Abstract
A series of C4 substituted α-ketooxazoles were examined as inhibitors of the serine hydrolase fatty acid amide hydrolase in efforts that further define and generalize a fundamental substituent effect on enzyme inhibitory potency. Thus, a plot of the Hammett σm versus –log Ki provided a linear correlation (R2 = 0.90) with a slope of 3.37 (ρ = 3.37) that is of a magnitude that indicates the electron-withdrawing character of the substituent dominates its effects (a one unit change in σm provides a >1000-fold change in Ki).
Fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH)1,2 is the enzyme that serves to hydrolyze endogenous lipid amides3,4 including anandamide (1a)5 and oleamide (1b),6 Figure 1. Its distribution is consistent with its role in degrading and regulating such signaling fatty acid amides at their sites of action.3 Although it is a member of the amidase signature family of serine hydrolases, for which there a number of prokaryotic enzymes, it is currently the only characterized mammalian enzyme bearing the family’s unusual Ser–Ser–Lys catalytic triad.7,8
Figure 1.

FAAH Substrates.
Due to the therapeutic potential of inhibiting FAAH9 especially for the treatment of pain,10 inflammation,11 or sleep disorders,12 there has been increasing interest in the development of selective and potent inhibitors of the enzyme.9 Early studies shortly following the initial discovery and characterization of FAAH led to the demonstration that the endogenous sleep-inducing molecule 2-octyl α-bromoacetoacetate is an effective FAAH inhibitor,13 the disclosure of a series of nonselective, reversible inhibitors bearing an electrophilic ketone (e.g., trifluoromethyl ketone-based inhibitors),14,15 and the reports of a set of irreversible inhibitors16 (e.g., fluorophosphonates and sulfonyl fluorides). To date, two classes of inhibitors have been disclosed that provide opportunities for the development of inhibitors with therapeutic potential. One class is the reactive aryl carbamates and ureas17–24 that irreversibly acylate a FAAH active site serine.25 A second class is the α-ketoheterocycle-based inhibitors26–29 that bind to FAAH via reversible hemiketal formation with an active site serine. Many of these latter competitive inhibitors are not only potent and extraordinarily selective for FAAH versus other mammalian serine hydrolases, but members of this class have been shown to be efficacious analgesics in vivo.28
In the course of these latter studies, we disclosed a fundamental substituent effect in which a well-defined correlation between the electronic character of a para substituent (Hammett σp) and the inhibitor potency (−log Ki) was observed.27 Thus, the inhibitor potency was found to smoothly increase as the electron-withdrawing character of the substituent increased and the magnitude of the effect was remarkably large (ρ = 2.7–3.0)26,27 indicating that a unit change in σp leads to nearly a 1000-fold increase in Ki. Presumably this reflects the electronic effect of the substituent on activating the electrophilic carbonyl toward nucleophilic attack by the FAAH active site catalytic Ser. Herein, we further generalize this fundamental effect to include meta substituents on the α-ketoheterocycle.
Whereas the former para substituents are directly conjugated with the electrophilic carbonyl, the meta substituents would exert their effects through their inductive electron-withdrawing properties. Moreover and although intuitive expectations might suggest that such a non-conjugated substituent effect might be small, a comparison of Hammett σp and σm constants suggests the magnitude of the effects may be surprisingly similar and, in some instances, even enhanced (e.g., F, Cl, Br, and I).
The candidate inhibitors bearing a varied C4 oxazole substituent were accessed from the readily available 2,26 enlisting its in situ conversion to the isomeric 4-bromooxazole via a halogen dance rearrangement, Scheme 1.30 Thus, C4-lithiation of 2 followed by its in situ rearrangement to the more stable 5-lithio-4-bromooxazole31 and its quench with water provided 3b, the requisite precursor for the series of derivatives to be examined. These were accessed by metallation of 3b with n-BuLi or t-BuLi followed by reaction with appropriate electrophiles (NCS, I2, CH3I, (MeS)2, DMF, CH3CONMe2, CF3CO2Et, NCCO2Me). Similarly, the C4 pyridine (3k, 3l, and 3m) and phenyl (3n) derivatives were prepared from bromide 3b using a Stille coupling reaction with the respective pyridyl or phenyl tributylstannanes. Many of these derivatives served as precursors to additional candidate inhibitors bearing further modified C4 substituents. Methyl ester 4j was directly converted to its corresponding carboxylic acid 4o and carboxamide 4p using LiOH and methanolic ammonia, respectively. Carboxylic acid 4o was also coupled with methylamine and dimethylamine to give the substituted carboxamides 4q and 4r. Carboxamide 4p was dehydrated with TFAA and pyridine to provide nitrile 4s. The trifluoromethyl derivative 3t was prepared from iodide 3d using the method developed by Chen et al32 and iodide 3d also served as the precursor to methyl ether 3u.33 In each case, deprotection of the TBS ether followed by Dess–Martin periodinane oxidation34 of the liberated alcohol yielded the corresponding α-ketooxazole (4b–u).
Scheme 1.

The FAAH inhibition derived from the examination of the series of inhibitors and the correlation derived from a plot of −log Ki versus σm (ρ = 3.37, R2 = 0.90 excluding 4e, 4m, 4p, 4u) is provided in Figure 2. The magnitude of the effect defined by the correlation is large (ρ = 3.37) and satisfyingly comparable to the observed with σp (ρ = 3.0)27 where a unit change in σm leads to an increase in the Ki of more than 1000-fold. As such and although the substituents may engage in additional, more subtle interactions at the enzyme active site, the magnitude of the electronic effect indicates it dominates the behavior of the FAAH inhibitors.
Figure 2.

Rat FAAH inhibition (Ki, nM) and plot of σm versus −log Ki.
Importantly, this allows one to quantitatively predict a Ki from the correlation based on the Hammett substituent constant (σp and σm) or use the measured Ki to draw inferences about active site binding that might not be known a priori. As an example of the latter, we can confidently establish that 4o binds the FAAH active site as its deprotonated carboxylate (σm = 0.02) versus carboxylic acid (σm = 0.35) from the measured Ki and this conclusion is reasonable given the pH of the enzyme assay conditions (pH = 9.0).26 More subtly, we were able to establish that aldehyde 4g (and trifluoromethyl ketone 4i) exist in protic solution as gem diols (at C4, not C2; 1H and 13C NMR, data in Supporting Information) and that they inhibit FAAH with potencies at a level more consistent with this C4 substituent gem diol versus carbonyl active site binding. Although the latter C(OH)2CF3 gem diol most likely suffers significant destabilizing steric interactions at the enzyme active site comparable to that of a t-butyl substituent, the measured Ki of the hydrated aldehyde (CH(OH)2) is of a magnitude that suggests it may provide a good estimate of the σm for this substituent (0.02 for CH(OH)2 vs 0.35 for CHO). That is, the correlation between σm and Ki is sufficiently dependable that deviations from the expectations can be utilized to establish features of active site binding not a priori known.
In this correlation, there are several inhibitors (4m, 4k, 4p, and 4q) that deviate productively from expectations being more potent than predicted. All four could benefit from additional H-bonding at the active site that may increase affinity beyond that expected. Based on their relative Ki’s, the 4-pyridyl derivative 4m and, to a lesser extent, the 2-pyridyl derivative 4k may interact with H-bond donors including the mobile catalytic Lys142 at the FAAH active site26 where such a potential H-bond may be regarded not only as a conventional H-bond stabilizing interaction, but also as a partial protonation of the pyridyl nitrogen enhancing its electron-withdrawing properties. Similarly, the primary carboxamide 4p and, to a lesser extent, the secondary carboxamide 4q productively deviate from correlation expectations, whereas the tertiary carboxamide 4r falls below extrapolated35 expectations. Attractive explanations for this behavior include questions on the accuracy of the carboxamide σm, a productive H-bonding interaction of RCONHR at the FAAH active site for 4p and 4q (but not 4r) that further increase affinity, and/or destabilizing steric interactions that emerge only with the tertiary amide 4r. Two substituents (–Me, –OMe) display substantial nonproductive deviations from the correlation. Although we do not yet have attractive explanations for their behavior, both represent electron-donating and electron-rich substituents whose activity is predicted to be among the poorest. Thus, while additional substituent features can and will modulate the binding affinity of the candidate inhibitors (e.g., H-bonding, hydrophobic or steric interactions), the magnitude of the electronic effect of the substituent (ρ = 3.37) indicates that the latter will typically dominate, especially for small and simple substituents.
Finally, the oxazole substituents in such inhibitors not only influence the FAAH inhibitor potency, but they can have an equally remarkable impact on the FAAH inhibition selectivity.26 Although there are no other characterized mammalian members of the serine hydrolase family that bear the amidase signature sequence and its unusual Ser–Ser–Lys catalytic triad and no resulting close family of enzymes against which to counter screen the candidate inhibitors, a close collaboration with Professor Cravatt led to the implementation of a proteome-wide assay capable of simultaneously interrogating all mammalian serine hydrolases applicable to assessing the selectivity of reversible enzyme inhibitors.35 This assay, which requires no modification of the inhibitor, no purified protein for conventional substrate assay, no knowledge of candidate off-site targets or even the function or substrate of the enzymes, can globally detect, identify, and quantitate all potential competitive enzyme targets in the human proteome for such inhibitors.36 To date, two enzymes have emerged at potential competitive targets for inhibitors in this class: triacylglycerol hydrolase (TGH) and a previously uncharacterized membrane-associated hydrolase that lacked known substrates or function at the time (KIAA1363), but has since been characterized by Cravatt and coworkers.37 Enlisting this proteome selectivity assay, we have been able to simultaneously optimize inhibitors for both FAAH potency and selectivity, identifying key features of candidate inhibitors that can increase binding at the FAAH active site while simultaneously disrupting KIAA1363 and TGH affinity. This multidimensional SAR optimization is highlighted beautifully with the inhibitors 4t, 4s, 4k, 4m and 4o with the results summarized in Figure 3. Like observations made with the 5-substituted oxazoles,26 the addition of a 4-substituent to 4a enhances the FAAH versus KIAA1363 selectivity (>25-fold selective vs 8-fold for 4a), but not always as substantially as the 5-substituted oxazoles (>100-fold) where such inhibitors typically fail to inhibit KIAA1363. Similarly, the addition of a 4-substituent converts the TGH selective inhibitor 4a (>100-fold selective for TGH vs FAAH) into inhibitors that are modestly selective for FAAH (up to 5-fold selective). The exception to this is 4k which like OL-135 (5c) was found to be >300-fold selective for FAAH versus TGH. This enhancement in FAAH selectivity, while remarkable (typically >100-fold, but >40,000 for 4k), is generally not as great as that observed in the 5-substituted oxazole series.
Figure 3.

Selectivity Screening, IC50, μM (selectivity).
One additional feature of this study merits highlighting. In earlier studies,26 we found that either a 4-substituent or 5-substituent on the oxazole can be utilized to enhance FAAH inhibitor potency, but candidate inhibitors bearing both were significantly less active. Although not extensively investigated, analogous observations were made in the course of these studies.38 This suggests that the two classes of oxazole-based inhibitors may bind at the FAAH active site in a manner that places the substituent in a comparable location. This simply requires a flipped orientation of the oxazole at the active site reversing the location of the N and O of the heterocycle (Figure 4). Consistent with this suggestion, related inhibitors26 bearing a C5-substituent have been shown to exhibit a significant sensitivity to steric hindrance surrounding the analogous oxazole C4 center (potency: N > O > CH) indicating that there may be ample room for one, but not two such substituents. Provocatively and while this flipped orientation of the oxazole between the two series has little impact on the FAAH inhibitor potency, it may have a more significant impact on the FAAH selectivity which often, but not always, appears to erode with the 4-substituted series disclosed herein.
Figure 4.

A series of C4 substituted α-ketooxazoles were examined as inhibitors of the serine hydrolase fatty acid amide hydrolase in efforts that further define and generalize a fundamental substituent effect on enzyme inhibitory potency. A plot of the Hammett σm versus −log Ki provided a linear correlation (R2 = 0.90) with a slope of 3.37 (ρ = 3.37) that is of a magnitude that indicates the electron-withdrawing character of the substituent dominates its effects (a one unit change in σm provides a >1000-fold change in Ki). Moreover, this meta substituent effect is comparable, essentially identical, to that we previously defined for para substituents (ρ = 2.7–3.0, R2 = 0.91–0.97)26,29 confirming both its generality and magnitude independent of the site of substitution. Importantly, the correlation provides a useful and predictive design principle for enzyme inhibitors and is of a sufficient accuracy that subtleties of active site binding that are not known a priori may be established from a measured Ki. These observations may prove useful not only to extend to other enzyme classes, but have provided herein an additional and useful class of potent and selective FAAH inhibitors.
Supplementary Material
Supporting Information Available. Full experimental details on the preparation and characterization of the inhibitors, the FAAH inhibition assay, and FAAH assay measurement errors are provided.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the National Institutes of Health (DA15648), and the Skaggs Institute for Chemical Biology. We are especially grateful to Professor B. F. Cravatt for the supply of rat and recombinant human FAAH and for stimulating collaborations.
References and Notes
- 1.Cravatt BF, Giang DK, Mayfield SP, Boger DL, Lerner RA, Gilula NB. Nature. 1996;384:83. doi: 10.1038/384083a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Giang DK, Cravatt BF. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1997;94:2238. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.6.2238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. Vit Hormones. 2001;62:95. doi: 10.1016/s0083-6729(01)62002-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.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]
- 5.Devane WA, Hanus L, Breuer A, Pertwee RG, Stevenson LA, Griffin G, Gibson D, Mandlebaum A, Etinger A, Mechoulam R. Science. 1992;258:1946. doi: 10.1126/science.1470919. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Cravatt BF, Prospero-Garcia O, Suizdak F, Gilula NB, Henriksen SJ, Boger DL, Lerner RA. Science. 1995;268:1506. doi: 10.1126/science.7770779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Cravatt BF, Boger DL, Lerner RA. J Am Chem Soc. 1996;118:580. [Google Scholar]; Boger DL, Henriksen SJ, Cravatt BF. Curr Pharm Des. 1998;4:303. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. J Biol Chem. 2000;275:19177. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M001607200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Bracey MH, Hanson MA, Masuda KR, Stevens RC, Cravatt BF. Science. 2002;298:1793. doi: 10.1126/science.1076535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Cravatt BF, Lichtman AH. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2003;7:469. doi: 10.1016/s1367-5931(03)00079-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Lambert DM, Fowler CJ. J Med Chem. 2005;48:5059. doi: 10.1021/jm058183t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Cravatt BF, Demarest K, Patricelli MP, Bracey MH, Giang DK, Martin BR, Lichtman AH. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:9371. doi: 10.1073/pnas.161191698. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Lichtman AH, Shelton CC, Advani T, Cravatt BF. Pain. 2004;109:319. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2004.01.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Cravatt BF, Saghatelian A, Hawkins EG, Clement AB, Bracey MH, Lichtman AH. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:10821. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0401292101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Karsak M, Gaffal E, Date R, Wang–Eckhardt L, Rehnelt J, Petrosino S, Starowicz K, Steuder R, Schlicker E, Cravatt BF, Mechoulam R, Buettner R, Werner S, Di Marzo V, Tueting T, Zimmer A. Science. 2007;316:1494. doi: 10.1126/science.1142265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Huitrmn–Reséndiz S, Sanchez–Alavez M, Wills DN, Cravatt BF, Henriksen SJ. Sleep. 2004;27:857. doi: 10.1093/sleep/27.5.857. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Patricelli MP, Patterson JP, Boger DL, Cravatt BF. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 1998;8:613. doi: 10.1016/s0960-894x(98)00073-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Koutek B, Prestwich GD, Howlett AC, Chin SA, Salehani D, Akhavan N, Deutsch DG. J Biol Chem. 1994;269:22937. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Patterson JE, Ollmann IR, Cravatt BF, Boger DL, Wong CH, Lerner RA. J Am Chem Soc. 1996;118:5938. [Google Scholar]; Boger DL, Sato H, Lerner AE, Austin BJ, Patterson JE, Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 1999;9:265. doi: 10.1016/s0960-894x(98)00734-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Deutsch DG, Omeir R, Arreaza G, Salehani D, Prestwich GD, Huang Z, Howlett A. Biochem Pharmacol. 1997;53:255. doi: 10.1016/s0006-2952(96)00830-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Deutsch DG, Lin S, Hill WAG, Morse KL, Salehani D, Arreaza G, Omeir RL, Makriyannis A. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1997;231:217. doi: 10.1006/bbrc.1997.6072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Edgemond WS, Greenberg MJ, McGinley PJ, Muthians S, Campbell WB, Hillard CJ. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1998;286:184. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Kathuria S, Gaetani S, Fegley D, Valino F, Duranti A, Tontini A, Mor M, Tarzia G, La Rana G, Calignano A, Giustino A, Tattoli M, Palmery M, Cuomo V, Piomelli D. Nat Med. 2003;9:76. doi: 10.1038/nm803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Jayamanne A, Greenwood R, Mitchell VA, Aslan S, Piomelli D, Vaughan CW. Br J Pharmacol. 2006;147:281. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706510. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Mor M, Rivara S, Lodola A, Plazzi PV, Tarzia G, Duranti A, Tontini A, Piersanti G, Kathuria S, Piomelli D. J Med Chem. 2004;47:4998. doi: 10.1021/jm031140x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Tarzia G, Duranti A, Tontini A, Piersanti G, Mor M, Rivara S, Plazzi PV, Park C, Kathuria S, Piomelli D. J Med Chem. 2003;46:2352. doi: 10.1021/jm021119g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Tarzia G, Duranti A, Gatti G, Piersanti G, Tontini A, Rivara S, Lodola A, Plazzi PV, Mor M, Kathuria S, Piomelli D. ChemMedChem. 2006;1:130. doi: 10.1002/cmdc.200500017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ahn K, Johnson DS, Fitzgerald LR, Liimatta M, Arendse A, Stevenson T, Lund ET, Nugent RA, Normanbhoy T, Alexander JP, Cravatt BF. Biochemistry. 2007;46:13019. doi: 10.1021/bi701378g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Abouab–Dellah, A.; Burnier, P.; Hoornaert, C.; Jeunesse, J.; Puech, F. WO 2004/099176. Abouab–Dellah, A.; Almario, G. A.; Froissant, J.; Hoornaert, C. WO 2005/077898. Abouab–Dellah, A.; Almario, G. A.; Hoornaert, C.; Li, A. T. WO 2005/070910. Abouab–Dellah, A.; Almario, G. A.; Hoornaert, C.; Li, A. T. WO 2007/027141.
- 20.Sit, S.-Y.; Xie, K.; Deng, H. WO2003/06589. Sit, S.-Y.; Xie, K. WO 2002/087569. Sit SY, Conway C, Bertekap R, Xie K, Bourin C, Burris K, Deng H. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2007;17:3287. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2007.04.009.
- 21.Apodaca, R.; Breitenbucher, J. G.; Pattabiraman, K.; Seierstad, M.; Xiao, W. US 2006/0173184. Apodaca, R.; Breitenbucher, J. G.; Pattabiraman, K.; Seierstad, M.; Xiao, W. US 2007/004741.
- 22.Matsumoto, T.; Kori, M.; Miyazaki, J.; Kiyota, Y. WO 2006054652. Matsumoto, T.; Kori, M.; Kouno, M. WO 2007020888.
- 23.Ishii, T.; Sugane, T.; Maeda, J.; Narazaki, F.; Kakefuda, A.; Sato, K.; Takahashi, T.; Kanayama, T.; Saitoh, C.; Suzuki, J.; Kanai, C. WO 2006/088075.
- 24.Moore SA, Nomikos GG, Dickason–Chesterfield AK, Sohober DA, Schaus JM, Ying BP, Xu YC, Phebus L, Simmons RM, Li D, Iyengar S, Felder CC. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:17852. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0507470102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Alexander JP, Cravatt BF. J Am Chem Soc. 2006;128:9699. doi: 10.1021/ja062999h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Alexander JP, Cravatt BF. Chem Biol. 2005;12:1179. doi: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2005.08.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Boger DL, Sato H, Lerner AE, Hedrick MP, Fecik RA, Miyauchi H, Wilkie GD, Austin BJ, Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97:5044. doi: 10.1073/pnas.97.10.5044.Boger DL, Miyauchi H, Hedrick MP. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2001;11:1517. doi: 10.1016/s0960-894x(01)00211-6.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.Guimaráes CRW, Boger DL, Jorgensen WL. J Am Chem Soc. 2005;127:17377. doi: 10.1021/ja055438j.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.Romero FA, Du W, Hwang I, Rayl TJ, Kimball FS, Leung D, Hoover HS, Apodaca RL, Breitenbucher BJ, Cravatt BF, Boger DL. J Med Chem. 2007;50:1058. doi: 10.1021/jm0611509.Hardouin C, Kelso MJ, Romero FA, Rayl TJ, Leung D, Hwang I, Cravatt BF, Boger DL. J Med Chem. 2007;50:3359. doi: 10.1021/jm061414r.Kimball FS, Romero FA, Ezzili C, Garfunkle J, Rayl TJ, Hochstatter DG, Hwang I, Boger DL. J Med Chem. 2008;51:937. doi: 10.1021/jm701210y.Garfunkle J, Ezzili C, Rayl TJ, Hochstatter DG, Hwang I, Boger DL. J Med Chem. 2008;51 doi: 10.1021/jm800136b. in press. For a review of α-ketoheterocycle enzyme inhibitors, see Maryanoff BE, Costanzo MJ. Bioorg Med Chem. 2008;16:1562. doi: 10.1016/j.bmc.2007.11.015.
- 27.Romero FA, Hwang I, Boger DL. J Am Chem Soc. 2006;68:14004. doi: 10.1021/ja064522b. Although we are unaware of reports that enlist Hammett σp or σm values on oxazoles, studies on heterocycles including furan and thiophene exhibit near perfect Hammett σp or σm correlations with those established for phenyl as we have used them, see: Freeman F. J Chem Edu. 1970;47:140.
- 28.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]; Chang L, Luo L, Palmer JA, Sutton S, Wilson SJ, Barbier AJ, Breitenbucher JG, Chaplan SR, Webb M. Br J Pharmacol. 2006;148:102. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706699. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.For additional studies, see: 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.Muccioli GG, Fazio N, Scriba GKE, Poppitz W, Cannata F, Poupaert JH, Wouters J, Lambert DM. J Med Chem. 2006;49:417. doi: 10.1021/jm050977k.Saario SM, Poso A, Juvonen RO, Jarvinen T, Salo–Ahen OMH. J Med Chem. 2006;49:4650. doi: 10.1021/jm060394q.Myllymaki MJ, Saario SM, Kataja AO, Castillo–Melendez JA, Navalainen T, Juvonen RO, Jarvinen T, Koskinen AMP. J Med Chem. 2007;50:4236. doi: 10.1021/jm070501w.
- 30.Stanetty P, Spina M, Mihovilovic MD. Synlett. 2005;9:1433. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Schnürch M, Spina M, Khan AF, Mihovilovic MD, Stanetty P. Chem Soc Rev. 2007;36:1046. doi: 10.1039/b607701n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Chen Q-Y, Wu S-W. J Chem Soc, Chem Commun. 1989:705. [Google Scholar]; Qing FL, Fan J, Sun HB, Yue XJ. J Chem Soc Perkin Trans 1. 1997:3053. [Google Scholar]
- 33.Hui Z, Ma D, Cao W. Synlett. 2007;2:243. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Dess DB, Martin JC. J Am Chem Soc. 1991;113:7277. [Google Scholar]
- 35.We could not locate a σm for –CONMe2, but would expect it to approach that reported for –CONH2 (0.28) or –CONHMe (0.35).
- 36.Leung D, Hardouin C, Boger DL, Cravatt BF. Nature Biotech. 2003;21:687. doi: 10.1038/nbt826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Kidd D, Liu Y, Cravatt BF. Biochemistry. 2001;40:4005. doi: 10.1021/bi002579j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Liu Y, Patricelli MP, Cravatt BF. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96:14694. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.26.14694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Chiang KP, Niessen S, Saghatelian A, Cravatt BF. Chem Biol. 2006;13:1041. doi: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2006.08.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.For example, the 4,5-dibromo derivative, 1-(4,5-dibromooxazol-2-yl)-7-phenylheptan-1-one, exhibited a Ki of 47 nM. This is 16-fold less potent than the 5-bromo derivative (Ki = 3 nM), 16-fold less potent than 4b, and >100-fold less active than estimates based on the combined substituent effects.
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supporting Information Available. Full experimental details on the preparation and characterization of the inhibitors, the FAAH inhibition assay, and FAAH assay measurement errors are provided.
