Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2016 Jul 21;26(17):4282–4286. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2016.07.042

Discovery and SAR of a novel series of potent, CNS penetrant M4 PAMs based on a non-enolizable ketone core: Challenges in disposition

Michael R Wood a,c,, Meredith J Noetzel a,b,, James C Tarr a,, Alice L Rodriguez a, Atin Lamsal a, Sichen Chang a, Jarrett J Foster a, Emery Smith d, Peter Chase d, Peter S Hodder e, Darren W Engers a,b, Colleen M Niswender a,b,g, Nicholas J Brandon f, Michael W Wood f, Mark E Duggan f, P Jeffrey Conn a,b,g, Thomas M Bridges a,b,*, Craig W Lindsley a,b,c,*
PMCID: PMC4987221  NIHMSID: NIHMS806907  PMID: 27476142

Abstract

This letter describes the chemical optimization of a novel series of M4 PAMs based on a non-enolizable ketone core, identified from an MLPCN functional high-throughput screen. The HTS hit was potent, selective and CNS penetrant; however, the compound was highly cleared in vitro and in vivo. SAR provided analogs for which M4 PAM potency and CNS exposure were maintained; yet, clearance remained high. Metabolite identification studies demonstrated that this series was subject to rapid, and near quantitative, reductive metabolism to the corresponding secondary alcohol metabolite that was devoid of M4 PAM activity.

Keywords: M4, Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor, Positive allosteric modulator (PAM), Schizophrenia, Structure-Activity Relationship (SAR)

Graphical abstract

graphic file with name nihms806907u1.jpg


Selective activation of the M4 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor has emerged as a very promising, and mechanistically distinct, therapeutic approach for the treatment of numerous neuropsychiatric and rare genetic CNS disorders.1-8 Until recently,9 the M4 PAMs reported to date have been primarily within a single amide-bearing chemotype (Figure 1),10-19 wherein non-obvious, subtle structural modifications engender steep SAR, species differences in PAM potency as well as affinity/cooperativity and subtype selectivity, solubility, and/or P-gp efflux.10-21 As such, all of the known chemotypes of M4 PAMs (1-6) pose one or more major challenges en route to a clinical devleopment candidate. In this Letter, we detail the identification, SAR and DMPK profile of a new, non-enolizable ketone chemotype, related to 1, 2 and 4, identified in a high-throughput screening (HTS) campaign.22

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Structures of reported M4 PAMs 1-6.

Under the auspice of the MLPCN, we performed a functional M4 HTS in 1536-well assay format against the ∼360,000 compound MLSMR collection, and four structurally novel M4 PAMs were identified.22 Of the hits, VU0009153 (7, CID:682264) represented an interesting lead (Figure 2), as it was similarly potent on both human and rat M4 (EC50s of 120 nM (76% ACh Max) and 76 nM (71% ACh Max), respectively (using DMSO stock from the source plates). In addition to no apparent species differences, 7 was was also inactive on both human M1 and M5 (built-in HTS counterscreen). Upon re-synthesis of 7, M4 PAM potency remained intact (hM4 EC50 = 138 nM, pEC50 = 6.86±0.07, ACh Max = 76.8±4.1 and rM4, EC50 = 145 nM, pEC50 = 6.84±0.10, ACh Max = 80.5±6.3). Moreover, it was a des-NH variant of the prototypical M4 PAM chemotypes 1, 2, and 4, replacing the amide linker with a non-enolizable ketone. PAM 7 displayed very high in vitro intrinsic clearance (CLint) in both rat and human hepatic microsomes with predicted hepatic clearance (CLhep) near hepatic blood flow rates (Qhep), but was this due to the trimethyl moiety, or an inherent feature of the ketone-linker? Figure 2 also highlights the three regions of 7 targeted for SAR exploration with focus on alternate aryl/heteroaryl moieties, evaluating our preferred aza systems of 2 and 4, while also exploring ketone bioisosteres.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Structure and key pharmacology and in vitro DMPK data for the M4 PAM HTS hit VU0009153 (7), and three areas to address in the lead optimization campaign. Potency, efficacy, and selectivity was determined via calcium mobilization assays with hM4/Gqi5-CHO or rM4/Gqi5-CHO cells performed in the presence of an EC20 fixed concentration of acetylcholine; values represent means from three (n=3) independent experiments performed in triplicate. Plasma protein binding and hepatic microsomal intrinsic clearance values represent data from a single (n=1) experiment performed in triplicate.

The chemistry to produce analogs of 7 was straightforward (Scheme 1), and employed advanced mercaptonitrile intermediates 8-10 previously described3,15-19 in a one-step protocol. Here, intermediates 8-10 are treated with a diverse array of commercial bromomethylketones 11 under basic conditions to afford, via a one-pot alklyation/cyclization sequence analogs 12-14, respectively in yields ranging from 55-90%.

Scheme 1.

Scheme 1

Reagents and conditions: a) KOH, EtOH, rt, 6 hr, 55-90%.

Table 1 highlights select SAR for the first generation of analogs 12 surveying diverse aryl/heteroaryl moeities. The direct analog of 7, 12a, lost ∼7- to 10-fold potency at both human and rat M4, whereas the direct ketone congener of 2 (12c) was essentially equipotent at both human and rat M4, but with diminished efficacy (∼50% ACh Max). The 2,4-difluorophenyl analog 12e and the 4-pyridyl congener 12f displayed good activity at human M4, but exhibited a significant (4- to 7-fold) rightward shift in potency at rat M4. In general, ketone-linked subseries 12 possessed weaker efficacy than the corresponding amide-linked derivatives. Relative to 7, these findings suggest substitution in the 5-position may be required for M4 PAM potency.

Table 1.

Structures and activities for M4 PAM analogs 12.

graphic file with name nihms806907u2.jpg
Cpd Ar (Het) hM4 EC50 (nM)a [% ACh Max ±SEM] hM4 pEC50 (±SEM) rM4 EC50 (nM)a [% ACh Max ±SEM] rM4 pEC50 (±SEM)
12a Ph 891 [47±6%] 6.05±0.12 1,500 [46±4%] 5.82±0.03
12b 4-OHPh 355 [70±6%] 6.45±0.04 380 [73±4%] 6.42±0.02
12c 4-OMePh 479 [48±6%] 6.32±0.11 490 [54±4%] 6.31±0.05
12d 3-Cl,4-FPh 240 [45±9%] 6.62±0.11 195 [41±2%] 6.71±0.03
12e 2,4-diFPh 562 [39±3%] 6.25±0.28 3,980 [35±7%] 5.40±0.31
12f 4-pyridyl 589 [71±5%] 6.23±0.12 2,239 [64±6%] 5.65±0.22
a

Calcium mobilization assays with hM4/Gqi5-CHO or rM4/Gqi5-CHO cells performed in the presence of an EC20 fixed concentration of acetylcholine; values represent means from three (n=3) independent experiments performed in triplicate.

While in a very limited number of cases (Table 2), substitution at the 5-position with a chlorine atom afforded active M4 PAMs with good efficacy as in 13a-b, solubility with other analogs proved poor (driven by cLogPs >5) and hindered evaluation. Thus, our attention focused on the 5,6-dimethyl pyridazine core of 4 and ketone analogs 14.

Table 2.

Structures and activities for M4 PAM analogs 13.

graphic file with name nihms806907u3.jpg
Cpd Ar (Het) hM4 EC50 (nM)a [% ACh Max ±SEM] hM4 pEC50 (±SEM) rM4 EC50 (nM)a [% ACh Max ±SEM] rM4 pEC50 (±SEM)
13a Ph 372 [45±5%] 6.43±0.13 692 [43±4%] 6.16±0.12
13b 3-pyridyl 105 [74±5%] 6.98±0.16 417 [95±7%] 6.38±0.06
a

Calcium mobilization assays with hM4/Gqi5-CHO or rM4/Gqi5-CHO cells performed in the presence of an EC20 fixed concentration of acetylcholine; values represent means from three (n=3) independent experiments performed in triplicate.

As shown in Table 3, analogs 14 restored M4 PAM potency (hM4, EC50s 102 nM to 891 nM) and efficacy (ACh Max 55-76%), akin to 7; however, unpredictable species differences emerged (cf, 14a versus 14d-e) with a trend towards diminished potency at rat M4. Encouragingly, analogs within these three subseries retained selectivity for M4 versus M1-.3,5 (data not shown).

Table 3.

Structures and activities for M4 PAM analogs 14.

graphic file with name nihms806907u4.jpg
Cpd Ar (Het) hM4 EC50 (nM)a [% ACh Max ±SEM] hM4 pEC50 (±SEM) rM4 EC50 (nM)a [% ACh Max ±SEM] rM4 pEC50 (±SEM)
14a Ph 102 [76±3%] 6.99±0.04 166 [67±8%] 6.78±0.04
14b 4-OMePh 646 [63±6%] 6.19±0.21 1,450 [70±7%] 5.84±0.20
14c 2,4-diFPh 331 [55±5%] 6.48±0.28 380 [66±4%] 6.42±0.05
14d 3-pyridyl 105 [74±5%] 6.98±0.16 417 [95±7%] 6.38±0.06
14e 4-pyridyl 891 [76±4%] 6.05±0.05 3,550 [68±3%] 5.45±0.07
a

Calcium mobilization assays with hM4/Gqi5-CHO or rM4/Gqi5-CHO cells performed in the presence of an EC20 fixed concentration of acetylcholine; values represent means from three (n=3) independent experiments performed in triplicate.

From our ongoing M4 PAM program, we had additional mercaptonitrile intermediates beyond 8-10, so we elected to convert them into ketone analogs 15-16 and assess their profiles (Figure 3). Gratifyingly, significant diversity was tolerated, providing, in the case of 15, our most potent M4 PAM in the ketone-linked series (hM4 EC50 =37 nM, pEC50 = 7.12±0.09, ACh Max = 63.8±5.9 and rM4 EC50 = 182 nM, pEC50 = 6.74±0.05, ACh Max = 52.7±5.4).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

More highly functionalized M4 PAMs 15-17 in the ketone series. Potencies were determined via calcium mobilization assays with hM4/Gqi5-CHO or rM4/Gqi5-CHO cells performed in the presence of an EC20 fixed concentration of acetylcholine; values represent means from three (n=3) independent experiments performed in triplicate.

Initial in vitro and in vivo DMPK evaluation of analogs 12-17 showed a range of low to moderate fraction unbound in rat and human plasma (fus from 0.005 to 0.180) coupled with high CNS distribution (Kps of 0.83 to 6.95 and Kp,uus of 0.48 to 2.12, but low absolute concentrations in plasma and brain).2 In addition, analogs 12-17 showed generally clean CYP450 inhibition profiles with the exception of often potent CYP1A2 inhibition (data not shown). However, 12-17 all shared one common property, predicted in vitro clearance in hepatic microsomes near hepatic blood flow rates (hCLhep ≥ 20 mL/min/kg and rCLhep ≥ 68 mL/min/kg) despite their structural diversity. The only commonality amongst them was the non-enolizable ketone linker. In vitro metabolite identification (Met ID) studies performed with 12f (as a representative of the series) in rat and human cryopreserved hepatocytes demonstrated a rapid, and near quantitative, reductive metabolism route affording the generic secondary alcohol 18 as the single major metabolite (Figure 4). We synthesized these known and putative metabolites by simple reduction of the ketones, and found that unfortunately, analogs 18 were devoid of M4 PAM activity (human and rat EC50s > 10 μM), i.e, a primary pharmacology inactivation metabolism pathway. Subsequent rat IV PK studies using a subset of representative compounds demonstrated that these PAMs were also highly cleared in vivo (CLps >70 mL/min/kg) indicating a good in vitro:in vivo correlation (IVIVC). Interestingly, even the secondary alcohols 18 had high predicted hepatic clearance (CLhep >15 and >55 mL/min/kg for human and rat, respectively).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Metabolite identification studies in rat and human cryopreserved hepatocytes with 12f suggest 12-17 undergo rapid and near quantitative reductive metabolism to the corresponding inactive secondary alcohols, 18. Predicted hepatic clearance values (from microsomal CLint assays) represent data from a single (n=1) experiment performed in triplicate.

Based on these data, we decided to pursue two divergent courses of action: 1) survey enolizable ketone congeners, and 2) survey alternatives for the ketone functional group. Figure 5 highlights two representative examples, 19 and 20, of the first approach employing a phenethyketone derivative. Despite the significant structural change, 19 (hM4 EC50 = 479 nM, pEC50 =6.32±0.12, ACh Max = 59.1±4.8 and rM4 EC50 = 540 nM, pEC50 = 6.27±0.02, ACh Max = 67.9±5.9) and 20 (hM4, EC50 = 380 nM, pEC50 = 6.42±0.11, ACh Max = 69.1±4.3 and rM4 EC50 = 254 nM, pEC50 = 6.60±0.10, ACh Max = 77.2±4.4) were potent M4 PAMs. Once again high brain distribution was observed (Kps ∼11, with very low absolute concentrations)23, but both compounds were highly cleared in vitro (predicted CLhep =18 and 62 mL/min/kg for human and rat, respectively). Thus, this approach was terminated in favor of exploring alternatives for the ketone moiety.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Phenethylketone-based M4 PAMs 19 and 20. Potencies were determined via calcium mobilization assays with hM4/Gqi5-CHO or rM4/Gqi5-CHO cells performed in the presence of an EC20 fixed concentration of acetylcholine; values represent means from three (n=3) independent experiments performed in triplicate.

A number of substitutions for the ketone moiety were prepared and assessed as M4 PAMs. In short, we synthesized and assessed mono-fluoro, gem-difluro, ether and amino (1° and 2°) derivatives; however, all were devoid of M4 PAM activity (EC50s > 10 μM). All attempts to make the 2- and 3-spirooxetane ketone bioisosteres proved unsuccessful, as the 3-amino moiety of the azathiophene bicycle precluded successful chemistry. By this time, it was clear that the ketone series was not tractable for the development of a clinical candidate, despite similar non-enolizable ketone moieties found in commercial drugs wherein ketone reduction is not a major route of metabolism.24,25 In the present system, the presence of the 3-amino moiety, essential for M4 PAM activity, likely serves as internal H-bond donor to activate the carbonyl moiety for metabolic reduction.

In summary, an HTS campaign identified a new M4 PAM chemotype, based on a non-enolizable ketone moiety, as a substitute for the classical amide linker in 1-4. Despite attractive M4 PAM potency and CNS penetration, the compounds uniformly were unstable in hepatic microsomes as well as in vivo, and underwent a rapid and near quantitative reductive metabolism to the corresponding secondary alcohol – an inactive metabolite, confirmed via synthesis and biological evaluation. All attempts to replace the ketone were unsuccessful, rendering this new core not viable to deliver a clinical candidate. Further study and optimization with other HTS series are ongoing, and will be reported in due course.

Acknowledgments

We thank the NIH for funding via the NIH Roadmap Initiative 1X01 MH077607 (C.M.N.), the Molecular Libraries Probe Center Network (U54MH084512 to P.S.H. and U54MH084659 to C.W.L.) We also thank William K. Warren, Jr. and the William K. Warren Foundation who funded the William K. Warren, Jr. Chair in Medicine (to C.W.L.).

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  • 1.Chan WY, McKinize DL, Bose S, Mitchell SN, Witkins JM, Thompson RC, Christopoulos A, Birdsall NJ, Bymaster FP, Felder CC. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:10978–10983. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0800567105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Leach K, Loiancono RE, Felder CC, McKinize DL, Mogg A, Shaw DB, Sexton PM, Christopoulos A. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2010;35:855–869. doi: 10.1038/npp.2009.194. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Brady A, Jones CK, Bridges TM, Kennedy PJ, Thompson AD, Breininger ML, Gentry PR, Yin H, Jadhav SB, Shirey J, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. J Pharm & Exp Ther. 2008;327:941–953. doi: 10.1124/jpet.108.140350. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Byun NE, Grannan M, Bubser M, Barry RL, Thompson A, Rosanelli J, Gowrishnakar R, Kelm ND, Damon S, Bridges TM, Melancon BJ, Tarr JC, Brogan JT, Avison MJ, Deutch AY, Wess J, Wood MR, Lindsley CW, Gore JC, Conn PJ, Jones CK. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2014;39:1578–1593. doi: 10.1038/npp.2014.2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Farrell M, Roth BL. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2010;35:851–852. doi: 10.1038/npp.2009.206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jones CK, Byun N, Bubser M. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012;37:16–42. doi: 10.1038/npp.2011.199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Pancani T, Foster DJ, Bichell T, Bradley E, Bridges TM, Klar R, Daniels JS, Jones CK, Bowman AB, Lindsley CW, Xiang Z, Conn PJ. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:14078–14083. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1512812112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Shen W, Plotkin JL, Francardo V, Ko WKD, Xie Z, Li Q, Fieblinger T, Wess J, Neubig RR, Lindsley CW, Conn PJ, Greengrad P, Bezard E, Cenci MA, Surmeier DJ. Neuron. 2015;88:762–773. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.10.039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Wood MR, Noetzel MJ, Engers JL, Bollinger KA, Melancon BJ, Tarr JC, Han C, West M, Gregro AR, Lamsal A, Chang S, Ajmera S, Smith E, Chase P, Hodder PS, Bubser M, Jones CK, Hopkins CR, Emmitte KA, Niswender CM, Wood MW, Duggan ME, Conn PJ, Bridges TM, Lindsley CW. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2016;26:3029–3033. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2016.05.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Conn PJ, Christopolous A, Lindsley CW. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009;8:41–54. doi: 10.1038/nrd2760. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Melancon BJ, Hopkins CR, Wood MR, Emmitte KA, Niswender CM, Christopoulos A, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. J Med Chem. 2012;55:1445–1464. doi: 10.1021/jm201139r. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Conn PJ, Lindsley CW, Meiler J, Niswender CM. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2014;13:692–708. doi: 10.1038/nrd4308. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Huynh T, Valant C, Crosby IT, Sexton PM, Christopoulos A, Capuano B. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2015;6:838–844. doi: 10.1021/acschemneuro.5b00035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Pacani T, Bolarinwa C, Smith Y, Lindsley CW, Conn PJ, Xiang Z. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2014;5:318–314. doi: 10.1021/cn500003z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Shirey JK, Xiang Z, Orton D, Brady AE, Johnson KA, Williams R, Ayala JE, Rodriguez AL, Wess J, Weaver D, Niswender CM, Conn PJ. Nat Chem Bio. 2008;4:42–50. doi: 10.1038/nchembio.2007.55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Le U, Melancon BJ, Bridges TM, Utley TJ, Lamsal A, Vinson PN, Sheffler DJ, Jones CK, Morrison R, Wood MR, Daniels JS, Conn PJ, Niswender CM, Lindsley CW, Hopkins CR. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2013;23:346–350. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2012.10.073. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Kennedy JP, Bridges TM, Gentry PR, Brogan JT, Brady AE, Shirey JK, Jones CK, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. ChemMedChem. 2009;4:1600–1607. doi: 10.1002/cmdc.200900231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Salovich JM, Sheffler DJ, Vinson PN, Lamsal A, Utley TJ, Blobaum AL, Bridges TM, Le U, Jones CK, Wood MR, Daniels JS, Conn PJ, Niswender CM, Lindsley CW, Hopkins CR. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2012;22:5084–5088. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2012.05.109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bubser M, Bridges TM, Thorbeck DD, Gould RW, Grannan M, Noetzel MJ, Niswender CM, Daniels JS, Melancon BJ, Tarr JC, Wess J, Duggan ME, Brandon NJ, Dunlop J, Wood MW, Wood MR, Lindsley CW, Conn PJ, Jones CK. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2014;5:920–942. doi: 10.1021/cn500128b. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; Wood MR, Hopkins CR, Brogan JT, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW. Biochemistry. 2011;50:2403–2410. doi: 10.1021/bi200129s. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Digby GJ, Utley TJ, Lamsal A, Sevel C, Sheffler DJ, Lebois EP, Bridges TM, Wood MR, Niswender CM, Lindsley CW, Conn PJ. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2012;3:1025–1036. doi: 10.1021/cn300103e. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sheffler DJ, Sevel C, Le U, Lovell KM, Tarr JC, Cho HP, Digby GJ, Niswender CM, Conn PJ, Hopkins CR, Wood MR, Lindsley CW. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2013;23:223–227. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2012.10.132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Smith E, Chase P, Niswender CM, Conn PJ, Lindsley CW, Madoux F, Acosta M, Scampavia L, Spicer T, Hodder P. J Biomol Screening. 2015;20:858–868. doi: 10.1177/1087057115581770. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Total and calculated unbound brain:plasma partition coefficients determined at 0.25 hr post-administration of an IV cassette dose (0.20-0.25 mg/kg) to male, SD rat (n=1); in conjunction with in vitro rat plasma protein and brain homogenate binding assay data.
  • 24.Khan MM. CNS Drugs. 2016;30:589–601. doi: 10.1007/s40263-016-0343-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Malátková P, Wsól V. Drug Metab Rev. 2014;46:96–123. doi: 10.3109/03602532.2013.853078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES