Castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is a fatal, metastatic form of prostate cancer. CRPC is characterized by reactivation of the androgen axis due to changes in androgen receptor signaling and/or adaptive intratumoral androgen biosynthesis. AKR1C3 is upregulated in CRPC where it catalyzes the formation of potent androgens. This makes AKR1C3 a target for the treatment of CRPC. AKR1C3 inhibitors should not inhibit AKR1C1/AKR1C2, which inactivate 5α-dihydrotestosterone. Indomethacin, used to inhibit cyclooxygenase, also inhibits AKR1C3 and displays selectivity over AKR1C1/AKR1C2. Parallel synthetic strategies were used to generate libraries of indomethacin analogues, which exhibit reduced cyclooxygenase inhibitory activity but retain AKR1C3 inhibitory potency and selectivity. The lead compounds inhibited AKR1C3 with nanomolar potency, displayed >100-fold selectivity over AKR1C1/AKR1C2, and blocked testosterone formation in LNCaP-AKR1C3 cells. The AKR1C3·NADP(+)·2'-des-methyl-indomethacin crystal structure was determined, and it revealed a unique inhibitor binding mode. The compounds reported are promising agents for the development of therapeutics for CRPC.
Castrate-resistanpan>t pan> class="Disease">prostate cancer (CRPC) is a fatal, metastatic form of prostate cancer. CRPC is characterized by reactivation of the androgen axis due to changes in androgen receptor signaling and/or adaptive intratumoral androgen biosynthesis. AKR1C3 is upregulated in CRPC where it catalyzes the formation of potent androgens. This makes AKR1C3 a target for the treatment of CRPC. AKR1C3 inhibitors should not inhibit AKR1C1/AKR1C2, which inactivate 5α-dihydrotestosterone. Indomethacin, used to inhibit cyclooxygenase, also inhibits AKR1C3 and displays selectivity over AKR1C1/AKR1C2. Parallel synthetic strategies were used to generate libraries of indomethacin analogues, which exhibit reduced cyclooxygenase inhibitory activity but retain AKR1C3 inhibitory potency and selectivity. The lead compounds inhibited AKR1C3 with nanomolar potency, displayed >100-fold selectivity over AKR1C1/AKR1C2, and blocked testosterone formation in LNCaP-AKR1C3 cells. The AKR1C3·NADP(+)·2'-des-methyl-indomethacin crystal structure was determined, and it revealed a unique inhibitor binding mode. The compounds reported are promising agents for the development of therapeutics for CRPC.
Aldo-keto reductase
1C3, also known as type 5 17β-hydroxysteroid
depan> class="Chemical">hydrogenase, is a critical enzyme in androgen biosynthesis within
the prostate and has been implicated in the development of castrate-resistant
prostate cancer (CRPC). CRPC is characterized by the intratumoral
reactivation of androgen receptor signaling caused by adaptive intratumoral
androgen biosynthesis and/or androgen receptor (AR) amplification
leading to resistance to androgen deprivation therapy.[1−3] Elevated androgen levels within the tumor occur due to the upregulation
of key enzymes involved in androgen biosynthesis.[4−6] AKR1C3 catalyzes
the conversion of the weak androgen precursors 4-androstene-3,17-dione
(Δ4-AD) and 5α-androstane-3,17-dione to the
potent androgens testosterone and 5α-dihydrotestosterone (DHT),
respectively, and is one of the most highly upregulated genes in CRPC,
Figure 1.[4,5]
Figure 1
Representative reactions
catalyzed by AKR1C3. AR = androgen receptor,
FP = F prostanoid receptor, and PG = prostaglandin.
Representative reactions
catalyzed by AKR1C3. pan> class="Gene">AR = androgen receptor,
FP = F prostanoid receptor, and PG = prostaglandin.The success in phase III clinical trials of abiraterone
acetate
(pan> class="Chemical">Zytiga), a 17α-hydroxylase/17,20-lyase inhibitor, and its subsequent
approval by the FDA support the involvement of adaptive androgen biosynthesis
within the tumor in CRPC.[7−10] However, abiraterone blocks glucocorticoid (cortisol)
biosynthesis. Abiraterone therefore needs to be coadministered with
the glucocorticoid, prednisone to limit adverse effects. Since AKR1C3
acts further downstream of CYP17, it does not play a role in glucocorticoid
biosynthesis, which in addition to its intratumoral localization makes
it an appealing therapeutic target in CRPC.AKR1C3 through its
pan> class="Chemical">prostaglandin (PG) F2α synthase
activity also redirects the metabolism of PGD2 into 11β-PGF2α and can suppress the activation of PPARγ by
preventing the formation of putative PGJ2 ligands, which
would favor differentiation.[11−15] Thus, AKR1C3 inhibition might be beneficial in either hormone-dependent
or hormone-independent prostate cancer.AKR1C1 anpan>d pan> class="Gene">AKR1C2are
isoforms closely related to AKR1C3 and are
required to inactivate DHT in the prostate.[16−19] It is therefore imperative that
AKR1C3 be inhibited selectively. Several selective AKR1C3 inhibitors
have recently been reported. These compounds include 3-(phenylamino)benzoic
acids,[20−22] baccharin,[23] 3-(3,4-dihydroisoquinolin-2(1H)-ylsulfonyl)benzoic acids,[24]N-benzoylanthranilic acids,[25] and a thiazolidinedione[26] that
was discovered by virtual screening (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Structures of other known selective AKR1C3 inhibitors.
Structures of other known selective n class="Gene">AKR1C3 inhibitors.
Nonsteroidal anpan>ti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) pan> class="Gene">are
potent inhibitors
of the AKR1C enzymes at therapeutically relevant concentrations.[12,27−29] In contrast to most NSAIDs, indomethacin inhibits
AKR1C3 with little or no effect on AKR1C1 and AKR1C2. Indomethacin
has been shown to inhibit AKR1C3-dependent processes in human cell
lines and murine xenografts.[14,30] However, the potential
therapeutic usefulness of indomethacin in the context of CRPC is limited
because of the undesired side effects associated with chronic COX
inhibition. Despite this, indomethacin represents a vital lead compound
that can be used to develop selective AKR1C3 inhibitors that are stripped
of COX inhibitory activity.Extensive SAR studies on pan> class="Chemical">indomethacin
(Figure 3) have shown that the p-chlorobenzoyl group,
the 2′-methyl group, and the 3′-acetic acid side chain
are essential for COX inhibition. Previous efforts in our lab led
to the discovery of N-(4-chlorobenzoyl)-melatonin,
which inhibited AKR1C3 with potency comparable to that seen with indomethacin;
moreover, it was selective over AKR1C1 and AKR1C2, and it did not
inhibit COX.[31,32] However, the therapeutic usefulness
of this compound is limited due to its poor solubility and bioavailability.
Figure 3
Structure
of indomethacin (1) is shown. Groups shown
in red are essential for COX inhibition and were modified to yield
class I analogues; class II compounds are 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin analogues; and class III compounds are 3′-alkyl
analogues.
Structure
of indomethacin (1) is shownpan>. Groups shownpan>
in red pan> class="Gene">are essential for COX inhibition and were modified to yield
class I analogues; class II compounds are 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin analogues; and class III compounds are 3′-alkyl
analogues.In this study, we report the synthesis
and structure–activity
relationship studies of three series of indomethacin anpan>alogues. These
compounds have been classified based on the presence anpan>d position
of the 2′-alkyl group anpan>d the 3′-pan> class="Chemical">aliphatic acid group
on the indole ring.[33] Class I analogues
have the 2′-alkyl, 3′-aliphatic acidarrangement on
the indole ring of indomethacin preserved, class II compounds are
based on 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin and retain
the 3′-aliphatic acid group on the indole ring but lack the
2′-methyl group, and class III compounds have this arrangement
reversed to give an aliphatic acid group on the 2′-position
and an alkyl group on the 3′-positon of the indole ring (Figure 3).This study led to the discovery of potent
and selective AKR1C3
inhibitors that pan> class="Gene">are devoid of inhibitory activity against AKR1C1,
AKR1C2, and COX. Additionally, these compounds block androgen synthesis
in a prostate cancer cell line that overexpresses AKR1C3 and have
no agonist effect on the AR. The crystal structure of AKR1C3 in complex
with 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin is also reported,
showing that this class of compounds occupies a unique binding pose
in the enzyme active site.
Results
Chemistry
Our
search for novel pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 inhibitors was
aided by the availability of high-throughput chemistry and analysis
technologies. All three classes of compounds were prepared using parallel
synthesis approaches based on well-established Fischer–indole
chemistry. We reported previously an efficient three-step reaction
sequence that is amenable to rapid and high-yielding analogue production
(outlined in Scheme 1).[34] The optimized route used indole alkanoic acid methyl- or
allyl esters as intermediates, featured maximum synthetical flexibility
(e.g., variation of the indole 5′-substituents or late-stage N-acylation), and was more sustainable than the conventional
pathway shown in Scheme 2 for quite a few of
the envisioned analogues, including 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin (20). Compounds are characterized
by either a 5′-methoxy or 5′-flouro group on the indole
ring, alternating 2′-/3′-(cyclo)aliphatic acid substituents
and variable N1-acyl moieties. Utilization
of Fischer indolization/N-acylation/(ester cleavage)
with microwave heating led to assembly of novel N-acyl indole alkanoic acids or esters 2–13, 17, and 19 (Table 1; class I analogues with 2′-alkyl and 3′-aliphatic
acid groups), the 2′-des-methyl derivatives 20–25, 42 and 43 (Table 2; class II 3′-aliphatic acid
group) as well as compounds 44 and 62 (Table 3; class III reversed 2′-aliphatic acid/3′-alkyl
or 2′-/3′-cyclized acid substituents). For technical
details, please refer to the cited literature. Moreover, the procedure
enabled simple scale-up from milligram to multigram quantities (e.g.,
for lead compounds 20 and 50), which is
desirable for testing efficacy in murine xenograft models of CRPC.[30]
Scheme 1
Optimized Fischer Indolization/N-Acylation/Ester
Cleavage Approach for Expedient Production of Different N-Acyl Indole Alkanoic Acid Analogues[34]
Scheme 2
Classical Synthetic Strategy for the
Preparation of N-(4-Chlorobenzoyl) Indole Alkanoic
Acid Analogues and Sulfonamide
Derivatives as COOH Bioisosteres
Reagents and conditions: (i)
1. Et3N, 2. CH3CHO, toluene, 0 to 25 °C,
3 h; (ii) 4-chloro-benzoyl chloride, pyridine, 10 to 25 °C, 2
h; (iii) HCl (g), CH2Cl2, 0°C to rt, 1
h; (iv) (cyclo)aliphatic keto acid, AcOH, 70-80 °C, 3 h; (v)
1,1′-carbonyldiimidazole (CDI), CH2Cl2, 0-5 °C, 2 h, then alkyl-/arylsulfonamide, diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene
(DBU), rt, 4-6 h; (vi) 1. oxalyl chloride, CH2Cl2, 0 °C to rt, 8 h, 2. alkyl-/arylsulfonamide, 1,2-DCE or CH2Cl2, pyridine, rt, overnight.
Table 1
Inhibitory Properties of Indomethacin
Analogues on AKR1C3 and AKR1C2
Table 2
Inhibitory
Properties of 2′-des-Methyl Indomethacin Analogues
on AKR1C3 and AKR1C2
Table 3
Inhibitory Properties
of 3′-Alkyl
Indomethacin Analogues on AKR1C3 and AKR1C2
Classical Synthetic Strategy for the
Preparation of N-(4-Chlorobenzoyl) Indole Alkanoic
Acid Analogues and Sulfonamide
Derivatives as COOH Bioisosteres
Reagents and conditions: (i)
1. Et3N, 2. CH3pan> class="CellLine">CHO, toluene, 0 to 25 °C,
3 h; (ii) 4-chloro-benzoyl chloride, pyridine, 10 to 25 °C, 2
h; (iii) HCl (g), CH2Cl2, 0°C to rt, 1
h; (iv) (cyclo)aliphatic keto acid, AcOH, 70-80 °C, 3 h; (v)
1,1′-carbonyldiimidazole (CDI), CH2Cl2, 0-5 °C, 2 h, then alkyl-/arylsulfonamide, diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene
(DBU), rt, 4-6 h; (vi) 1. oxalyl chloride, CH2Cl2, 0 °C to rt, 8 h, 2. alkyl-/arylsulfonamide, 1,2-DCE or CH2Cl2, pyridine, rt, overnight.Indomethacin anpan>alogues
with conserved 5′-methoxy groups
anpan>d 4-pan> class="Chemical">chlorobenzoyl tails at their indole N1 were also synthesized following the conventional reaction scheme,
Scheme 2, which was primarily adopted by Yamamoto[35] for assembly of 1. The key reagent
for the underlying Fischer indolization step, 4-chloro-N-(4-methoxyphenyl)benzohydrazide hydrochloride (D),
was prepared according to the reported literature procedures from
the aryl hydrazine precursor A via intermediates B and C.[36] Target
compounds 16 (Table 1; 3′-propionic
acid group) and 20 (Table 2, 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin) were readily obtained from D by refluxing with slight excess of 5-oxohexanoic acid E (here, R1 = Me, n = 2) and 4-oxobutanoic
acid E (R1 = H, n = 1) in
AcOH, respectively. Application of 4-oxohexanoic acid F (R1 =Me, n = 1) as cyclization reagent
quantitatively yielded the reversed 2′-propionic acid/3′-alkyl
indole derivative 44 as the only isolable product.[37] The purity of compounds 16, 20, and 44 after a simple filtration and elutriation
with water was 99% based on LC–MS analysis. In contrast, reaction
of D with either 5-oxoheptanoic acid F (R1 = Me, n = 2) or 4-oxoheptanoic acid F (R1 = Et, n = 1) in a trial
to further extend the aliphatic acid chain in position 2′ (for 45) or the 3′-alkyl substituent (for 46) of the indole, led to isomer mixtures containing only about 75%
of the envisaged target structure (by 1H NMR; compare Supporting Information). Mixtures of 45 and 46 of known composition were evaluated in the biochemical
screens as such. We later successfully isolated the major indole regioisomer 47 (2′-propionic acid/3′-ethyl) from mixture 46 with an acceptable sample/isomeric purity of 95% by repeated
trituration of the crude product precipitate with diethyl ether.Analogues 48 and 49 structurally derive
from compound 44 and bear anpan> additional α,α-dipan> class="Chemical">methyl
(48) or α-methyl group (49) in their
aliphatic acid chain. Their synthesis could be accomplished by converting D with appropriately prebuilt keto acids. However, these cyclization
reagents, namely, 2,2-dimethyl-4-oxohexanoic acid and 2-methyl-4-oxohexanoic
acid, were not commercially available and needed to be prepared beforehand
following existing protocols (for details, see Supporting Information).[37,38] Whereas analogue 49 could be accumulated as solid and filtered pure from the
watery reaction solution, compound 48 needed to be extracted
into dichloromethane and purified on silica gel. The purities of 48 (after flash chromatography) and 49 (dried
filter residue) were judged to be 95% and >97%, respectively.In compounds 61 and 64, the 2′-
and 3′-positions are bridged by a fused six-membered aliphatic
ring; the two structures only vpan> class="Gene">ary in the position of the carboxylic
acid functionality attached to the cyclohexane ring. Although compounds 61 and 64 formally represent 2,3,4,9-tetrahydro-1H-carbazole-carboxylic acid derivatives, they were considered
possible AKR1C3 inhibitor candidates as well. The synthesis followed
the above-mentioned universal procedure in Scheme 2, except that different cyclic keto acids G (for 61, p-keto; for 64, m-keto) were used for the ring-closure with the hydrazine
hydrochloride precursor D (Scheme 2). Both the symmetrical 4-oxocyclohexanecarboxylic acid and, more
surprisingly, the unsymmetrical 3-oxocyclohexanecarboxylic acid yielded
a single and clean reaction product (filterable precipitate) in high
yield (>82%; purity ∼99% by LC–MS).[39]In order to enhance the desired biological (anpan>d physical)
properties
of the compounds, (bio)isosteric replacements of the free cpan> class="Gene">arboxylic
acid functions were accomplished on indomethacin (1),
2′-des-methyl-indomethacin (20), the 2′-propionic acid/3′-methylindole derivatives 44 and 51, and the carbazole carboxylic acid
analogue 61. Different isostere options were considered,
and finally, the sulfonamide group was chosen as it retained the essential
acidic character of the former COOH group. Moreover, this moiety facilitated
the introduction of further (sterically demanding) substituents at
the sulfone tail end, which might in turn affect the size, shape,
conformation, inductive and mesomeric effects, polarizability, H-bond-formation
capacity, lipophilicity, or pKa of the
new analogues. A library of initially 30 sulfonamide derivatives was
generated as specified in Scheme 2 (right-hand
side) applying state-of-the-art methods of combinatorial chemistry:
entries 14 and 15 (Table 1) represent class I analogues, entries 26–41 (Table 2) belong to class II, and
finally compounds 50, 51, 52–60, and 63 (Table 3) are members of structural class III (see above). For the
standard (one-pot) two-step amide coupling reactions, the acid groups
of starting compounds 1, 20, 44, 51, and 61 were activated with carbonyldiimidazole
or infrequently as acid chlorides (to improve the efficiency of the
reaction, e.g., for 15 and 27) prior to
sulfonylamine addition.[40−42] After acidic workup (to minimize
amide hydrolysis) and evaporation of the organic solvents, the residues
were combined with DMSO (1 mL each) and subjected to automated mass-directed
HPLC purification with a set purity threshold of ≥95%.The chemical structures of all intermediates and target compounds
were confirmed anpan>d fully chpan> class="Gene">aracterized by NMR spectroscopy and mass
spectrometry. The purity of the test compounds was determined using
liquid chromatography [UV detection at 215 and 254 nm along with ELSD
detection] and was ≥95%, if not otherwise denoted (compare Experimental Section and/or Supporting Information).
Strategy
The synthesized
compounds were compared for
their ability to inhibit pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 over AKR1C2. AKR1C2 was used in this
comparison due to its similarity in amino acid sequence and structure
and because its inhibition is undesirable. The ratio of the IC50 values for the two enzymes was computed to generate a selectivity
ratio. The higher the ratio, the more selective the compound is in
its ability to inhibit AKR1C3.
Class I Analogues
These compounds retain the 2′-alkyl,
3′-aliphatic acid substitution on the pan> class="Chemical">indole ring of indomethacin
and possess one or more of the following modifications: substitution
on the p-chlorobenzoyl group, replacement of the
5′-OCH3 group, esterification/amidation of the free
acid, and modification of the acetic acid side chain. Results from
the AKR1C3/AKR1C2 screen of these compounds are shown in Table 1. Indomethacin is a potent and selective inhibitor
of AKR1C3. It inhibited AKR1C3 with an IC50 value of 100
nM and was over 300-fold selective over AKR1C2. To evaluate the importance
of substitution on the phenyl ring, the p-Cl substituent
of indomethacin was replaced with substituents of varying electronic
properties and lipophilicity. Introduction of p-CH3 (2), p-CH2Cl (3), or p-OCH3 (4)
on the phenyl ring did not significantly alter either AKR1C3 potency
or selectivity. These compounds displayed IC50 values between
120 and 160 nM for AKR1C3 and were over 300-fold selective for AKR1C3
over AKR1C2. However, when the p-Cl group was substituted
with a p-CF3 group (5), the
inhibitor lost both potency and selectivity and was only 130-fold
selective for AKR1C3. The reduction in potency and selectivity was
even more pronounced with a smaller p-F (7) substitution and was reduced further when the CF3 group
was moved to the meta-position (6, AKR1C3-IC50 > 2 μM). Removal of the p-chlorobenzoyl
group
altogether to yield des-chlorobenzoyl-indomethacin 18 (a major metabolite and decomposition product of indomethacin)
showed that inhibition potency and selectivity was completely eliminated.
These findings underscored the need for the N-benzoyl
ring as well as a suitable substitution at the para-position of the
phenyl ring for AKR1C3 inhibition. Interchanging the 5′-OCH3 groups in compounds 1 and 6 with
fluorines at the same indole position in analogues 8 and 9 was detrimental to AKR1C3 selectivity as AKR1C3 inhibition
was mostly unchanged, while undesired AKR1C2 inhibition was enhanced.The free carboxylic acid, which exists predominanpan>tly as the negatively
chpan> class="Gene">arged carboxylate at physiological pH, is thought to contribute
to the general inhibition of AKR1C enzymes by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory
drugs (NSAIDs). Consistent with this, esterification of indomethacin
to give the methyl ester (10) led to a 57-fold loss of
inhibitory potency for AKR1C3 and a reduction in selectivity. This
trend was also seen with all other methyl esters 11–13 when compared to their corresponding free acid derivatives
(2, 4, and 5). Despite this
loss of potency, the rank order of inhibitory potency for the methylesters was similar to the free acids. The requirement for an acid
functionality for optimal AKR1C3 inhibition was likewise apparent
with compound 19. This indomethacin fragment lacks the
complete carboxyalkyl chain in position 3′ of the indole and
revealed a 36-fold lower inhibitory activity on the target enzyme
in comparison to 1. However, the interactions of 19 and 1 with AKR1C2 were still comparable, clearly
indicating differences in the way the compounds bind to AKR1C3 and
AKR1C2. The AKR1C inhibition data for compound 18 reconfirm
the need for an intact N-acyl (here, p-Cl-benzoyl) substituent. The decrease in inhibitor potency (and
selectivity) observed for AKR1C3 appeared to be less with 19 than with 18 (see above).Further modification
of the acetic acid group of pan> class="Chemical">indomethacin yielded
the N-(sulfonyl)acetamide analogues 14 and 15. While the N-(methylsulfonyl)acetamide
analogue, 14, led to a 22-fold reduction in inhibitory
potency for AKR1C3 (IC50 value for AKR1C3 = 2.24 μM),
potency was partially restored by the formation of the N-(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)acetamide analogue 15, a compound
with an IC50 value of 0.74 μM and 108-fold selectivity
for AKR1C3.Increasing the length of the aliphatic side chain
of indomethacin
from -ethyl to -propyl (16) led to a 2-fold reduction
inpan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 potency, but the compound retained 257-fold selectivity
for AKR1C3 over AKR1C2 (Table 1). Replacement
of the 5′-OCH3 group of this compound with a fluorine
atom (17) did not change the AKR1C3 inhibitory potency,
but this compound was a more potent AKR1C2 inhibitor than 16 leading to a loss of AKR1C3 selectivity.
Class II: 2′-des-Methyl-indomethacin
Analogues
Structurally, these compounds have a 3′aliphatic
acid on the indole ring, but the 2′-pan> class="Chemical">methyl group on the indole
ring has been eliminated. Compared to indomethacin, the parent compound
in this class, 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin
(20), was a less potent and less selective AKR1C3 inhibitor
(Table 2). It displayed an IC50 value
of 960 nM for AKR1C3 and an IC50 value of 100 μM
for AKR1C2, which translated to 100-fold selectivity for AKR1C3. The
loss in AKR1C3 potency with removal of the 2′-CH3 group was seen across most of the des-methyl-indomethacin
analogues when compared to their respective class I analogues (e.g., 21 vs 10 and 23 vs 5). Within the triad of class II compounds 22–24 with alternating substituents at the benzoyl moiety, the
potency and selectivity decreased in the same rank order as discovered
for the indomethacin counterparts 5–7 in Table 1 from p-CF3 > p-F > m-CF3. One exception with quite promising inhibitory qualities
was the N-(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)acetamide derivative, 27, which gave an IC50 value of 210 nM for AKR1C3
and was
240-fold selective for AKR1C3 over AKR1C2, while the corresponding
indomethacin analogue 15 was less potent and less selective.
The presence of a trifluoromethyl group on the acetamide seems critical
for AKR1C3 inhibition since the N-(methylsulfonyl)acetamide
analogue of des-methyl-indomethacin (26) displayed weak AKR1C3 inhibition and a total loss of selectivity
for AKR1C3. Further substitution on the N-(sulfonyl)acetamide
group with substituted phenyl groups or heterocycles (28–41) did not significantly improve AKR1C3 potency
or selectivity, although analogues with bulky aromatic rings and/or
aromatic rings with substituents capable of forming electrostatic
interactions generally gave better AKR1C3 inhibitors. Introduction
of a 5′-F on the indole ring of des-methyl-indomethacin
to give 25 led to little or no improvement in AKR1C3
potency and a 4-fold increase in AKR1C2 inhibitory potency. This translated
to a reduction in AKR1C3 selectivity.Finally, compounds 42 and 43 display structurally edited versions
of the parent molecules, 2′-pan> class="Chemical">des-methylindomethacin 20 and its methyl ester 21, respectively, whose
terminal aryl rings of the original N-4-Cl-benzoyl
substituents were truncated leaving a linear propanoyl group in each
case. Both derivatives 42 and 43 were about
2- to 2.5-fold less potent than their N-benzoyl analogues 20 and 21 in inhibiting AKR1C3. The methyl ester 43 again was clearly inferior with respect to AKR1C3 inhibition
and selectivity.
Class III: 3′-Alkyl Indomethacin Analogues
The
compounds in this class have the acetic acid side chain of pan> class="Chemical">indomethacin 1 replaced with a 3′-alkyl group and the 2′-CH3 group substituted with an aliphatic acid or a substituted N-(sulfonyl)acetamide, in effect reversing the position
of the aliphatic acid and alkyl group on the indole ring of 1. Relative to indomethacin and the class I inhibitor 16, compound 44, with a 3′-CH3 group and a 2′-propionic acid substituent on the indole ring,
retained AKR1C3 potency with IC50 value of 130 nM (Table 3). This result indicated that AKR1C3 will tolerate
flexibility in the position of the aliphatic acid side chain and alkyl
group on the indole ring. However, 44 was less selective
for AKR1C3 than both 1 and 16, being 111-fold
selective for AKR1C3 over AKR1C2. Introduction of an α-CH3 group on the aliphatic acid side chain of 44 introduced a chiral center, and the racemate of this compound, 49, displayed 2-fold lower potency for AKR1C3 and an unchanged
AKR1C2 potency relative to 44. Removal of the chiral
center by formation of the geminal dimethyl analogue, 48, restored AKR1C3 potency. Synthesis of the N-(methylsulfonyl)acetamide
analogue, 50, led to a 3-fold loss of AKR1C3 potency
(340 nM) but an increase in AKR1C3 selectivity (275-fold). However,
its α-CH3 analogue, 51, exhibited poor
inhibition of AKR1C3. Replacement of the methylsulfonyl group of 50 with a trifluoromethylsulfonyl group (52)
also did not improve AKR1C3 potency and selectivity in contrast to
class I and II analogues, neither did a series of further sulfonamides 53–60 with bulkier (hetero)aryl substituents
attached to their sulfonyl tail end.The library also produced
mixtures of 45 in which the 3′ substituenpan>t is
pan> class="Chemical">methyl and the 2′ substituent is butyric acid or the 3′
substituent is propionic acid and the 2′ substituent is a propyl
group. This mixture produced an IC50 value = 0.15 μM
for AKR1C3 and was 119-fold selective for the inhibition of AKR1C3
over AKR1C2. Additionally, the library produced mixtures of 46 in which either the 3′ substituent is ethyl and
the 2′ substituent is propionic acid or the 3′ substituent
is acetic acid and the 2′ substituent is a propyl group. This
mixture gave an IC50 value of 70 nM for AKR1C3 that was
279-fold selective for the inhibition of AKR1C3 over AKR1C2. The latter
mixture was then resolved and the active component identified as compound 47.Compound 47 was the most potent and
selective compound
in the study, with an IC50 value of 90 nM for AKR1C3, anpan>d
was 540-fold selective for pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 over AKR1C2. Cyclization of the
side chains at the 2′- and 3′-position on the indole
ring of 47 to form the racemic tetrahydrocarbazole analogue
with a 3′-carboxylic acid group (61) did not produce
a pronounced change in either AKR1C3 potency or selectivity. This
compound gave an IC50 value of 160 nM for AKR1C3 and showed
a 330-fold selectivity for AKR1C3 over AKR1C2. Changing the p-chloro substituent on the benzoyl ring of 61 with a m-CF3 group to give 62 fractionally improved the selectivity to a factor of 360 by raising
the IC50 value for AKR1C2 inhibition more than the IC50 value for AKR1C3 inhibition. In contrast, replacement of
the carboxylic acid function of 61 by the isosteric N-(methylsulfonyl)acetamide decreased the potency of 63 for AKR1C3 and drastically reduced the selectivity to a
factor of only 20. Compound 64, a close analogue of the
2,3,4,9-tetrahydro-1H-carbazole-carboxylic acid 61, but with the −COOH group in position 2 in the six-membered
cyclohexene ring, did not exhibit improved potency and selectivity
over the primary lead compound 44 within this series
(IC50 = 340 nM).
Inhibition of Other AKR1C Isoforms and COX
(Secondary Screens)
Lead compounds were subsequently counterscreened
against other
human AKR1C enzymes (pan> class="Gene">AKR1C1 and AKR1C4). A complete profile of the
inhibitory properties of these compounds on all human AKR1C enzymes
is shown in Table 4. All the compounds tested
had IC50 values for AKR1C1 in the high micromolar range
and showed between 100- and 800-fold selectivity for AKR1C3 over AKR1C1.
Table 4
Inhibitory Effects of Compounds on
Other AKR1C Enzymes
IC50 values (μM)
compdsa
AKR1C3
AKR1C1
AKR1C2
AKR1C4
2
0.16
>100 (>625)b
54.50 (336)
>100 (>625)
3
0.12
100 (833)
40.74 (329)
49.75 (415)
5
0.27
>100 (>370)
35.73 (134)
>100
(>370)
15
0.74
>100 (>135)
81.0 (108)
>100 (>135)
16
0.22
>100 (>455)
57.0 (257)
>100 (>455)
20
0.96
>100 (>100)
100 (100)
48.7 (357)
27
0.21
>100 (>478)
50.13 (240)
>100 (>478)
44
0.13
17.73 (136)
14.45 (111)
3.51 (27)
47
0.09
30.71 (341)
49.57 (538)
1.95 (22)
50
0.34
100 (296)
93.0 (275)
12.64 (37)
61
0.16
76.25 (477)
53.50 (331)
3.15 (20)
AKR1C3 and AKR1C2 data were taken
from Tables 1–3 above.
Values in parentheses
are IC50 ratios and represent inhibitor selectivity for
AKR1C3 over
other AKR1C enzymes.
n class="Gene">AKR1C3 and n class="Gene">AKR1C2 data were taken
from Tables 1–3 above.
Values inparenpan>theses
pan> class="Gene">are IC50 ratios and represent inhibitor selectivity for
AKR1C3 over
other AKR1C enzymes.Also,
all of the compounds tested had IC50 values between
50 to 100 μM for AKR1C4 anpan>d had over 130–600-fold selectivity
for pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 over AKR1C4 with the exception of the class III compounds, 44, 47, 50, and 61,
which showed less than 50-fold selectivity.Secondary screens
also involved a screen against pan> class="Gene">COX-1 and COX-2
to reaffirm that compounds will not act as NSAIDs. Initially we used
a continuous colorimetric COX-1 assay that monitored the oxidation
of N,N,N,N-tetramethyl-1,4-phenylenediamine (TMPD) when it is coupled
to the formation of PGH2 from PGG2 employing
arachidonic acid (AA) as substrate.The activity of the lead
compounds on oCOX-1 is shownpan> in Table 5. pan> class="Chemical">Indomethacin
(1) potently inhibited
COX-1 with an IC50 of 20 nM. This value was consistent
with reported inhibitory potency of 1 for COX-1.[43] All the other lead compounds were at least 37-fold
less potent than 1 on COX-1. Compound 61 with IC50 value for COX-1 of 750 nM was the most potent
COX-1 inhibitor among the lead compounds. Surprisingly, 16, which contains a propyl side chain instead of an ethyl side chain,
was 2000-fold weaker as a COX-1 inhibitor than 1. The
3′-alkyl analogues 44 and 50 did
not display significant inhibitory activity on COX-1 at the highest
inhibitor concentration (100 μM) tested. Compared to their respective
AKR1C3 inhibitory potency, all the compounds with the exception of 27 and 61, displayed over 200-fold selectivity
for AKR1C3 over COX-1.
Table 5
COX-1 Inhibitory
Activity of Lead
Compounds; Data Derived from the Continuous Colorimetric Assay
compd
AKR1C3 IC50 (μM)
COX 1 IC50 (μM)
COX 1 IC50/AKR1C3 IC50
indomethacin (1)
0.10
0.02
0.2
16
0.22
48.8
222
27
0.21
2.19
10
44
0.13
100
770
50
0.34
>100
>294
61
0.16
0.75
5
To further evaluate the residual
COX-1 anpan>d pan> class="Gene">COX-2 inhibitory activity
of a subset of AKR1C3 inhibitors, we also used a discontinuous 14C-AATLC-based COX assay, where samples were taken, the reaction
stopped, and the concentration of radioactive substrates/products
determined on a plate reader (for details see Supporting Information). Compounds were tested at four distinct
concentrations, 250 nM, 1000 nM, 4 μM, and 25 μM, on either
ovine COX-1 or mouseCOX-2, and IC50 values (if applicable)
were detected graphically from the resulting dose–response
curves. Results are compiled in Table 6. The
AA concentration of 5 μM used in the latter assay represents
the Km for COX-1 and COX-2, which enables
rapid, reversible, and slow, tight-binding inhibitors to be detected.
Both assays are well established in our laboratories and have been
described earlier in the literature.[20,44]
Table 6
COX-1 and COX-2 Inhibitory Activities
of Selected AKR1C3 Inhibitors; Data Derived from the Discontinuous
Radioactive TLC Assay
compd
oCOX 1 IC50 (μM)
wt mCOX 2
IC50 (μM)
COX 1 IC50/COX 2 IC50
indomethacin (1)
0.05
0.20
0.25
8
0.49
0.09
5.44
20
15.27 (P)a
3.27 (P)
4.67
25
42.7% inhib. @ 25 μM
35.6% inhib. @ 25 μM
n/a
44
11% inhib. @ 25 μM
17.6% inhib. @ 4 μM
n/a
47
15.6% inhib. @ 25 μM (P)
7.0
n/a
48
24.2% inhib. @ 25 μM (P)
33.7% inhib. @ 25 μM (P)
n/a
50
30.8% inhib. @ 25 μM (P)
32.4% inhib. @ 25 μM (P)
n/a
61
1.0
3.02 (P @ 61.4%)
0.33
64
2.4 (P @ 56.1%)
1.48 (P @ 62.6%)
1.62
P = plateau;
oCOX-1 = ovineCOX-1;
mCOX-2 = murineCOX-2.
P = plateau;
oCOX-1 = ovinepan> class="Gene">COX-1;
mCOX-2 = murineCOX-2.Unlike 1, its 5′-fluoro equivalent 8 (Table 1) and to some degree the class III
inhibitors 61 and 64 (Table 3), the other indole-based lead pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 inhibitors listed in
Table 6, do not strongly inhibit COX-1 or COX-2.
As reported earlier, 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin 20 is only a very weak competitive inhibitor of both COX enzymes
with a preference for COX-2.[45]The
same proved true for its close analogue 25 (here,
5′-OCH3 replaced by 5′-F) but without preference
for either COX enzyme. The best results from the stanpan>dpoint of minimal
pan> class="Gene">COX interaction were achieved with the 3′-alkyl indole derivatives 44, 47, 48 (free acids), and 50 (sulfonamide), whose percent COX-1/-2 inhibition did not
exceed 34% at 25 μM. In particular, for compounds 44 (3′-methyl) and 47 (3′-ethyl), with an
unbranched 2′-aliphatic acid chain, the maximum inhibition
achieved was even lower. Compound 44 inhibited oCOX-1
at 11% (25 μM) and mCOX-2 at <18% (4 μM). The homo
analogue 47 demonstrated 16% inhibition of oCOX-1 at
25 μM and a poor IC50 of 7 μM for mCOX-2. In
many cases the formation of a plateau at higher inhibitor concentrations
suggests that inhibition is readily reversible. Collectively, compounds 16 (class I), compounds 20 and 27 (class II), and compounds 44–47 and 50 (class III) are among the most promising lead
compounds not to inhibit COX-1 and COX-2.
Inhibition of Testosterone
Formation in LNCaP-AKR1C3 Cells
To evaluate the efficacy
of the lead compounds in a prostate cancer
cell model, we tested their ability to block pan> class="Chemical">testosterone formation
in LNCaP cells stably transfected with AKR1C3.[46] Cells were incubated with 0.1 μM Δ4-AD, and their ability to block the formation of testosterone-17β-glucuronide
was measured (Figure 4). In the
absence of the inhibitor, Δ4-AD is converted to testosterone
and androsterone glucuronides. We found that there was robust inhibition
of testosterone formation when the cells were treated with 0.1 μM
Δ4-AD in the presence of 30 μM 1, 44, and 50 (Figure 4).
Figure 4
Inhibitory effect of indomethacin and indomethacin analogues 44 and 50 on testosterone formation in LNCaP-AKR1C3
cells measured by radiochromatography.
Inhibitory effect of indomethacin anpan>d pan> class="Chemical">indomethacin analogues 44 and 50 on testosterone formation in LNCaP-AKR1C3
cells measured by radiochromatography.
Effects of Lead Compounds on AR Reporter Gene Assay
Since
AR activation is involved in progression of CRPC, we next evaluated
the effect of these compounds on pan> class="Gene">AR signaling using a luciferase reporter
gene assay. Agonist activity by these compounds would be deleterious
in the context of CRPC. When HeLa-AR3A-PSA-(ARE)4-Luc13
cells (a kind gift from Dr. Elizabeth Wilson) were treated with the
compounds in the absence of DHT, none of the compounds displayed agonist
activity on the AR in the absence of DHT.The compounds also
did not enhance DHT-mediated pan> class="Gene">AR signaling (Figure 5). The EC50 value for DHT induction of the luciferase
reporter in the presence and absence of the indomethacin analogues
was not significantly different. The EC50 value for DHT
induction of the luciferase reporter was 0.13 ± 0.02 nM, while
the values in the presence of 1, 27, 44, and 50 were 0.14 ± 0.02, 0.10 ±
0.02, 0.15 ± 0.03, and 0.14 ± 0.05 nM, respectively (Figure 5). This data also indicates that these compounds
did not act as AR antagonists.
Figure 5
Dose–response curve of 5α-dihydrotestosterone
(5α-DHT)
in HeLa-AR3A-PSA-(ARE)4-Luc13 cells in the presence and
absence of 10 μM lead compounds.
Dose–response curve of 5α-dihydrotestosterone
(5α-pan> class="Chemical">DHT)
in HeLa-AR3A-PSA-(ARE)4-Luc13 cells in the presence and
absence of 10 μM lead compounds.
Crystal Structure of the AKR1C3·NADP+·20 (2′-des-Methyl-indomethacin) Complex
The structure of AKR1C3 in complex with pan> class="Chemical">NADP+ and 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin was determined at a resolution of
1.8 Å by molecular replacement (Table 7 and Figure 6).[47] We found that there are two monomers of AKR1C3 in each unit cell.
Monomer A exhibited a lower average B-factor compared to monomer B,
but the two monomers showed an almost identical conformation with
an rmsd of 0.23 Å. The cofactor binding cavity of AKR1C3 is not
perturbed upon binding of the inhibitor. NADP+ maintains
the same binding position and conformation as in the other AKR1C3
structures determined.[48−51] The steroid/inhibitor binding cavity of AKR1C3 is composed of five
compartments: oxyanion site (formed by Tyr55, His117, and NADP+), steroid channel (Trp227 and Leu54), and three subpockets,
SP1 (Ser118, Asn167, Phe306, Phe311, and Tyr319), SP2 (Trp86, Leu122,
Ser129, and Phe311), and SP3 (Tyr24, Glu192, Ser221, and Tyr305).[52] Two molecules of compound 20 are
found in each steroid/inhibitor binding cavity (Figure 6A). One molecule interacts with the oxyanion site through
hydrogen bonding between the carboxylate group and the active site
residues Tyr55 and His117. The carboxylate group of this molecule
also lies on the face of the positively charged nicotinamide ring
of NADP+ and makes a favorable charge–charge interaction.
The indole ring of this molecule is bound between the two gate keepers
of the steroid channel, Trp227 and Leu54, and the p-chorobenzoyl ring of the inhibitor projects into the SP1 subpocket.
This molecule is likely the first molecule of 20 to enter
the active site considering its deeper penetration in the cavity.
The second molecule of 20 stacks on the first molecule
through offset stacked aromatic interactions between the p-chorobenzoyl rings and edge-to-face aromatic interactions between
the indole rings. The indole ring of the second molecule of 20 projects to the steroid channel. In contrast to the crystal
structure, the inhibition dose–response curve of 20 for AKR1C3 exhibits a slope factor of 1, which disagrees with multisite
binding. Nonspecific binding or occupancy of low affinity binding
sites by more than one inhibitor molecule per enzyme active site can
occur in the presence of excess inhibitor used under the crystallization
conditions.
Table 7
Data Collection and Refinement Statistics
for the AKR1C3·NADP+·20 Complex
(PDB ID: 4DBW)
data collection
resolution
range (Å)
50.0–1.80
unique reflections measured
60585 (5607)b
Rmergea
0.050 (0.28)b
I/σ
(I)
19.8 (3.3)b
completeness
(%)
96.7 (89.8)b
Rmerge = Σ|I – ⟨I⟩|/ΣI, where I is
the observed intensity and ⟨I⟩ is the
average intensity calculated for replicate data.
The number in parentheses refers
to the outer 0.1 Å shell of data.
Crystallographic R-factor, R = Σ||Fo| – |Fc||/Σ|Fo| for reflections
contained in the working set. Free R-factor, Rfree = Σ||Fo| – |Fc||/Σ|Fo| for reflections contained in the test set
excluded from refinement. |Fo| and |Fc| are the observed and calculated structure
factor amplitudes, respectively.
Per asymmetric unit.
Ramachandran statistics were calculated
with PROCHECK.[53]
Figure 6
Stereoview (A) and schematic (B) illustrations of the occupancy
of the AKR1C3 active site by compound 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin (20) (PDB ID: 4DBW). The first molecule
of 20 is anchored to the active site through hydrogen
bonding to Tyr55 and His117. The second molecule of 20 stacks on the first molecule. Both molecules project their p-chorobenzoyl rings into the SP1 pocket. The distance between
the 2′-position on the indole ring of the first molecule of 20 and the carboxamide group of the nicotinamide cofactor
is only 3.5 Å (blue dash, panel A), prohibiting indomethacin
from assuming this binding pose. The simulated-annealing omit map
of 20 is contoured at 2.3σ. Compound 20 is shown in ball-and-stick representation with carbon atoms colored
in black. The noncarbon atoms are colored as follows: oxygen = red,
nitrogen = blue, chlorine = green, and phosphorus = orange. Water
molecules are shown as red spheres. Hydrogen bonds are indicated by
red dashes.
Rmerge = Σ|I – ⟨I⟩|/ΣI, where I is
the observed intensity and ⟨I⟩ is the
average intensity calculated for replicate data.The number inpn class="Gene">arentheses refers
to the outer 0.1 Å shell of data.
Crystallographic R-factor, R = Σ||Fo| – |Fc||/Σ|Fo| for reflections
contained in the working set. Free R-factor, Rfree = Σ||Fo| – |Fc||/Σ|Fo| for reflections contained in the test set
excluded from refinement. |Fo| and |Fc| n class="Gene">are the observed anpan>d calculated structure
factor amplitupan> class="Chemical">des, respectively.
Per asymmetric unit.Ramachandran statistics were calculated
with PROCHECK.[53]Stereoview (A) and schematic (B) illustrations of the occupanpan>cy
of the pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 active site by compound 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin (20) (PDB ID: 4DBW). The first molecule
of 20 is anchored to the active site through hydrogen
bonding to Tyr55 and His117. The second molecule of 20 stacks on the first molecule. Both molecules project their p-chorobenzoyl rings into the SP1 pocket. The distance between
the 2′-position on the indole ring of the first molecule of 20 and the carboxamide group of the nicotinamide cofactor
is only 3.5 Å (blue dash, panel A), prohibiting indomethacin
from assuming this binding pose. The simulated-annealing omit map
of 20 is contoured at 2.3σ. Compound 20 is shown in ball-and-stick representation with carbon atoms colored
in black. The noncarbon atoms are colored as follows: oxygen = red,
nitrogen = blue, chlorine = green, and phosphorus = orange. Water
molecules are shown as red spheres. Hydrogen bonds are indicated by
red dashes.
Discussion
AKR1C3
is a critical enzyme in the intraprostatic biosynpan>thesis
of anpan>drogens anpan>d has been implicated in the progression of CRPC.[4−6] Therefore, pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 inhibition is expected to be an effective therapy
in CRPC. We describe the synthesis and structure–activity relationship
studies of indomethacin-based AKR1C3 inhibitors. On the basis of the
known SAR for COX inhibition, three classes of compounds were synthesized:
(I) analogues in which groups essential for COX-inhibition were substituted;
(II) 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin analogues
in which the 2′-CH3 group essential for tight binding
to COX[54] was removed from the structure;
and (III) 3′-alkyl analogues in which the acetic acid side
chain essential for COX inhibition was replaced with an alkyl group
and the acid-side chain was moved to the 2′-position.This effort led to the discovery of potent AKR1C3 inhibitors that
retain selectivity for pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 over other AKR1C enzymes and have been
stripped of COX inhibitory activity. These compounds inhibit testosterone
formation in a prostate cancer cell line and display no agonist or
antagonist activity at the androgen receptor. The crystal structure
of a lead compound, 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin
(20), in complex with AKR1C3 was also obtained to elucidate
enzyme–inhibitor interactions. Of the compounds synthesized
and tested, seven class I and class II analogues had the required
AKR1C3 selectivity and potency. Many of the class III analogues had
desirable AKR1C3 potency but were less selective for AKR1C3 over AKR1C4,
which plays a critical role in bile-acid biosynthesis.
Structural
Consideration of AKR1C3 Inhibitor Potency and Selectivity
Five crystal structures exist for AKR1C3 inhibitor complexes that
pan> class="Gene">are relevant to the present study: AKR1C3·NADP+·indomethacin,[49,55] AKR1C3·NADP+·2′-des-methyl-indomethacin (20),[47] and AKR1C3·NADP+·Z-sulindac[55] (Figure 7), which can be used to
explain the binding and selectivity of class I–III inhibitors.
These structures show that the active site of AKR1C3 contains three
subpockets (SP1–SP3), and depending on the inhibitor class,
different subpockets may be occupied. At the base of the active site,
an oxyanion site exists and consists of Tyr55, His117, and Lys84,
which for most NSAID derivatives provides a counterion to bind the
carboxylic acid on these drugs.[55] The steroid
channel extends from the oxyanion hole and is flanked by Trp227 and
Leu54 on either side. Surprisingly, few NSAID derivatives fully occupy
the steroid channel.
Figure 7
Binding poses of indomethacin analogues in AKR1C3. (A)
Indomethacin
(IMN, black) at pH 6 (PDB ID: 1S2A), where the carboxylate group anchors
the indole ring in the SP3 pocket by interacting with Q222 and a phosphate
group of the pyrophosphate moiety of the cofactor. 2′-des-Methyl-indomethacin (20, green, PDB ID: 4DBW) is superimposed
as a reference showing how the oxyanion site is occupied by the carboxylate
group and the SP1 pocket is occupied by the p-chorobenzoyl
ring. (B) Indomethacin (black) at pH 7.5 (PDB ID: 3UG8), where the carboxylate
group is tethered to the oxyanion site and the p-chorobenzoyl
ring penetrates the SP1 pocket. Two alternative conformations exist
for Trp227, each with 50% occupancy. Note that the 5′-methoxy
group on the indole ring points into SP3 so that the indole ring of
indomethacin assumes a ∼120° angle with the indole ring
of 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin. (C) Z-Sulindac (black, PDB ID: 3R7M), where the carboxylate group is anchored
to the oxyanion site and the 4-methylsulfinyl group approaches the
SP2 pocket. (D) The proposed fifth binding pose illustrated
by compound 27 (black, generated by AutoDock Vina), where
the N-(sulfonyl)acetamide group occupies the SP3
pocket, the p-chorobenzoyl ring occupies the SP1
pocket, and the indole ring almost overlaps with the indole ring of
2′-des-methyl-indomethacin. Noncarbon atoms,
water, and hydrogen bonds are presented as described in Figure 6 where sulfur = yellow.
Binding poses of indomethacin anpan>alogues inpan> class="Gene">AKR1C3. (A)
Indomethacin
(IMN, black) at pH 6 (PDB ID: 1S2A), where the carboxylate group anchors
the indole ring in the SP3 pocket by interacting with Q222 and a phosphate
group of the pyrophosphate moiety of the cofactor. 2′-des-Methyl-indomethacin (20, green, PDB ID: 4DBW) is superimposed
as a reference showing how the oxyanion site is occupied by the carboxylate
group and the SP1 pocket is occupied by the p-chorobenzoyl
ring. (B) Indomethacin (black) at pH 7.5 (PDB ID: 3UG8), where the carboxylate
group is tethered to the oxyanion site and the p-chorobenzoyl
ring penetrates the SP1 pocket. Two alternative conformations exist
for Trp227, each with 50% occupancy. Note that the 5′-methoxy
group on the indole ring points into SP3 so that the indole ring of
indomethacin assumes a ∼120° angle with the indole ring
of 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin. (C) Z-Sulindac (black, PDB ID: 3R7M), where the carboxylate group is anchored
to the oxyanion site and the 4-methylsulfinyl group approaches the
SP2 pocket. (D) The proposed fifth binding pose illustrated
by compound 27 (black, generated by AutoDock Vina), where
the N-(sulfonyl)acetamide group occupies the SP3
pocket, the p-chorobenzoyl ring occupies the SP1
pocket, and the indole ring almost overlaps with the indole ring of
2′-des-methyl-indomethacin. Noncarbon atoms,
water, and hydrogen bonds are presented as described in Figure 6 where sulfur = yellow.Three AKR1C3·pan> class="Chemical">NADP+·indomethacin structures
have been reported in the Protein Data Bank.[49,55] The structure obtained at pH 6.0 (PDB ID: 1S2A) shows a unique
binding pose, in which the carboxylic acid, presumably ionized as
the negatively charged carboxylate, is not anchored in the oxyanion
site but instead projects into SP3, where it interacts with Gln222
and with the pyrophosphate bridge of the cofactor (Figure 7A). As the pH of the crystallization condition is
increased to 7.5 (PDB ID: 3UG8), deprotonation
of the pyrophosphate bridge weakened the interactions in SP3 so that
the indole ring rotates by ∼40° to permit the carboxylate
group to interact with the oxyanion site. In this binding pose, the
5′-OCH3 group still remains in SP3, while the p-chlorobenzoyl ring enters SP1 (Figure 7B). In the AKR1C3·NADP+·2′-des-methyl-indomethacin complex (PDB ID: 4DBW), the carboxylate
remains anchored by the oxyanion hole, but the 5′-OCH3 group no longer interacts with SP3. In addition, the orientation
of the p-chlorobenzoyl ring is altered so that it
lies perpendicular to this ring in the indomethacin structure determined
at pH 7.5 (Figure 7B). Indomethacin cannot
assume the binding pose of 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin
since the 2′-methyl group of indomethacin would clash with
the nicotinamide headgroup of the cofactor. In the AKR1C3·NADP+·Z-sulindac structure (PDB ID: 3R7M), the indene ring
is flipped by 180° relative to the indole ring in the 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin structure, and the 4-methylsulfinyl
group approaches SP2 (Figure 7C).Most
of the class I compounds would adopt the binding conformations
exemplified by indomethacin. Since our inhibition experiments were
performed at pH 7.0, it is likely that both pH 6 anpan>d pH 7.5 binding
poses for pan> class="Chemical">indomethacin will coexist in solution. The unsubstituted
free acids inhibit AKR1C3 with the highest potency and selectivity
indicating that the interaction between the binding sites and the
carboxylate is essential for inhibitor anchoring. Analogues with an
extended acid side chain at the 3′-position, i.e., replacement
of the acetic acid chain by a propionic acid side chain (compound 16), is also well tolerated suggesting there is space available
in the binding cavity to accommodate the additional carbon atom, but
larger subsitituents such as the N-(sulfonyl)acetamide
derivatives cannot be accommodated by either of the two indomethacin
binding poses observed in the available crystal structures. Upon inspection
of the AKR1C3 structures, we propose a fifth binding pose for these
bulky analogues in which inhibitors extend their p-chorobenzoyl ring into the SP1, and the bulky 3-subsitituents would
occupy the SP3 (Figure 7D, generated by AutoDock
Vina[56]). The SP3 pocket is lined by polar/charged
residues including Tyr24, Gln222, Asp224, and Arg226, which supports
the observation that polar substituents are generally favored, and
the very bulky side chains may be exposed through an opening in the
SP3 pocket into bulk solvent. This new binding pose is supported by
docking studies and can be applied to all the bulky analogues in all
three classes of inhibitors.Only two class II compounds based
on 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin (20) pan> class="Gene">are likely to adopt the binding
pose of 20, namely, compounds 21 and 25. Interaction with the oxyanion site is again supported
since the corresponding methyl estersare weak inhibitors of AKR1C3.
The N-(sulfonyl)-acetamide of 2′-des-methyl-indomethacin is too bulky to interact with the oxyanion site
and likely assumes the fifth binding pose proposed.Class III
compounds that have a bulky side chain at the 2′-position
cannot be easily superimposed on the indomethacin or 2′-pan> class="Chemical">des-methyl-indomethacin binding poses presented in any of
the crystal structures, but all these compounds could assume the fifth
binding pose proposed. By contrast, class III compounds containing
a 3′-methyl/ethyl group may adopt the Z-sulindac
binding conformation since this conformation imposes the least restriction
on the size of the 2′ substitution. Structural information
of a AKR1C3·NADP+·class III inhibitor would be
invaluable to confirm that this new binding pose exists.
Promising Lead
Compounds
Eleven compounds were selected
for further evaluation. The selection criteria was AKR1C3 potency
<1 μM anpan>d greater thanpan> 100-fold selectivity for pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 over
AKR1C2. On this list, five were class I analogues, two were class
II analogues, and four were class III analogues. These compounds were
all greater than 100-fold selective for AKR1C3 over AKR1C1, ensuring
that there would be no interference with DHT inactivation within the
prostate. All the compounds were also selective for AKR1C3 over AKR1C4.
While the 3′-alkyl analogues were still over 20-fold selective
for AKR1C3 over AKR1C4, they displayed lower AKR1C3 selectivity relative
to AKR1C4 in comparison to the class I and II analogues. AKR1C4 is
primarily involved in bile acid biosynthesis and steroid hormone biotransformation
in the liver, where it is predominantly expressed.[17,57,58] The consequence, if any, of the low selectivity
of the 3-alkyl analogues for AKR1C3 over AKR1C4 will need to be explored.The absence of intrinsic agonist activity or positive modulation
of DHT-mediated pan> class="Gene">AR transcription in the reporter gene assay by all
the lead compounds is important since either effect on the AR would
counteract the effect of AKR1C3 inhibition.The compounds were
also efficacious in a prostate cancer cell model
where they produced robust inhibition of pan> class="Chemical">testosterone formation when
cells were treated with the AKR1C3 substrate Δ4-AD.
This indicates the compounds possess adequate physicochemical properties
to traverse the cell membrane and, more importantly, are able to target
AKR1C3 in a cellular context. This is in agreement with the report
of Cai et al., which showed that indomethacin was effective in vivo, in a castrate-resistant prostate cancer setting
at inhibiting tumor cell proliferation.[30] These findings support the potential therapeutic usefulness of AKR1C3
inhibitors in CRPC. It equally indicates that the indomethacin analogues
and importantly those with little or no COX activity such as the lead
compounds reported in this study should block the adaptive intratumoral
biosynthesis that drives CRPC, thereby inhibiting cancer progression
without any of the adverse effects secondary to chronic COX inhibition.
Since the compounds identified in this study are expected to have
pharmacokinetic profiles comparable to that of indomethacin, we anticipate
that the lead compounds will be well-tolerated for CRPC treatment.In conclusion, we have discovered indomethacin-based inhibitors
of pan> class="Gene">AKR1C3 that are devoid of activity against other AKR1C isoforms,
do not display COX inhibitory activity or AR agonist activity, and
are effective in a prostate cancer cell model. These compounds are
useful therapeutic leads in the management of CRPC. These compounds
have the potential to be superior therapeutic agents compared to abiraterone
in the management of CRPC because they do not interfere with glucocorticoid
biosynthesis and therefore would not require coadministration with
a glucocorticoid.
Experimental Section
General
All commercially available reagents and anhydrous
solvents were used as received. Microwave reactions were carried out
using a Biotage Inpan>itiator 8-EXP Microwave Synpan>thesizer. Analytical
thin-layer chromatography was cpan> class="Gene">arried out using glass-backed plates
coated with fluorescent silica gel 60 F254 from Whatman
(Partisil LK6D). Spots were visualized under natural light and UV
illumination at λ = 254 and 365 nm. Flash chromatography was
conducted on a Biotage SP1 automated flash chromatography system equipped
with a fixed wavelength UV detector (λ = 254 nm). Samples were
preabsorbed onto ready-made silica gel samplets and then applied on
normal-phase flash chromatography cartridges (Biotage KP-SIL, size
according to requirements) eluting with a 0–100% EtOAc/hexane
(0.5% acetic acid) gradient. Where stated, purification was performed
utilizing a custom high-throughput mass-directed preparative (RP-)
HPLC platform using an appropriate acetonitrile/water gradient with
TFA modifier.[59]1H and 13C NMR spectra were recorded at 400 and 100 MHz, respectively,
using a Bruker AV-400 with sample changer (BACS 60). 19F NMR spectra were measured at 282 MHz using a Bruker AV-300. MS
samples were analyzed on an Agilent 1200 LC–MS system operating
in single MS mode with electrospray ionization. Samples were introduced
into the mass spectrometer using chromatography. A purity of ≥95%
(unless otherwise indicated) for the final compounds in this study
was confirmed by analytical HPLC on either a Waters HPLC system with
PDA detector (set at λ = 254 nm) equipped with a Supelco Supelcosil
LC-18 reverse-phase column (15 cm × 3 mm, 5 μm) or the
aforementioned Agilent 1200 analytical LC–MS with UV detection
at λ = 215 and 254 nm along with ELCD detection (Stationary
phase: YMC J’sphere H-80 S-4 column (3.0 × 50 mm)), using
two different gradient methods. The mobile phases were MeOH/0.01 M
KH2PO4, and ACN/H2O (plus 0.1% TFA),
respectively (for further details see Supporting
Information).
Preparation and Analytical Data of Exemplified
Test Compounds
The general synthetic procedures A–D
n class="Gene">are specified in the Supporting Information.
In accordance with general procedure C, oxalyl chloride
(30 μL, 0.35 mmol) was added dropwise to a solution of pan> class="Chemical">2-(1-(4-chlorobenzoyl)-5-methoxy-1H-indol-3-yl)acetic acid 20 (100 mg, 0.29 mmol)
in 2 mL of dry CH2Cl2 under argon. The reaction
mixture was stirred overnight at room temperature. The solvent was
evaporated and the crude product was washed with dry hexane (3 ×
1 mL) and dried in vacuo to give the title compound (pale white solid)
in 95% yield (100 mg). C18H13Cl2NO3, Mr = 362.21; 1H NMR
(400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 3.90 (s, 3H), 4.21 (s, 2H), 6.95
(d, J = 2.4 Hz, 1H), 7.04 (dd, J = 2.4/9.0 Hz, 1H), 7.29 (s, 1H), 7.52–7.55 (m, 2H), 7.67–7.71
(m, 2H), 8.29 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 1H); LC–MS (ESI)
(method 2) tR 2.72 min (>99%, UV254), m/z 358.2 [M + H]+.
In accordance with general procedure D,
80 mg (0.22 mmol) of 2-(1-(4-chlorobenzoyl)-5-methoxy-1H-indol-3-yl)acetyl chloride anpan>d 49.4 mg (0.33 mmol) of
pan> class="Chemical">trifluoromethanesulfonamide were dissolved in 1.8 mL of 1,2-dichloroethane
(DCE) under stirring. Then 17.5 mg (0.22 mmol) of pyridine was added,
and the reaction was allowed to run at ambient temperature until the
starting material was consumed (∼4 h). After the addition of
13 μL of AcOH, the organic solution was washed with H2O (3 × 2 mL), dried over Na2SO4, filtered,
and concentrated in vacuo. The crude product was purified by flash
chromatography (SiO2, ethyl acetate/hexane, 0.5% AcOH gradient)
to afford the title compound in 70% yield (73 mg). C19H14ClF3N2O5S, Mr = 474.84; 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 3.44 (s, 2H), 3.79 (s, 3H), 6.95 (dd, J = 2.6/9.0 Hz, 1H), 7.14 9d, J = 2.4 Hz,
1H), 7.23 (s, 1H), 7.64–7.66 (m, 2H), 7.72–7.74 (m,
2H), 8.15 (d, J = 8.8 Hz, 1H, C7′-H); 19F NMR (282 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
−75.58 (s, −CF3); LC–MS (ESI) (method
2) tR 2.37 min (>99%, UV254, ELSD), m/z 475.0 [M + H]+.
The title compound
was synthesized via general procedure A as described for isomer mixture 46 (see Supporting Inpan>formation).
pan> class="Chemical">H2O was added. The watery reaction mixture was extracted
with methylene chloride (2×) and the combined organic phases
dried over Na2SO4. The solvent was removed under
reduced pressure and the residual beige solid repeatedly triturated
with diethyl ether. The resulting white precipitation was collected
by filtration (ether wash phases abolished) and dried in vacuo to
afford 47 as a single product. Yield: 36 mg, 29%. C21H20ClNO4, Mr = 385.84; 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 1.18 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 3H), 2.46
(t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2H), 2.69 (q, J =
7.6 Hz, 2H), 3.09 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2H), 3.75 (s, 3H),
6.42 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 1H), 6.63 (dd, J = 2.4/9.0 Hz, 1H), 7.03 (d, J = 2.4 Hz, 1H), 7.63
(m, 4H); LC–MS (ESI) (method 2) tR 2.82 min (95%, UV220, UV254), m/z 386.2 [M + H]+.
According to general procedure A, the title compound was
obtained
from 4-chloro-N-(4-methoxyphenyl)benzohydrazide hydrochloride
(50 mg, 0.16 mmol) anpan>d pan> class="Chemical">2,2-dimethyl-4-oxohexanoic acid (30 mg, 0.19
mmol) in AcOH (0.5 mL) after 3 h at 80 °C, extraction into hot
hexane, and subsequent purification by flash chromatography in 36%
yield (23 mg) as a yellow oil, which crystallized constantly upon
drying at high vacuum. C22H22ClNO4, Mr = 399.87; 1H NMR (400
MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 1.03 (s, 6H), 2.21
(s, 3H), 3.25 (s, 2H), 3.76 (s, 3H), 6.52 (d, J =
9.2 Hz, 1H), 6.67 (dd, J = 2.6/9.0 Hz, 1H), 7.03
(d, J = 2.4 Hz, 1H), 7.64–7.68 (m, 4H); LC–MS
(ESI) (method 2) tR 2.89 min (95%, UV220,
UV254), m/z 400.0 [M + H]+.
According
to general procedure A, the title compound was obtained from 4-chloro-N-(4-methoxyphenyl)benzohydrazide hydrochloride (50 mg,
0.16 mmol) anpan>d pan> class="Chemical">3-oxocyclohexanecarboxylic acid (27.2 mg, 0.19 mmol)
in AcOH (0.5 mL) after 3 h at 80 °C in 82% yield (50 mg) as an
off-white solid. C21H18ClNO4, Mr = 383.82; 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 1.79–1.87 (m, 1H), 2.11–2.14
(m, 1H), 2.57–2.75 (m, 5H), 6.73 (dd, J =
2.8/9.0 Hz, 1H), 6.97 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 1H), 7.06 (d, J = 9.2 Hz, 1H), 7.62–7.69 (m, 4H); LC–MS
(ESI) (method 2) tR 2.82 min (>99%,
ELSD), m/z 384.0 [M + H]+.
Enzyme Purification
Homogenous recombinant enzymes
(AKR1C1-4, pan> class="Gene">COX 1, and COX 2) used in this study were prepared and
purified as previously described.[16,17,60−62]
AKR1C Isoforms
The potency of the compounds on all
AKR enzymes was determined by their ability to inhibit the NADP+ depan> class="Gene">pendent oxidation of S-(+)-1,2,3,4-tetrahydro-1-naphthol
(S-tetralol) catalyzed by AKR1C isoforms, as previously
described.[20,21] The concentration of S-tetralol used in the assays for each AKR1C enzyme was
equal to the Km value for the respective
enzyme so that the IC50 values can be directly compared.
COX 1 and 2
The ability of
compounds to inhibit COX activity was determined by two different
test systems: a continuous colorimetric assay that monitored the oxidation
of pan> class="Chemical">N,N,N,N-tetramethyl-1,4-phenylenediamine (TMPD) when it is coupled
to the formation of PGH2 from PGG2 using arachidonic
acid (AA) as substrate, and a discontinuous 14C-AATLC-based
COX assay, where samples were taken, the reaction stopped, and the
concentration of radioactive substrates/products determined on a plate
reader. Both assays have been described earlier in literature.[20,44]
IC50 Determination (Except for the Discontinuous
COX Assay, See Above)
Initial velocities of an enzyme reaction
measured in the presence of varying concentpan> class="Species">rations of inhibitor were
compared to a solvent control to give percent inhibition values. IC50 values of compounds was determined by fitting the inhibition
data using Grafit 5.0 software [y = (range)/[1 + (I/IC50)S] + background] and obtained from a single experiment with each inhibitor concentration
run in quadruplicate with the exception of COX assays that were conducted
in duplicate. Substrate, cofactor, and enzyme were titrated for each
experiment. Selectivity of a compound for AKR1C3 relative to another
tested enzyme is defined as the ratio of the IC50 values
for the tested enzyme: IC50 value for AKR1C3; the higher
the ratio, the greater the selectivity for AKR1C3.
Androgen Receptor
Reporter Gene Assay
HeLa cells that
pan> class="Gene">are stably transfected with the AR and a luciferase reporter gene
(HeLa-AR3A-PSA-(ARE)4-Luc13 cells, a kind gift from Dr. Elizabeth
Wilson) were used for this assay. These cells are plated in a 96-well
plate at 1.5 × 104 cell/100 μL/well in phenol
red free-MEM supplemented with 5% charcoal stripped FBS, 1% Pen/Strep,
2 mM l-glutamine, Geneticin (500 g/mL), and hygromycin (200
g/mL) (CSS media) to maintain selection. The cells are incubated for
6–8 h after which time the media is aspirated and fresh CSS
media containing 0.1–100 nM DHT in the presence and absence
of 10 μM lead compound was added to the cells. The cells were
then incubated for 20 h at 37 °C and 5% CO2 after
which luciferase expression in the cells is measured using the BrightGlo
luciferase assay kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
Briefly, after the incubation time, the cells were allowed to equilibrate
to room temperature. The luciferase substrate was then added to the
cells and the luminescence in each well was measured on a BIOTEK Synergy
2 plate reader. The maximal luciferase activity was seen with 100
nM DHT.
LNCaP-AKR1C3 Mediated Formation of Testosterone
Androgen-dependent
pan> class="Disease">prostate cancer cells (LNCaP) were genetically engineered to stably
express AKR1C3 (LNCaP-AKR1C3).[46] The cell
line was used to determine the ability of lead compounds to block
the conversion of Δ4-AD to testosterone. LNCaP-AKR1C3
cells were plated in RPMI-1640 supplemented with 5% charcoal stripped
serum, 1% Pen/strep, 2 mM l-glutamine, and 500 μg/mL
G418 (CSS media). After 24 h incubation, the media was aspirated and
fresh CSS media containing 0.1 μM [14C]-Δ4-AD with or without inhibitor was added. The media was collected
after 48 h treatment and analyzed for testosterone levels. Briefly,
the collected media was extracted with ethyl acetate. The aqueous
fraction was then treated with β-glucuronidase (200 units/mL
at pH 6.6) for 24 h at 37 °C to liberate conjugated testosterone
and extracted with ethyl acetate. The organic extracts were pooled
and dried under vacuo. Steroid reference standards and extracts dissolved
in 100 μL of ethyl acetate were applied to LK6D SilicaTLC plates
(Whatman Inc., Clifton, NJ). TLC plates were developed using a dichloromethane/ethyl
acetate (80:20 v/v) solution and were counted with a Bioscan System
200 plate reader (Washington, DC).
Crystallography
Crystals of the AKR1C3·pan> class="Chemical">NADP+·20 complex were obtained using the hanging
drop vapor diffusion method at 4 °C. Drops typically contained
3.0 μL of protein solution (9.3 mg/mL AKR1C3, 10 mM potassium
phosphate (pH 7.0), 1.0 mM BME, 1.0 mM EDTA, 7% (v/v) DMSO, 1.33 mM 20, and 2.0 mM NADP+) and 3.0 μL of reservoir
solution (0.1 M 2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid
(pH 6.0) and 15% (w/v) polyethylene glycol 8000). Crystals appeared
and grew to a suitable size for diffraction in approximately 3 days.
Prior to flash-cooling, crystals were soaked for 5 min in a cryoprotective
solution containing 16% (w/v) Jeffamine ED-2001. Crystals yielded
diffraction data to 1.80 Å at beamline X29 (λ = 0.9795
Å) of the National Synchrotron Light Source at Brookhaven National
Laboratory (Upton, NY). Crystals belong to space group P1 with unit cell parameters a = 47.35 Å, b = 49.09 Å, c = 83.44 Å, α
= 74.30°, β = 87.04°, and γ = 69.95°. The
unit cell contains two monomers of AKR1C3. Data were integrated and
scaled with HKL2000 and Scalepack.[63] Data
collection and reduction statistics are reported in Table 7.The structure of the AKR1C3·pan> class="Chemical">NADP+·20 complex was solved by molecular replacement
performed with PHASER[64] from the CCP4 suite
of programs using the coordinates of the AKR1C3·NADP+·indomethacin complex (PDB: 1S2A)[49] less ligand
and solvent molecules as a search probe. The programs CNS,[65] PHENIX,[66] and COOT[67] were used for refinement and model fitting.
NADP+ and 20 were built into the electron
density map at the final stage of refinement. The correct modeling
of the ligands was confirmed by simulated annealing omit maps. The
quality of the model was verified with Molprobity and PROCHECK. The
refinement statistics are reported in Table 7.
Authors: Mo Chen; Adegoke O Adeniji; Barry M Twenter; Jeffrey D Winkler; David W Christianson; Trevor M Penning Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Lett Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 2.823
Authors: Stephen M F Jamieson; Darby G Brooke; Daniel Heinrich; Graham J Atwell; Shevan Silva; Emma J Hamilton; Andrew P Turnbull; Laurent J M Rigoreau; Elisabeth Trivier; Christelle Soudy; Sharon S Samlal; Paul J Owen; Ewald Schroeder; Tony Raynham; Jack U Flanagan; William A Denny Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: T Suzuki-Yamamoto; M Nishizawa; M Fukui; E Okuda-Ashitaka; T Nakajima; S Ito; K Watanabe Journal: FEBS Lett Date: 1999-12-03 Impact factor: 4.124
Authors: Alison H M Reid; Gerhardt Attard; Daniel C Danila; Nikhil Babu Oommen; David Olmos; Peter C Fong; L Rhoda Molife; Joanne Hunt; Christina Messiou; Christopher Parker; David Dearnaley; Joost F Swennenhuis; Leon W M M Terstappen; Gloria Lee; Thian Kheoh; Arturo Molina; Charles J Ryan; Eric Small; Howard I Scher; Johann S de Bono Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-02-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Andrew L Lovering; Jon P Ride; Christopher M Bunce; Julian C Desmond; Stephen M Cummings; Scott A White Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Michael Stanbrough; Glenn J Bubley; Kenneth Ross; Todd R Golub; Mark A Rubin; Trevor M Penning; Phillip G Febbo; Steven P Balk Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-03-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Andy J Liedtke; Brenda C Crews; Cristina M Daniel; Anna L Blobaum; Philip J Kingsley; Kebreab Ghebreselasie; Lawrence J Marnett Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: A O'Donnell; I Judson; M Dowsett; F Raynaud; D Dearnaley; M Mason; S Harland; A Robbins; G Halbert; B Nutley; M Jarman Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-06-14 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Airlie J McCoy; Ralf W Grosse-Kunstleve; Paul D Adams; Martyn D Winn; Laurent C Storoni; Randy J Read Journal: J Appl Crystallogr Date: 2007-07-13 Impact factor: 3.304
Authors: Phumvadee Wangtrakuldee; Adegoke O Adeniji; Tianzhu Zang; Ling Duan; Buddha Khatri; Barry M Twenter; Michelle A Estrada; Tyler F Higgins; Jeffrey D Winkler; Trevor M Penning Journal: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 4.292
Authors: Chengfei Liu; Wei Lou; Yezi Zhu; Joy C Yang; Nagalakshmi Nadiminty; Nilesh W Gaikwad; Christopher P Evans; Allen C Gao Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2015-02-03 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Katelyn Powell; Louie Semaan; M Katie Conley-LaComb; Irfan Asangani; Yi-Mi Wu; Kevin B Ginsburg; Julia Williams; Jeremy A Squire; Krishna R Maddipati; Michael L Cher; Sreenivasa R Chinni Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-03-09 Impact factor: 12.531