BACKGROUND: Because annulated indoles have almost no representation in the PubChem or MLSMR databases, an unprecedented class of an indole-based library was constructed, using the indole aryne methodology, and screened for antitumor activity. Sixty-six novel 6,7-annulated-4-substituted indole compounds were synthesized, using a strategic combination of 6,7-indolyne cycloaddition and cross-coupling reactions under both Suzuki-Miyaura and Buchwald-Hartwig conditions, and tested for their effectiveness against murine L1210 tumor cell proliferation in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Various markers of tumor cell metabolism, DNA degradation, mitotic disruption, cytokinesis and apoptosis were assayed in vitro to evaluate drug cytotoxicity. RESULTS: Most compounds inhibited the metabolic activity of leukemic cells in a time- and concentration-dependent manner but only 9 of them were sufficiently potent to inhibit L1210 tumor cell proliferation by 50% in the low-μM range after 2 (IC(50): 4.5-20.4 μM) and 4 days (0.5-4.0 μM) in culture. However, the antiproliferative compounds that were the most effective at day 4 were not necessarily the most potent at day 2, suggesting different speeds of action. A 3-h treatment with antiproliferative annulated indole was sufficient to inhibit, in a concentration-dependent manner, the rate of DNA synthesis measured in L1210 cells over a 0.5-h period of pulse-labeling with (3)H-thymidine. Four of the antiproliferative compounds had weak DNA-binding activities but one compound reduced the fluorescence of the ethidium bromide-DNA complex by up to 53%, suggesting that some annulated indoles might directly interact with double-stranded DNA to disrupt its integrity and prevent the dye from intercalating into DNA base pairs. However, all 9 antiproliferative compounds induced DNA cleavage at 24 h in L1210 cells, containing (3)H-thymidine-prelabeled DNA, suggesting that these antitumor annulated indoles might trigger an apoptotic pathway of DNA fragmentation. Indeed the antiproliferative annulated indoles caused a time-dependent increase of caspase-3 activity with a peak at 6 h. Interestingly, the compounds with the most potent antiproliferative IC(50) values at day 2 were consistently the most effective at inhibiting DNA synthesis at 3 h and inducing DNA fragmentation at 24 h. After 24-48 h, antiproliferative concentrations of annulated indoles increased the mitotic index of L1210 cells and stimulated the formation of many bi-nucleated cells, multi-nucleated cells, apoptotic cells and micronuclei, suggesting that these antitumor compounds might enhance mitotic abnormality, induce chromosomal damage or missegregation, and block cytokinesis to induce apoptosis. CONCLUSION: Although annulated indoles may have interesting bioactivity, novel derivatives with different substitutions must be synthesized to elucidate structure-activity relationships, identify more potent antitumor lead compounds, and investigate their molecular targets and mechanisms of action.
BACKGROUND: Because annulated indoles have almost no representation in the PubChem or MLSMR databases, an unprecedented class of an indole-based library was constructed, using the indole aryne methodology, and screened for antitumor activity. Sixty-six novel 6,7-annulated-4-substituted indole compounds were synthesized, using a strategic combination of 6,7-indolyne cycloaddition and cross-coupling reactions under both Suzuki-Miyaura and Buchwald-Hartwig conditions, and tested for their effectiveness against murineL1210 tumor cell proliferation in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Various markers of tumor cell metabolism, DNA degradation, mitotic disruption, cytokinesis and apoptosis were assayed in vitro to evaluate drug cytotoxicity. RESULTS: Most compounds inhibited the metabolic activity of leukemic cells in a time- and concentration-dependent manner but only 9 of them were sufficiently potent to inhibit L1210 tumor cell proliferation by 50% in the low-μM range after 2 (IC(50): 4.5-20.4 μM) and 4 days (0.5-4.0 μM) in culture. However, the antiproliferative compounds that were the most effective at day 4 were not necessarily the most potent at day 2, suggesting different speeds of action. A 3-h treatment with antiproliferative annulated indole was sufficient to inhibit, in a concentration-dependent manner, the rate of DNA synthesis measured in L1210 cells over a 0.5-h period of pulse-labeling with (3)H-thymidine. Four of the antiproliferative compounds had weak DNA-binding activities but one compound reduced the fluorescence of the ethidium bromide-DNA complex by up to 53%, suggesting that some annulated indoles might directly interact with double-stranded DNA to disrupt its integrity and prevent the dye from intercalating into DNA base pairs. However, all 9 antiproliferative compounds induced DNA cleavage at 24 h in L1210 cells, containing (3)H-thymidine-prelabeled DNA, suggesting that these antitumor annulated indoles might trigger an apoptotic pathway of DNA fragmentation. Indeed the antiproliferative annulated indoles caused a time-dependent increase of caspase-3 activity with a peak at 6 h. Interestingly, the compounds with the most potent antiproliferative IC(50) values at day 2 were consistently the most effective at inhibiting DNA synthesis at 3 h and inducing DNA fragmentation at 24 h. After 24-48 h, antiproliferative concentrations of annulated indoles increased the mitotic index of L1210 cells and stimulated the formation of many bi-nucleated cells, multi-nucleated cells, apoptotic cells and micronuclei, suggesting that these antitumor compounds might enhance mitotic abnormality, induce chromosomal damage or missegregation, and block cytokinesis to induce apoptosis. CONCLUSION: Although annulated indoles may have interesting bioactivity, novel derivatives with different substitutions must be synthesized to elucidate structure-activity relationships, identify more potent antitumor lead compounds, and investigate their molecular targets and mechanisms of action.
Authors: Jean-Pierre H Perchellet; Andrew M Waters; Elisabeth M Perchellet; Vijaya K Naganaboina; Kusum L Chandra; John Desper; Sundeep Rayat Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Paul D Thornton; Neil Brown; David Hill; Ben Neuenswander; Gerald H Lushington; Conrad Santini; Keith R Buszek Journal: ACS Comb Sci Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 3.784
Authors: Y Hitotsuyanagi; H Fujiki; M Suganuma; N Aimi; S Sakai; Y Endo; K Shudo; T Sugimura Journal: Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo) Date: 1984-10 Impact factor: 1.645
Authors: Elisabeth M Perchellet; Kyle R Crow; Gunjan Gakhar; Thu Annelise Nguyen; Aibin Shi; Duy H Hua; Jean-Pierre H Perchellet Journal: Int J Oncol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.650
Authors: Jean-Pierre H Perchellet; Elisabeth M Perchellet; Chingakham Ranjit Singh; Meghan T Monnett; Elizabeth R Studer; Paul D Thornton; Neil Brown; David Hill; Ben Neuenswander; Gerald H Lushington; Conrad Santini; Keith R Buszek Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 2.480