Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Oct 15.
Published in final edited form as: Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2012 Aug 24;22(20):6481–6485. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2012.08.043

Optimization of an ether series of mGlu5 positive allosteric modulators: Molecular determinants of MPEP-site interaction crossover

Jason T Manka a,b,c, Paige N Vinson a,b, Karen J Gregory a,b,i, Ya Zhou a,b,c, Richard Williams a,b,c, Kiran Gogi a,b, Emily Days a,e, Satya Jadhav a,b, Elizabeth J Herman a,b, Hilde Lavreysen f, Claire Mackie g, José M Bartolomé h, Gregor J Macdonald f, Thomas Steckler f, J Scott Daniels a,b,c, C David Weaver a,e, Colleen M Niswender a,b,c, Carrie K Jones a,b,c,j, P Jeffrey Conn a,b,c, Craig W Lindsley a,b,c,d, Shaun R Stauffer a,b,c,d,*
PMCID: PMC3755010  NIHMSID: NIHMS498112  PMID: 22981332

Abstract

We report the optimization of a series of non-MPEP site metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGlu5) positive allosteric modulators (PAMs) based on a simple acyclic ether series. Modifications led to a gain of MPEP site interaction through incorporation of a chiral amide in conjunction with a nicotinamide core. A highly potent PAM, 8v (VU0404251), was shown to be efficacious in a rodent model of psychosis. These studies suggest that potent PAMs within topologically similar chemotypes can be developed to preferentially interact or not interact with the MPEP allosteric binding site.

Keywords: Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5, mGlu5, Positive allosteric modulator (PAM), Non-MPEP


The development of positive allosteric modulators (PAMs) of mGlu5 14 in an effort to test the NMDA hypofunction5 for schizophrenia has provided robust preclinical validation in multiple psychosis and cognition models.612 Allosteric mechanisms of receptor modulation may provide several advantages over orthosteric-based strategies, including increased receptor subtype selectivity, improved chemical tractability, and reduced receptor sensitization. 1315 Recent studies using the mGlu5 MPEP-site PAM CDPPB (Fig. 1, 1)16 have shown that, upon sub-chronic dosing, tolerance develops in sleep architecture endpoints in rats. In parallel, mGlu5 expression levels are reduced, although modest and transiently as noted upon removal of drug. This observation raises interesting mechanistic questions in regard to sensitization when administering a PAM, including whether or not these effects are metabolite mediated (e.g., ‘molecular switches’),9,1721 receptor residence time dependent, allosteric site dependent, or inherent to a particular scaffold.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Representative MPEP site (14) and non-MPEP site (5 and 6) mGlu5 PAMs.

In an attempt to understand differential binding site-dependent properties of mGlu5 PAMs in mGlu5 signaling, we sought to identify structurally diverse PAMs that had the potential to interact with allosteric sites other than the classical MPEP site (Fig. 1, 1–4).15,814,16 Currently, the in vivo profile of a true non-MPEP site mGlu5 PAM has yet to be identified.

Poor physicochemical properties and a lack of adequate potency against the rat mGlu5 receptor have prevented the non-MPEP PAM CPPHA (5) from being pursued in preclinical animal models.22,23 Fortunately, through an HTS campaign in these labs, a second non-MPEP site PAM, VU0357121 (6),24 was identified as a potential starting point for non-MPEP site PAM optimization; however, VU0357121 (6) itself was found not suitable for further testing in vivo.25 PAM 6 shares the common amide backbone structure found in CPPHA (5). Alternatively, the ether linkage of 6 can be envisioned as an acetylene replacement (Figs. 1 and 2) related to PAMs like 3 (VU0360172).10 Interestingly, despite their structural resemblances and similar functional EC50s in calcium mobilization assays expressing the rat mGlu5 receptor, VU0357121 (6) was not observed to displace the MPEP-site ligand [3H]methoxyPEPy.24 Although discovered and optimized within separate academic and lead optimization campaigns, we were intrigued to understand if through directed SAR we might identify the major molecular determinants responsible for governing MPEP versus non-MPEP allosteric site interactions of these respective mGlu5 PAMs.26,27 Here, we describe the synthesis and SAR of a series of non-MPEP and MPEP site mGlu5 PAMs based on a simple acyclic ether scaffold and propose the major molecular determinants required for MPEP-site interaction by examining hybrid molecules containing variations on the western ether group, core aromatic ring, and amide sub-structure (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

MPEP interacting PAM VU0360172 (3), non-MPEP PAM VU0357121 (6), and proposed hybrid molecules 78.

Ethers 78 were prepared using one of two three step sequences (Scheme 1) starting from either 4-bromo methylbenzoate (phenyl analogs 7) or from methyl 6-chloronicotinate (nicotinamide analogs 8). Saponification of 9, followed by amide coupling to give intermediate 10 and a late stage etherification using either SNAr or Cu-mediated Ullman conditions provided ethers 78. Alternatively, etherification can be committed early in the synthesis to provide intermediate 11, which upon ester hydrolysis and amide coupling allowed for late stage incorporation of diverse amides to furnish final benzamide or nicotinamide ethers 78.

Scheme 1.

Scheme 1

Synthesis of analogs 78. Reagents and conditions: (a) LiOH, MeOH, THF, 95% (b) HNR1R2, HATU, DIPEA, DMF, 60–95% (c) R3OH, NaH, DMF, 30–75% (d) R3OH, CuI, TMP, Cs2CO3, toluene, 20–55%, (d) All compounds were purified by silica-phase automated chromatography or mass-directed prep RP-HPLC where required.

Initial efforts focused on holding the n-butyl ether tail of 6 (VU0357121) constant while changing the core structure as either phenyl or nicotinamide while surveying a number of eastern amides (selected analogs, Table 1). Functional EC50s in calcium mobilization assays using HEK293 cells expressing the rat mGlu5 receptor were employed in addition to single concentration evaluation of [3H]methoxyPEPy binding to evaluate MPEP site interaction.10

Table 1.

Structures and activities of alkyl ethers 7ad and 8ac

graphic file with name nihms498112u2.jpg
Compd X Amide Rat pEC50a (±SD) EC50 (nM) [3H]MeOPEPy %displacementb
7a CH graphic file with name nihms498112t1.jpg 6.22 (±0.16) 607 12
7b CH graphic file with name nihms498112t2.jpg <5.0 >10,000 0
7c CH graphic file with name nihms498112t3.jpg 5.29 (±0.25) 5172 6.5
7d CH graphic file with name nihms498112t4.jpg Inactive Inactive NT
8a N graphic file with name nihms498112t5.jpg 6.14 (±0.19) 725 5
8b N graphic file with name nihms498112t6.jpg 5.60 (±0.19) 2491 27
8c N graphic file with name nihms498112t7.jpg 5.72 (±0.09) 1901 9.5

NT = not tested.

a

pEC50 are the average of three independent determination and represent a coefficient of variation (CV) <0.05.

b

Determined at 10 μM test compound, average of two determinations.

Similar to the non-MPEP site PAM CPPHA (5),23 SAR was extremely flat, with this first generation library (over 48 analogues per scaffold) affording no improvements in PAM activity over 6. Within the phenyl core series, cycloalkyls 7a, 7c resulted in a >15-fold loss in functional activity. Heterocycles, including close structural analogs of 6, such as trisubstituted pyridyl amide 7b, proved to be deleterious for activity. Capping the NH amide of 6 to afford the N-methyl congener 7d also had a negative impact on activity and revealed a strict requirement for the secondary amide. Interestingly, the observed amide SAR contrasts with previous SAR within the phenyl acetylene templates in which both secondary and tertiary amides were equally tolerated.10,20,21,28 The nicotinamide core modification to give 8a resulted in 22-fold loss in activity versus 6; however, the cyclohexyl replacement 8b was comparable in activity to 8a within the context of the nicotinamide core. Overall, amongst the n-butyl ethers examined, little MPEP site interaction was observed; although perhaps a weak trend for interaction with cyclohexyl derivatives 7a and 8b was observed (12–27% displacement).

In parallel, studies were conducted focusing on modification of the western ether tail (Table 2, 8d–k), examining alkyl group tether length, branching, and incorporating western aromatic moieties similar to the pendant aryl groups utilized within the known acetylenic PAM chemotypes.10,20,21,28 In order to mitigate potential plasma esterase activity for secondary anilido amides29,30 such as 6 and 8a, the western ether survey was conducted using a cyclohexyl amide in conjunction with the more polar nicotinamide core heterocycle (Table 2). Among the analogs tested, three showed submicromolar PAM activity, including the homolog pentyl ether 8d which was fivefold more potent versus 8b (EC50 = 449 nM), cyclopentylmethyl ether 8j (EC50 = 446 nM), and the benzyl ether 8k (EC50 = 34 nM). Shortening of the tail to propyl analog 8e resulted in complete loss of potentiation, indicating that pentyl was the optimal chain length for potency. Branching at the alpha carbon was unproductive (8f); however, branching one additional carbon removed at the beta carbon modestly improved potency twofold (racemic 8g, EC50 = 1076 nM). On the basis of this result, ring constraints were incorporated. The cyclopropyl methyl derivative 8i unfortunately proved inactive; however, the cyclopentyl methyl ether 8j maintained good potency (EC50 = 446 nM). A limited binding study was conducted for two of the submicromolar PAMs 8j and 8k. The benzyl derivative 8k with the highest functional activity showed weak MPEP site interaction with 21% displacement at 10 μM, indicative of an estimated >100-fold divergence from its functional activity. Collectively, these data suggest a similar mechanism of receptor activation for 8k and 6, involving an allosteric site of interaction overlapping and/or outside the MPEP site. PAM 8k can be envisioned as a close structural analog of the acetylene based PAM 3 (VU0360172); however, in contrast to 8k, acetylene PAM 3 has a reported Ki of 195 nM. With 8k in hand a subsequent study was conducted to further optimize functional activity. In addition we hoped to address metabolic instability of both the eastern and western lipophilic substructures based upon soft-spot analysis from rat microsomal incubations which indicated extensive oxidative metabolism.

Table 2.

Structures and activities of nicotinamide ethers 8dk

graphic file with name nihms498112u3.jpg
Compd Ether Rat pEC50a (±SD) EC50 (nM) [3H]MeOPEPy%displacementb
8d graphic file with name nihms498112t8.jpg 6.35 (±0.10) 449 NT
8e graphic file with name nihms498112t9.jpg Inactive Inactive NT
8f graphic file with name nihms498112t10.jpg Inactive Inactive NT
8g graphic file with name nihms498112t11.jpg 5.97 (±0.10) 1076 NT
8h graphic file with name nihms498112t12.jpg 5.94 (±0.03) 1139 NT
8i graphic file with name nihms498112t13.jpg Inactive Inactive NT
8j graphic file with name nihms498112t14.jpg 6.35 (±0.19) 446 0
8k graphic file with name nihms498112t15.jpg 7.47 (±0.33) 34 21

NT = not tested.

a

pEC50 are the average of three independent determination and represent a coefficient of variation (CV) <0.05.

b

Determined at 10 μM test compound, average of two determinations.

To this end, we focused on a number of sterically encumbered amide groups in conjunction with simple fluorine substitution of the western phenyl ring in an attempt to improve stability whilst maintaining good PAM potency (Table 3, 8l–v). Relative to 8k fluorine substitution was tolerable at the 3-position (8l, EC50 = 29 nM). In contrast, fluorine substitution at the 4-postion (8m) resulted in a sevenfold loss in activity. Similar western phenyl SAR (H vs 3-fluorine) was also observed within the tetrahydropyranyl and cyclobutanyl amides (8n8q). Although oxidative metabolism in vitro was reduced with the incorporation of either a tetrahydropyran or oxetane ring system (data not shown), these initial eastern heterocycle modifications were not as effective in retaining potentiator activity, as only modest PAM activity was observed (tetrahydropyran 8o, EC50 = 1604 nM). Highly hindered substituents proximal to the amide NH, such as tert-butyl amide 8s or cyclobutyl amide 8q, were far more effective affording PAMs with activity routinely under 500 nM (EC50s 136–300 nM). Identification of enantiospecific switches is a desirable property to have within a lead modulator scaffold, providing enhanced specificity for the target and simultaneously the potential for enhanced mGlu selectivity. Extending a cycloalkyl one carbon from the amide and incorporating a stereogenic center bearing an alpha methyl group led to enantioselective PAM R-8t.27 The chiral trifluorocyclopropyl derivative 8u, a lower MW analog of R-8t, was found to also have an EC50 < 100 nM and was relatively stable metabolically in vitro (data not shown). The chiral (R)-N-(3,3-dimethylbutan-2-yl)nicotinamide 8v furnishes a highly potent PAM with an impressive EC50 of 7.2 nM. PAM 8v represents an twofold increase in activity over cyclohexyl analog R-8t within our high expressing rat receptor HEK cell line, and is one of the most potent mGlu5 PAMs reported to date. Examination of 8v in a lower expressing human mGlu5 receptor cell line31 revealed a ~10-fold rightward shift in potency (70 nM) with no detected agonism activity for compound alone (Fig. 3). With the exquisite activity of 8v (VU0404251), we opted to examine its in vitro and in vivo DMPK profile further (Fig. 3). Interestingly, PAM 8v showed full displacement of the MPEP-site radioligand [3H]-methoxyPEPy with a Ki of 153 ± 23 nM, suggestive of a competitive interaction for the MPEP site. Although limited to single point binding and functional EC50 data, it appears that within the alkyl amide sub-series (7a, 8b, and 8k) that the nicotinamide core modification in conjunction with the optimized chiral eastern amide of 8v are more critical determinants for the MPEP site crossover interaction and not the identity of the western ether tail group. Additional analogs and binding studies within the series are needed to more fully support this hypothesis.32

Table 3.

Structures and activities of nicotinamide benzyl ethers 8kv

graphic file with name nihms498112u4.jpg
Compd X Amide Rat pEC50a (±SD) EC50 (nM)
8k H graphic file with name nihms498112t16.jpg 7.47 (±0.33) 34
8l 3-F 7.54 (±0.26) 29
8m 4-F 6.60 (±0.14) 251
8n H graphic file with name nihms498112t17.jpg 5.42 (±0.36) 3810
8o 3-F 5.79 (±0.38) 1604
8p H graphic file with name nihms498112t18.jpg 6.53 (±0.32) 297
8q 3-F 6.52 (±0.33) 300
8r 3-F graphic file with name nihms498112t19.jpg Inactive Inactive
8s 3-F graphic file with name nihms498112t20.jpg 6.87 (±0.24) 136
S-8t 3-F graphic file with name nihms498112t21.jpg 6.78 (±0.16) 167
R-8t 3-F graphic file with name nihms498112t22.jpg 7.82 (±0.38) 15
8u 3-F graphic file with name nihms498112t23.jpg 7.07 (±0.09) 83
8v (VU0404251) 3-F graphic file with name nihms498112t24.jpg 8.14 (±0.30) 7.2
a

pEC50 are the average of three independent determination and represent a coefficient of variation (CV) <0.10.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

In vitro profile for 8v (VU0404251).

Point mutation studies examining the glutamate concentration– response curve (CRC) fold-shift to further illuminate the putative allosteric binding site and critical residues for modulator binding and cooperativity determinants have proven useful using a number of well established mGlu5 tool compounds.24,33,34 Unfortunately for some chemotypes, including VU0357121 (6),24 conclusions from mutagenesis and binding studies may be ambiguous due to overlapping sites or cooperativity between sites/residues in the presence of novel PAMs. Analysis of MPEP site sensitive mutants (P654F, T780A, A809V Fig. 4) and CPPHA sensitive mutant (F585I Fig. 4) on the fold-shift of the glutamate CRC in the presence of 1 μM of 8v indicate a profile similar to VU0357121 (6). MPEP-site point mutations reduced the ability of 8v to shift the glutamate concentration–response curve (Fig. 4) as compared to the effect at the wild-type rat mGlu5 receptor, where 1 μM of 8v elicits a fivefold shift of the glutamate CRC. Collectively, the binding and point mutation studies outlined here demonstrate a consistent hypothesis involving 8v interacting at the MPEP site.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Fold-shifts studies using 8v (VU0404251).

While 8v lacked optimal solubility (Fassif <20 μg/mL) and free fraction (rat, human plasma protein binding ≥99%), it possessed more than adequate potency and selectivity for potential proof-of-concept studies in vivo for the series. Results from non-crossover in vivo pharmacokinetic (PK) studies in rats (1 mg/kg IV, 10 mg/kg PO 20% β-CD) revealed a CLp of 13.7 mL/min/kg and a terminal half-life (t1/2) of 5 h. Snapshot oral PK drug concentrations in portal vein, plasma, and brain (0.5, 1.0, 3.0, 6.0 h) revealed a moderate first-pass effect (Ehep 0.41) with relatively high volume of distribution (Vss = 2.3 L/kg) and good systemic exposure (plasmaAUC = 23 μM h). Due to high plasma protein binding, the relative CNS penetration of VU0404251 (8v) was low (brainAUC = 1.2 μMh, b/p = 0.05); however, absolute brain levels (Cmax = 435 nM, Tmax = 30 min) were considered sufficient for further evaluation. Encouraged by these results, a high oral dose of VU0404251 (8v) was administered and examined for its effects on the reversal of amphetamine-induced hyperlocomotion in rats (Fig. 5), a model predictive of antipsychotic activity.7,8 PAM VU0404251 (8v) showed robust effects in reversal of hyperlocomotion, achieving an estimated terminal unbound brain concentration of ca. 74 nM, a concentration which is ca ten fold above the rat in vitro EC50 of VU0404251 (8v).35

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Reversal of amphetamine-induced hyperlocomotion with mGlu5 PAM 8v (VU0404251) at a dose of 100 mg/kg p.o. (vehicle 20% β-CD).

In summary, we have explored hybrid PAMs of VU0360172 and VU0357121 focusing on understanding the molecular determinants responsible for MPEP versus non-MPEP allosteric site interactions. Based upon radioligand, functional, and single point mutation studies within this series, we have demonstrated through subtle chemical modification, that potent PAMs within similar chemotypes can be developed to preferentially interact or not interact with the MPEP allosteric binding site.36 From these efforts, a highly potent non-acetylenic PAM VU0404251 (8v) was identified and shown to be efficacious in vivo at a single high dose. Future studies to definitively understand the observed structure-function/affinity relationship and the identification of true non-MPEP modulators of mGlu5 with utility in vivo are in progress. Efforts within this and related series uncovering potentiators of mGlu5 with enhanced solubility and unbound free fraction will be reported in due course.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by grants from the NIH (NS031373-15, MH073676-04) and from an industry sponsored contract from Johnson & Johnson. K.J.G. thanks NARSAD and NHMRC for fellowship support. The authors thank Daryl F. Venable for technical assistance with radioligand binding assays.

References and notes

  • 1.Williams DL, Jr, Lindsley CW. Curr Top Med Chem. 2005;5:825. doi: 10.2174/1568026054750290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lindsley CW, Wolkenberg SE, Shipe WD, Williams DL., Jr Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel. 2005;8:449. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Stauffer SR. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2011;2:450. doi: 10.1021/cn2000519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Cleva RM, Olive MF. Molecules. 2011;16:2097. doi: 10.3390/molecules16032097. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Lindsley CW, Shipe WD, Wolkenberg SE, Theberge CR, Williams DL, Jr, Sur C, Kinney GG. Curr Top Med Chem. 2006;6:771. doi: 10.2174/156802606777057599. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.O’Brien JA, Lemaire W, Chen TB, Chang RS, Jacobson MA, Ha SN, Lindsley CW, Schaffhauser HJ, Sur C, Pettibone DJ, Conn PJ, Williams DL., Jr Mol Pharmacol. 2003;64:731. doi: 10.1124/mol.64.3.731. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lindsley CW, Wisnoski DD, Leister WH, O’Brien JA, Lemaire W, Williams DL, Jr, Burno M, Sur C, Kinney GG, Pettibone DJ, Tiller PR, Smith S, Duggan ME, Hartman GD, Conn PJ, Huff JR. J Med Chem. 2004;47:5825. doi: 10.1021/jm049400d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kinney GG, O’Brien JA, Lemaire W, Burno M, Bickel DJ, Clements MK, Chen TB, Wisnoski DD, Lindsley CW, Tiller PR, Smith S, Jacobson MA, Sur C, Duggan ME, Pettibone DJ, Conn PJ, Williams DL., Jr J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2005;313:199. doi: 10.1124/jpet.104.079244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sharma S, Kedrowski J, Rook JM, Smith RL, Jones CK, Rodriguez AL, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. J Med Chem. 2009;52:4103. doi: 10.1021/jm900654c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Rodriguez AL, Grier MD, Jones CK, Herman EJ, Kane AS, Smith RL, Williams R, Zhou Y, Marlo JE, Days EL, Blatt TN, Jadhav S, Menon UN, Vinson PN, Rook JM, Stauffer SR, Niswender CM, Lindsley CW, Weaver CD, Conn PJ. Mol Pharmacol. 2010;78:1105. doi: 10.1124/mol.110.067207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Zhou Y, Manka JT, Rodriguez AL, Weaver CD, Days EL, Vinson PN, Jadhav S, Hermann EJ, Jones CK, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW, Stauffer SR. ACS Med Chem Lett. 2010;1:433. doi: 10.1021/ml100181a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Spear N, Gadient RA, Wilkins DE, Do M, Smith JS, Zeller KL, Schroeder P, Zhang M, Arora J, Chhajlani V. Eur J Pharmacol. 2011;659:146. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2011.02.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bridges TM, Lindsley CW. ACS Chem Biol. 2008;3:530. doi: 10.1021/cb800116f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Conn PJ, Christopoulos A, Lindsley CW. Nat Rev Drug Disc. 2009;8:41. doi: 10.1038/nrd2760. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Melancon BJ, Hopkins CR, Wood MR, Emmitte KA, Niswender CM, Christopoulos A, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. J Med Chem. 2012 doi: 10.1021/jm201139r. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jm201139r. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 16.Parmentier-Batteur S, Obrien JA, Doran S, Nguyen SJ, Flick RB, Uslaner JM, Chen H, Finger EN, Williams TM, Jacobson MA, Hutson PH. Neuropharmacology. 2012;62:1453. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2010.11.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Zhou Y, Rodriguez AL, Williams R, Weaver CD, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2009;19:6502. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2009.10.059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wood MR, Hopkins CR, Brogan JT, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. Biochemistry. 2011;50:2403. doi: 10.1021/bi200129s. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lamb JP, Engers DW, Niswender CM, Rodriguez AL, Venable DF, Conn JP, Lindsley CW. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011;21:2711. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.11.119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Williams R, Manka JT, Rodriguez AL, Vinson PN, Niswender CM, Weaver CD, Jones CK, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW, Stauffer SR. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011;21:1350. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2011.01.044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sams AG, Mikkelsen GK, Brodbeck RM, Pu X, Ritzen A. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011;21:3407. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2011.03.103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.O’Brien JA, Lemaire W, Wittmann M, Jacobson MA, Ha SN, Wisnoski DD, Lindsley CW, Schaffhauser HJ, Rowe B, Sur C, Duggan ME, Pettibone DJ, Conn PJ, Williams DL., Jr J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2004;309:568. doi: 10.1124/jpet.103.061747. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Zhao Z, Wisnoski DD, O’Brien JA, Lemaire W, Williams DL, Jr, Jacobson MA, Wittman M, Ha SN, Schaffhauser H, Sur C, Pettibone DJ, Duggan ME, Conn PJ, Hartman GD, Lindsley CW. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2007;17:1386. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2006.11.081. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hammond AS, Rodriguez AL, Townsend SD, Niswender CM, Gregory KJ, Lindsley CW, Conn PJ. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2010;1:702. doi: 10.1021/cn100051m. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Due to poor metabolic stability and solubility/formulation properties, attempts to administer VU0357121 intraperitoneal (IP) or intracerebroventricular (ICV) in rat to achieve adequate CNS exposure for in vivo POC studies have been unsuccessful.
  • 26.During the course of this work we became aware of similar subject matter, see: Varnes JG, Marcus AP, Mauger RC, Throner SR, Hoesch V, King MM, Wang X, Sygowski LA, Spear N, Gadient R, Brown DG, Campbell JB. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011;21:1402. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2011.01.027.
  • 27.Conn JP, Lindsley CW, Weaver CD, Stauffer S, Williams R, Macdonald G, Bartolome-Nebreda JM, Zhou Y. WO2011035324A1. 2011
  • 28.Ritzen A, Sindet R, Hentzer M, Svendsen N, Brodbeck RM, Bundgaard C. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2009;19:3275. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2009.04.095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Satoh T, Hosokawa M. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1998;38:257. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.38.1.257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Liu L, Halladay JS, Shin Y, Wong S, Coraggio M, La H, Baumgardner M, Le H, Gopaul S, Boggs J, Kuebler P, Davis JC, Jr, Liao XC, Lubach JW, Deese A, Sowell CG, Currie KS, Young WB, Khojasteh SC, Hop CECA, Wong H. Drug Metab Dispos. 2011;39:1840. doi: 10.1124/dmd.111.040840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Noetzel MJ, Rook JM, Vinson PN, Cho HP, Days E, Zhou Y, Rodriguez AL, Lavreysen H, Stauffer SR, Niswender CM, Xiang Z, Daniels JS, Jones CK, Lindsley CW, Weaver CD, Conn PJ. Mol Pharmacol. 2012;81:120. doi: 10.1124/mol.111.075184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Benzamide analog 8w was recently synthesized and tested as a direct comparator and found to have an EC50 ~2.5-fold less than 8v. Future studies examining 8w and the related butyl ether 9 to further understand the nature of the putative allosteric binding site(s) is in progress.graphic file with name nihms498112u1.jpg
  • 33.Malherbe P, Kratochwil N, Zenner MT, Piussi J, Diener C, Kratzeisen C, Fischer C, Porter RH. Mol Pharmacol. 2003;64:823. doi: 10.1124/mol.64.4.823. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Chen Y, Goudet C, Pin JP, Conn PJ. Mol Pharmacol. 2008;73:909. doi: 10.1124/mol.107.040097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Based upon rat brain homogenate binding fraction unbound (1%) and total brain levels ([brain]90min = 7.4 ± 2.2 μM).
  • 36.For a recent example of highly variable affinity-potency relationships within the CDPPB series, see: Zou MF, Cao J, Rodriguez AL, Conn PJ, Newman AH. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011;21:2650. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.12.110.

RESOURCES