Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2008 Aug 7.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Chem Soc. 2006 Nov 1;128(43):14004–14005. doi: 10.1021/ja064522b

Delineation of a Fundamental α-Ketoheterocycle Substituent Effect For Use in the Design of Enzyme Inhibitors

F Anthony Romero 1, Inkyu Hwang 1, Dale L Boger 1,*
PMCID: PMC2501112  NIHMSID: NIHMS59178  PMID: 17061864

Anandamide1 (1a) and oleamide2-4 (1b) have emerged as the prototypical members of a class of endogenous fatty acid amides that serve as chemical messengers (Figure 1). Anandamide binds and activates the central (CB1) and peripheral (CB2) cannabinoid receptors where it has been implicated in the modulation of nociception, feeding and anxiety.5 Oleamide was found to accumulate in the cerebrospinal fluid of animals under conditions of sleep deprivation and induces physiological sleep in a dose dependent manner.3,4 The pharmacological action of both anandamide and oleamide is terminated by the enzyme fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH; Figure 1).6-9 It degrades neuromodulating fatty acid amides at their site of action and is currently the only characterized mammalian enzyme that is in the amidase signature family bearing an unusual catalytic Ser-Ser-Lys triad.6-9 As such, FAAH has emerged as an exciting therapeutic target for a range of clinical disorders.5,10

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Substrates of fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH).

One class of FAAH inhibitors that exhibit potent and selective enzyme inhibition and in vivo efficacy is the α-ketoheterocycles.11-16

Since their introduction by Edwards,17-19 the use of such α-ketoheterocycles has emerged as a powerful design concept for the development of inhibitors of serine and cysteine proteases and hydrolases.20 Possessing electrophilic carbonyls, they reversibly form enzyme-stabilized covalent hemiketals or hemithioketals with the enzyme catalytic nucleophile analogous to more conventional aldehyde,21 trifluoromethyl ketone,22 or α-keto ester23 and amide inhibitors.24 By virtue of the ability of the heterocycle to hydrogen-bond to the adjacent hemiketal of the enzyme adduct17-19 and because of interactions of the heterocycle itself with the enzyme active site independent of its role in activating the carbonyl,13 they offer advantages over the simpler predecessors. Although the potency of such α-ketoheterocycles has been anticipated to be related to the intrinsic electron-withdrawing properties of the heterocycles,17-19 attempts to draw such correlations are weak, accompanied by deviations from expectations, and the more potent heterocycles in a series are empirically derived.25

Herein, we report the synthesis and evaluation of a series of 5-substituted 7-phenyl-1-(oxazol-2-yl)heptan-1-ones that define an alternative and fundamental α-ketoheterocycle substituent effect that led to the discovery of FAAH inhibitors with Ki's as low as 400 pM. Its intrinsic basis, which relates Ki with the Hammett σp constant of the substituent, as well as the magnitude of the effect (ρ = 3.01), and its predictive value (R2 = 0.91) suggest a widespread applicability in studies beyond FAAH inhibition.

Key to the divergent synthesis of the inhibitors was the preparation of intermediate 3 from which all the compounds could be derived (Scheme 1). Intermediate 3 was obtained by Vedejs oxazole metalation,26 condensation with 7-phenylheptanal and TBS protection of the resulting alcohol. Selective C5-lithiation27 of 3 followed by treatment with various electrophiles (CO2(g), CF3CONMe2, CH3CONMe2, DMF, I2, Br2, NCS, N-fluorobenzenesulfonimide, CH3I, (MeS)2) afforded 4b, 4fh, 4j and 4lp, many of which served as precursors to additional candidate inhibitors bearing further modified C5-substituents. Carboxylic acid 5b was directly converted to its corresponding methyl ester 5c by treatment with TMSCHN2. The ester 5c was converted to the carboxamide 5d by treatment with methanolic ammonia, which, in turn, was dehydrated with TFAA and pyridine to provide nitrile 5i. Using a method developed by Chen et al., iodide 4l was transformed to 4k (FSO2CF2CO2CH3, CuI) bearing a C5 trifluoromethyl substituent.28,29 In each case, deprotection of the TBS ether followed by Dess–Martin periodinane oxidation30 of the liberated alcohol yielded the corresponding α-ketoheterocycles.

Scheme 1.

Scheme 1

This series, which constitutes a set of relatively small substituents that can occupy accessible space in the FAAH active site, exhibited FAAH inhibition that tracked with the electron-withdrawing properties of the substituents (Figure 2). A plot of the inhibition (−Log Ki) versus the Hammett σp constant for the substituents (Figure 3) was found to follow a well-defined correlation (ρ = 3.01, R2 = 0.91). In addition, this substituent effect was established to be large (ρ = 3.01) resulting in a 1000-fold increase in Ki per unit change in σp and indicating that the electronic character of the substituent is the dominant factor contributing to the differences in binding affinity. Presumably, this arises from the increased electrophilic character of the C2 carbonyl imparted by the electron-withdrawing C5 substituent that leads to an increased strength of the covalent bond formed with the catalytic Ser241 OH thereby enhancing the stability of the tetrahedral adduct and lowering the Ki value.31 The definition of this fundamental relationship between the Ki and substituent property (σp) permits the prediction of an expected Ki. For example, we can assert that the carboxylic acid 5b binds FAAH as the carboxylate anion (−CO2 vs −CO2H, σp = 0.11 vs 0.44) under the conditions of the assay (from the Ki value, pH 9). Even more interestingly, we are able to establish that both the aldehyde 5g and trifluoromethyl ketone 5h exist in solution as gem diols (at C5, but not C2; 1H and 13C NMR) and inhibit the enzyme with potencies (Ki = 6 and 3.5 nM) at a level more consistent with this C5 substituent gem diol versus carbonyl active site binding and providing the first σp estimates for such substituents (0.26 for CH(OH)2 and 0.33 for C(OH)2CF3).32 That is, the correlation between σp and Ki is sufficiently dependable that deviations from expectations can be utilized to establish features of active site binding that are not a priori known. Similarly, with this correlation in hand, two of the more potent inhibitors in Figure 2 (5f, 5g) were retrospectively prepared and examined based on this relationship. Notably, 5c, 5i, and 5k bearing the strongest electron-withdrawing substituents, display subnanomolar FAAH inhibitory potency. While additional substituent features can and will further modulate the binding affinity of the candidate inhibitors (e.g., H-bonding, hydrophobic or steric interactions),33 the magnitude of the electronic effect of the substituent (ρ = 3.01) on the activity of a conjugated α-ketoheterocycle (Ki) suggest the latter will dominate, especially with small and simple substitutents.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

FAAH inhibition. aMeasurement errors are provided in Supporting Information.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

−Log Ki (μM) versus σp.

The delineation of a fundamental correlation that relates the Hammett σp constant of a substituent with its enzyme inhibition (−Log Ki) and the magnitude of the effect (ρ = 3.01) provides a useful new predictive tool for the rational design of serine and cysteine protease and hydrolase inhibitors.

Supplementary Material

2

graphic file with name nihms-59178-f0005.jpg

The synthesis and examination of a systematic series of 5-substituted 2-keto oxazoles as inhibitors of fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) defined a fundamental substituent effect that led to the discovery of inhibitors with Ki's as low as 400 pM. The intrinsic basis of the relationship (−Log Ki vs σp), which relates Ki with the Hammett σp constant of the substituent, the magnitude of the effect (ρ = 3.01), and its predictive value (R2 = 0.91) suggest a widespread applicability in studies beyond FAAH.

Acknowledgment

We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the National Institutes of Health (DA15648) and the Skaggs Institute for Chemical Biology, and the postdoctoral fellowship support for F.A.R. (American Cancer Society).

Footnotes

Supporting Information Available: Full experimental details and characterization, and FAAH assay measurement errors of the inhibitors disclosed herein. This information is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

References

  • 1.Dervane WA, Hanus L, Breuer A, Pertwee RG, Stevenson LA, Griffin G, Gibson D, Mandelbaum A, Etinger A, Mechoulam R. Science. 1992;258:1946. doi: 10.1126/science.1470919. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Boger DL, Henriksen SJ, Cravatt BF. Curr. Pharm. Des. 1998;4:303. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cravatt BF, Lerner RA, Boger DL. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996;118:580. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Cravatt BF, Prospero-Garcia O, Suizdak G, Gilula NB, Henriksen SJ, Boger DL, Lerner RA. Science. 1995;268:1506. doi: 10.1126/science.7770779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Lambert DM, Fowler CJ. J. Med. Chem. 2005;48:5059. doi: 10.1021/jm058183t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bracey MH, Hanson MA, Masuda KR, Stevens RC, Cravatt BF. Science. 2002;298:1793. doi: 10.1126/science.1076535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Cravatt BF, Giang DK, Mayfield SP, Boger DL, Lerner RA, Gilula NB. Nature. 1996;384:83. doi: 10.1038/384083a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Giang DK, Cravatt BF. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997;94:2238. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.6.2238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Boger DL, Fecik RA, Patterson JE, Miyauchi H, Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2000;10:2613. doi: 10.1016/s0960-894x(00)00528-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Cravatt BF, Lichtman AH. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003;7:469. doi: 10.1016/s1367-5931(03)00079-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Boger DL, Miyauchi H, Du W, Hardouin C, Fecik RA, Cheng H, Hwang I, Hedrick MP, Leung D, Acevedo O, Guimaráes CRW, Jorgensen WL, Cravatt BF. J. Med. Chem. 2005;48:1849. doi: 10.1021/jm049614v. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Boger DL, Miyauchi H, Hedrick MP. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2001;11:1517. doi: 10.1016/s0960-894x(01)00211-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Boger DL, Sato H, Lerner AE, Hedrick MP, Fecik RA, Miyauchi H, Wilkie GD, Austin BJ, Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2000;97:5044. doi: 10.1073/pnas.97.10.5044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Du W, Hardouin C, Cheng H, Hwang I, Boger DL. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2005;15:103. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2004.10.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Leung D, Du W, Hardouin C, Cheng H, Hwang I, Cravatt BF, Boger DL. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2005;15:1423. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2004.12.085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lichtman AH, Leung D, Shelton CC, Saghatelian A, Hardouin C, Boger DL, Cravatt BF. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2004;311:441. doi: 10.1124/jpet.104.069401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Edwards PD, Meyer EF, Vijayalakshmi J, Tuthill PA, Andisik DA, Gomes B, Strimpler A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992;114:1854. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Edwards PD, Zottola MA, Davis M, Williams CM, Tuthill PA. J. Med. Chem. 1995;38:3972. doi: 10.1021/jm00020a011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Edwards PD, Zottola MA, Davis M, Williams J, Tuthill PA. J. Med. Chem. 1995;38:76. doi: 10.1021/jm00020a011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Costanzo MJ, Almond HR, Hecker LR, Schott MR, Yabut SC, Zhang H-C, Andrade-Gordon P, Corcoran TW, Giardino EC, Kauffman JA, Lewis JM, de Garavilla L, Haertlein BJ, Maryanoff BE. J. Med. Chem. 2005;48:1984. doi: 10.1021/jm0303857. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Westerik JO, Wolfenden R. J. Biol. Chem. 1972;247:8195. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Wolfenden R. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 1976;5:271. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bb.05.060176.001415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Angelastro MR, Mehdi S, Burkhart JP, Peet NP, Bey P. J. Med. Chem. 1990;33:11. doi: 10.1021/jm00163a002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ocain TD, Rich DH. J. Med. Chem. 1992;35:451. doi: 10.1021/jm00081a005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ohmoto K, Yamamoto T, Okuma M, Horiuchi T, Imanishi H, Odagaki Y, Kawabata K, Sekioka T, Hirota Y, Matsuoka S, Nakai H, Toda M. J. Med. Chem. 2001;44:1268. doi: 10.1021/jm000410y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Vedejs E, Monahan SD. J. Org. Chem. 1996;61:5192. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Hari Y, Obika S, Sakaki M, Morio K, Yamagata Y, Imanishi T. Tetrahedron. 2002;58:3051. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chen Q-Y, Wu S-W. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1989:705. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Qing F-L, Fan J, Sun H-B, Yue X-J. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1997;1:3053. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Dess DB, Martin JC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991;113:7277. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.A reviewer has suggested that this may also arise from an increased H-bond capability of the oxazole nitrogen known to stabilize such enzyme adducts.
  • 32.An anomalous σp of 0.22 is occasionally reported for −CHO (vs 0.42) that may more accurately reflect the analogous, but unrecognized gem diol.
  • 33.An example is provided in Supporting Information.

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

2

RESOURCES