytotoxic agents. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2012, 22, 2488–2493. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Rami, M.; Cecchi, A.; Montero, J.-L.; Innocenti, A.; Vullo, D.; Scozzafava, A.; Winum, J.-Y.; Supuran, C.T.
Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitors: Design of Membrane-Impermeant Copper(II) Complexes of DTPA-, DOTA-,
and TETA-Tailed Sulfonamides Targeting the Tumor-Associated Transmembrane Isoform IX. ChemMedChem
2008, 3, 1780–1788. [CrossRef]
26. Loesche, A.; Kahnt, M.; Serbian, I.; Brandt, W.; Csuk, R. Triterpene-Based Carboxamides Act as Good
Inhibitors of Butyrylcholinesterase. Molecules 2019, 24, 948. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Deng, S.-L.; Baglin, I.; Nour, M.; Cavé, C. Synthesis of phosphonodipeptide conjugates of ursolic acid and
their homologs. Heteroat. Chem. 2008, 19, 55–65. [CrossRef]
Sample Availability: Samples of all compounds are available from the authors.
©
2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).