ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
My Activity
CONTENT TYPES

Figure 1Loading Img

Discovery of a High Affinity Adenosine A1/A3 Receptor Antagonist with a Novel 7-Amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine Scaffold

  • Anna Suchankova
    Anna Suchankova
    Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
  • Margarita Stampelou
    Margarita Stampelou
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
  • Klontiana Koutsouki
    Klontiana Koutsouki
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    Department of Nutrition & Dietetics, School of Health Sciences and Education, Harokopio University, 17671 Athens, Greece
  • Athanasios Pousias
    Athanasios Pousias
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
  • Lakshiv Dhingra
    Lakshiv Dhingra
    Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
  • Kerry Barkan
    Kerry Barkan
    Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
    More by Kerry Barkan
  • Nicole Pouli
    Nicole Pouli
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    More by Nicole Pouli
  • Panagiotis Marakos
    Panagiotis Marakos
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
  • Roxane Tenta
    Roxane Tenta
    Department of Nutrition & Dietetics, School of Health Sciences and Education, Harokopio University, 17671 Athens, Greece
    More by Roxane Tenta
  • Antonios Kolocouris*
    Antonios Kolocouris
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    *Email: [email protected]
  • Nikolaos Lougiakis*
    Nikolaos Lougiakis
    Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    *Email: [email protected]
  • , and 
  • Graham Ladds*
    Graham Ladds
    Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
    *Email: [email protected]
    More by Graham Ladds
Cite this: ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 2022, 13, 6, 923–934
Publication Date (Web):May 31, 2022
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.2c00052

Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0.
  • Open Access

Article Views

2122

Altmetric

-

Citations

LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (5 MB)
Supporting Info (1)»

Abstract

Here we describe the design and synthesis of pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines as adenosine receptor (AR) ligands. We demonstrate that the introduction of a 3-phenyl group, together with a 7-benzylamino and 1-methyl group at the pyrazolopyridazine scaffold, generated the antagonist compound 10b, which displayed 21 nM affinity and a residence time of ∼60 min, for the human A1R, 55 nM affinity and a residence time of ∼73 min, for the human A3R and 1.7 μΜ affinity for the human A2BR while not being toxic. Strikingly, the 2-methyl analog of 10b, 15b, had no significant affinity. Docking calculations and molecular dynamics simulations of the ligands inside the orthosteric binding area suggested that the 2-methyl group in 15b hinders the formation of hydrogen bonding interactions with N6.55 which are considered critical for the stabilization inside the orthosteric binding cavity. We, therefore, demonstrate that 10a is a novel scaffold for the development of high affinity AR ligands. From the mutagenesis experiments the biggest effect was observed for the Y2717.46A mutation which caused an ∼10-fold reduction in the binding affinity of 10b.

This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0.
  • cc licence
  • by licence
Adenosine, a naturally occurring purine nucleoside, is the endogenous agonist of adenosine receptors (ARs). (1) ARs are G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) comprising four subtypes; A1, A2A, A2B, and A3. The A2A and A2B subtypes act synergistically with Gαs stimulating adenylyl cyclase and, therefore, increasing 3′,5′-cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels. In contrast, A1 and A3 receptor subtypes inhibit adenylyl cyclase and decrease cAMP levels by coupling to the Gi/o family of G proteins.
In the last two decades numerous heterocyclic compounds have been synthesized as AR ligands including xanthines and bi- or tricyclic fused heterocyclic analogues, e.g., purines, deazapurines, pyrazolopyridines, imidazotriazines, thienopyridazines, naphthyridines, pyridopyrimidines, and pyrazoloquinolines. (2−4)
Different therapeutic applications have been identified in preclinical and clinical studies for A1R antagonists as potassium-sparing diuretic agents with kidney-protecting properties, (2) treatments for chronic lung diseases such as asthma, (5,6) and possible use in Parkinson’s disease. (7)
A3R has been reported to be overexpressed in several types of cancer cells and is, thus, considered as a biological marker for tumors. (8) In a recent study, the potent and selective A3R antagonist LJ-1888 ((2R,3R,4S)-2-[2-chloro-6-(3-iodobenzylamino)-9H-purine-9-yl]tetrahydrothiophene-3,4-diol) blocked the development and attenuated the progression of renal interstitial fibrosis, (9) while A3R antagonists have demonstrated efficacy in eye pathologies by lowering intraocular pressure. (10)
While the binding mode of several agonists and antagonists at A1R has been revealed with X-ray crystallography or cryogenic electron microscopy, (11−13) the experimental structures for A3R and A2BR have, to date, not been resolved, and only homology models can be used for these AR subtypes.
By the repurposing of antiproliferative aromatic condensed nitrogen heterocycles, we previously identified nanomolar affinity pyrazolo[3,4-c]pyridine A1R/A3R antagonists. (14) It has been reported that non-xanthine pyrazolo derivatives that potently bind ARs are pyrazolo[4,3-d]pyrimidines, (3) pyrazolo[1,5-c]quinazolines, (15) pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines, (16,17) pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines, pyrazolo[4,3-e]-1,2,4-triazolo[1,5-c]pyrimidines, pyrazolo[3,4-c]- or -[4,3-c]quinolines, pyrazolo[4,3-d]pyrimidinones, pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidines, and pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyridines. (18) After we previously identified the potent pyrazolo[3,4-c]pyridine A1R/A3R antagonists (14) and observed that certain substituted pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines had antagonistic potency against A3R or A1R, (16,17) we quantified the novel pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine scaffold for activity at ARs. Here, we synthesized a series of new 3-alkyl- or 3-aryl-7-amino-pyrazolo-[3,4-d]pyridazine derivatives and determined their affinities against the different ARs using functional cAMP accumulation assays, fluorescent ligand displacement binding studies, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. (19,20) We identified the 21 nM A1R/55 nM A3R/<2 μΜ A2BR antagonist 1-methyl-3-phenyl-7-benzylaminopyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine (10b) as a lead compound. Strikingly, compound 15b, the 2-methyl congener of 10b, had lower affinity by >100-fold against 3AR subtypes since, we assumed, it cannot form hydrogen bonding interactions with N6.55 which are considered critical for stabilization inside the orthosteric binding cavity. Finally, as these new compounds present structural similarity to antiproliferative purine analogues, (21) we evaluated their cytotoxic potential against the human fibroblasts cell line (WI-38) and prostatic (PC-3) and colonic (HCT116) cancer cell lines.

Similarity Calculations

Searching the CHEMBL (22) database to determine if pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine has been used as a scaffold for ligands binding to ARs, using a TanimotoCombo (Tc) (23) coefficient > 0.85, we did not find any pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine derivatives with potency against ARs, suggesting that it is a novel ring system for the development of AR ligands. When we considered the amide 7-benzylamino-3-phenylpyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine, we found the 4-(2-phenethyl)amino 1-phenylethylpyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridine (Tc = 0.15) had been reported to bind A1R. (16,17) Thus, we proceeded with a structural activity relationship study around 7-benzylamino-3-phenyl pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine and synthesized a series of 7-amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines for biological evaluation against ARs.

Chemistry

The synthesis of the target compounds was accomplished through the previously reported pyrazolecarboxylates 4a,b and 5a,b (Scheme 1). Briefly, commercial isopropylmethylketone (1a) or acetophenone (1b), was first converted to the ethyl 2,4-diketocarboxylates 2a and 2b, respectively, (24,25) which upon reaction with hydrazine monohydrate gave the pyrazolecarboxylates 3a,b. (26) These were methylated using methyl iodide in the presence of sodium hydride and provided the regioisomers 4a,b (27,28) and 5a,b, (28) respectively. Interestingly, when we used tetrahydrofuran as solvent in the place of dimethylformamide (DMF), we exclusively obtained the N1-methyl-5-carboxylate 4a isomer.

Scheme 1

Scheme 1. Synthesis of 4a,b and 5a,ba

aReagents and conditions: (a) diethyl oxalate, NaH 60%, toluene dry, 50°C, 2 h; (b) NH2NH2 80%, EtOH, reflux, 90 min; (c) (i) NaH 60%, DMF dry, 0 °C, 15 min, (ii) CH3I, rt, 1 h.

Each of the isomeric pyrazoles 4a,b or 5a,b was subsequently treated with paraformaldehyde in the presence of a 33% HBr solution in acetic acid and was converted to the bromides 6a,b (Scheme 2) or 11a,b (Scheme 3), respectively. The bromomethyl group was then oxidized using N-methylmorpholine N-oxide to generate the carbaldehydes 7a,b (Scheme 2) and 12a,b (Scheme 3).

Scheme 2

Scheme 2. Synthesis of 10a–ca

aReagents and conditions: (a) paraformaldehyde, 33% HBr in AcOH, 90 °C, 3.5 h; (b) Ν-methylmorpholine-Ν-oxide, MeCN dry, rt, 24 h; (c) NH2NH2 (80%), HCl 36%, EtOH, 90°C, 1 h; (d) POCl3, 110 °C, 2.5–8 h; (e) HNR1R2, EtOH, reflux, 2 h.

Scheme 3

Scheme 3. Synthesis of 15a–ca

aReagents and conditions: (a) paraformaldehyde, 33% HBr in AcOH, 90 °C, 3.5 h; (b) Ν-methylmorpholine-Ν-oxide, MeCN dry, rt, 24 h; (c) NH2NH2 (80%), HCl 36%, EtOH, 90 °C, 1 h; (d) POCl3, 110 °C, 2.5–8 h; (e) HNR1R2, EtOH, reflux, 2 h.

The aldehydes 7a,b and 12a,b were then treated with hydrazine, and upon ring closure the pyrazolopyridazinones 8a,b and 13a,b were obtained. The pyridazinones reacted with phosphorus oxychloride to give the corresponding chloro derivatives 9a,b and 14a,b with suitable purity that they could be introduced to the next reaction. These crude products were then treated with benzylamine or morpholine to result in the target compounds 10ac and 15ac (Figures S1–S3).

Assessing Biological Activity of Pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine Derivatives

cAMP Assays Assessing Activity at Adenosine Receptors

Having synthesized compounds 10ac and 15ac, we next tested their activity, as antagonists, against the different human AR subtypes using a single high concentration of the compound (1 μM) coadministered with NECA (5′-N-ethylcarboxamidoadenosine) in a cAMP accumulation assay (Figure 1A and B). Note that for A1R and A3R 10 μM forskolin was added since these are Gi/o-coupled receptors and reduce cAMP accumulation. (19,29) All compounds lacked efficacy at NECA-stimulated A2AR (even when tested at 10 μM) (Table S1). Compounds 10c, 15b, and 15c also lacked efficacy at the other 3AR subtypes, with 15a displaying weak efficacy only at A3R, while compounds 10a and 10b displayed activity at all 3ARs although this was only detectable for A2BR when a 10 μM concentration of the compound was used (Table S1). Based upon a single concentration of antagonist, we calculated the equilibrium dissociation constant (pKd) of each compound (Table 1). Of the compounds tested, 10b displayed the highest affinity at the different AR subtypes with greater selectivity toward A1R and A3R than A2BR. We next performed a more extensive Schild analysis using multiple doses of the most potent antagonist, 10b, only at A1R and A3R (Figure 1C). In both cases 10b acted as a competitive antagonist, generating a Schild slope that did not significantly differ from unity. Using the Schild plot, we calculated 10b’s affinity (pA2/pKb) to be 21 nM at A1R and 55 nM at A3R while only 1.7 μΜ at A2BR (Table S1).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Characterization of 7-amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines at human A1R and A3R. (A and B) Cells expressing either human A1R (A) or A3R (B) were exposed to 10 μM forskolin and stimulated with increasing concentrations of NECA for 30 min in the presence of a 1 μM concentration of the test compound, and the cAMP accumulation was quantified. (C) cAMP accumulation was measured as detailed in part A using multiple concentrations of 10b. Using pEC50 values, Schild regression analysis was conducted to calculate pA2/pKb values. All values are mean ± SEM expressed as percentage forskolin inhibition, relative to NECA. n ≥ 3 independent experimental repeats were performed in duplicate.

Table 1. Chemical Structures, Antagonistic Potencies (pEC50 in the Presence of NECAa), and Affinities (pKib) of 7-Amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines 10a–c and 15a–c against A1R and A3R
a

Mean ± SEM; functional activities (pEC50 values of NECA in the presence of either 1 μM ligands or vehicle) as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) of at least three independent repeats, conducted in duplicate─values obtained from Figure 1.

b

Mean ± SEM; equilibrium binding affinities of the ligands measured with NanoBRET against Nluc-A3R or Nluc-A1R; NECA was used as positive control. (3)

#

Due to the high affinity of MRS1220, 10 nM was used to enable measurement of the full dose–response curve of NECA to determine pEC50.

Statistical significance compared to NECA was determined, at p < 0.05, through one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-test (*, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001; ****, p < 0.0001).

Quantifying Binding Parameters Using a NanoBRET-Based Saturation Binding Assay

We next sought to independently verify the affinities determined using the Shield analysis by directly quantifying the potential antagonists’ binding to A1R and A3R using a previously described saturation nano-bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (NanoBRET) binding assay. (19) We determined the ability of all the compounds to displace the specific binding of CA200645, (30) a fluorescent antagonist of A3R and A1R, using Nluc-A3R expressing human embryonic kidney 293 (HEK293) and Nluc-A1R HEK293 cells (Figure 2 and Table 1). A2BR was not included in this analysis since the pKd values of 10a and 10b at A2BR were estimated to be below 1 μM (Figure 1 and Table 1). Consistent with the Schild analysis, compound 10b displayed the highest affinity at A1R and A3R (A1R, pKi = 7.95 ± 0.09; A3R, pKi = 7.89 ± 0.11). Of the remaining compounds, 10a displayed weak affinity at A3R (pKi, 6.42 ± 0.28), which agreed with the Schild regression estimate, but failed to fully displace CA200645 at A1R, making an estimate for its affinity unreliable. All the other compounds failed to displace CA200645 at A1R or A3R except for 15a and 15c, which did display some binding at A3R but, like 10a, also failed to fully displace CA200645 at the concentrations tested. Significantly, 15b, which contains an N-methyl substitution to 1-NH and 2-NMe compared to 1-NMe and 2-NH in 10b, failed to bind either AR subtype.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Inhibition of BRET between CA200645 at NLuc-A1R and Nluc-A3R by 10b and 10a. HEK293 cells expressing Nluc-A1R (A) or Nluc-A3R (B) were treated with 5 nM or 20 nM CA200645, respectively, enabling concentration-dependent decreases in the BRET ratio at 10 min to be determined with the response normalized to DMSO. Binding curves were fitted with the Cheng Prusoff equation built into GraphPad Prism 9.3 to enable estimates of the pKi. (19) Comparison of pKi values for A1R (C) and A3R (D) as determined via BRET binding. Each data point represents the mean ± SEM of at least three experiments performed in duplicate. The statistical significance compared to NECA was determined, at p < 0.05, through one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-test (*, p < 0.05; ***, p < 0.001). #Compounds did not fully displace CA200645, so pKi values are estimates preventing statistical analysis.

Determining Kinetic Parameters of 10b Binding at A3R and A1R Using NanoBRET

We next investigated the real-time binding kinetics (19,30) of 10b at A3R and A1R using the NanoBRET binding method. Specifically, we quantified 10b’s ability to inhibit specific binding of CA200645 to Nluc-A3R and Nluc-A1R expressed in HEK293 cells. The kinetic parameters for CA200645 binding at Nluc-A3R were previously determined as Kon = 32.5 ± 0.28 × 105 M–1 min–1 and Koff = 0.025 ± 0.005 min–1 with a pKD of 10.11. Conversely the kinetics of CA200645 binding at Nluc-A1R were determined as Kon = 14.5 ± 0.4 × 105 M–1 min–1, Koff = 0.023 ± 0.001 min–1, and pKD = 7.80 ± 0.2 nM. (14) Applying these parameters into the “kinetics of competitive binding” model built into GraphPad Prism9.0, we were able to provide estimates of the kinetics of binding for 10b against A1R (Kon = 51.4 ± 0.26 × 105 M–1 min–1, Koff = 0.019 ± 0.003 min–1 with a pKD = 7.46 ± 0.1 and RT = 59.8 ± 12.7 min) and against the A3R, (Kon = 25.6 ± 0.1 × 105 M–1min–1, Koff = 0.0014 ± 0.002 min–1 with a pKD = 7.26 ± 0.05 and RT = 72.58 ± 8.8 min). None of the other compounds were analyzed using this method due to their extremely fast Koff rates (>min–1). For compound 10b there was an excellent agreement between pKD (Kon/Koff) of the compounds from the kinetics assays and the Schild analysis (pA2/pKb) and fair agreement (∼3.16-fold) with the saturation binding assays (pKi).

Simulations

Investigation of the Binding of the 7-Amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines to A1R and A3R

Having pharmacologically evaluated the different compounds, we then used molecular docking to provide insights into how they bind to the ARs. We docked 10a10c into the orthosteric binding site of A1R and 10b and 15b into A2BR and A3R (the amino acid sequences of A1R, A3R, and A2BR in the orthosteric binding area are shown in Scheme S1) using ChemScore as the scoring function (31) with the highest score docking pose being inserted into a hydrated phosphatidylethanolamine bilayer. The complexes were subjected to 100 ns MD simulations with amber99sb, (32) and then, the MD simulations’ trajectory was analyzed (Table S2). The MD simulations showed that the 7-benzylamino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine 10b substituted with N1Me and a 3-phenyl group formed a stable complex with all 3ARs with RMSDprotein values <2.1 Å. Starting from the same docking pose of 10b in A1R or A3R (Figure 3), the mean frame from MD simulations was close to the starting docking pose in A1R (RMSDlig = 1.21 Å) while in A3R (Figure S2) the ligand moved considerably into the cleft between the transmembrane (TM)3, TM5, and TM6 helices (RMSDlig = 4.88 Å). Thus, starting from the same binding pose for 10b, the MD simulations produced two different binding orientations at A1R and A3R. This is due to the fact that A1R has a broader binding area, expanded toward TM1 and TM2, compared to the other ARs, according to the X-ray structures of A1R in complex with antagonists. (11,12) A similar AR ligand reported in the literature is 4-(2-phenethyl)amino 1-phenylethyl pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridine (Tc = 0.15), which binds with a similar docking pose to 10b to A1R. (16) We also docked a representative adenine derivative (N9-methyl,N6-benzyl adenine) to A1R and found a similar docking pose (Figure S3).

Figure 3

Figure 3. (A–C) 100 ns MD simulations of 10ac inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R. (D) 100 ns MD simulations of 15b inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R. Starting structures are shown (docking pose), and representative frames from MD simulations, receptor–ligand interaction frequency histograms, and RMSD plots of proteins (RMSDprotein; blue plots) and ligand heavy atoms (RMSDligand; red plots) inside the orthosteric binding area of WT A1R or A3R. Bars are plotted only for residues with interaction frequencies ≥0.2. Color scheme: ligand = brown sticks, receptor = white cartoon and sticks, hydrogen bonding interactions = yellow (dashes or bars), π–π interactions = green (dashes or bars), hydrophobic interactions = gray, water bridges = blue. For the protein models of A1R in complex with 10ac or 15b, the experimental structure of the inactive form of A1R in complex with an antagonist (PDB ID 5UEN (4)) was used.

Inside the A1R orthosteric site, compound 10b formed hydrogen bonds through its pyrazole or pyridazine nitrogen donor groups to the amide side chain of N2546.5 or the imidazole side chain of H2787.43. Furthermore, 10b was stabilized in the orthosteric binding site through π–π interactions between its pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine or phenyl rings with F1715.29, H2516.2, and W2476.48, respectively. The benzylamino group of 10b oriented toward the widened TM2 area in A1R, forming hydrophobic interactions with A662.61 and I692.64. Furthermore, 10b was found to bind deep in the pocket interacting with V873.32 and W2476.48 while 3-phenyl-pyrazole aligned close to the side chains of M1805.38 and L2506.1 (Figure 3A). In A3R, compound 10b was stabilized through formation of hydrogen bonding interactions with N2546.5 and H2787.43 and hydrophobic interactions with L903.32, L913.33, F1685.29, M1775.38, L2466.1, and I2687.39 (Figure S2B). Finally, the MD simulations for 10b (Figure S2A) in complex with A2BR (Figure S2) show weak hydrogen bond interactions with N2546.5.
Pharmacologically, compounds 10b and 15b differed considerably in their affinity to the ARs (Figures 1 and 2 and Table 1). Comparing MD simulations for 15b with 10b in the orthosteric binding area of A1R, A3R (and A2BR) shows that starting from a similar docking pose, the substitution from N1 Me and 2-NH (found in 10b) to N1H and N2 Me (in 15b) results in 15b failing to generate hydrogen bonds with N6.55 because of the steric repulsion between 2-methyl and the amide side chain of N6.55; for this reason also 15a and 15c were inactive (Figure S2). Although many ligands can have similar docking poses, subtle changes in the ligand substitution pattern can result in significant changes in binding, and this can be followed only with MD simulations. Considering the two active compounds, 10b and 10a, replacement of the 3-phenyl group (found in 10b) with a 3-isopropyl group (generating 10a) results in a remarkable reduction of affinity. This is due to 10a losing significant π–π interactions with H2516.2 and hydrophobic interactions with residues deeper in the binding site, e.g., W2476.48, L2506.1, and V873.32 (Figure 3). Finally, substitution of 10b’s 7-benzylamino by the more rigid morpholinyl group (found in 10c) resulted in reduced affinity to the ARs. The more rigid morpholino group in 10c repels F1715.29, so the ligand rotates and moves to the bottom of the binding area, losing hydrogen bonding interactions with N2546.5 and weakening its hydrophobic interaction with critical residues, e.g., F1715.29 and L2506.1 (Figure 3). With an accuracy of ∼±4 kcal mol–1, the MM-GBSA method (33,34) (Supporting Information) only provides an approximation when applied to structure–activity relationships for analogs in the same series. Nevertheless, the MM-GBSA binding free energy calculations for ligands 10ac against A1R (Table S2), using the OPLS2005 force field (35,36) with a hydrophobic slab as an implicit membrane model and including the waters in the orthosteric binding area, predicted fairly well the stability of 10ac in complex with A1R with binding free energy values (after neglecting entropy) ΔGeff = −94.50, −96.42, and −85.35 kcal mol–1.

Mutagenesis Experiments to Study 10b Binding to A1R

We have previously observed that mutation of residues that do not directly interact with the ligands (e.g., V5.30 for A3R, which is more than 4 Å apart from the ligand inside the orthosteric binding area) can, through allosteric interactions due to the plasticity of the binding area, significantly affect ligand affinity. (20,21,37) As such it is not always straightforward to determine the effects of a mutation on affinity properties. Despite this caveat, we next used mutational analysis combined with NanoBRET to determine the important residues required for 10b binding to A1R. The mutation of L2506.1A resulted in only a slight reduction of binding affinity for 10b (Table 2) despite the MD simulations suggesting that the ligand should be close enough to L2506.1 to enable hydrophobic interactions. It is possible that residues H2516.52 and W2476.48 could contribute to the stabilization of 10b with hydrophobic interactions even if L2506.1 is mutated to alanine. It is noteworthy that mutation of E1725.30 (which is also more than 4 Å apart from the ligand inside the orthosteric binding area) to alanine also did not significantly change the binding affinity (Table 2). This contrasts with our studies using 3-phenyl-7-anilinopyrazolo[3,4-c]pyridines which showed a 1.5-fold decrease in affinity due to the E1725.30A mutation. (14)
Table 2. Binding Affinities (pKi) for 10b Measured Using Saturation NanoBRET Binding with CA200645 as the Fluorescent Tracer against WT A1R and Mutant A1Rs
A1RpKiEffect on affinity
WT7.68 ± 0.11baseline
T913.36A7.68 ± 0.07no change
E1725.30 A7.34 ± 0.06no significant change
L2506.51 A7.57 ± 0.04no significant change
H2516.52A7.62 ± 0.06no significant change
S2677.42A7.86 ± 0.03no significant change
Y2717.46A6.99 ± 0.05∼10-fold reduction
In addition, mutation of H2516.2A has been reported to reduce antagonist affinity against A3R (20,21) although here it did not have any effect on 10b affinity at A1R. Other residues of interest to mutate were T913.36A and S2677.42A, which are deep in the orthosteric pocket. Interestingly, we found that mutation to alanine of these residues also did not have a significant effect on the binding affinity of 10b (Table 2). This is in contrast to our results for pyrazolo[3,4-c]pyridines which can interact directly with these residues. (9) The results for 10b suggested that it is positioned above pyrazolo[3,4-c]pyridines, (9) in the A1R pocket, and so unaffected by these mutations.
The biggest effect in this study was observed for the Y2717.46A A1R mutation, which caused a ∼10-fold reduction in the binding affinity of 10b (Table 2). This effect is in contrast to that observed previously for pyrazolo[3,4-c]pyridines (14) for which we showed that the Y2717.46A mutation caused a slight increase in binding affinity. Since the MD simulations showed contacts with H2787.43 and not Y2717.46, the Y2717.46A mutation in A1R might affect the binding of 10b through contact with H2787.43. We performed the MD simulations of 10b in complex with A1R-Y2717.46A and observed that the ligand loses its hydrogen bonding interactions with N2546.5, which might weaken its binding interactions with the orthosteric binding area (Figure S4).

Preliminary Toxicological Analysis of Pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazine Derivatives

Given the high affinity 10b displays for A1R and A3R, and thus the potential for it to be a scaffold for future compound development, we wanted to evaluate its antiproliferative nature as an early indicator of its toxicological profile. We therefore evaluated 10b, alongside the other compounds in this study, for cytotoxic activity against human fibroblasts (WI-38) and two cancer cell lines, namely the prostate cancer (PC-3) and colon cancer (HCT116) cell lines. Importantly, 10b alongside all the compounds proved to be not cytotoxic against the cell lines, with IC50 values >10 μM. The only compound that did display any cytotoxicity was 15b, which displayed moderate cytotoxicity against the PC-3 and HCT116 cell lines, showing IC50 values of 5.3 ± 0.1 μM against PC-3 cells and 4.15 ± 0.05 μM against HCT116 cells. As a result of these data, we are confident that 10b is noncytotoxic and can be progressed for further development as a dual A1R/A3R antagonist.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.2c00052.

  • Scheme S1. Comparison of amino acid residue sequences of the binding area. Table S1. Chemical structures and antagonistic potencies of 7-amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines 10a–c and 15a–c against A2AR and A2BR. Table S2. Mean RMSD values for all compounds against A1R, A2AR, and A2BR and ΔGeff only for 10–10c against A1R. Figure S1. 1H and 13C NMR spectra of the target compounds. Figure S2. Results from the MD simulations of 10b and 15b against A3R and A2BR. Figure S3. Docking poses of 4-(2-phenethyl)amino-1-phenylethyl pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridine and N9-methyl,N6-benzyl adenine to A1R. Figure S4. Representative frames from 100 ns MD simulations of 10b inside the orthosteric binding area of WT A1R and 10b inside mutant Y271A A1R and the receptor–ligand interaction frequency histogram and RMSD graphs of protein Ca and ligand heavy atoms. Information for the methods and synthetic protocols. (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Authors
    • Antonios Kolocouris - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, GreeceOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6110-1903 Email: [email protected]
    • Nikolaos Lougiakis - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece Email: [email protected]
    • Graham Ladds - Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.Orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7320-9612 Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Anna Suchankova - Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
    • Margarita Stampelou - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    • Klontiana Koutsouki - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, GreeceDepartment of Nutrition & Dietetics, School of Health Sciences and Education, Harokopio University, 17671 Athens, GreecePresent Address: Cyprus Pharmaceutical Organization Limited, 11 King Paul A’ Street, 1096 Nicosia, Cyprus
    • Athanasios Pousias - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    • Lakshiv Dhingra - Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
    • Kerry Barkan - Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1PD, U.K.
    • Nicole Pouli - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    • Panagiotis Marakos - Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry, Section of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15771 Athens, Greece
    • Roxane Tenta - Department of Nutrition & Dietetics, School of Health Sciences and Education, Harokopio University, 17671 Athens, Greece
  • Author Contributions

    A.S., M.S., and K.K. contributed equally. A.K., N.L. and G.L. contributed equally. A.K., N.L., G.L., and M.S. conceived and designed the research; K.K. and A.P. synthesized and characterized the compounds in the P.M., N.P., and N.L. lab; A.S. and L.D. performed the mammalian assays in the G.L. lab; M.S. performed the simulations in the A.K. lab; K.K., A.P., M.S., A.S., N.L., P.M., A.K., and G.L. analyzed the data; A.K., P.M., N.P., N.L., and G.L. wrote the manuscript; A.K., G.L., N.L., and M.S. edited the manuscript.

  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This research represents part of the master’s thesis of K.K. and part of the Ph.D. theses of A.S. and M.S. We gratefully acknowledge the support of Chiesi Hellas (A.K.), the Cambridge Trust (A.S.), the Leverhulme Trust (G.L.), and the BBSRC (G.L.). This work was supported by computational time granted from the Greek Research & Technology Network (GRNET) in the National HPC facility - ARIS - under project ID pr001007.

Abbreviations

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

ARs

adenosine receptors

BRET

bioluminescence resonance energy transfer

GPCRs

G protein-coupled receptors

HEK

human embryonic kidney

MD

molecular dynamics

NECA

5′-N-ethylcarboxamidoadenosine

PDB

Protein Data Bank

RMSD

root-mean-square deviation

Tc

TanimotoCombo

tm

mixing time

TM

transmembrane

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 37 other publications.

  1. 1
    Fredholm, B. B.; IJzerman, A. P.; Jacobson, K. A.; Linden, J.; Muller, C. E.; Müller, C. E. International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. LXXXI. Nomenclature and Classification of Adenosine Receptors ─ An Update. Pharmacol. Rev. 2011, 63, 134,  DOI: 10.1124/pr.110.003285
  2. 2
    Schenone, S.; Brullo, C.; Musumeci, F.; Bruno, O.; Botta, M. A1 Receptors Ligands: Past, Present and Future Trends. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2010, 10, 878901,  DOI: 10.2174/156802610791268729
  3. 3
    Squarcialupi, L.; Catarzi, D.; Varano, F.; Betti, M.; Falsini, M.; Vincenzi, F.; Ravani, A.; Ciancetta, A.; Varani, K.; Moro, S.; Colotta, V. Structural Refinement of Pyrazolo[4,3-d]Pyrimidine Derivatives to Obtain Highly Potent and Selective Antagonists for the Human A3 Adenosine Receptor. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2016, 108, 117133,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2015.11.015
  4. 4
    Sun, B.; Bachhawat, P.; Chu, M. L.-H.; Wood, M.; Ceska, T.; Sands, Z. A.; Mercier, J.; Lebon, F.; Kobilka, T. S.; Kobilka, B. K. Crystal Structure of the Adenosine A2A Receptor Bound to an Antagonist Reveals a Potential Allosteric Pocket. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2017, 114, 20662071,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1621423114
  5. 5
    el-Hashim, A.; D’Agostino, B.; Matera, M. G.; Page, C. Characterization of adenosine receptors involved in adenosine-induced bronchoconstriction in allergic rabbits. Br. J. Pharmacol. 1996, 119, 12621268,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1996.tb16031.x
  6. 6
    Brown, R. A.; Spina, D.; Page, C. P. Adenosine receptors and asthma. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2008, 153, S446S456,  DOI: 10.1038/bjp.2008.22
  7. 7
    Johnson, J. A.; Montgomery, A. P.; Starr, E. R.; Ludwig, J.; Trevitt, J. Dose-dependent effects of adenosine antagonists on tacrine-induced tremulous jaw movements. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2018, 833, 364369,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2018.06.004
  8. 8
    Cohen, S.; Fishman, P. Targeting the A3 Adenosine Receptor to Treat Cytokine Release Syndrome in Cancer Immunotherapy. Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 2019, 13, 491497,  DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S195294
  9. 9
    Lee, J.; Hwang, I.; Lee, J. H.; Lee, H. W.; Jeong, L.-S.; Ha, H. The Selective A3AR Antagonist LJ-1888 Ameliorates UUO-Induced Tubulointerstitial Fibrosis. Am. J. Pathol. 2013, 183, 14881497,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2013.07.010
  10. 10
    Wang, Z.; Do, C. W.; Avila, M. Y.; Peterson-Yantorno, K.; Stone, R. A.; Gao, Z.-G.; Joshi, B.; Besada, P.; Jeong, L. S.; Jacobson, K. A.; Civan, M. M. Nucleoside-Derived Antagonists to A3 Adenosine Receptors Lower Mouse Intraocular Pressure and Act across Species. Exp. Eye Res. 2010, 90, 146154,  DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2009.10.001
  11. 11
    Glukhova, A.; Thal, D. M.; Nguyen, A. T.; Vecchio, E. A.; Jörg, M.; Scammells, P. J.; May, L. T.; Sexton, P. M.; Christopoulos, A. Structure of the Adenosine A1 Receptor Reveals the Basis for Subtype Selectivity. Cell 2017, 168, 867877,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.01.042
  12. 12
    Cheng, R. K. Y.; Segala, E.; Robertson, N.; Deflorian, F.; Doré, A. S.; Errey, J. C.; Fiez-Vandal, C.; Marshall, F. H.; Cooke, R. M. Structures of Human A1 and A2A Adenosine Receptors with Xanthines Reveal Determinants of Selectivity. Structure 2017, 25, 12751285,  DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2017.06.012
  13. 13
    Draper-Joyce, C. J.; Khoshouei, M.; Thal, D. M.; Liang, Y.-L.; Nguyen, A. T. N.; Furness, S. G. B.; Venugopal, H.; Baltos, J.-A.; Plitzko, J. M.; Danev, R.; Baumeister, W.; May, L. T.; Wootten, D.; Sexton, P. M.; Glukhova, A.; Christopoulos, A. Structure of the Adenosine-Bound Human Adenosine A1 Receptor-Gi Complex. Nature 2018, 558, 559563,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0236-6
  14. 14
    Stampelou, M.; Suchankova, A.; Tzortzini, E.; Dhingra, L.; Barkan, K.; Lougiakis, N.; Marakos, P.; Pouli, N.; Ladds, G.; Kolocouris, A. Novel Pyrazolo[3,4-c]Pyridine Antagonists with Nanomolar Affinity for A1/A3 Adenosine Receptors: Binding Kinetics and Exploration of Their Binding Profile Using Mutagenesis Experiments, MD Simulations and TI/MD Calculations. ChemRxiv 2021,  DOI: 10.26434/chemrxiv-2021-j18mg-v3 .
  15. 15
    Catarzi, D.; Colotta, V.; Varano, F.; Poli, D.; Squarcialupi, L.; Filacchioni, G.; Varani, K.; Vincenzi, F.; Borea, P. A.; Dal Ben, D.; Lambertucci, C.; Cristalli, G. Pyrazolo[1,5-c]Quinazoline Derivatives and Their Simplified Analogues as Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Synthesis, Structure-Affinity Relationships and Molecular Modeling Studies. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2013, 21, 283294,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bmc.2012.10.031
  16. 16
    Manetti, F.; Schenone, S.; Bondavalli, F.; Brullo, C.; Bruno, O.; Ranise, A.; Mosti, L.; Menozzi, G.; Fossa, P.; Trincavelli, M. L.; Martini, C.; Martinelli, A.; Tintori, C.; Botta, M. Synthesis and 3D QSAR of new pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines: potent and selective inhibitors of A1 adenosine receptors. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 71727185,  DOI: 10.1021/jm050407k
  17. 17
    Tuccinardi, T.; Zizzari, A. T.; Brullo, C.; Daniele, S.; Musumeci, F.; Schenone, S.; Trincavelli, M. L.; Martini, C.; Martinelli, A.; Giorgi, G.; Botta, M. Substituted pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines as human A1 adenosine antagonists: Developments in understanding the receptor stereoselectivity. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2011, 9, 44484455,  DOI: 10.1039/c0ob01064b
  18. 18
    Cheong, S. L.; Venkatesan, G.; Paira, P.; Jothibasu, R.; Mandel, A. L.; Federico, S.; Spalluto, G.; Pastorin, G. Pyrazolo Derivatives as Potent Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: An Overview on the Structure-Activity Relationships. Int. J. Med. Chem. 2011, 480652,  DOI: 10.1155/2011/480652
  19. 19
    Barkan, K.; Lagarias, P.; Stampelou, M.; Stamatis, D.; Hoare, S.; Safitri, D.; Klotz, K.-N.; Vrontaki, E.; Kolocouris, A.; Ladds, G. Pharmacological Characterisation of Novel Adenosine A3 Receptor Antagonists. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 20781,  DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74521-y
  20. 20
    Lagarias, P.; Barkan, K.; Tzortzini, E.; Stampelou, M.; Vrontaki, E.; Ladds, G.; Kolocouris, A. Insights to the Binding of a Selective Adenosine A3 Receptor Antagonist Using Molecular Dynamic Simulations, MM-PBSA and MM-GBSA Free Energy Calculations, and Mutagenesis. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2019, 59, 51835197,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00751
  21. 21
    Papastathopoulos, A.; Lougiakis, N.; Kostakis, I. K.; Marakos, P.; Pouli, N.; Pratsinis, H.; Kletsas, D. New Bioactive 5-Arylcarboximidamidopyrazolo[3,4-c]Pyridines: Synthesis, Cytotoxic Activity, Mechanistic Investigation and Structure-Activity Relationships. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2021, 218, 113387,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2021.113387
  22. 22
    Bento, A. P.; Gaulton, A.; Hersey, A.; Bellis, L. J.; Chambers, J.; Davies, M.; Krüger, F. A.; Light, Y.; Mak, L.; McGlinchey, S.; Nowotka, M.; Papadatos, G.; Santos, R.; Overington, J. P. The ChEMBL Bioactivity Database: An Update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42, D1083D1090,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkt1031
  23. 23
    Hawkins, P. C. D.; Skillman, A. G.; Nicholls, A. Comparison of Shape-Matching and Docking as Virtual Screening Tools. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 7482,  DOI: 10.1021/jm0603365
  24. 24
    Pei, Y.; Wickham, B. O. S. Regioselective Syntheses of 3-Aminomethyl-5-Substituted Isoxazoles: A Facile and Chemoselective Reduction of Azide to Amine by Sodium Borohydride Using 1,3-Propanedithiol as a Catalyst. Tetrahedron Lett. 1993, 34, 75097512,  DOI: 10.1016/S0040-4039(00)60386-6
  25. 25
    Fadnavis, N. W.; Radhika, K. R. Enantio- and Regiospecific Reduction of Ethyl 4-Phenyl-2,4-Dioxobutyrate with Baker’s Yeast: Preparation of (R)-HPB Ester. Tetrahedron Asymmetry 2004, 15, 34433447,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tetasy.2004.09.007
  26. 26
    Dang, T. T.; Dang, T. T.; Fischer, C.; Görls, H.; Langer, P. Synthesis of Pyrazole-3-Carboxylates and Pyrazole-1,5-Dicarboxylates by One-Pot Cyclization of Hydrazone Dianions with Diethyl Oxalate. Tetrahedron 2008, 64, 22072215,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tet.2007.12.024
  27. 27
    Yan, Z.; Liu, A.; Huang, M.; Liu, M.; Pei, H.; Huang, L.; Yi, H.; Liu, W.; Hu, A. Design, Synthesis, DFT Study and Antifungal Activity of the Derivatives of Pyrazolecarboxamide Containing Thiazole or Oxazole Ring. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2018, 149, 170181,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2018.02.036
  28. 28
    Schmidt, A.; Habeck, T.; Kindermann, M. K.; Nieger, M. New Pyrazolium-Carboxylates as Structural Analogues of the Pseudo-Cross-Conjugated Betainic Alkaloid Nigellicine. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 59775982,  DOI: 10.1021/jo0344337
  29. 29
    Knight, A.; Hemmings, J. L.; Winfield, I.; Leuenberger, M.; Frattini, E.; Frenguelli, B. G.; Dowell, S. J.; Lochner, M.; Ladds, G. Discovery of Novel Adenosine Receptor Agonists That Exhibit Subtype Selectivity. J. Med. Chem. 2016, 59, 947964,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.5b01402
  30. 30
    Stoddart, L. A.; Vernall, A. J.; Denman, J. L.; Briddon, S. J.; Kellam, B.; Hill, S. J. Fragment Screening at Adenosine-A3 Receptors in Living Cells Using a Fluorescence-Based Binding Assay. Chem. Biol. 2012, 19, 11051115,  DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2012.07.014
  31. 31
    Eldridge, M. D.; Murray, C. W.; Auton, T. R.; Paolini, G. V.; Mee, R. P. Empirical Scoring Functions: I. The Development of a Fast Empirical Scoring Function to Estimate the Binding Affinity of Ligands in Receptor Complexes. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 425445,  DOI: 10.1023/A:1007996124545
  32. 32
    Hornak, V.; Abel, R.; Okur, A.; Strockbine, B.; Roitberg, A.; Simmerling, C. Comparison of Multiple Amber Force Fields and Development of Improved Protein Backbone Parameters. Proteins Struct. Funct. Genet. 2006, 65, 712725,  DOI: 10.1002/prot.21123
  33. 33
    Massova, I.; Kollman, P. A. Combined molecular mechanical and continuum solvent approach (MM-PBSA/GBSA) to predict ligand binding. Per. Drug Discovery Design 2000, 18, 113135,  DOI: 10.1023/A:1008763014207
  34. 34
    Wang, E.; Sun, H.; Wang, J.; Wang, Z.; Liu, H.; Zhang, J. Z. H.; Hou, T. End-Point Binding Free Energy Calculation with MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA: Strategies and Applications in Drug Design. Chem. Rev. 2019, 119, 94789508,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00055
  35. 35
    Kaminski, G.; Friesner, R. A.; Tirado-Rives, J.; Jorgensen, W. L. Evaluation and Reparametrization of the OPLS-AA Force Field for Proteins via Comparison with Accurate Quantum Chemical Calculations on Peptides. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105 (28), 64746487,  DOI: 10.1021/jp003919d
  36. 36
    Shivakumar, D.; Williams, J.; Wu, Y.; Damm, W.; Shelley, J.; Sherman, W. Prediction of Absolute Solvation Free Energies using Molecular Dynamics Free Energy Perturbation and the OPLS Force Field. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2010, 6, 150919,  DOI: 10.1021/ct900587b
  37. 37
    Stamatis, D.; Lagarias, P.; Barkan, K.; Vrontaki, E.; Ladds, G.; Kolocouris, A. Structural Characterization of Agonist Binding to an A3 Adenosine Receptor through Biomolecular Simulations and Mutagenesis Experiments. J. Med. Chem. 2019, 62, 88318846,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b01164

Cited By

This article is cited by 1 publications.

  1. Barbara Preti, Anna Suchankova, Giuseppe Deganutti, Michele Leuenberger, Kerry Barkan, Iga Manulak, Xianglin Huang, Sabrina Carvalho, Graham Ladds, Martin Lochner. Discovery and Structure–Activity Relationship Studies of Novel Adenosine A1 Receptor-Selective Agonists. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2022, 65 (21) , 14864-14890. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.2c01414
  • Abstract

    Scheme 1

    Scheme 1. Synthesis of 4a,b and 5a,ba

    aReagents and conditions: (a) diethyl oxalate, NaH 60%, toluene dry, 50°C, 2 h; (b) NH2NH2 80%, EtOH, reflux, 90 min; (c) (i) NaH 60%, DMF dry, 0 °C, 15 min, (ii) CH3I, rt, 1 h.

    Scheme 2

    Scheme 2. Synthesis of 10a–ca

    aReagents and conditions: (a) paraformaldehyde, 33% HBr in AcOH, 90 °C, 3.5 h; (b) Ν-methylmorpholine-Ν-oxide, MeCN dry, rt, 24 h; (c) NH2NH2 (80%), HCl 36%, EtOH, 90°C, 1 h; (d) POCl3, 110 °C, 2.5–8 h; (e) HNR1R2, EtOH, reflux, 2 h.

    Scheme 3

    Scheme 3. Synthesis of 15a–ca

    aReagents and conditions: (a) paraformaldehyde, 33% HBr in AcOH, 90 °C, 3.5 h; (b) Ν-methylmorpholine-Ν-oxide, MeCN dry, rt, 24 h; (c) NH2NH2 (80%), HCl 36%, EtOH, 90 °C, 1 h; (d) POCl3, 110 °C, 2.5–8 h; (e) HNR1R2, EtOH, reflux, 2 h.

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Characterization of 7-amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines at human A1R and A3R. (A and B) Cells expressing either human A1R (A) or A3R (B) were exposed to 10 μM forskolin and stimulated with increasing concentrations of NECA for 30 min in the presence of a 1 μM concentration of the test compound, and the cAMP accumulation was quantified. (C) cAMP accumulation was measured as detailed in part A using multiple concentrations of 10b. Using pEC50 values, Schild regression analysis was conducted to calculate pA2/pKb values. All values are mean ± SEM expressed as percentage forskolin inhibition, relative to NECA. n ≥ 3 independent experimental repeats were performed in duplicate.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Inhibition of BRET between CA200645 at NLuc-A1R and Nluc-A3R by 10b and 10a. HEK293 cells expressing Nluc-A1R (A) or Nluc-A3R (B) were treated with 5 nM or 20 nM CA200645, respectively, enabling concentration-dependent decreases in the BRET ratio at 10 min to be determined with the response normalized to DMSO. Binding curves were fitted with the Cheng Prusoff equation built into GraphPad Prism 9.3 to enable estimates of the pKi. (19) Comparison of pKi values for A1R (C) and A3R (D) as determined via BRET binding. Each data point represents the mean ± SEM of at least three experiments performed in duplicate. The statistical significance compared to NECA was determined, at p < 0.05, through one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-test (*, p < 0.05; ***, p < 0.001). #Compounds did not fully displace CA200645, so pKi values are estimates preventing statistical analysis.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. (A–C) 100 ns MD simulations of 10ac inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R. (D) 100 ns MD simulations of 15b inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R. Starting structures are shown (docking pose), and representative frames from MD simulations, receptor–ligand interaction frequency histograms, and RMSD plots of proteins (RMSDprotein; blue plots) and ligand heavy atoms (RMSDligand; red plots) inside the orthosteric binding area of WT A1R or A3R. Bars are plotted only for residues with interaction frequencies ≥0.2. Color scheme: ligand = brown sticks, receptor = white cartoon and sticks, hydrogen bonding interactions = yellow (dashes or bars), π–π interactions = green (dashes or bars), hydrophobic interactions = gray, water bridges = blue. For the protein models of A1R in complex with 10ac or 15b, the experimental structure of the inactive form of A1R in complex with an antagonist (PDB ID 5UEN (4)) was used.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 37 other publications.

    1. 1
      Fredholm, B. B.; IJzerman, A. P.; Jacobson, K. A.; Linden, J.; Muller, C. E.; Müller, C. E. International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. LXXXI. Nomenclature and Classification of Adenosine Receptors ─ An Update. Pharmacol. Rev. 2011, 63, 134,  DOI: 10.1124/pr.110.003285
    2. 2
      Schenone, S.; Brullo, C.; Musumeci, F.; Bruno, O.; Botta, M. A1 Receptors Ligands: Past, Present and Future Trends. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2010, 10, 878901,  DOI: 10.2174/156802610791268729
    3. 3
      Squarcialupi, L.; Catarzi, D.; Varano, F.; Betti, M.; Falsini, M.; Vincenzi, F.; Ravani, A.; Ciancetta, A.; Varani, K.; Moro, S.; Colotta, V. Structural Refinement of Pyrazolo[4,3-d]Pyrimidine Derivatives to Obtain Highly Potent and Selective Antagonists for the Human A3 Adenosine Receptor. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2016, 108, 117133,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2015.11.015
    4. 4
      Sun, B.; Bachhawat, P.; Chu, M. L.-H.; Wood, M.; Ceska, T.; Sands, Z. A.; Mercier, J.; Lebon, F.; Kobilka, T. S.; Kobilka, B. K. Crystal Structure of the Adenosine A2A Receptor Bound to an Antagonist Reveals a Potential Allosteric Pocket. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2017, 114, 20662071,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1621423114
    5. 5
      el-Hashim, A.; D’Agostino, B.; Matera, M. G.; Page, C. Characterization of adenosine receptors involved in adenosine-induced bronchoconstriction in allergic rabbits. Br. J. Pharmacol. 1996, 119, 12621268,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1996.tb16031.x
    6. 6
      Brown, R. A.; Spina, D.; Page, C. P. Adenosine receptors and asthma. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2008, 153, S446S456,  DOI: 10.1038/bjp.2008.22
    7. 7
      Johnson, J. A.; Montgomery, A. P.; Starr, E. R.; Ludwig, J.; Trevitt, J. Dose-dependent effects of adenosine antagonists on tacrine-induced tremulous jaw movements. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2018, 833, 364369,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2018.06.004
    8. 8
      Cohen, S.; Fishman, P. Targeting the A3 Adenosine Receptor to Treat Cytokine Release Syndrome in Cancer Immunotherapy. Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 2019, 13, 491497,  DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S195294
    9. 9
      Lee, J.; Hwang, I.; Lee, J. H.; Lee, H. W.; Jeong, L.-S.; Ha, H. The Selective A3AR Antagonist LJ-1888 Ameliorates UUO-Induced Tubulointerstitial Fibrosis. Am. J. Pathol. 2013, 183, 14881497,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2013.07.010
    10. 10
      Wang, Z.; Do, C. W.; Avila, M. Y.; Peterson-Yantorno, K.; Stone, R. A.; Gao, Z.-G.; Joshi, B.; Besada, P.; Jeong, L. S.; Jacobson, K. A.; Civan, M. M. Nucleoside-Derived Antagonists to A3 Adenosine Receptors Lower Mouse Intraocular Pressure and Act across Species. Exp. Eye Res. 2010, 90, 146154,  DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2009.10.001
    11. 11
      Glukhova, A.; Thal, D. M.; Nguyen, A. T.; Vecchio, E. A.; Jörg, M.; Scammells, P. J.; May, L. T.; Sexton, P. M.; Christopoulos, A. Structure of the Adenosine A1 Receptor Reveals the Basis for Subtype Selectivity. Cell 2017, 168, 867877,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.01.042
    12. 12
      Cheng, R. K. Y.; Segala, E.; Robertson, N.; Deflorian, F.; Doré, A. S.; Errey, J. C.; Fiez-Vandal, C.; Marshall, F. H.; Cooke, R. M. Structures of Human A1 and A2A Adenosine Receptors with Xanthines Reveal Determinants of Selectivity. Structure 2017, 25, 12751285,  DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2017.06.012
    13. 13
      Draper-Joyce, C. J.; Khoshouei, M.; Thal, D. M.; Liang, Y.-L.; Nguyen, A. T. N.; Furness, S. G. B.; Venugopal, H.; Baltos, J.-A.; Plitzko, J. M.; Danev, R.; Baumeister, W.; May, L. T.; Wootten, D.; Sexton, P. M.; Glukhova, A.; Christopoulos, A. Structure of the Adenosine-Bound Human Adenosine A1 Receptor-Gi Complex. Nature 2018, 558, 559563,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0236-6
    14. 14
      Stampelou, M.; Suchankova, A.; Tzortzini, E.; Dhingra, L.; Barkan, K.; Lougiakis, N.; Marakos, P.; Pouli, N.; Ladds, G.; Kolocouris, A. Novel Pyrazolo[3,4-c]Pyridine Antagonists with Nanomolar Affinity for A1/A3 Adenosine Receptors: Binding Kinetics and Exploration of Their Binding Profile Using Mutagenesis Experiments, MD Simulations and TI/MD Calculations. ChemRxiv 2021,  DOI: 10.26434/chemrxiv-2021-j18mg-v3 .
    15. 15
      Catarzi, D.; Colotta, V.; Varano, F.; Poli, D.; Squarcialupi, L.; Filacchioni, G.; Varani, K.; Vincenzi, F.; Borea, P. A.; Dal Ben, D.; Lambertucci, C.; Cristalli, G. Pyrazolo[1,5-c]Quinazoline Derivatives and Their Simplified Analogues as Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Synthesis, Structure-Affinity Relationships and Molecular Modeling Studies. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2013, 21, 283294,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bmc.2012.10.031
    16. 16
      Manetti, F.; Schenone, S.; Bondavalli, F.; Brullo, C.; Bruno, O.; Ranise, A.; Mosti, L.; Menozzi, G.; Fossa, P.; Trincavelli, M. L.; Martini, C.; Martinelli, A.; Tintori, C.; Botta, M. Synthesis and 3D QSAR of new pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines: potent and selective inhibitors of A1 adenosine receptors. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 71727185,  DOI: 10.1021/jm050407k
    17. 17
      Tuccinardi, T.; Zizzari, A. T.; Brullo, C.; Daniele, S.; Musumeci, F.; Schenone, S.; Trincavelli, M. L.; Martini, C.; Martinelli, A.; Giorgi, G.; Botta, M. Substituted pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridines as human A1 adenosine antagonists: Developments in understanding the receptor stereoselectivity. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2011, 9, 44484455,  DOI: 10.1039/c0ob01064b
    18. 18
      Cheong, S. L.; Venkatesan, G.; Paira, P.; Jothibasu, R.; Mandel, A. L.; Federico, S.; Spalluto, G.; Pastorin, G. Pyrazolo Derivatives as Potent Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: An Overview on the Structure-Activity Relationships. Int. J. Med. Chem. 2011, 480652,  DOI: 10.1155/2011/480652
    19. 19
      Barkan, K.; Lagarias, P.; Stampelou, M.; Stamatis, D.; Hoare, S.; Safitri, D.; Klotz, K.-N.; Vrontaki, E.; Kolocouris, A.; Ladds, G. Pharmacological Characterisation of Novel Adenosine A3 Receptor Antagonists. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 20781,  DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74521-y
    20. 20
      Lagarias, P.; Barkan, K.; Tzortzini, E.; Stampelou, M.; Vrontaki, E.; Ladds, G.; Kolocouris, A. Insights to the Binding of a Selective Adenosine A3 Receptor Antagonist Using Molecular Dynamic Simulations, MM-PBSA and MM-GBSA Free Energy Calculations, and Mutagenesis. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2019, 59, 51835197,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00751
    21. 21
      Papastathopoulos, A.; Lougiakis, N.; Kostakis, I. K.; Marakos, P.; Pouli, N.; Pratsinis, H.; Kletsas, D. New Bioactive 5-Arylcarboximidamidopyrazolo[3,4-c]Pyridines: Synthesis, Cytotoxic Activity, Mechanistic Investigation and Structure-Activity Relationships. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2021, 218, 113387,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2021.113387
    22. 22
      Bento, A. P.; Gaulton, A.; Hersey, A.; Bellis, L. J.; Chambers, J.; Davies, M.; Krüger, F. A.; Light, Y.; Mak, L.; McGlinchey, S.; Nowotka, M.; Papadatos, G.; Santos, R.; Overington, J. P. The ChEMBL Bioactivity Database: An Update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42, D1083D1090,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkt1031
    23. 23
      Hawkins, P. C. D.; Skillman, A. G.; Nicholls, A. Comparison of Shape-Matching and Docking as Virtual Screening Tools. J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 7482,  DOI: 10.1021/jm0603365
    24. 24
      Pei, Y.; Wickham, B. O. S. Regioselective Syntheses of 3-Aminomethyl-5-Substituted Isoxazoles: A Facile and Chemoselective Reduction of Azide to Amine by Sodium Borohydride Using 1,3-Propanedithiol as a Catalyst. Tetrahedron Lett. 1993, 34, 75097512,  DOI: 10.1016/S0040-4039(00)60386-6
    25. 25
      Fadnavis, N. W.; Radhika, K. R. Enantio- and Regiospecific Reduction of Ethyl 4-Phenyl-2,4-Dioxobutyrate with Baker’s Yeast: Preparation of (R)-HPB Ester. Tetrahedron Asymmetry 2004, 15, 34433447,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tetasy.2004.09.007
    26. 26
      Dang, T. T.; Dang, T. T.; Fischer, C.; Görls, H.; Langer, P. Synthesis of Pyrazole-3-Carboxylates and Pyrazole-1,5-Dicarboxylates by One-Pot Cyclization of Hydrazone Dianions with Diethyl Oxalate. Tetrahedron 2008, 64, 22072215,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tet.2007.12.024
    27. 27
      Yan, Z.; Liu, A.; Huang, M.; Liu, M.; Pei, H.; Huang, L.; Yi, H.; Liu, W.; Hu, A. Design, Synthesis, DFT Study and Antifungal Activity of the Derivatives of Pyrazolecarboxamide Containing Thiazole or Oxazole Ring. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2018, 149, 170181,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2018.02.036
    28. 28
      Schmidt, A.; Habeck, T.; Kindermann, M. K.; Nieger, M. New Pyrazolium-Carboxylates as Structural Analogues of the Pseudo-Cross-Conjugated Betainic Alkaloid Nigellicine. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 59775982,  DOI: 10.1021/jo0344337
    29. 29
      Knight, A.; Hemmings, J. L.; Winfield, I.; Leuenberger, M.; Frattini, E.; Frenguelli, B. G.; Dowell, S. J.; Lochner, M.; Ladds, G. Discovery of Novel Adenosine Receptor Agonists That Exhibit Subtype Selectivity. J. Med. Chem. 2016, 59, 947964,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.5b01402
    30. 30
      Stoddart, L. A.; Vernall, A. J.; Denman, J. L.; Briddon, S. J.; Kellam, B.; Hill, S. J. Fragment Screening at Adenosine-A3 Receptors in Living Cells Using a Fluorescence-Based Binding Assay. Chem. Biol. 2012, 19, 11051115,  DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2012.07.014
    31. 31
      Eldridge, M. D.; Murray, C. W.; Auton, T. R.; Paolini, G. V.; Mee, R. P. Empirical Scoring Functions: I. The Development of a Fast Empirical Scoring Function to Estimate the Binding Affinity of Ligands in Receptor Complexes. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 1997, 11, 425445,  DOI: 10.1023/A:1007996124545
    32. 32
      Hornak, V.; Abel, R.; Okur, A.; Strockbine, B.; Roitberg, A.; Simmerling, C. Comparison of Multiple Amber Force Fields and Development of Improved Protein Backbone Parameters. Proteins Struct. Funct. Genet. 2006, 65, 712725,  DOI: 10.1002/prot.21123
    33. 33
      Massova, I.; Kollman, P. A. Combined molecular mechanical and continuum solvent approach (MM-PBSA/GBSA) to predict ligand binding. Per. Drug Discovery Design 2000, 18, 113135,  DOI: 10.1023/A:1008763014207
    34. 34
      Wang, E.; Sun, H.; Wang, J.; Wang, Z.; Liu, H.; Zhang, J. Z. H.; Hou, T. End-Point Binding Free Energy Calculation with MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA: Strategies and Applications in Drug Design. Chem. Rev. 2019, 119, 94789508,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00055
    35. 35
      Kaminski, G.; Friesner, R. A.; Tirado-Rives, J.; Jorgensen, W. L. Evaluation and Reparametrization of the OPLS-AA Force Field for Proteins via Comparison with Accurate Quantum Chemical Calculations on Peptides. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105 (28), 64746487,  DOI: 10.1021/jp003919d
    36. 36
      Shivakumar, D.; Williams, J.; Wu, Y.; Damm, W.; Shelley, J.; Sherman, W. Prediction of Absolute Solvation Free Energies using Molecular Dynamics Free Energy Perturbation and the OPLS Force Field. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2010, 6, 150919,  DOI: 10.1021/ct900587b
    37. 37
      Stamatis, D.; Lagarias, P.; Barkan, K.; Vrontaki, E.; Ladds, G.; Kolocouris, A. Structural Characterization of Agonist Binding to an A3 Adenosine Receptor through Biomolecular Simulations and Mutagenesis Experiments. J. Med. Chem. 2019, 62, 88318846,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b01164
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.2c00052.

    • Scheme S1. Comparison of amino acid residue sequences of the binding area. Table S1. Chemical structures and antagonistic potencies of 7-amino-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyridazines 10a–c and 15a–c against A2AR and A2BR. Table S2. Mean RMSD values for all compounds against A1R, A2AR, and A2BR and ΔGeff only for 10–10c against A1R. Figure S1. 1H and 13C NMR spectra of the target compounds. Figure S2. Results from the MD simulations of 10b and 15b against A3R and A2BR. Figure S3. Docking poses of 4-(2-phenethyl)amino-1-phenylethyl pyrazolo[3,4-b]pyridine and N9-methyl,N6-benzyl adenine to A1R. Figure S4. Representative frames from 100 ns MD simulations of 10b inside the orthosteric binding area of WT A1R and 10b inside mutant Y271A A1R and the receptor–ligand interaction frequency histogram and RMSD graphs of protein Ca and ligand heavy atoms. Information for the methods and synthetic protocols. (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect