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

Figure 1Loading Img

Identification of Novel Liver X Receptor Activators by Structure-Based Modeling

View Author Information
Institute of General, Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry/Theoretical Chemistry and Center for Molecular Biosciences Innsbruck (CMBI), University of Innsbruck, Innrain 80/82, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
Computer-Aided Molecular Design (CAMD) Group and CMBI, Institute of Pharmacy/Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 80/82, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
§ Institute of Pharmacy/Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Koenigin Luise Strasse 2 + 4, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
Department of Vascular Biology and Thrombosis Research, Medical University of Vienna, Schwarzspanierstrasse 17, A-1090 Wien, Austria
Cite this: J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2012, 52, 5, 1391–1400
Publication Date (Web):April 10, 2012
https://doi.org/10.1021/ci300096c

Copyright © 2012 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

  • Open Access

Article Views

2163

Altmetric

-

Citations

LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (4 MB)
Supporting Info (1)»

Abstract

Liver X receptors (LXRs) are members of the nuclear receptor family. Activators of LXRs are of high pharmacological interest as LXRs regulate cholesterol, fatty acid, and carbohydrate metabolism as well as inflammatory processes. On the basis of different X-ray crystal structures, we established a virtual screening workflow for the identification of novel LXR modulators. A two-step screening concept to identify active compounds included 3D-pharmacophore filters and rescoring by shape alignment. Eighteen virtual hits were tested in vitro applying a reporter gene assay, where concentration-dependent activity was proven for four novel lead structures. The most active compound 10, a 1,4-naphthochinone, has an estimated EC50 of around 5 μM.

Introduction

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Liver X receptors (LXRs) are members of the nuclear receptor family. The two subtypes α and β are classified in a homology-based nomenclature system as NR1H3 and NR1H2, respectively. (1) As lipid-activated nuclear receptors, they are composed of a highly conserved DNA binding domain (DBD) and a ligand binding domain (LBD), which can be targeted by endogenous ligands (oxidized cholesterol derivates), (2) as well as by synthetic ligands. (3) The regulatory impact of nuclear receptors on gene expression is linked with a conformational rearrangement of the LBD upon ligand binding, the dissociation of assembled corepressors or the recruitment of coactivators, and induced transcription effected by the DBD of the nuclear receptors. Enhanced transrepression of associated genes via LXR activation needs further studies, though already some insights in the complex inflammation related signaling pathways could be gained, as reviewed by Bensinger et al. (4, 5)
The physiological impact of LXR is associated with the communicative interface of lipid metabolism and inflammation. (6, 3) Therefore, the LXRs were identified as a promising drug target for indications such as hypercholesterolemia, atherosclerosis, and cardiovascular diseases. (7, 4) Identification of first potent LXR agonists (8) and convenient results in vivo, such as promising experiments with atherosclerotic mice (9) motivated medicinal chemistry campaigns. Accelerated by insights into the molecular structure of the LXR LBD, various LXR-modulating scaffolds were identified and reviewed in refs 10 and 11. A striking setback on the road to the clinical application of LXR agonists is the increase of triglyceride levels in animal studies. (5) Strategies to overcome this side effect related with LXRα activation is the development of LXRβ-selective activators (12-14) or tissue-specific LXR modulators. (15) Detailed investigations revealed that the complex regulation processes in lipid metabolism might be considered as critical with regard to further potential side effects. (16) Nevertheless, potential uses as drug target remain attractive and the development of LXR modulators also including antagonists is an attractive research field. (17) Recently, LXR signaling was linked with acquired immune response, (18) proliferation control, (5) and antitumor response. (19) Furthermore, Alzheimer’s disease (20, 21) and diabetes (22) were added to the potential application fields of LXR modulators.
For the nuclear receptors LXRα and β 10 Brookhaven Protein Data Bank (PDB) entries were deposited from 2003 up to 2009 (Table 1). (23, 24) The secondary structure of nuclear receptor ligand binding domains, dominated by 12 α-helices forming a mainly hydrophobic binding pocket, is highly conserved for the LXR structure of both subtypes. The PDB entry 1pq9 was excluded from this investigation as the ligand was destroyed during X-ray treatment of the crystal. (25) Full chains for the LBD are found in 1pq6, 1pqc, and 3fc6, (25, 26) while the other crystal structures miss the 3D coordinates for several residues related to the flexibility of the protein. The PDB entries differ in resolution, cocrystallized proteins (monomers, homodimers, and physiological heterodimers with retinoid X receptor (RXR)), and the complexed ligands (Figure 1). Compound 1, epoxycholesterol, is an endogenous LXR activator with weaker affinity than some published synthetic nonsteroid ligands. The hexaflouropropanol moiety in the sulfonamide T-0901317, compound 2, (3) was optimized to compound 3 during structure guided design of the amide series by GSK. (27) Pharmacokinetic improvement efforts on compound 5, GW3965, (8) led to the indol substituted compound 6. (26) The maleimide structure of compound 4 represents a further scaffold and was identified by HTS. (28)

Figure 1

Figure 1. LXR modulators cocrystallized in PDB crystal structures.

Table 1. Structural Data Available from PDB Deposits 2003–2009
PDB entryligandresolution [Å]subtypegene sourcecrystal compositionrefs
1p8d12.80βhumanhomodimer, synthetic coactivator 39
1pq92a2.10βhumanhomodimer 25
1pq652.40βhumanhomodimer 25
1pqc22.80βhumanhomodimer 25
1upv22.10βhumanmonomer 63
1upw22.40βhumanmonomer 63
1uhl22.90αhumandimer with RXRβ 64
2acl42.80αmousedimer with RXRα 28
3fal32.36αmousedimer with RXRα 27
3fc662.06αmousedimer with RXRα 26
a

Ligand artifact from X-ray experiment.

The published structural insights are a suitable basis for structure-based virtual screening (VS) strategies. The application of an approved computational high throughput screening (HTS) can be a faster and less expensive approach than classical experimental HTS in order to identify new scaffolds for LXR modulators. VS approaches have already been successfully applied on LXR. For instance, the identification of 2-aryl-N-acyl indole as LXR agonist, such as compound 6, was guided by docking experiments. (29) The same working group published a successful docking campaign applying the program GLIDE to identify a further LXR modulating scaffold. (30) Two recent studies, (31, 32) published during the preparation of this manuscript, also used 3D-pharmacophores to establish a VS protocol. Zhao et al. developed a ligand-based quantitative model for LXR agonists and validated their findings by docking. (32) The study of Ghemtio et al. has a similar methodological approach as the study we present here. (31) The authors compared a combination of 3D-pharmacophores and volume restrictions as prefilter for exhaustive docking. (33) However, our study goes a step further, as we included experimental testing of predicted virtual hits and thereby provide evidence for the model’s validity.

Results

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Study Design

Crystallographic data from LXR LBD in complex with bioactive ligands, as found in the freely accessible PDB, (23, 24) provided structural insights into the molecular interactions. In the concept of structure-based 3D-pharmacophores, the interacting features and their geometric relations are derived from the X-ray structures and translated into a pharmacophore model, which can be applied for screening of virtual compound databases reviewed in refs 34 and 35. In our study, we first included the 10 X-ray structures published up to 2009 covering LXR α as well as β, as the biological assay we applied is not suitable to distinguish subtype selectivity (Table 1). The pharmacophores, generated with LigandScout 2.3, (36) were manually modified and theoretically validated before seven pharmacophores derived from different PDB entries were selected for the VS. Applying multiple pharmacophores, we could cover different binding modes related with conformational changes in the binding pocket. The second step of VS was a reranking of the screening hit lists with the TanimotoCombo scoring function of ROCS, a method for fast alignment and comparison to the bioactive ligand conformation as query molecule. (37, 38) The two-step in silico strategy was applied for screening of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Database (250 761 compounds). Eighteen highly ranked compounds were selected from the hit list by aspects of availability, chemical diversity, and drug-like character for an in vitro transactivation assay, which verified LXR activation for four compounds. The work flow and key data are visualized in Figure 2.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Workflow for finding novel LXR modulators.

LXR Ligand Binding Pocket

The binding sites of the LXRs are mainly hydrophobic and composed of two to three cavities and a tunnel directing to the solvent-exposed residues (C2) (Figure 3). In the C1 cavity, interaction with His435 (His421 in LXRα) is crucial and a hydrogen bond to this residue is supposed to stabilize the stacking of His435 to Trp457 (Trp443 in LXRα) in the C-terminal α-helix (known as helix 12), which favors the association of coactivators next to helix 12. (39) The epoxide oxygen of the endogenous ligand 1 forms this interaction as well as the synthetic compounds. (10) Although the hydrogen bond was described as critical, LXR modulators are known which do not establish a hydrogen bond to His435. (40) Small ligands, like compound 2, fill the C1 and C2 region. The benzylsulfonate moiety extends a little into a wide tunnel, which is also present in the binding pocket with bound endogenous ligand. For comparison, larger molecules show another binding mode, where a third subpocket (C3) can open and accommodate branched hydrophobic substituents. This C3-cavity is formed by three phenylalanine residues. It is opened by an altered side chain conformation of Phe340. The typical features of the binding pocket are reflected in the pharmacophore features.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Binding pocket of compound 2 in 1pqc (A) and compound 5 in 1pq6 (B) with pharmacophore features of the models and highlighted cavity C1 (red), binding tunnel C2 (green), and subpocket C3 (blue); for the benefit of clear arrangement Xvols are hidden. His435, Trp443, and Phe340 are shown in ball and stick style. In part B, Phe340 changes its conformation and opens up the hydrophobic cavity C3 in order to accommodate the larger ligand compound 5.

Pharmacophore Models

The nine pharmacophore models generated based on PDB entries were composed of four to seven features describing ligand–receptor interactions and excluded volumes (Xvols) on protein atoms to line the binding pocket. (36) Initial pharmacophore generation was automated using the LigandScout algorithm and was followed by manual modification of the pharmacophore models. The optimization process aimed at improved enrichment factors, which describes the ratio of found active compounds versus hits from a decoy database (calculated according to the Experimental Section). To achieve a higher yield of active hits in the test set, selected features were deleted or modified. Further manipulations affected the spatial restriction for the pharmacophore models: While the standard approach placed single excluded volumes according to a residue-dependent algorithm (applied for the models 1p8d, 1pqc, 1uhl, 1upv, 1upw, 2acl, and 3fal), an alternative approach composed a coat of excluded volumes with a 0.8 Å tolerance on each heavy atom of the protein in the binding site (applied for the models 1pqc and 3fal). Composition of the nine pharmacophores is depicted in Figure 4, and their validation performance is summarized in Table 1. All pharmacophores besides model 3fc6 have hydrogen bond acceptors (HBA) which describe the interaction to His435. Central hydrophobic features (HF) in the binding site represent the hydrophobic character of the binding site. In model 3fal the additional C3 interaction is represented by a HF; in 3fc6, by a hydrophobic aromatic feature (HAF). In the model 1pq6, a more restrictive aromatic ring feature (AR) takes into account the orientation of the aromatic plane as further criterion for feature mapping as the ligand’s phenyl moiety interacts via aromatic π-stacking to Phe340 (Figure 3). Pharmacophore model 2acl stands out with a very unfavorable enrichment factor. This is related to the distinct chemical scaffold of compound 6 and the fact that 1H-pyrrole-2,5-diones and related compounds were underrepresented in the test set.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Pharmacophore models generated for LXR modulators. Chemical features are color-coded: hydrogen bond acceptor (HBA) red, hydrogen bond donor (HBD) green, hydrophobic (HF) yellow, aromatic ring feature (AR) blue, hydrophobic aromatic feature (HAF) blue and yellow, shape (sh), and exclusion volumes (Xvols) gray.

The pharmacophores on PDB 1p8d and 1upw were excluded from the application phase of the screening system. With this study focusing on the identification of new nonsteroidal scaffolds, we decided to neglect the model 1p8d based on an endogenous ligand, which produced hit lists dominated by steroids during the validation screening. The enrichment factor of 6.2 for the model 1upw is typical for a crude filter, which could be useful for prescreening when followed by further filters for hit list reduction. In this study, the pharmacophore model 1upw is considered to be inappropriate as the pharmacophores are the only cutoff delimiter. Additionally, the 1upw model produced hits with high overlap to the model 1pqc during validation: only three test set hits of 1upw were not matched by the model of 1pqc. Two of those test set compounds were covered by the models 1upv and 2acl. Therefore, exclusion of the model 1upw only had a minor effect on found actives from the test set, but resulted in a major reduction of the number of found decoys. The seven pharmacophore models used for subsequent screening matched 29 out of 41 active compounds in the test set and showed a combined enrichment factor of 5.2 in the validation screening.

Pharmacophore Screening

The parallel pharmacophore filtering of the NCI database resulted in seven virtual hit lists, one for each pharmacophore. The hit lists were composed of the compounds matching the pharmacophore model’s chemical and geometrical restraints. The number of hits found by each model is displayed in Table 2. Mismatch between the NCI hit lists and the corresponding conformational hit lists is due to molecules failing the conformer generation algorithm of Openeye’s Omega software, e.g. metal-containing compounds. The nonredundant, combined hit lists comprised 19 769 compounds corresponding to a filtering rate of 7.6%.
Table 2. Pharmacophore Characteristics
model code1p8da1pq61pqc1upv1upwa1uhl2acl3fal3fc6allall w/o 1p8d1upw
test set (41)723921675693029
decoy set WDI (67050)4641699237017433813924916128394113189352
EF24.922.46.3176.66.28.41.77.8146.64.45.2
a

1p8d and 1upw were not used for subsequent virtual screening.

Table 3. Virtual and Biological Screening Results
model1pq61pqc1upv1uhl2acl3fal3fc6combined
no. of hits from NCI (250 761)4193807856298418755275244 
no. of hits shape alignment411679175329061832518324319769
no. of selected compounds772956118
no. of active compounds12142104

Shape Alignment

A subsequent ranking of the hit lists produced by pharmacophore screening was performed with shape based alignment applying Openeye’s software ROCS. Bioactive conformations extracted from the crystal structures served as query molecules for alignment. A combination of shape overlap and chemical feature similarity between reference and the molecules from the hit lists (TanimotoCombo score) were applied for ranking. On the basis of this ranking, we selected 18 compounds for validation tests (Supporting Information, Table S1). The selection included highly ranked hits with conclusive alignment poses, low molecular weight (except one <500 g/mol), and chemical diversity. Three compounds contained a central sulfonamide and four compounds showed an aniline substructure, similar to the query compounds and other known LXR modulators. Nevertheless, the tested compounds also included new scaffolds, e.g., two acridine scaffolds and a 2,3-substituted naphthochinone.

LXR Reporter Assay

For 18 compounds the relative induction of the LXR-driven luciferase reporter gene was determined (Supporting Information, Table S2). Four compounds (7, 8, 9, and 10, Figure 5, Table 4) showed a significant transactivation relative to the induction of ABCA1 transcription by the known LXR modulator 2. Four compounds classified as active were reanalyzed at different compound concentrations (Figure 6). Compound 8 (NSC130822; 6-((benzyl((8-hydroxy-6-quinolinyl)methyl)amino)methyl)-8-quinolinol) and compound 10 (NSC618463; 2-(4-methyl-1Δ5-pyridin-1-yl)-3-(3-(trifluoromethyl)anilino)naphthoquinone) induced ABCA1 transcription comparable to the known LXR activators 2 and 5, but in higher concentrations. Compound 7 (NSC130101; 2-((diethylamino)methyl)-4-((4-methoxy-9-acridinyl)amino)phenol) and compound 9 (NSC131747; 4-(3-hydroxy-4-methoxybenzyl)-7-methoxy-8-isoquinolinol) even need concentrations of 50 μM to observe transactivation effects. Compound 9 showed the lowest absolute induction of ABCA1, what is in agreement with the results from relative induction experiments, where compound 9 at 25 μM showed 49.2% of induction compared to 1 μM of compound 2 (Supporting Information, Table S2).

Figure 5

Figure 5. Newly identified LXR agonists and their shape alignment with the query compounds. (A) 7 with query compound 2 of 1upv. (B) 8 with query compound 5 of 1pq6. (C) 9 with query compound 3 of 3fal. (D) 10 with query compound 4 of 2acl.

Figure 6

Figure 6. ABCA1 induction by compounds 7, 8, 9, and 10 at different concentrations. The control includes ABCA1 induction of compound 2 at 1 μM (light gray) and compound 5 at 1 μM (anthracite) as well as unstimulated control with DMSO (gray) and without DMSO (black).

Table 4. Newly Identified LXR Agonists
compoundhitlist, rank (shape-based)rel induction ± SDa [%]
1 μM
25 μM
71pqc, 347113.6 ± 1.4*
1upv, 590.9 ± 9.9*
1uhl, 106 
2acl, 601 
81pqc, 283744.9 ± 8.8
1pq6, 4276.7 ± 24.1
3fal, 96 
93fal, 106.6 ± 2.7
49.2 ± 10.5*
102acl, 5553.4 ± 17.6
 109.7 ± 5.7*
a

SD: standard deviation of three experiments.

Discussion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The four identified LXR modulators were derived from a VS concept combining pharmacophore screening and rescoring with shape-based alignment.
With regard to the methodological aspects, this study joins a list of other screening approaches, which were already successful for other inflammatory targets and led to the identification of novel compounds targeting inflammation. (41-44) As far as we know, this is the first pharmacophore-based virtual screening published for the target LXR including biological confirmation. Nevertheless, the here presented screening concept for LXR is comparable to the structure based filtering strategies by Ghemtio et al. (31) The authors of the latter primarily focused on the comparative performance of the filters and finally proposed a consensus strategy for LXRβ. In contrast, our study is initially designed with a hierarchically condensation of two methods for VS and included LXRα and LXRβ. Additionally, our study integrated a biological testing for verification. Despite of these differences, we agree in many conceptual and methodological aspects. Similar to our approach, Ghemtio et al. applied parallel pharmacophores and shape filtering based on different crystal structures. The parallel conception is a convenient approach to overcome the challenges of a flexible drug target when multiple different crystal structures are available, as it is the case for LXR. (45, 46)
Pharmacophore filtering and shape alignment, two virtual screening tools known for fast performance, are combined here. To show the synergy by the subsequent use of the two methods within this study, independent performance of both pharmacophore screening and shape alignment were analyzed retrospectively (Supporting Information Table S2 and S3). The four active compounds, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are not ranked within the first 25% of the pharmacophore hit lists with the exception of compound 7 matching the model 1uhl with a good fit value. In respect, shape alignment alone without prefiltering by pharmacophores would not result in a top-ranking (top 500) for the active compounds. Top-ranked hits from both methods applied independently might still be active as no testing was performed to evaluate them as truly negative. However, we can state that neither pharmacophore nor shape alignment alone would have resulted in a selection of the four active compounds identified here. We conclude that the hierarchical combination of pharmacophore screening in a first step and shape alignment in a second one was crucial for the identification of the active LXR modulators.
A principle advantage of the parallel screening approach is that the modular conception allows for easily extending and adapting the approach to new insights. During manuscript preparation a further ligand-bound LXRβ structure was released in the PDB representing the binding mode of 4-(3-aryloxyaryl)quinolines. (47) An additional pharmacophore model based on this new X-ray structure showed a hydrogen bond interaction with Leu330 (Supporting Information, Figure S2). This feature was not yet covered within the set of nine pharmacophore models. This hydrogen bond was suggested for LigandScout’s automated pharmacophore generation in 3fc6 modeling but manually deleted in the model 3fc6 during model optimization. The new model 3kfc is characterized by a good hit rate in the test set (23/41) and partially complements the set of seven used pharmacophores by covering six additional test set compounds. Nevertheless, it shows also a high hit rate within the decoys, and because of this low restrictivity, we suggest not to include this new pharmacophore model 3kfc in further applications of the virtual screening approach.
Regarding the biological results, we could identify compounds 8 and 10 with EC50 around 5 μM and the weaker LXR activators 7 and 9. Three of the active compounds show a molecular weight over 400 g/mol. The smallest compound (9, molecular weight 311.3 g/mol) being the weakest LXR activator in this study is a suitable candidate for lead optimization, as the small scaffold allows the addition of substituents targeting further interaction points within the spacious binding pocket. Compounds 7 and 8 showed more extended structures with four or more aromatic rings. Although the bulky acridine in compound 7 might be a steric challenge, 7 is matched by four pharmacophore models and the alignment within the structure 2acl complex predicts a convenient interaction pattern (Figure 7). Compound 8 showed no top-ranking in the alignment. Motivation to test compound 8 was the frequent occurrence of quinolin-8-ol substructures within the hit lists, and therefore, compound 8 with two quinolin-8-ol moieties and fair ranking within three hit lists was selected.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Alignment of compound 7 in the LXR crystal structure (PDB code 2acl). Five hydrophobic interactions and a hydrogen bond with Ser278 (LXRβ numbering) were identified with LigandScout. His435, Trp443, and Ser278 are shown in ball and stick style.

Compound 10 is of special interest, not only because of the highest activity found in this study but also for its interesting scaffold. The 2,3-substituted naphthochinone is different from known LXR modulators, and it is not surprising, that it was only found by the pharmacophore model 2acl, showing a distinct interaction pattern. (28) Alignment with the maleimide 4 showed perfect overlap for the aromatic substitute (Figure 5D), while the permanent charge of the pyridinyl substructure links to the basic function of other LXR activator classes, e.g. the tertiary amines as present in 3, 5, and 6.

Conclusion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

We presented a VS approach for the metabolic and immunological target LXR. Here the subsequent use of pharmacophore screening and shape alignment has been successful. The four novel compounds 7, 8, 9, and 10 are identified as activators of LXR induced ABCA transactivation with low micromolar EC50 values and transactivation induction in levels comparable to known LXR activators. All four hits can serve as inspiration for lead optimization. Thus, the screening approach was evaluated positively and larger scale application is planned.

Experimental Section

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Software Specification

The following software programs were used for this study: Inte:ligand’s LigandScout 3.0 and Openeye’s VIDA for visualization of 3D figures. Inte:ligand’s LigandScout 2.3 for pharmacophore generation, Accelrys’ Catalyst 4.11 for screening and calculation of multiconformer databases, Openeye’s ROCS 2.4.2 for shape based alignment, and OMEGA 2.3.2 for calculation of multiconformer databases.

Compound Data Sets

Three compound databases were screened during this study. While a set of 41 LXR ligands (test set, Supporting Information, Figure S1) and a decoy set of drug-like compounds, the Derwent World Drug Index 2005 (WDI), were screened for pharmacophore validation, the third database was used for productive virtual screening (NCI database).
Forty-one ligands covering 12 scaffolds composed a validation data set, the so-called test set. The ligand structures and activity information were extracted from literature. We draw on a review by Bennett (10) and references therein, collecting LXR modulators published up to March 2007. Endogenous ligands and more recently published synthetic ligands completed our selection for the test set. (3, 8, 12-14, 26, 30, 48-55) Compounds’ 3D structures were prepared with CORINA 3.0 (56) and the multiconformer database was calculated using Accelrys’ Catalyst 4.11 (57) (catConf settings: maximum number of conformers = 250/molecule, generation type = best quality, max. energy 20 kcal/mol above the calculated energy minimum). The WDI is a commercially available database with 67 050 drugs and biologically active compounds. (58) Here, we used this data set for selectivity check of the pharmacophores and considered these compounds as inactive decoys for the screening. The NCI database is the compound collection provided by the Developmental Therapeutic Program of the National Cancer Institute, (59) and a part of the compounds are provided for experimental research. The NCI data set, release 3, 2003 including 260 071 entries was downloaded and calculated as a multiconformational database using Catalyst for pharmacophore screening resulting in a 250 761 compound library (catconf settings: maximum number of conformers =100/molecule, generation type = fast). The hit lists as well as the NCI Database were calculated as multiconformational databases using OMEGA version 2.3.2 with the default setting to provide a format compatible with ROCS.

Pharmacophore Modeling, Screening, and Validation

The pharmacophores were generated applying LigandScout2.3 with default settings for the detection of protein–ligand interactions. (36) These primary pharmacophores were submitted to manual manipulation to exclude interactions with water molecules. The number of features for the primary pharmacophore models was reduced to make them more suitable for scaffold hopping during validation. VS was performed with the search engine of Accelrys’ Catalyst 4.11 using the best flexible search option. (57)
To validate the models we screened the WDI as a collection of decoys and our test set including 41 LXR modulators. Calculating the enrichment factor (EF) helps to quantify the models discriminatory power:where TP is the number of active LXR modulators matched by the model, n is the sum of LXR modulators and decoys matched by the model, A is the number of active LXR modulators within the test set, and N is the number of all compounds in the validation data sets. (60)

Shape Alignment

The command line application ROCS 2.4.2 performs automated alignment of investigated compounds to a query molecule optimizing the overlap of the shape, which is characterized by a sum of continuous Gaussian functions. (38) ROCS optimizes the shape overlap and produces a scoring function according to the Tanimoto equation,where I terms are the self-volume overlaps for the query molecule f and a compared molecule g and the overlap Of,g, was maximized during alignment.
A further ROCS score is the ColorTanimoto, which calculates the overlap of the six chemical features (hydrogen-bond donors, hydrogen-bond acceptors, hydrophobes, anions, cations, and rings), defined with the ImplicitMillsDean force field. (61) The TanimotoCombo, which simply adds the two scores ShapeTanimoto and ColorTanimoto, was used for the ranking of the pharmacophore-based hit lists. It can take values between 0 and 2. We used the conformations of cocrystallized LXR activators from the PDB entries as query molecules for the alignment of the hit lists produced by the pharmacophores derived from the same PDB entry

LXR Reporter Assay

A bioluminescence assay using the luciferase reporter construct driven by ABCA1 gene promoter was used to quantify the activity of potential LXR modulators. All experimental conditions were exactly as described by us recently, (62) except for overexpressing human LXRβ and using ABCA1 promoter-driven reporter. The induction relative to compound 2 (100%) was determined for all 18 compounds performing three repeats for each experiment at 1 and 25 μM concentration, respectively. Two experiments at 25 μM were not possible due to solubility problems. For four active compounds, additional dose-dependency experiments were performed at five concentrations, and these experiments were evaluated for EC50 estimations.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Structures and transactivation assay results of the 18 tested compounds, the comparative analysis of independent pharmacophore and shape-based screening, the test set of compounds used for validation, and the pharmacophore modeling for 3kfc. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

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 Author
    • Daniela Schuster - Computer-Aided Molecular Design (CAMD) Group and CMBI, Institute of Pharmacy/Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 80/82, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Susanne von Grafenstein - Institute of General, Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry/Theoretical Chemistry and Center for Molecular Biosciences Innsbruck (CMBI), University of Innsbruck, Innrain 80/82, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
    • Judit Mihaly-Bison - Department of Vascular Biology and Thrombosis Research, Medical University of Vienna, Schwarzspanierstrasse 17, A-1090 Wien, Austria
    • Gerhard Wolber - Institute of Pharmacy/Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Koenigin Luise Strasse 2 + 4, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
    • Valery N. Bochkov - Department of Vascular Biology and Thrombosis Research, Medical University of Vienna, Schwarzspanierstrasse 17, A-1090 Wien, Austria
    • Klaus R. Liedl - Institute of General, Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry/Theoretical Chemistry and Center for Molecular Biosciences Innsbruck (CMBI), University of Innsbruck, Innrain 80/82, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgment

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This work was part of the national research network “Drugs from Nature Targeting Inflammation–DNTI“ projects number S107 sponsored by the Austrian Science Fund FWF (subprojects S1072/S10711 and S10709/S10713). Test compounds were provided free of charge by the National Cancer Institute. We thank Dr. Rémy D. Hoffmann, Accelrys SARL Paris, for screening the Derwent WDI database and Patrick Markt, Johannes Kirchmair, Stefan Noha, and Gudrun Spitzer for discussion on methodical issues as well as Judith Rollinger for technical support.

Abbreviations

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

LXR

Liver X receptor

LBD

ligand binding domain

DBD

DNA binding domain

HTS

high throughput screening

VS

virtual screening

WDI

world drug index

NCI

National Cancer Institute

EF

enrichment factor

HBA

hydrogen bond acceptor

HBD

hydrogen bond donor

HF

hydrophobic feature

AR

aromatic ring feature

HAF

hydrophobic aromatic feature

sh

shape

Xvols

exclusion volumes

SD standard deviation
RXR

retinoid X receptor

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 64 other publications.

  1. 1
    Auwerx, J.; Baulieu, E.; Beato, M.; Becker-Andre, M.; Burbach, P. H.; Camerino, G.; Chambon, P.; Cooney, A.; Dejean, A.; Dreyer, C.; Evans, R. M.; Gannon, F.; Giguere, V.; Gronemeyer, H.; Gustafson, J. A.; Laudet, V.; Lazar, M. A.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Milbrandt, J.; Milgrom, E.; Moore, D. D.; O’Malley, B.; Parker, M.; Parker, K.; Perlmann, T.; Pfahl, M.; Rosenfeld, M. G.; Samuels, H.; Schutz, G.; Sladek, F. M.; Stunnenberg, H. G.; Spedding, M.; Thummel, C.; Tsai, M. J.; Umesono, K.; Vennstrom, B.; Wahli, W.; Weinberger, C.; Willson, T. M.; Yamamoto, K. Nucl Receptors Nomenclature, C., A unified nomenclature system for the nuclear receptor superfamily Cell 1999, 97, 161 163
  2. 2
    Janowski, B. A.; Willy, P. J.; Devi, T. R.; Falck, J. R.; Mangelsdorf, D. J. An oxysterol signalling pathway mediated by the nuclear receptor LXR alpha Nature 1996, 383, 728 731
  3. 3
    Schultz, J. R.; Tu, H.; Luk, A.; Repa, J. J.; Medina, J. C.; Li, L. P.; Schwendner, S.; Wang, S.; Thoolen, M.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Lustig, K. D.; Shan, B. Role of LXRs in control of lipogenesis Genes Dev. 2000, 14, 2831 2838
  4. 4
    Bensinger, S. J.; Tontonoz, P. Integration of metabolism and inflammation by lipid-activated nuclear receptors Nature 2008, 454, 470 477
  5. 5
    Bensinger, S. J.; Bradley, M. N.; Joseph, S. B.; Zelcer, N.; Janssen, E. M.; Hausner, M. A.; Shih, R.; Parks, J. S.; Edwards, P. A.; Jamieson, B. D.; Tontonoz, P. LXR signaling couples sterol metabolism to proliferation in the acquired immune response Cell 2008, 134, 97 111
  6. 6
    Joseph, S. B.; Castrillo, A.; Laffitte, B. A.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Tontonoz, P. Reciprocal regulation of inflammation and lipid metabolism by liver X receptors Nat. Med. 2003, 9, 213 219
  7. 7
    Kalaany, N. Y.; Mangelsdorf, D. J. LXRs and FXR: The Yin and Yang of cholesterol and fat metabolism Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2006, 68, 159 191
  8. 8
    Collins, J. L.; Fivush, A. M.; Watson, M. A.; Galardi, C. M.; Lewis, M. C.; Moore, L. B.; Parks, D. J.; Wilson, J. G.; Tippin, T. K.; Binz, J. G.; Plunket, K. D.; Morgan, D. G.; Beaudet, E. J.; Whitney, K. D.; Kliewer, S. A.; Willson, T. M. Identification of a nonsteroidal liver X receptor agonist through parallel array synthesis of tertiary amines J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 1963 1966
  9. 9
    Bradley, M. N.; Hong, C.; Chen, M. Y.; Joseph, S. B.; Wilpitz, D. C.; Wang, X. P.; Lusis, A. J.; Collins, A.; Hseuh, W. A.; Collins, J. L.; Tangirala, R. K.; Tontonoz, P. Ligand activation of LXR beta reverses atherosclerosis and cellular cholesterol overload in mice lacking LXR alpha and apoE J. Clin. Investig. 2007, 117, 2337 2346
  10. 10
    Bennett, D. J.; Carswell, E. L.; Cooke, A. J.; Edwards, A. S.; Nimz, O. Design, structure activity relationships and X-ray co-crystallography of non-steroidal LXR agonists Curr. Med. Chem. 2008, 15, 195 209
  11. 11
    Goodwin, B. J.; Zuercher, W. J.; Collins, J. L. Recent advances in Liver X Receptor biology and chemistry Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2008, 8, 781 791
  12. 12
    Hu, B.; Quinet, E.; Unwalla, R.; Collini, M.; Jetter, J.; Dooley, R.; Andraka, D.; Nogle, L.; Savio, D.; Halpern, A.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Nambi, P.; Wrobel, J. Carboxylic acid based quinolines as liver X receptor modulators that have LXR beta receptor binding selectivity Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2008, 18, 54 59
  13. 13
    Hu, B.; Unwalla, R.; Collini, M.; Quinet, E.; Feingold, I.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wihelmsson, A.; Nambi, P.; Wrobel, J. Discovery and SAR of cinnolines/quinolines as liver X receptor (LXR) agonists with binding selectivity for LXR beta Biorg. Med. Chem. 2009, 17, 3519 3527
  14. 14
    Wrobel, J.; Steffan, R.; Bowen, S. M.; Magolda, R.; Matelan, E.; Unwalla, R.; Basso, M.; Clerin, V.; Gardell, S. J.; Nambi, P.; Quinet, E.; Reminick, J. I.; Vlasuk, G. P.; Wang, S.; Feingold, I.; Huselton, C.; Bonn, T.; Farnegardh, M.; Hansson, T.; Nilsson, A. G.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Zamaratski, E.; Evans, M. J. Indazole-based liver X receptor (LXR) modulators with maintained atherosclerotic lesion reduction activity but diminished stimulation of hepatic triglyceride synthesis J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 7161 7168
  15. 15
    Fievet, C.; Staels, B. Liver X receptor modulators: Effects on lipid metabolism and potential use in the treatment of atherosclerosis Biochem. Pharmacol. 2009, 77, 1316 1327
  16. 16
    Calkin, A. C.; Tontonoz, P. Liver X receptor signaling pathways and atherosclerosis Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 2010, 30, 1513 1518
  17. 17
    Zuercher, W. J.; Buckholz, R. G.; Campobasso, N.; Collins, J. L.; Galardi, C. M.; Gampe, R. T.; Hyatt, S. M.; Merrihew, S. L.; Moore, J. T.; Oplinger, J. A.; Reid, P. R.; Spearing, P. K.; Stanley, T. B.; Stewart, E. L.; Willson, T. M. Discovery of tertiary sulfonamides as potent liver X receptor antagonists J. Med. Chem. 2010, 53, 3412 3416
  18. 18
    Joseph, S. B.; Bradley, M. N.; Castrillo, A.; Bruhn, K. W.; Mak, P. A.; Pei, L. M.; Hogenesch, J.; O’Connell, R. M.; Cheng, G. H.; Saez, E.; Miller, J. F.; Tontonoz, P. LXR-dependent gene expression is important for macrophage survival and the innate immune response Cell 2004, 119, 299 309
  19. 19
    Villablanca, E. J.; Raccosta, L.; Zhou, D.; Fontana, R.; Maggioni, D.; Negro, A.; Sanvito, F.; Ponzoni, M.; Valentinis, B.; Bregni, M.; Prinetti, A.; Steffensen, K. R.; Sonnino, S.; Gustafsson, J. A.; Doglioni, C.; Bordignon, C.; Traversari, C.; Russo, V. Tumor-mediated liver X receptor-alpha activation inhibits CC chemokine receptor-7 expression on dendritic cells and dampens antitumor responses Nat. Med. 2010, 16, 98 105
  20. 20
    Zelcer, N.; Khanlou, N.; Clare, R.; Jiang, Q.; Reed-Geaghan, E. G.; Landreth, G. E.; Vinters, H. V.; Tontonoz, P. Attenuation of neuroinflammation and Alzheimer’s disease pathology by liver x receptors Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007, 104, 10601 10606
  21. 21
    Fitz, N. F.; Cronican, A.; Pham, T.; Fogg, A.; Fauq, A. H.; Chapman, R.; Lefterov, I.; Koldamova, R. Liver X receptor agonist treatment ameliorates amyloid pathology and memory deficits caused by high-fat diet in APP23 mice J. Neurosci. 2010, 30, 6862 6872
  22. 22
    Baranowski, M. Biological role of liver X receptors J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2008, 59, 31 55
  23. 23
    Berman, H.; Westbrook, J.; Feng, Z.; Gilliland, G.; Bhat, T.; Weissig, H.; Shindyalov, I.; Bourne, P. The Protein Data Bank Nucleic Acids Res. 2000, 28, 235 42
  24. 24
    Berman, H.; Henrick, K.; Nakamura, H. Announcing the worldwide Protein Data Bank Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2003, 10, 980 980
  25. 25
    Farnegardh, M.; Bonn, T.; Sun, S.; Ljunggren, J.; Ahola, H.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Gustafsson, J. A.; Carlquist, M. The three-dimensional structure of the liver X receptor beta reveals a flexible ligand-binding pocket that can accommodate fundamentally different ligands J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 38821 38828
  26. 26
    Washburn, D. G.; Hoang, T. H.; Campobasso, N.; Smallwood, A.; Parks, D. J.; Webb, C. L.; Frank, K. A.; Nord, M.; Duraiswami, C.; Evans, C.; Jaye, M.; Thompson, S. K. Synthesis and SAR of potent LXR agonists containing an indole pharmacophore Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2009, 19, 1097 1100
  27. 27
    Chao, E. Y.; Caravella, J. A.; Watson, M. A.; Campobasso, N.; Ghisletti, S.; Billin, A. N.; Galardi, C.; Wang, P.; Laffitte, B. A.; Lannone, M. A.; Goodwin, B. J.; Nichols, J. A.; Parks, D. J.; Stewart, E.; Wiethe, R. W.; Williams, S. P.; Smallwood, A.; Pearce, K. H.; Glass, C. K.; Willson, T. M.; Zuercher, W. J.; Collins, J. L. Structure-guided design of N-phenyl tertiary amines as transrepression-selective liver X receptor modulators with anti-inflammatory activity J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 5758 5765
  28. 28
    Jaye, M. C.; Krawiec, J. A.; Campobasso, N.; Smallwood, A.; Qiu, C. Y.; Lu, Q.; Kerrigan, J. J.; Alvaro, M. D. L.; Laffitte, B.; Liu, W. S.; Marino, J. P.; Meyer, C. R.; Nichols, J. A.; Parks, D. J.; Perez, P.; Sarov-Blat, L.; Seepersaud, S. D.; Steplewski, K. M.; Thompson, S. K.; Wang, P.; Watson, M. A.; Webb, C. L.; Haigh, D.; Caravella, J. A.; Macphee, C. H.; Willson, T. M.; Collins, J. L. Discovery of substituted maleimides as liver X receptor agonists and determination of a ligand-bound crystal structure J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 5419 5422
  29. 29
    Kher, S.; Lake, K.; Sircar, I.; Pannala, M.; Bakir, F.; Zapf, J.; Xu, K.; Zhang, S. H.; Liu, J. P.; Morera, L.; Sakurai, N.; Jack, R.; Cheng, J. F. 2-Aryl-N-acyl indole derivatives as liver X receptor (LXR) agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2007, 17, 4442 4446
  30. 30
    Cheng, J. F.; Zapf, J.; Takedomi, K.; Fukushima, C.; Ogiku, T.; Zhang, S. H.; Yang, G.; Sakurai, N.; Barbosa, M.; Jack, R.; Xu, K. Combination of virtual screening and high throughput gene profiling for identification of novel liver X receptor modulators J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 2057 2061
  31. 31
    Ghemtio, L.; Devignes, M. D.; Smail-Tabbone, M.; Souchet, M.; Leroux, V.; Maigret, B. Comparison of three preprocessing filters efficiency in virtual screening: Identification of new putative LXR beta regulators as a test case J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50, 701 715
  32. 32
    Zhao, W.; Gu, Q.; Wang, L.; Ge, H.; Li, J.; Xu, J. Three-dimensional pharmacophore modeling of liver-X receptor agonists J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 51, 2147 2155
  33. 33
    Beautrait, A.; Leroux, V.; Chavent, M.; Ghemtio, L.; Devignes, M. D.; Smaiel-Tabbone, M.; Cai, W.; Shao, X.; Moreau, G.; Bladon, P.; Yao, J.; Maigret, B. Multiple-step virtual screening using VSM-G: overview and validation of fast geometrical matching enrichment J. Mol. Model. 2008, 14, 135 148
  34. 34
    Leach, A. R.; Gillet, V. J.; Lewis, R. A.; Taylor, R. Three-dimensional pharmacophore methods in drug discovery J. Med. Chem. 2010, 53, 539 558
  35. 35
    Langer, T. Pharmacophores in drug research Mol. Inform. 2010, 29, 470 475
  36. 36
    Wolber, G.; Langer, T. LigandScout: 3-D pharmacophores derived from protein-bound Ligands and their use as virtual screening filters J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 160 169
  37. 37
    OEChem, version 1.7.0; OpenEye Scientific Software, I., Santa Fe, NM, USA; www.eyesopen.com, 2009.
  38. 38
    Grant, J. A.; Gallardo, M. A.; Pickup, B. T. A fast method of molecular shape comparison: A simple application of a Gaussian description of molecular shape J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 1653 1666
  39. 39
    Williams, S.; Bledsoe, R. K.; Collins, J. L.; Boggs, S.; Lambert, M. H.; Miller, A. B.; Moore, J.; McKee, D. D.; Moore, L.; Nichols, J.; Parks, D.; Watson, M.; Wisely, B.; Willson, T. M. X-ray crystal structure of the liver X receptor beta ligand binding domain - Regulation by a histidine-tryptophan switch J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 27138 27143
  40. 40
    Ratni, H.; Blum-Kaelin, D.; Dehmlow, H.; Hartman, P.; Jablonski, P.; Masciadri, R.; Maugeais, C.; Patiny-Adam, A.; Panday, N.; Wright, M. Discovery of tetrahydro-cyclopenta[b]indole as selective LXRs modulator Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2009, 19, 1654 1657
  41. 41
    Markt, P.; Petersen, R.; Flindt, E.; Kristiansen, K.; Kirchmair, J.; Spitzer, G.; Distinto, S.; Schuster, D.; Wolber, G.; Laggner, C.; Langer, T. Discovery of novel PPAR ligands by a virtual screening approach based on pharmacophore modeling, 3D shape, and electrostatic similarity screening J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 6303 17
  42. 42
    Noha, S. M.; Atanasov, A. G.; Schuster, D.; Markt, P.; Fakhrudin, N.; Heiss, E. H.; Schrammel, O.; Rollinger, J. M.; Stuppner, H.; Dirsch, V. M.; Wolber, G. Discovery of a novel IKK-beta inhibitor by ligand-based virtual screening techniques Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 21, 577 583
  43. 43
    Fakhrudin, N.; Ladurner, A.; Atanasov, A. G.; Heiss, E. H.; Baumgartner, L.; Markt, P.; Schuster, D.; Ellmerer, E. P.; Wolber, G.; Rollinger, J. M.; Stuppner, H.; Dirsch, V. M. Computer-aided discovery, validation, and mechanistic characterization of novel neolignan activators of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma Mol. Pharmacol. 2010, 77, 559 566
  44. 44
    Waltenberger, B.; Wiechmann, K.; Bauer, J.; Markt, P.; Noha, S. M.; Wolber, G.; Rollinger, J. M.; Werz, O.; Schuster, D.; Stuppner, H. Pharmacophore modeling and virtual xcreening for novel acidic inhibitors of microsomal prostaglandin E-2 synthase-1 (mPGES-1) J. Med. Chem. 2011, 54, 3163 3174
  45. 45
    Schuster, D.; Waltenberger, B.; Kirchmair, J.; Distinto, S.; Markt, P.; Stuppner, H.; Rollinger, J. M.; Wolber, G. Predicting cyclooxygenase inhibition by three-dimensional pharmacophoric profiling. Part I: model generation, validation and applicability in ethnopharmacology Mol. Inform. 2010, 29, 75 86
  46. 46
    Schuster, D. 3D pharmacophores as tools for activity profiling Drug Discovery Today: Technol. 2010, 7, 205 211
  47. 47
    Bernotas, R. C.; Singhaus, R. R.; Kaufman, D. H.; Travins, J. M.; Ullrich, J. W.; Unwalla, R.; Quinet, E.; Evans, M.; Nambi, P.; Olland, A.; Kauppi, B.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wrobel, J. 4-(3-Aryloxyaryl)quinoline sulfones are potent liver X receptor agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2010, 20, 209 212
  48. 48
    Spencer, T. A.; Li, D. S.; Russel, J. S.; Collins, J. L.; Bledsoe, R. K.; Consler, T. G.; Moore, L. B.; Galardi, C. M.; McKee, D. D.; Moore, J. T.; Watson, M. A.; Parks, D. J.; Lambert, M. H.; Willson, T. M. Pharmacophore analysis of the nuclear oxysterol receptor LXR alpha J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 886 897
  49. 49
    Yang, C. D.; McDonald, J. G.; Patel, A.; Zhang, Y.; Umetani, M.; Xu, F.; Westover, E. J.; Covey, D. F.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Cohen, J. C.; Hobbs, H. H. Sterol intermediates from cholesterol biosynthetic pathway as liver X receptor ligands J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 27816 27826
  50. 50
    Molteni, V.; Li, X.; Nabakka, J.; Liang, F.; Wityak, J.; Koder, A.; Vargas, L.; Romeo, R.; Mitro, N.; Mak, P. A.; Seidel, M.; Haslam, J. A.; Chow, D.; Tuntland, T.; Spalding, T. A.; Brock, A.; Bradley, M.; Castrillo, A.; Tontonoz, P.; Saez, E. N-acylthiadiazolines, a new class of liver x receptor agonists with selectivity for LXR beta J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 4255 4259
  51. 51
    Li, L. P.; Liu, J. W.; Zhu, L. S.; Cutler, S.; Hasegawa, H.; Shan, B.; Medina, J. C. Discovery and optimization of a novel series of liver X receptor-alpha agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006, 16, 1638 1642
  52. 52
    Liu, W. G.; Chen, S.; Dropinski, J.; Colwell, L.; Robins, M.; Szymonifka, M.; Hayes, N.; Sharma, N.; MacNaul, K.; Hernandez, M.; Burton, C.; Sparrow, C. P.; Menke, J. G.; Singh, S. B. Design, synthesis, and structure-activity relationship of podocarpic acid amides as Liver X receptor agonists for potential treatment of atherosclerosis Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2005, 15, 4574 4578
  53. 53
    Szewczyk, J. W.; Huang, S.; Chin, J.; Tian, J.; Mitnal, L.; Rosa, R. L.; Peterson, L.; Sparrow, C. P.; Adams, A. D. SAR studies: Designing potent and selective LXR agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006, 16, 3055 3060
  54. 54
    Panday, N.; Benz, J.; Blum-Kaelin, D.; Bourgeaux, V.; Dehmlow, H.; Hartman, P.; Kuhn, B.; Ratni, H.; Warot, X.; Wright, M. B. Synthesis and evaluation of anilinohexafluoroisopropanols as activators/modulators of LXR alpha and beta Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006, 16, 5231 5237
  55. 55
    Hu, B. H.; Collini, M.; Unwalla, R.; Miller, C.; Singhaus, R.; Quinet, E.; Savio, D.; Halpern, A.; Basso, M.; Keith, J.; Clerin, V.; Chen, L.; Resmini, C.; Liu, Q. Y.; Feingold, I.; Huselton, C.; Azam, F.; Farnegardh, M.; Enroth, C.; Bonn, T.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Nambi, P.; Wrobel, J. Discovery of phenyl acetic acid substituted quinolines as novel liver X receptor agonists for the treatment of atherosclerosis J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 6151 6154
  56. 56
    Molecular Networks; Molecular Networks: Erlangen, Germany.
  57. 57
    http://accelrys.com/products/discovery-studio/; Accelrys Software Inc.: San Diego, 2005.
  58. 58
    Thompson Scientific; Derwent Publications Ltd.: London, U.K., 2005.
  59. 59
    Milne, G. W. A.; Nicklaus, M. C.; Driscoll, J. S.; Wang, S. M.; Zaharevitz, D. National-Cancer-Institute drug information-system 3D Database J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 1219 1224
  60. 60
    Güner, O. F.; Waldman, M.; Hoffmann, R.; Kim, J. H. Strategies for Database Mining and Pharmacophore Development; International University Line: La Jolla, CA, USA, 2000.
  61. 61
    Mills, J. E. J.; Dean, P. M. Three-dimensional hydrogen-bond geometry and probability information from a crystal survey J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1996, 10, 607 622
  62. 62
    Schuster, D.; Markt, P.; Grienke, U.; Mihaly-Bison, J.; Binder, M.; Noha, S. M.; Rollinger, J. M.; Stuppner, H.; Bochkov, V. N.; Wolber, G. Pharmacophore-based discovery of FXR agonists. Part I: Model development and experimental validation Biorg. Med. Chem. 2011, 19, 7168 7180
  63. 63
    Hoerer, S.; Schmid, A.; Heckel, A.; Budzinski, R. M.; Nar, H. Crystal structure of the human liver X receptor beta ligand-binding domain in complex with a synthetic agonist J. Mol. Biol. 2003, 334, 853 861
  64. 64
    Svensson, S.; Ostberg, T.; Jacobsson, M.; Norstrom, C.; Stefansson, K.; Hallen, D.; Johansson, I. C.; Zachrisson, K.; Ogg, D.; Jendeberg, L. Crystal structure of the heterodimeric complex of LXR alpha and RXR beta ligand-binding domains in a fully agonistic conformation EMBO J. 2003, 22, 4625 4633

Cited By

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article is cited by 15 publications.

  1. Bahaa El-Dien M. El-Gendy, Shaimaa S. Goher, Lamees S. Hegazy, Mohamed M. H. Arief, Thomas P. Burris. Recent Advances in the Medicinal Chemistry of Liver X Receptors. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2018, 61 (24) , 10935-10956. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.8b00045
  2. Veronika Temml, Constance V. Voss, Verena M. Dirsch, and Daniela Schuster . Discovery of New Liver X Receptor Agonists by Pharmacophore Modeling and Shape-Based Virtual Screening. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2014, 54 (2) , 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci400682b
  3. Sonam Deshwal, Anurag TK Baidya, Rajnish Kumar, Rajat Sandhir. Structure-based virtual screening for identification of potential non-steroidal LXR modulators against neurodegenerative conditions. The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 2022, 223 , 106150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2022.106150
  4. Asma Sellami, Manon Réau, Matthieu Montes, Nathalie Lagarde. Review of in silico studies dedicated to the nuclear receptor family: Therapeutic prospects and toxicological concerns. Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022, 13 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2022.986016
  5. Varsha D. Shiragannavar, Nirmala G. Sannappa Gowda, Prasanna K. Santhekadur. Discovery of eukaryotic cellular receptor for Withaferin A, a multifaceted drug from Withania somnifera plant. Medicine in Drug Discovery 2022, 14 , 100127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medidd.2022.100127
  6. Julio Buñay, Allan Fouache, Amalia Trousson, Cyrille de Joussineau, Erwan Bouchareb, Zhekun Zhu, Ayhan Kocer, Laurent Morel, Silvere Baron, Jean‐Marc A. Lobaccaro. Screening for liver X receptor modulators: Where are we and for what use?. British Journal of Pharmacology 2021, 178 (16) , 3277-3293. https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.15286
  7. Meimei Chen, Fafu Yang, Jie Kang, Huijuan Gan, Xuemei Yang, Xinmei Lai, Yuxing Gao. Identfication of Potent LXRβ-Selective Agonists without LXRα Activation by In Silico Approaches. Molecules 2018, 23 (6) , 1349. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules23061349
  8. He Peng, Zhihong Liu, Xin Yan, Jian Ren, Jun Xu. A de novo substructure generation algorithm for identifying the privileged chemical fragments of liver X receptorβ agonists. Scientific Reports 2017, 7 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08848-4
  9. Nathalie Lagarde, Solenne Delahaye, Jean-François Zagury, Matthieu Montes. Discriminating agonist and antagonist ligands of the nuclear receptors using 3D-pharmacophores. Journal of Cheminformatics 2016, 8 (1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s13321-016-0154-2
  10. Jean‐François Dufour, Joachim C. Mertens. Hepatocytes. 2015, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118663387.ch1
  11. Ulrike Grienke, Teresa Kaserer, Florian Pfluger, Christina E. Mair, Thierry Langer, Daniela Schuster, Judith M. Rollinger. Accessing biological actions of Ganoderma secondary metabolites by in silico profiling. Phytochemistry 2015, 114 , 114-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2014.10.010
  12. Yali Li, Ling Wang, Zhihong Liu, Chanjuan Li, Jiake Xu, Qiong Gu, Jun Xu. Predicting selective liver X receptor β agonists using multiple machine learning methods. Molecular BioSystems 2015, 11 (5) , 1241-1250. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4MB00718B
  13. Teresa Kaserer, Veronika Temml, Daniela Schuster. Pharmacophore‐Based Methods for Predicting the Inhibition and Induction of Metabolic Enzymes. 2014, 351-372. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527673261.ch14
  14. Teresa Kaserer, Veronika Temml, Daniela Schuster. Polypharmacology and Adverse Bioactivity Profiles Predict Potential Toxicity and Drug‐Related Adrs. 2014, 23-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783344.ch2
  15. Laureane N. Masi, Alice C. Rodrigues, Rui Curi. Fatty acids regulation of inflammatory and metabolic genes. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care 2013, 61 , 1. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCO.0b013e32836236df
  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. LXR modulators cocrystallized in PDB crystal structures.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Workflow for finding novel LXR modulators.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Binding pocket of compound 2 in 1pqc (A) and compound 5 in 1pq6 (B) with pharmacophore features of the models and highlighted cavity C1 (red), binding tunnel C2 (green), and subpocket C3 (blue); for the benefit of clear arrangement Xvols are hidden. His435, Trp443, and Phe340 are shown in ball and stick style. In part B, Phe340 changes its conformation and opens up the hydrophobic cavity C3 in order to accommodate the larger ligand compound 5.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. Pharmacophore models generated for LXR modulators. Chemical features are color-coded: hydrogen bond acceptor (HBA) red, hydrogen bond donor (HBD) green, hydrophobic (HF) yellow, aromatic ring feature (AR) blue, hydrophobic aromatic feature (HAF) blue and yellow, shape (sh), and exclusion volumes (Xvols) gray.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Newly identified LXR agonists and their shape alignment with the query compounds. (A) 7 with query compound 2 of 1upv. (B) 8 with query compound 5 of 1pq6. (C) 9 with query compound 3 of 3fal. (D) 10 with query compound 4 of 2acl.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. ABCA1 induction by compounds 7, 8, 9, and 10 at different concentrations. The control includes ABCA1 induction of compound 2 at 1 μM (light gray) and compound 5 at 1 μM (anthracite) as well as unstimulated control with DMSO (gray) and without DMSO (black).

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. Alignment of compound 7 in the LXR crystal structure (PDB code 2acl). Five hydrophobic interactions and a hydrogen bond with Ser278 (LXRβ numbering) were identified with LigandScout. His435, Trp443, and Ser278 are shown in ball and stick style.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 64 other publications.

    1. 1
      Auwerx, J.; Baulieu, E.; Beato, M.; Becker-Andre, M.; Burbach, P. H.; Camerino, G.; Chambon, P.; Cooney, A.; Dejean, A.; Dreyer, C.; Evans, R. M.; Gannon, F.; Giguere, V.; Gronemeyer, H.; Gustafson, J. A.; Laudet, V.; Lazar, M. A.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Milbrandt, J.; Milgrom, E.; Moore, D. D.; O’Malley, B.; Parker, M.; Parker, K.; Perlmann, T.; Pfahl, M.; Rosenfeld, M. G.; Samuels, H.; Schutz, G.; Sladek, F. M.; Stunnenberg, H. G.; Spedding, M.; Thummel, C.; Tsai, M. J.; Umesono, K.; Vennstrom, B.; Wahli, W.; Weinberger, C.; Willson, T. M.; Yamamoto, K. Nucl Receptors Nomenclature, C., A unified nomenclature system for the nuclear receptor superfamily Cell 1999, 97, 161 163
    2. 2
      Janowski, B. A.; Willy, P. J.; Devi, T. R.; Falck, J. R.; Mangelsdorf, D. J. An oxysterol signalling pathway mediated by the nuclear receptor LXR alpha Nature 1996, 383, 728 731
    3. 3
      Schultz, J. R.; Tu, H.; Luk, A.; Repa, J. J.; Medina, J. C.; Li, L. P.; Schwendner, S.; Wang, S.; Thoolen, M.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Lustig, K. D.; Shan, B. Role of LXRs in control of lipogenesis Genes Dev. 2000, 14, 2831 2838
    4. 4
      Bensinger, S. J.; Tontonoz, P. Integration of metabolism and inflammation by lipid-activated nuclear receptors Nature 2008, 454, 470 477
    5. 5
      Bensinger, S. J.; Bradley, M. N.; Joseph, S. B.; Zelcer, N.; Janssen, E. M.; Hausner, M. A.; Shih, R.; Parks, J. S.; Edwards, P. A.; Jamieson, B. D.; Tontonoz, P. LXR signaling couples sterol metabolism to proliferation in the acquired immune response Cell 2008, 134, 97 111
    6. 6
      Joseph, S. B.; Castrillo, A.; Laffitte, B. A.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Tontonoz, P. Reciprocal regulation of inflammation and lipid metabolism by liver X receptors Nat. Med. 2003, 9, 213 219
    7. 7
      Kalaany, N. Y.; Mangelsdorf, D. J. LXRs and FXR: The Yin and Yang of cholesterol and fat metabolism Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2006, 68, 159 191
    8. 8
      Collins, J. L.; Fivush, A. M.; Watson, M. A.; Galardi, C. M.; Lewis, M. C.; Moore, L. B.; Parks, D. J.; Wilson, J. G.; Tippin, T. K.; Binz, J. G.; Plunket, K. D.; Morgan, D. G.; Beaudet, E. J.; Whitney, K. D.; Kliewer, S. A.; Willson, T. M. Identification of a nonsteroidal liver X receptor agonist through parallel array synthesis of tertiary amines J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 1963 1966
    9. 9
      Bradley, M. N.; Hong, C.; Chen, M. Y.; Joseph, S. B.; Wilpitz, D. C.; Wang, X. P.; Lusis, A. J.; Collins, A.; Hseuh, W. A.; Collins, J. L.; Tangirala, R. K.; Tontonoz, P. Ligand activation of LXR beta reverses atherosclerosis and cellular cholesterol overload in mice lacking LXR alpha and apoE J. Clin. Investig. 2007, 117, 2337 2346
    10. 10
      Bennett, D. J.; Carswell, E. L.; Cooke, A. J.; Edwards, A. S.; Nimz, O. Design, structure activity relationships and X-ray co-crystallography of non-steroidal LXR agonists Curr. Med. Chem. 2008, 15, 195 209
    11. 11
      Goodwin, B. J.; Zuercher, W. J.; Collins, J. L. Recent advances in Liver X Receptor biology and chemistry Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2008, 8, 781 791
    12. 12
      Hu, B.; Quinet, E.; Unwalla, R.; Collini, M.; Jetter, J.; Dooley, R.; Andraka, D.; Nogle, L.; Savio, D.; Halpern, A.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Nambi, P.; Wrobel, J. Carboxylic acid based quinolines as liver X receptor modulators that have LXR beta receptor binding selectivity Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2008, 18, 54 59
    13. 13
      Hu, B.; Unwalla, R.; Collini, M.; Quinet, E.; Feingold, I.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wihelmsson, A.; Nambi, P.; Wrobel, J. Discovery and SAR of cinnolines/quinolines as liver X receptor (LXR) agonists with binding selectivity for LXR beta Biorg. Med. Chem. 2009, 17, 3519 3527
    14. 14
      Wrobel, J.; Steffan, R.; Bowen, S. M.; Magolda, R.; Matelan, E.; Unwalla, R.; Basso, M.; Clerin, V.; Gardell, S. J.; Nambi, P.; Quinet, E.; Reminick, J. I.; Vlasuk, G. P.; Wang, S.; Feingold, I.; Huselton, C.; Bonn, T.; Farnegardh, M.; Hansson, T.; Nilsson, A. G.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Zamaratski, E.; Evans, M. J. Indazole-based liver X receptor (LXR) modulators with maintained atherosclerotic lesion reduction activity but diminished stimulation of hepatic triglyceride synthesis J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 7161 7168
    15. 15
      Fievet, C.; Staels, B. Liver X receptor modulators: Effects on lipid metabolism and potential use in the treatment of atherosclerosis Biochem. Pharmacol. 2009, 77, 1316 1327
    16. 16
      Calkin, A. C.; Tontonoz, P. Liver X receptor signaling pathways and atherosclerosis Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 2010, 30, 1513 1518
    17. 17
      Zuercher, W. J.; Buckholz, R. G.; Campobasso, N.; Collins, J. L.; Galardi, C. M.; Gampe, R. T.; Hyatt, S. M.; Merrihew, S. L.; Moore, J. T.; Oplinger, J. A.; Reid, P. R.; Spearing, P. K.; Stanley, T. B.; Stewart, E. L.; Willson, T. M. Discovery of tertiary sulfonamides as potent liver X receptor antagonists J. Med. Chem. 2010, 53, 3412 3416
    18. 18
      Joseph, S. B.; Bradley, M. N.; Castrillo, A.; Bruhn, K. W.; Mak, P. A.; Pei, L. M.; Hogenesch, J.; O’Connell, R. M.; Cheng, G. H.; Saez, E.; Miller, J. F.; Tontonoz, P. LXR-dependent gene expression is important for macrophage survival and the innate immune response Cell 2004, 119, 299 309
    19. 19
      Villablanca, E. J.; Raccosta, L.; Zhou, D.; Fontana, R.; Maggioni, D.; Negro, A.; Sanvito, F.; Ponzoni, M.; Valentinis, B.; Bregni, M.; Prinetti, A.; Steffensen, K. R.; Sonnino, S.; Gustafsson, J. A.; Doglioni, C.; Bordignon, C.; Traversari, C.; Russo, V. Tumor-mediated liver X receptor-alpha activation inhibits CC chemokine receptor-7 expression on dendritic cells and dampens antitumor responses Nat. Med. 2010, 16, 98 105
    20. 20
      Zelcer, N.; Khanlou, N.; Clare, R.; Jiang, Q.; Reed-Geaghan, E. G.; Landreth, G. E.; Vinters, H. V.; Tontonoz, P. Attenuation of neuroinflammation and Alzheimer’s disease pathology by liver x receptors Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007, 104, 10601 10606
    21. 21
      Fitz, N. F.; Cronican, A.; Pham, T.; Fogg, A.; Fauq, A. H.; Chapman, R.; Lefterov, I.; Koldamova, R. Liver X receptor agonist treatment ameliorates amyloid pathology and memory deficits caused by high-fat diet in APP23 mice J. Neurosci. 2010, 30, 6862 6872
    22. 22
      Baranowski, M. Biological role of liver X receptors J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2008, 59, 31 55
    23. 23
      Berman, H.; Westbrook, J.; Feng, Z.; Gilliland, G.; Bhat, T.; Weissig, H.; Shindyalov, I.; Bourne, P. The Protein Data Bank Nucleic Acids Res. 2000, 28, 235 42
    24. 24
      Berman, H.; Henrick, K.; Nakamura, H. Announcing the worldwide Protein Data Bank Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2003, 10, 980 980
    25. 25
      Farnegardh, M.; Bonn, T.; Sun, S.; Ljunggren, J.; Ahola, H.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Gustafsson, J. A.; Carlquist, M. The three-dimensional structure of the liver X receptor beta reveals a flexible ligand-binding pocket that can accommodate fundamentally different ligands J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 38821 38828
    26. 26
      Washburn, D. G.; Hoang, T. H.; Campobasso, N.; Smallwood, A.; Parks, D. J.; Webb, C. L.; Frank, K. A.; Nord, M.; Duraiswami, C.; Evans, C.; Jaye, M.; Thompson, S. K. Synthesis and SAR of potent LXR agonists containing an indole pharmacophore Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2009, 19, 1097 1100
    27. 27
      Chao, E. Y.; Caravella, J. A.; Watson, M. A.; Campobasso, N.; Ghisletti, S.; Billin, A. N.; Galardi, C.; Wang, P.; Laffitte, B. A.; Lannone, M. A.; Goodwin, B. J.; Nichols, J. A.; Parks, D. J.; Stewart, E.; Wiethe, R. W.; Williams, S. P.; Smallwood, A.; Pearce, K. H.; Glass, C. K.; Willson, T. M.; Zuercher, W. J.; Collins, J. L. Structure-guided design of N-phenyl tertiary amines as transrepression-selective liver X receptor modulators with anti-inflammatory activity J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 5758 5765
    28. 28
      Jaye, M. C.; Krawiec, J. A.; Campobasso, N.; Smallwood, A.; Qiu, C. Y.; Lu, Q.; Kerrigan, J. J.; Alvaro, M. D. L.; Laffitte, B.; Liu, W. S.; Marino, J. P.; Meyer, C. R.; Nichols, J. A.; Parks, D. J.; Perez, P.; Sarov-Blat, L.; Seepersaud, S. D.; Steplewski, K. M.; Thompson, S. K.; Wang, P.; Watson, M. A.; Webb, C. L.; Haigh, D.; Caravella, J. A.; Macphee, C. H.; Willson, T. M.; Collins, J. L. Discovery of substituted maleimides as liver X receptor agonists and determination of a ligand-bound crystal structure J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 5419 5422
    29. 29
      Kher, S.; Lake, K.; Sircar, I.; Pannala, M.; Bakir, F.; Zapf, J.; Xu, K.; Zhang, S. H.; Liu, J. P.; Morera, L.; Sakurai, N.; Jack, R.; Cheng, J. F. 2-Aryl-N-acyl indole derivatives as liver X receptor (LXR) agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2007, 17, 4442 4446
    30. 30
      Cheng, J. F.; Zapf, J.; Takedomi, K.; Fukushima, C.; Ogiku, T.; Zhang, S. H.; Yang, G.; Sakurai, N.; Barbosa, M.; Jack, R.; Xu, K. Combination of virtual screening and high throughput gene profiling for identification of novel liver X receptor modulators J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 2057 2061
    31. 31
      Ghemtio, L.; Devignes, M. D.; Smail-Tabbone, M.; Souchet, M.; Leroux, V.; Maigret, B. Comparison of three preprocessing filters efficiency in virtual screening: Identification of new putative LXR beta regulators as a test case J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50, 701 715
    32. 32
      Zhao, W.; Gu, Q.; Wang, L.; Ge, H.; Li, J.; Xu, J. Three-dimensional pharmacophore modeling of liver-X receptor agonists J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 51, 2147 2155
    33. 33
      Beautrait, A.; Leroux, V.; Chavent, M.; Ghemtio, L.; Devignes, M. D.; Smaiel-Tabbone, M.; Cai, W.; Shao, X.; Moreau, G.; Bladon, P.; Yao, J.; Maigret, B. Multiple-step virtual screening using VSM-G: overview and validation of fast geometrical matching enrichment J. Mol. Model. 2008, 14, 135 148
    34. 34
      Leach, A. R.; Gillet, V. J.; Lewis, R. A.; Taylor, R. Three-dimensional pharmacophore methods in drug discovery J. Med. Chem. 2010, 53, 539 558
    35. 35
      Langer, T. Pharmacophores in drug research Mol. Inform. 2010, 29, 470 475
    36. 36
      Wolber, G.; Langer, T. LigandScout: 3-D pharmacophores derived from protein-bound Ligands and their use as virtual screening filters J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 160 169
    37. 37
      OEChem, version 1.7.0; OpenEye Scientific Software, I., Santa Fe, NM, USA; www.eyesopen.com, 2009.
    38. 38
      Grant, J. A.; Gallardo, M. A.; Pickup, B. T. A fast method of molecular shape comparison: A simple application of a Gaussian description of molecular shape J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 1653 1666
    39. 39
      Williams, S.; Bledsoe, R. K.; Collins, J. L.; Boggs, S.; Lambert, M. H.; Miller, A. B.; Moore, J.; McKee, D. D.; Moore, L.; Nichols, J.; Parks, D.; Watson, M.; Wisely, B.; Willson, T. M. X-ray crystal structure of the liver X receptor beta ligand binding domain - Regulation by a histidine-tryptophan switch J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 27138 27143
    40. 40
      Ratni, H.; Blum-Kaelin, D.; Dehmlow, H.; Hartman, P.; Jablonski, P.; Masciadri, R.; Maugeais, C.; Patiny-Adam, A.; Panday, N.; Wright, M. Discovery of tetrahydro-cyclopenta[b]indole as selective LXRs modulator Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2009, 19, 1654 1657
    41. 41
      Markt, P.; Petersen, R.; Flindt, E.; Kristiansen, K.; Kirchmair, J.; Spitzer, G.; Distinto, S.; Schuster, D.; Wolber, G.; Laggner, C.; Langer, T. Discovery of novel PPAR ligands by a virtual screening approach based on pharmacophore modeling, 3D shape, and electrostatic similarity screening J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 6303 17
    42. 42
      Noha, S. M.; Atanasov, A. G.; Schuster, D.; Markt, P.; Fakhrudin, N.; Heiss, E. H.; Schrammel, O.; Rollinger, J. M.; Stuppner, H.; Dirsch, V. M.; Wolber, G. Discovery of a novel IKK-beta inhibitor by ligand-based virtual screening techniques Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 21, 577 583
    43. 43
      Fakhrudin, N.; Ladurner, A.; Atanasov, A. G.; Heiss, E. H.; Baumgartner, L.; Markt, P.; Schuster, D.; Ellmerer, E. P.; Wolber, G.; Rollinger, J. M.; Stuppner, H.; Dirsch, V. M. Computer-aided discovery, validation, and mechanistic characterization of novel neolignan activators of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma Mol. Pharmacol. 2010, 77, 559 566
    44. 44
      Waltenberger, B.; Wiechmann, K.; Bauer, J.; Markt, P.; Noha, S. M.; Wolber, G.; Rollinger, J. M.; Werz, O.; Schuster, D.; Stuppner, H. Pharmacophore modeling and virtual xcreening for novel acidic inhibitors of microsomal prostaglandin E-2 synthase-1 (mPGES-1) J. Med. Chem. 2011, 54, 3163 3174
    45. 45
      Schuster, D.; Waltenberger, B.; Kirchmair, J.; Distinto, S.; Markt, P.; Stuppner, H.; Rollinger, J. M.; Wolber, G. Predicting cyclooxygenase inhibition by three-dimensional pharmacophoric profiling. Part I: model generation, validation and applicability in ethnopharmacology Mol. Inform. 2010, 29, 75 86
    46. 46
      Schuster, D. 3D pharmacophores as tools for activity profiling Drug Discovery Today: Technol. 2010, 7, 205 211
    47. 47
      Bernotas, R. C.; Singhaus, R. R.; Kaufman, D. H.; Travins, J. M.; Ullrich, J. W.; Unwalla, R.; Quinet, E.; Evans, M.; Nambi, P.; Olland, A.; Kauppi, B.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wrobel, J. 4-(3-Aryloxyaryl)quinoline sulfones are potent liver X receptor agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2010, 20, 209 212
    48. 48
      Spencer, T. A.; Li, D. S.; Russel, J. S.; Collins, J. L.; Bledsoe, R. K.; Consler, T. G.; Moore, L. B.; Galardi, C. M.; McKee, D. D.; Moore, J. T.; Watson, M. A.; Parks, D. J.; Lambert, M. H.; Willson, T. M. Pharmacophore analysis of the nuclear oxysterol receptor LXR alpha J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44, 886 897
    49. 49
      Yang, C. D.; McDonald, J. G.; Patel, A.; Zhang, Y.; Umetani, M.; Xu, F.; Westover, E. J.; Covey, D. F.; Mangelsdorf, D. J.; Cohen, J. C.; Hobbs, H. H. Sterol intermediates from cholesterol biosynthetic pathway as liver X receptor ligands J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 27816 27826
    50. 50
      Molteni, V.; Li, X.; Nabakka, J.; Liang, F.; Wityak, J.; Koder, A.; Vargas, L.; Romeo, R.; Mitro, N.; Mak, P. A.; Seidel, M.; Haslam, J. A.; Chow, D.; Tuntland, T.; Spalding, T. A.; Brock, A.; Bradley, M.; Castrillo, A.; Tontonoz, P.; Saez, E. N-acylthiadiazolines, a new class of liver x receptor agonists with selectivity for LXR beta J. Med. Chem. 2007, 50, 4255 4259
    51. 51
      Li, L. P.; Liu, J. W.; Zhu, L. S.; Cutler, S.; Hasegawa, H.; Shan, B.; Medina, J. C. Discovery and optimization of a novel series of liver X receptor-alpha agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006, 16, 1638 1642
    52. 52
      Liu, W. G.; Chen, S.; Dropinski, J.; Colwell, L.; Robins, M.; Szymonifka, M.; Hayes, N.; Sharma, N.; MacNaul, K.; Hernandez, M.; Burton, C.; Sparrow, C. P.; Menke, J. G.; Singh, S. B. Design, synthesis, and structure-activity relationship of podocarpic acid amides as Liver X receptor agonists for potential treatment of atherosclerosis Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2005, 15, 4574 4578
    53. 53
      Szewczyk, J. W.; Huang, S.; Chin, J.; Tian, J.; Mitnal, L.; Rosa, R. L.; Peterson, L.; Sparrow, C. P.; Adams, A. D. SAR studies: Designing potent and selective LXR agonists Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006, 16, 3055 3060
    54. 54
      Panday, N.; Benz, J.; Blum-Kaelin, D.; Bourgeaux, V.; Dehmlow, H.; Hartman, P.; Kuhn, B.; Ratni, H.; Warot, X.; Wright, M. B. Synthesis and evaluation of anilinohexafluoroisopropanols as activators/modulators of LXR alpha and beta Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006, 16, 5231 5237
    55. 55
      Hu, B. H.; Collini, M.; Unwalla, R.; Miller, C.; Singhaus, R.; Quinet, E.; Savio, D.; Halpern, A.; Basso, M.; Keith, J.; Clerin, V.; Chen, L.; Resmini, C.; Liu, Q. Y.; Feingold, I.; Huselton, C.; Azam, F.; Farnegardh, M.; Enroth, C.; Bonn, T.; Goos-Nilsson, A.; Wilhelmsson, A.; Nambi, P.; Wrobel, J. Discovery of phenyl acetic acid substituted quinolines as novel liver X receptor agonists for the treatment of atherosclerosis J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 6151 6154
    56. 56
      Molecular Networks; Molecular Networks: Erlangen, Germany.
    57. 57
      http://accelrys.com/products/discovery-studio/; Accelrys Software Inc.: San Diego, 2005.
    58. 58
      Thompson Scientific; Derwent Publications Ltd.: London, U.K., 2005.
    59. 59
      Milne, G. W. A.; Nicklaus, M. C.; Driscoll, J. S.; Wang, S. M.; Zaharevitz, D. National-Cancer-Institute drug information-system 3D Database J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 1219 1224
    60. 60
      Güner, O. F.; Waldman, M.; Hoffmann, R.; Kim, J. H. Strategies for Database Mining and Pharmacophore Development; International University Line: La Jolla, CA, USA, 2000.
    61. 61
      Mills, J. E. J.; Dean, P. M. Three-dimensional hydrogen-bond geometry and probability information from a crystal survey J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 1996, 10, 607 622
    62. 62
      Schuster, D.; Markt, P.; Grienke, U.; Mihaly-Bison, J.; Binder, M.; Noha, S. M.; Rollinger, J. M.; Stuppner, H.; Bochkov, V. N.; Wolber, G. Pharmacophore-based discovery of FXR agonists. Part I: Model development and experimental validation Biorg. Med. Chem. 2011, 19, 7168 7180
    63. 63
      Hoerer, S.; Schmid, A.; Heckel, A.; Budzinski, R. M.; Nar, H. Crystal structure of the human liver X receptor beta ligand-binding domain in complex with a synthetic agonist J. Mol. Biol. 2003, 334, 853 861
    64. 64
      Svensson, S.; Ostberg, T.; Jacobsson, M.; Norstrom, C.; Stefansson, K.; Hallen, D.; Johansson, I. C.; Zachrisson, K.; Ogg, D.; Jendeberg, L. Crystal structure of the heterodimeric complex of LXR alpha and RXR beta ligand-binding domains in a fully agonistic conformation EMBO J. 2003, 22, 4625 4633
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    Structures and transactivation assay results of the 18 tested compounds, the comparative analysis of independent pharmacophore and shape-based screening, the test set of compounds used for validation, and the pharmacophore modeling for 3kfc. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.


    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