Journal of the American Chemical Society
Communication
Protecting Groups in Chemistry and Biology: Reaction Mechanisms
and Efficacy. Chem. Rev. 2013, 113, 119−191.
(23) Hansen, M. J.; Velema, W. A.; Lerch, M. M.; Szymanski, W.;
Feringa, B. L. Wavelength-Selective Cleavage of Photoprotecting
Groups: Strategies and Applications in Dynamic Systems. Chem. Soc.
Rev. 2015, 44, 3358−3377.
REFERENCES
■
(1) Stewart, B.; Wild, C. World Cancer Report 2014 http://
(2) Moslehi, J. J. Cardiovascular Toxic Effects of Targeted Cancer
Therapies. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 1457−1467.
(24) Weis, S.; Shafiq, Z.; Gropeanu, R. A.; del Campo, A. Ethyl
Substituted Coumarin-4-Yl Derivatives as Photoremovable Protecting
Groups for Amino Acids with Improved Stability for SPPS. J.
Photochem. Photobiol., A 2012, 241, 52−57.
(3) Bild, A. H.; Yao, G.; Chang, J. T.; Wang, Q.; Potti, A.; Chasse,
D.; Joshi, M.-B.; Harpole, D.; Lancaster, J. M.; Berchuck, A.; Olson, J.
A., Jr; Marks, J. R.; Dressman, H. K.; West, M.; Nevins, J. R.
Oncogenic Pathway Signatures in Human Cancers as a Guide to
Targeted Therapies. Nature 2006, 439, 353−357.
(25) Gandioso, A.; Contreras, S.; Melnyk, I.; Oliva, J.; Nonell, S.;
́
́
Velasco, D.; García-Amoros, J.; Marchan, V. Development of Green/
Red-Absorbing Chromophores Based on a Coumarin Scaffold That
Are Useful as Caging Groups. J. Org. Chem. 2017, 82, 5398−5408.
(26) Shu, L.; Gu, C.; Fishlock, D.; Li, Z. Practical Synthesis of
MDM2 Antagonist RG7388. Part 1: A Cu(II)-Catalyzed Asymmetric
[3 + 2] Cycloaddition. Org. Process Res. Dev. 2016, 20, 2050−2056.
(27) Rimmler, G.; Alker, A.; Bosco, M.; Diodone, R.; Fishlock, D.;
Hildbrand, S.; Kuhn, B.; Moessner, C.; Peters, C.; Rege, P. D.;
Schantz, M. Practical Synthesis of MDM2 Antagonist RG7388. Part 2:
Development of the Cu(I) Catalyzed [3 + 2] Asymmetric
Cycloaddition Process for the Manufacture of Idasanutlin. Org.
Process Res. Dev. 2016, 20, 2057−2066.
(4) van ’t Veer, L. J.; Bernards, R. Enabling Personalized Cancer
Medicine through Analysis of Gene-Expression Patterns. Nature 2008,
452, 564−570.
(5) Vogelstein, B.; Kinzler, K. W. P53 Function and Dysfunction.
Cell 1992, 70, 523−526.
(6) Kastenhuber, E. R.; Lowe, S. W. Putting P53 in Context. Cell
2017, 170, 1062−1078.
(7) Lakoma, A.; Barbieri, E.; Agarwal, S.; Jackson, J.; Chen, Z.; Kim,
Y.; Mcvay, M.; Shohet, J.; Kim, E. The MDM2 Small-Molecule
Inhibitor RG7388 Leads to Potent Tumor Inhibition in P53 Wild-
Type Neuroblastoma. Cell Death Discovery 2015, 1, 15026.
(8) Brown, C. J.; Lain, S.; Verma, C. S.; Fersht, A. R.; Lane, D. P.
Awakening Guardian Angels: Drugging the P53 Pathway. Nat. Rev.
Cancer 2009, 9, 862−873.
(28) Tsakos, M.; Schaffert, E. S.; Clement, L. L.; Villadsen, N. L.;
Poulsen, T. B. Ester Coupling Reactions − an Enduring Challenge in
the Chemical Synthesis of Bioactive Natural Products. Nat. Prod. Rep.
2015, 32, 605−632.
(29) Ding, Q.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, J.-J.; Jiang, N.; Zhang, J.; Ross, T. M.;
Chu, X.-J.; Bartkovitz, D.; Podlaski, F.; Janson, C.; Tovar, C.;
Filipovic, Z. M.; Higgins, B.; Glenn, K.; Packman, K.; Vassilev, L. T.;
Graves, B. Discovery of RG7388, a Potent and Selective P53−MDM2
Inhibitor in Clinical Development. J. Med. Chem. 2013, 56, 5979−
5983.
(30) Buffer contains: TRIS, BIS-TRIS, MES, NaOAc, 25 mM each,
pH = 7.0. PPG-idasanutlin at 20 μM concentration.
(31) This increase is not a result of a stress response potentially
activated by irradiation of the cells with 400 nm light, since DMSO
control treated cells did not show any increase in p53 expression
following irradiation (Figure 3a,b).
(32) PPG (6), the photoproduct after photodeprotection, was also
tested and proved to be biologically inactive (see Figure S15 for
details).
(33) Fluorescence microscopy indicates that cellular uptake of
protected idasanultin (PPG-idasanutlin) is not prevented.
(34) Anti-p53 staining indicates p53 protein expression in the
nucleus. DNA stained by DAPI and actin staining shows the
cytoskeleton of the cell.
(9) Krenning, L.; Feringa, F. M.; Shaltiel, I. A.; Van Den Berg, J.;
Medema, R. H. Transient Activation of P53 in G2 Phase Is Sufficient
to Induce Senescence. Mol. Cell 2014, 55, 59−72.
(10) Burgess, A.; Chia, K. M.; Haupt, S.; Thomas, D.; Haupt, Y.;
Lim, E. Clinical Overview of MDM2/X-Targeted Therapies. Front.
Oncol. 2016, 6, 7.
(11) Haupt, Y.; Maya, R.; Kazaz, A.; Oren, M. Mdm2 Promotes the
Rapid Degradation of P53. Nature 1997, 387, 296−299.
(12) Honda, R.; Tanaka, H.; Yasuda, H. Oncoprotein MDM2 Is a
Ubiquitin Ligase E3 for Tumor Suppressor P53. FEBS Lett. 1997, 420,
25−27.
(13) Kubbutat, M. H. G.; Jones, S. N.; Vousden, K. H. Regulation of
P53 Stability by Mdm2. Nature 1997, 387, 299−303.
(14) Vassilev, L. T.; Vu, B. T.; Graves, B.; Carvajal, D.; Podlaski, F.;
Filipovic, Z.; Kong, N.; Kammlott, U.; Lukacs, C.; Klein, C.; Fotouhi,
N.; Liu, E. A. Vivo Activation of the P53 Pathway by Small-Molecule
Antagonists of MDM2. Science 2004, 303, 844−848.
(15) Harris, S. L.; Levine, A. J. The P53 Pathway: Positive and
Negative Feedback Loops. Oncogene 2005, 24, 2899−2908.
(16) Ray-Coquard, I.; Blay, J.; Italiano, A.; Le Cesne, A.; Penel, N.;
Zhi, J.; Heil, F.; Rueger, R.; Graves, B.; Ding, M.; Geho, D.;
Middleton, S. A.; Vassilev, L. T.; Nichols, G. L.; Bui, B. N. Effect of
the MDM2 Antagonist RG7112 on the P53 Pathway in Patients with
MDM2-Amplified, Well-Differentiated or Dedifferentiated Liposarco-
ma: An Exploratory Proof-of-Mechanism Study. Lancet Oncol. 2012,
13, 1133−1140.
(17) Lerch, M. M.; Hansen, M. J.; van Dam, G. M.; Szymanski, W.;
Feringa, B. L. Emerging Targets in Photopharmacology. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 10978−10999.
(18) Broichhagen, J.; Frank, J. A.; Trauner, D. A Roadmap to
Success in Photopharmacology. Acc. Chem. Res. 2015, 48, 1947−1960.
(19) Velema, W. A.; van der Berg, J. P.; Szymanski, W.; Driessen, A.
J. M.; Feringa, B. L. Orthogonal Control of Antibacterial Activity with
Light. ACS Chem. Biol. 2014, 9, 1969−1974.
(20) Stanton-Humphreys, M. N.; Taylor, R. D. T.; McDougall, C.;
Hart, M. L.; Brown, C. T. a.; Emptage, N. J.; Conway, S. J.
Wavelength-Orthogonal Photolysis of Neurotransmitters in Vitro.
Chem. Commun. 2012, 48, 657−659.
(35) Error bars represent mean + sd. ****p < 0.0001 (unpaired t-
test). Dots represent individual cells, n > 125 cells per condition
combined from 2 independent experiments.
(36) In all the experiments <1% DMSO was used.
(37) For photoactivatable probes for single cell imaging, see: Tran,
M. N.; Rarig, R-A. F.; Chenoweth, D. M. Synthesis and Properties of
Lysosome-specific Photoactivatable Probes for Live-Cell Imaging.
Chem. Sci. 2015, 6, 4508−4512, and references therein. For control
of cellular peptide uptake using an azobenzene switch, see: Prestel, A.;
̈
Moller, H. M. Spatio-temporal Control of Cellular Uptake Achieved
by Photoswitchable Cell-Penetrating Peptides. Chem. Commun. 2016,
52, 701−704.
(38) Bar graph shows mean + sem of three independent
experiments. Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
(39) Line-graphs represent mean of individual cells. n > 42 cells per
condition pooled from three independent experiments. ***p < 0,005,
****p < 0,0001 significance in 2-way ANOVA interaction score.
(21) Gandioso, A.; Cano, M.; Massaguer, A.; Marchan, V. A Green
Light-Triggerable RGD Peptide for Photocontrolled Targeted Drug
Delivery: Synthesis and Photolysis Studies. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81,
11556−11564.
̌
́
(22) Klan, P.; Solomek, T.; Bochet, C. G.; Blanc, A.; Givens, R.;
Rubina, M.; Popik, V.; Kostikov, A.; Wirz, J. Photoremovable
F
J. Am. Chem. Soc. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX