Bromodomains are gaining increasing interest as drug targets. Commercially sourced and de novo synthesized substituted [1,2,4]triazolo[4,3-a]phthalazines are potent inhibitors of both the BET bromodomains such as BRD4 as well as bromodomains outside the BET family such as BRD9, CECR2, and CREBBP. This new series of compounds is the first example of submicromolar inhibitors of bromodomains outside the BET subfamily. Representative compounds are active in cells exhibiting potent cellular inhibition activity in a FRAP model of CREBBP and chromatin association. The compounds described are valuable starting points for discovery of selective bromodomain inhibitors and inhibitors with mixed bromodomain pharmacology.
Bromodomains are gaining increasing interest as drug targets. Commercially sourced and de novo synthesized substituted [1,2,4]triazolo[4,3-a]phthalazines are potent inhibitors of both the BET bromodomains such as BRD4 as well as bromodomains outside the BET family such as BRD9, CECR2, and CREBBP. This new series of compounds is the first example of submicromolar inhibitors of bromodomains outside the BET subfamily. Representative compounds are active in cells exhibiting potent cellular inhibition activity in a FRAP model of CREBBP and chromatin association. The compounds described are valuable starting points for discovery of selective bromodomain inhibitors and inhibitors with mixed bromodomain pharmacology.
The rapidly expanding field of epigenetics
can be broadly divided
into two levels of processes: DNA methylation and histone modification.
Various post-translational modifications of histone proteins contribute
to the epigenetic code including methylation, acetylation, phosphorylation,
ubiquitinylation, and citrullination.[1] Acetylation
of lysine residues plays an important role in the regulation of chromatin
structure and ultimately transcription due to the charge neutralization
that occurs, leading to changes in protein conformation and protein–protein
interactions. It is similar to phosphorylation in its prevalence and
has been particularly studied on unstructured histone tails. Aberrant
lysine acetylation frequently leads to alterations in gene expression,
causing activation of pro-survival and proliferation-promoting pathways
and inactivation of tumor suppressor functions. Insight into the regulation
of ε-N-acetyl-lysine (Kac) marks is therefore
desirable in the understanding of and development of novel drugs for
cancer treatment. Consequently, enzymes that write (acetyltransferases,
HATs) and erase (histone deacetylases, HDACs) these marks have emerged
as interesting targets.[2,3]The bromodomain family of
protein interaction modules specifically
recognizes the acetyl-lysine mark, and these acetyl-lysine reader
domains have likewise gained interest of late as novel targets for
pharmacological intervention.[4,5] Bromodomain-containing
proteins are key components in diverse biological processes and are
involved in mediating the assembly of various nuclear protein complexes,
including the recruitment of chromatin modifying enzymes and transcriptional
regulators to acetylated chromatin. Chromosomal rearrangements, aberrant
expression of bromodomain-containing proteins, and protein dysfunctions
have been tightly linked to tumorigenesis,[6] and new avenues for the development of antineoplastic drugs have
recently been highlighted by the potent antitumor activity exhibited
by inhibitors which selectively target bromodomains.[7] Known bromodomain inhibitors mainly target the BET family
of bromodomains, including BRD3 and BRD4, but many other bromodomain-containing
proteins such as CREBBP, TIF1α, ATAD2, and SMARCA4 have been
implicated in a variety of diseases.[4]Potent BET inhibitors generally fall into three structural classes:
isoxazoles,[8] amides/ureas,[9] and 1,2,4-triazoles.[5] Most BET
inhibitors described to date have a methyl group adjacent to a hydrogen
bond acceptor which mimics the acetyl group of acetyl lysine. The
structurally related thieno- and benzo-diazepine triazoles (+)-JQ1
and I-BET762 (Figure 1A) were shown to be potent
inhibitors of the BET bromodomains and have potential for use in inflammatory
disease,[10] atherosclerosis,[11] NUT-midline carcinoma,[7] acute leukemia,[12] lymphoma,[13] and HIV infection.[14] Two structurally related fused triazoles (compounds 3 and 4) have been exemplified in patents from GSK[15] and Constellation[16] as potent BET inhibitors.
Figure 1
(A) Triazole-containing BET inhibitors. (B)
The bromodomain family
is made of eight subfamilies (large italic).[17] Family members screened in this work are shown in larger typeface.
(A) Triazole-containing BET inhibitors. (B)
The bromodomain family
is made of eight subfamilies (large italic).[17] Family members screened in this work are shown in larger typeface.Given the success of the chemical
probes (+)-JQ1 and I-BET762 in
deciphering the role of the BET subfamily of bromodomains in disease,
it is clear that there is an urgent need for inhibitors for the remaining
subfamilies of bromodomain-containing proteins in order to investigate
their biological function and therapeutic potential.
Results and Discussion
The selectivity of (+)-JQ1 and I-BET762 for the BETs has been attributed
to the 4-chlorophenyl moiety which forms hydrophobic interactions
with residues on the edge of the acetyl-lysine binding pocket including
W81. It was hoped that by keeping the 3-methyl-[1,2,4]-triazolo motif
but varying the fused ring and pendant substituents, novel compounds
could be found that would maintain bromodomain potency with altered
selectivity for non-BET proteins. To find new starting points for
bromodomains outside the BET family, a number of triazole-containing
commercial compounds were purchased and profiled against 17 BRDs in
the bromodomain family tree by differential scanning fluorimetry (DSF)
(Figure 1B).[7,18] The [1,2,4]triazolo[4,3-a]phthalazines shown in Figure 2 were
thought to be attractive potential BRD inhibitors due to the presence
of the 5-methyl group adjacent to the triazole H-bond acceptor.[19] It has been shown by Chung et al. that potent
BRD inhibitors can be discovered by focusing on privileged substructures.[20] By testing the potential inhibitors against
bromodomains from the entire protein family by the operationally simple
DSF assay in a platform discovery approach, a rapid assessment of
BRD potency and selectivity was established.
Figure 2
Commercial [1,2,4]triazolo[4,3-a]phthalazines
are potent inhibitors of multiple bromodomains by DSF screening.
Commercial [1,2,4]triazolo[4,3-a]phthalazines
are potent inhibitors of multiple bromodomains by DSF screening.When tested in a panel of bromodomains,
these initial compounds
showed hits for BRD4(1), BRD9, CECR2, CREBBP, and TAF1L(2), with the
greatest potencies against BRD9 (compounds 7 and 15) and CREBBP (compounds 9, 14,
and 17). Very little activity was observed against BAZ2A,
BAZ2B, PB1(5), and TIF1α. All of the commercially available
triazolophthalazines shared an amide or sulfonamide substituent at
the meta-position (R1) and a methyl group
at the para-position (R2) of the pendant
phenyl group. Sulfonamides were observed to have greater potency than
amides (e.g., compounds 7 and 15 vs compound 5). N- and S-linked sulfonamides
were found to have similar potencies (compound 7 vs 15). A variety of substituents were tolerated on the sulfonamide,
both aryl and alkyl. To examine the effect of the omnipresent para-methyl group in the commercial compounds, compound 13 was synthesized (Scheme 1). This
methyl group was shown to positively influence activity as the des-methyl analogue 13 was less active in the
DSF assay against all bromodomains tested.
Reagents and conditions: (a)
NH2NHAc, nBuOH, reflux (41%); (b) NH2NH2, THF; (c) R5CO2H, p-dioxane, reflux (32–42%); (d) Boc-glycine, THF,
reflux (39%); (e) 35, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O (29–80%); (f) HCl, EtOAc (100%); (g) 36, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O (25%); (h) (i) 37, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O, (ii) SnCl2, EtOH, reflux, (iii)
PhSO2Cl, pyridine, THF (16% over 3 steps); (i) 39, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O (35%); (j) (i) 38 or 40, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O, (ii) KOH, MeOH (39–79%
over 2 steps).As these compounds showed binding
to multiple bromodomains, compound 17 was chosen as a
representative for docking into the bromodomain
of CREBBP. Although there were other compounds as potent as compound 17, it was chosen for docking studies as it had a good combination
of high potency and rigidity which provided a small number of calculated
poses. All but the five water molecules previously shown to be important
in CREBBP[8e] were removed from the published
complex of CREBBP with a fragment ligand (PDB ID 3SVH), and compound 17 was docked into the protein using the ligedit functionality
of ICM-Pro.[21] As seen in Figure 3, compound 17 has an excellent fit
to the bromodomain. The triazole forms two hydrogen bonds via adjacent
nitrogen atoms to a structural water molecule and the conserved asparagine
residue (N1168) found in most bromodomains. The triazole’s
methyl group fits well into the cavity formed by the remaining water
molecules. The meta-sulfonamide formed two hydrogen
bonds to arginine (R1173) in CREBBP.
Figure 3
Docking of compound 17 (orange
ball and stick) in
bromodomain of CREBBP (PDB ID, 3SVH; protein, green ribbon and sticks; water
molecules, red and blue spheres; top loop removed for clarity in first
image). The triazole moiety forms two H-bonds (dashed line) to a conserved
water (red sphere) and asparagine 1168 (N1168). The sulfonamide accepts
two H-bonds from arginine 1173 (R1173).
Docking of compound 17 (orange
ball and stick) in
bromodomain of CREBBP (PDB ID, 3SVH; protein, green ribbon and sticks; water
molecules, red and blue spheres; top loop removed for clarity in first
image). The triazole moiety forms two H-bonds (dashed line) to a conserved
water (red sphere) and asparagine 1168 (N1168). The sulfonamide accepts
two H-bonds from arginine 1173 (R1173).To confirm the potencies initially established by DSF, AlphaScreen
competition assays were used to test whether representative compounds 6–8 and 15 could displace
labeled peptides from seven representative bromodomains (Table 1).[22] These compounds
were chosen as representatives as they all had similar structures
but differed in their bromodomain inhibition profiles. With one exception
(compound 8 with CREBBP), the pIC50 values
measured for the representative compounds were consistent with DSF Tm shifts (ΔTm). The coefficient of determination (R2) between the two assay formats was high enough that the general
and operationally simple DSF assay was felt to be a useful surrogate
for the more complex AlphaScreen in further efforts to increase the
potency of the compounds.
Table 1
pIC50 of
Representative
Compounds As Measured by AlphaScreen and ΔTm As Measured by DSF
6
7
8
15
target
ΔTm °Ca,b
pIC50
ΔTm °Ca,b
pIC50
ΔTm °Ca,b
pIC50
ΔTm °Ca,b
pIC50
BRD4(1)
1.4 ± 0.40 (3)
4.7 (4.6–4.8)c
2.2 ± 0.15 (3)
5.7 (5.6–5.8)c
1.7 ± 0.08 (3)
5.9 (5.9–5.9)c
4.3 ± 0.16 (3)
5.3 ± 0.54 (2)a
BRD9
2.1 ± 0.56 (3)
ND
3.6 ± 0.31 (3)
5.9 (5.7–6.1)c
1.8 ± 0.22 (3)
5.8 (5.6–6)c
5.6 ± 0.30 (3)
6.3 ± 0.12 (2)a
CECR2
1.5 ± 0.54 (3)
5.3 (5.1–5.5)c
2.4 ± 0.7 (3)
5.5 (4.9–6.0)c
3.2 ± 0.87 (3)
6.6 (6.5–6.7)c
3.3 ± 0.14 (3)
6.3 ± 0.17 (2)a
CREBBP
1.6 ± 0.10 (3)
5.2 ± 0.48 (2)a
1.9 ± 0.12 (3)
5.8 (5.5–6.1)c
0.7 ± 0.1 (3)
5.9 (5.7–6.2)c
2.8 ± 0.13 (3)
4.8 ± 0.061 (3)a
BAZ2B
0.03 ± 0.03 (3)
<4d
0.23 ± 0.09 (3)
<4d
0.20 ± 0.11 (3)
<4d
–0.013 ± 0.18 (3)
<4d
PB1(5)
0.16 ± 0.03 (3)
<4d
–0.18 ± 0.13 (3)
<4d
–0.33 ± 0.05 (3)
<4d
–0.070 ± 0.087 (3)
<4d
TIF1α
–0.14 ± 0.04 (3)
<4d
–0.27 ± 0.05 (3)
<4d
–0.19 ± 0.06 (3)
<4d
–0.12 ± 0.082 (3)
<4d
R2e
0.90
0.90
0.80
0.82
Mean ± standard
error of the
mean (number of determinations).
Compound concentration 10 μM.
pIC50 (95% CI based on
duplicate pIC50 measurements).
<25% inhibition at 100 μM.
Coefficient of determination based
on a linear correlation between DSF Tm shift (abscissa) and AlphaScreen
pIC50 (ordinate).
Mean ± standard
error of the
mean (number of determinations).Compound concentration 10 μM.pIC50 (95% CI based on
duplicate pIC50 measurements).<25% inhibition at 100 μM.Coefficient of determination based
on a linear correlation between DSF Tm shift (abscissa) and AlphaScreen
pIC50 (ordinate).With an interesting series of inhibitors discovered through compound
purchasing, additional analogues were designed and synthesized as
shown in Scheme 1. Initial analogues focused
on optimizing compounds 12 and 17 for CECR2
and CREBBP potency. Compound 12, although not the most
potent analogue, had a preference for CECR2 and CREBBP by DSF Tm shift. Compound 17 was an attractive
CREBBP lead due to its potency and synthetic accessibility. The fused
methyl triazole ring was formed by substitution of 1,4-dichlorophthalazine 18 with acetyl hydrazide and in situ condensation. Suzuki
coupling of the resulting aryl chloride with boronic ester 35 gave compound 13. Stepwise chloride displacement of
compound 18 with hydrazine and subsequent condensation
with carboxylic acids gave more elaborate substitution at the 2-position
of the triazole in compounds 24–28 following Suzuki reaction. It was hoped that triazole substituents
larger than methyl might compensate for the loss of activity on CECR2
and CREBBP seen between compounds 12 and 13 by displacing conserved waters in the bromodomain pocket (blue sphere
in Figure 3). The hydrophobic ethyl and cyclopropyl
groups of compounds 24 and 25, and hydrogen
bonding groups of compounds 26 and 28 provided
no additional binding beyond the methyl group of compound 13 and could not rescue the loss of the para-methyl
group from compound 12 (Figure 4).[17]
Figure 4
Synthetic inhibitors of multiple bromodomains.
Synthetic inhibitors of multiple bromodomains.The next group of analogues explored
alternative additional substituents
to the aryl sulfonamide. Compound 29 was made from the
commercially available sulfonamide-containing boronic ester 36. To examine the effect of a chlorine in the 6-position
of the phenyl ring, 2-chloro-5-nitrophenylboronic acid 37 was coupled to intermediate 19. Reduction and sulfonylation
gave compound 30. Although compound 29 showed
only weak binding to all bromodomains, compound 30 had
modest binding to BRD4(1) and CREBBP.As highlighted in Figure 3, CREBBP has an
arginine (R1173) at the mouth of the acetylated peptide binding pocket
and it was thought that the arylsulfonamide (calculated pKa 8.1)[23] of compound 15 might be interacting with this charged arginine. Carboxylic
acid-containing compounds were synthesized to try to exploit a potential
salt bridge to R1173 and create CREBBP selective inhibitors. Compounds 31–33 were synthesized from compound 19 via Suzuki reaction with boronic acids 38–40 and hydrolysis of the methyl esters if required. Of the
three, compound 33 with its extended acid was the most
active against CREBBP but did not show selectivity over BRD4(1). Comparing
compound 33 to compounds 12 and 13 showed that the acetic acid group could compensate to some extent
for the loss of activity going from 12 to 13 and turn a CECR2 and CREBBP favoring inhibitor into a BRD4(1) and
CREBBP inhibitor. Removing all substituents from the 6-phenyl group
gave the simplest molecule described so far, compound 34, which, although it is only a modest inhibitor, has an intriguing
selectivity for BRD9.[24]The structure–activity
relationship (SAR) established thus
far had highlighted the importance of a group at the 4-position of
the 6-phenyl substituent and the utility of a sulfonamide at the 3-position.
The potent and lipophilic analogues in Figure 1, such as compounds 14 and 17, suffered
from poor solubility. To identify more potent sulfonamides, without
further loss in solubility, a polar replacement for the critical 4-methyl
group was sought. As the docking of compound 17 in CREBBP
(Figure 3) did not show a direct binding role
of the 4-methyl group, its influence was hypothesized to be due to
a positive conformational effect on the sulfonamide. N-Morpholino- and 4-methylpiperazinyl- groups were chosen as polar
methyl substitutes, and analogues incorporating each were synthesized
as shown in Scheme 2.
Reagents and conditions: (a)
morpholine, iPrOH (100%); (b) 4-methylpiperazine,
Et3N, iPrOH (100%); (c) (BOpin)2, Pd(dppf)Cl2, KOAc, p-dioxane/DMSO (47–72%);
(d) 19, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O (32–50%);
(e) SnCl2, EtOH, reflux (26–100%); (f) RSO2Cl, Et3N, p-dioxane or RSO2Cl, pyridine, DCM (47–81%); (g) 22, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O (62%); (h) (i) 23, Pd(PPh3)4, K2CO3, p-dioxane/H2O, (ii) HCl, EtOAc (60%).In a route designed to allow synthesis of sulfonamide variants
from a common intermediate, 2,5-dibromonitrobenzene 41 was selectively reacted with morpholine or 4-methylpiperazine to
give compounds 42 and 43. After bromide
to boronate substitution, Suzuki coupling with compound 19 gave compounds 45 and 47. Reduction with
tin(II) chloride gave the anilines 46 and 48, which were capped with sulfonyl chlorides to give the inhibitors 49 – 55.The resulting compounds 47–55 were
tested by DSF in the panel of 17 bromodomains, and the results are
summarized in Figure 5. The strategy to increase
potency by replacing the para-methyl group with a
cyclic amine was very successful; compound 50 was as
potent as compound 15. However, increasing the size of
the sulfonamide from methyl to para-tolyl to give
compound 49 was detrimental to solubility and accurate Tm shift measurements were difficult to obtain.
The chloro-substituted analogues of compound 49 were
soluble, and compounds 51, 52, and 53 were potent and showed an apparent preference for CREBBP.
Figure 5
Triazolophthalazines
with para-aminophenyl substituents
are potent bromodomain inhibitors.
Triazolophthalazines
with para-aminophenyl substituents
are potent bromodomain inhibitors.Compound 53 is an interesting BRD4-, BRD9-,
and CREBBP-favoring
inhibitor targeting three different BRDs implicated in leukemia.[12,25] More polar replacements for the morpholine and chlorophenyl substituents
were incorporated in compound 55 in the form of 4-methylpiperazine
and 4-methoxyphenylsulfonyl groups, respectively, which gave a preference
for BRD9 over other bromodomains.In a final attempt to displace
two of the conserved waters in the
bromodomain acetyl-lysine binding pocket (blue sphere in Figure 3), two analogues of the potent inhibitor 53 with triazole methyl group extensions, compounds 56 and 57, were synthesized from compound 42. But as in compounds 24–28, they
both lost potency compared to the methyl analogue 53.Four representative compounds (50, 51, 53, and 55) were chosen for confirmation
screening and IC50 determination in AlphaScreen peptide
displacement assays against five bromodomains (Table 2). In general, all compounds were inactive against TIF1α
but the AlphaScreen assays showed less discrimination than the DSF
assays for the remaining four bromodomains. This may be due to assay
differences; DSF Tm shift is a measure
of protein stability increased by ligand interaction, whereas AlphaScreen
competition IC50 is also a function of the competing peptide’s
affinity for the BRD. In addition, the AlphaScreen IC50 is consistently measured at 20–25 °C, whereas the DSF Tm shift is measured at the melting temperature
of the protein which varies between proteins. Any compounds that bind
with a large entropic contribution would be expected to show differences
in potencies between assays run at different temperatures. Compound 50 was a promiscuous inhibitor and showed submicromolar IC50 values against BRD4(1), BRD9, CECR2, and CREBBP, whereas
compound 51 was at least 100-fold selective for BRD4(1),
BRD9, and CREBBP over CECR2. Compound 53 was similar
in profile to compound 51, with less discrimination over
CECR2. The only piperazine derivative, compound 55, had
a slight preference for CECR2 over BRD4(1), but despite inclusion
of polar substituents, poor solubility of this compound showed variable
IC50 determinations for BRD9 and CREBBP as shown by the
high standard errors.
Table 2
pIC50 of
Representative
Compounds As Measured by AlphaScreen and ΔTm As Measured by DSF
50
51
53
55
target
ΔTm °Ca,b,c
pIC50a,d
ΔTm °Ca,b,c
pIC50a,d
ΔTm °Ca,b,c
pIC50a,d
ΔTm °Ca,b,c
pIC50a,d
BRD4(1)
2.6 ± 0.099 (6)
6.6 ± 0.49 (2)
4.4 ± 0.81 (11)
6.8 ± 0.12 (2)
4.4 ± 0.38 (9)
6.0 ± 0.16 (2)
2.5 ± 0.38 (8)
5.3 ± 0.014 (2)
BRD9
4.9 ± 0.24 (4)
6.5 ± 0.092 (3)
6.6 ± 0.82 (6)
6.7 ± 0.11 (3)
6.2 ± 0.35 (5)
6.0 ± 0.11 (2)
7.3 ± 0.44 (3)
6.2 ± 0.99 (2)
CECR2
3.7 ± 0.16 (3)
6.8 ± 0.17 (2)
1.62 ± 0.48 (4)
4.6 ± 0.24 (2)
2.0 ± 0.16 (3)
4.7 ± 0.10 (2)
2.0 ± 0.16 (3)
6.0 ± 0.14 (2)
CREBBP
3.9 ± 0.33 (4)
6.2 ± 0.62 (2)
7.6 ± 0.94 (7)
6.7 ± 0.074 (2)
7.9 ± 0.33 (6)
6.2 ± 0.57 (2)
6.7 ± 0.35 (6)
6.1 ± 0.61 (2)
Mean ± standard error of the
mean (number of determinations).
Compound concentration 10 μM.
All compounds tested showed ΔTm < 0.2 °C for TIF1α.
All compounds tested showed <30%
inhibition of TIF1α at 50 μM.
Mean ± standard error of the
mean (number of determinations).Compound concentration 10 μM.All compounds tested showed ΔTm < 0.2 °C for TIF1α.All compounds tested showed <30%
inhibition of TIF1α at 50 μM.It is noteworthy that the compounds disclosed in this
work are
potent inhibitors of the CECR2, BRD4(1)/(2), CREBBP, BRD9, and TAF1L(2)
bromodomains to varying degrees. The inhibited bromodomains do not
cluster as expected from the sequence-based phylogenetic tree (Figure 1b). From the phylogenetic tree it would be expected
that closely related BRDs such as PCAF (subfamily I shared with CECR2),
PHIP(2) (subfamily III shared with CREBBP), BRPF3 and ATAD2 (subfamily
IV shared with BRD9), and TAF1(1) (subfamily VII shared with TAF1L(2))
would also be affected by the inhibitors. It could be argued that
the phylogenetic tree in Figure 1b described
by Filippakopoulos et al.[17] is based on
a sequence alignment of the entire bromodomain, whereas only the residues
in the ligand binding region are relevant to selectivity. A more ligand-focused
phylogenetic tree has been described by Vidler et al. which clusters
BRDs based on binding site residues.[26] This
refined analysis goes part of the way to explaining compound selectivity
as it clusters PHIP(2) with PB1(5) (both not inhibited) and moves
ATAD2 to its own branch, but it does not explain the remaining inconsistencies
as PCAF still clusters with CECR2, BRPF3 with BRD9, and TAF1(1) with
TAF1L(2). Calculated druggability is also insufficient to explain
inhibitor preference as both PCAF and TAF1(1) have similar SiteMap
D-scores to CECR2 and TAF1L(2).[26]Compound 51 was chosen as a representative of this
series, and co-crystallization was attempted with multiple bromodomains.
High resolution structures were obtained with BRD4(1) and BRD9 (Figure 6). The overall pose of the compound with the two
bromodomains was exactly as expected from the initial docking studies
of the predecessor 17 in CREBBP (Figure 3). The triazole moiety formed hydrogen bonds to the conserved
asparagine N140 in BRD4(1) and N100 in BRD9 and to a conserved pocket
water molecule in both proteins. The phthalazine ring system was sandwiched
securely between L94 and I146 in BRD4 and I53 and Y106 in BRD9. The
pendant aryl ring allowed further interactions of the sulfonamide.
In BRD4(1), the nitrogen of the sulfonamide appears to be deprotonated
and acting as an H-bond acceptor to tryptophan-81 with a heavy atom
distance of 2.1 Å. This unusual interaction has not been described
for previous BET inhibitors, which rely on a hydrophobic interaction
with W81 for potency. In BRD9, the sulfonamide is rotated to allow
a hydrophobic interaction between the 2-chlorophenyl group and I53.
This leaves the sulfonamide in a position to accept an H-bond from
the phenol of Y106. The morpholine substituent does not make any direct
interactions with the protein but keeps the sulfonamide conformation
favorable for protein interactions. Although compound 51 was not crystallized in CECR2, it was hypothesized that the difference
in selectivity could be rationalized by the large 2-chlorophenylsulfonamide
being harder to accommodate in the smaller pocket of CECR2 than the
smaller methylsulfonamide of the more promiscuous compound 50.
Figure 6
(A) Compound 51 (green stick) in complex with BRD4(1)
(PDB ID: 4NQM, blue ribbon and stick, top loop removed for clarity in first image)
shows H-bonds (dashed lines) between the triazole moiety, the conserved
asparagine (N140), and a pocket water (red sphere). The anionic sulfonamide
forms an additional hydrogen bond to tryptophan (W81). (B) In complex
with BRD9 (PDB ID: 4NQN, yellow ribbon and stick (the ZA loop was removed for clarity in
first image)), compound 51 forms H-bonds to N100 and
water but acts as an H-bond acceptor via a sulfonamide oxygen to Y106.
The electron density map from the X-ray refinement is shown as a dark-blue
mesh around the ligand.
(A) Compound 51 (green stick) in complex with BRD4(1)
(PDB ID: 4NQM, blue ribbon and stick, top loop removed for clarity in first image)
shows H-bonds (dashed lines) between the triazole moiety, the conserved
asparagine (N140), and a pocket water (red sphere). The anionic sulfonamide
forms an additional hydrogen bond to tryptophan (W81). (B) In complex
with BRD9 (PDB ID: 4NQN, yellow ribbon and stick (the ZA loop was removed for clarity in
first image)), compound 51 forms H-bonds to N100 and
water but acts as an H-bond acceptor via a sulfonamideoxygen to Y106.
The electron density map from the X-ray refinement is shown as a dark-blue
mesh around the ligand.The ability of inhibitors to displace the bromodomain of
CREBBP
from chromatin was assessed using fluorescence recovery after photobleaching
(FRAP). A construct consisting of the multimerised bromodomain of
CREBBP as well as a similar construct in which the conserved asparagine
responsible for binding of acetylated lysine has been mutated to a
phenylalanine was transfected into U2OS cells. Cells were treated
with the histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor SAHA in order to globally
increase lysine acetylation, resulting in a better assay window (Figure 7A). Treatment of the cells with compounds 50, 51, 53, and 55 significantly
decreased FRAP recovery times (Figures 7B),
indicative of displacement of the BRD construct from hyper-acetylated
chromatin. The piperazine derivative, compound 55, showed
a slightly decreased recovery time, indicating a stronger binding
to the CREBBP bromodomain.
Figure 7
(A) Cells transfected with a trimerized CREBBP-BRD-GFP
construct
show rapid recovery of fluorescent intensity after photobleaching
(FRAP) (black). Recovery time is increased by pretreating cells with
2.5 μM SAHA* (green) and restored by transfecting with incompetent
mutant protein (N1168F, red). (B) Cells treated with SAHAa (2.5 μM) and compounds 50 (blue), 51 (yellow), 53 (purple), and 55 (red) (1
μM) show increased recovery rates. (C) Recovery half-lives of
transfected (black), SAHA treated (green), and SAHA plus compound
treated cells. (D) Fluorescent images of cells show rapid recovery
of photobleached area (red circle) after compound treatment. aSAHA treated cells; bN1168F, mutation of N1168
to Phe.
(A) Cells transfected with a trimerized CREBBP-BRD-GFP
construct
show rapid recovery of fluorescent intensity after photobleaching
(FRAP) (black). Recovery time is increased by pretreating cells with
2.5 μM SAHA* (green) and restored by transfecting with incompetent
mutant protein (N1168F, red). (B) Cells treated with SAHAa (2.5 μM) and compounds 50 (blue), 51 (yellow), 53 (purple), and 55 (red) (1
μM) show increased recovery rates. (C) Recovery half-lives of
transfected (black), SAHA treated (green), and SAHA plus compound
treated cells. (D) Fluorescent images of cells show rapid recovery
of photobleached area (red circle) after compound treatment. aSAHA treated cells; bN1168F, mutation of N1168
to Phe.
Conclusions
A series of potent BRD
inhibitor compounds has been developed.
Initial SAR in this series shows the potential to develop selective
inhibitors for individual bromodomains, with compounds showing some
preference for the BRDs of CECR2, BRD4(1), CREBBP, BRD9, and TAF1L(2)
over the likes of PCAF, PHIP(2), BRPF3, ATAD2, TIF1α, SP140,
BAZ2A/B, TAF1(1), PB1(5), and SMARCA4. It is not clear from sequence-
and structure-based clustering why these novel inhibitors have preference
for some BRDs over others. Inhibitors with in vitro IC50 <1 μM have been identified for the previously untargeted
BRDs of BRD9 and CECR2. A modular synthetic route allows diversification
of multiple positions of the core and will be used to further explore
this scaffold to find more selective molecules to probe the biological
function of the less well studied members of this epigenetic reader
family. Using a FRAP assay, selected compounds have been shown to
be cell active. By adopting a chemical probe approach[27] rather than a preselected target approach and characterizing
compounds across the entire BRD family, compounds with intriguing
polypharmacology have also been uncovered such as compound 53, which selectively inhibits three bromodomain-containing proteins
implicated in leukemia (BRD4, CREBBP, and BRD9).
Experimental
Section
General Experimental
Commercial reagents were used
as received without further purification. Commercial anhydrous solvents
were used in reactions, and HPLC grade solvents were employed for
workup and chromatography. NMR spectra were recorded using a Varian
Mercury 300 or 400 MHz for 1H and 75 or 101 MHz for 13C. The solvent was used as internal deuterium lock. Coupling
constants (J) are quoted in Hz and are recorded to
the nearest 0.5 Hz. Identical proton coupling constants are averaged
in each spectrum and reported to the nearest 0.1 Hz. When peak multiplicities
are reported, the following abbreviations are used: s = singlet, d
= doublet, t = triplet, m = multiplet, br = broadened, dd = doublet
of doublets, dt = doublet of triplets. LRMS employed an electrospray
ionization source acquiring in positive and negative ionization mode. m/z values are reported in Daltons. Analytical
HPLC was carried out on an Agilent 1100 equipped with photodiode array
detector (DAD), quaternary gradient pump, and micro plate sampler
(Agilent 220). Separation of the analytes was performed upon Centurysil
C18-AQ + 5 μm, 50 mm × 4.6 mm (Johnson). The flow rate
of the mobile phase was kept at 3.5 mL/min. Mobile phases B and C
were acetonitrile with 0.35% CF3CO2H and water
with 0.35% CF3CO2H, respectively. The gradient
conditions were as follows: 0–0.5 min 1% B and 99% C, 3.7 min
90% B and 10% C, 5 min 99% B and 1% C. The injection volume was 10
μL. All compounds tested in biological assays were ≥95%
pure by HPLC at 254 nm and by evaporative light scattering detection
(ELSD).
Synthetic Procedure and Characterization of Compounds 13, 24–34, 49–57
1,4-Dichlorophthalazine 18 (5 g, 25.1 mmol) was mixed with n-butanol (100
mL) under argon, and acetic hydrazide (3.7 g, 50.2 mmol) was added.
The reaction was stirred at reflux overnight. The mixture was cooled
to room temperature, followed by filtration. The solid was washed
with EtOAc and MeOH. The solid residue was purified by flash column
chromatography (EtOAc:petroleum ether 1:3) to obtain title compound 19 (2.26 g, 41%). MS (ES+): m/z calcd for (C10H7ClN4 +
H)+ 219.0, found 219.0. Purity (ELSD) >95%.
A mixture of compound 19 (45
mg, 0.21 mmol), boronate 35 (50 mg, 0.17 mmol), Pd(PPh3)4 (20
mg), and K2CO3 (58 mg, 0.43 mmol) in dioxane
and water was stirred under argon at 120 °C. The reaction was
monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was added and the aqueous
layer was extracted with DCM. The organic layers were combined, washed
with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents
were removed in vacuo, and the residue was purified by flash column
chromatography (DCM:MeOH 30:1) to give the title compound 13 (30 mg, 33%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd
for (C23H19N5O2S + H)+ 430.1, found 429.9. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.60 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.11–8.02
(3H, m), 7.96–7.79 (3H, m), 7.66 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 7.24–7.11 (5H, m), 4.10 (2H, s), 2.71 (3H, s).
1-Chloro-4-hydrazinylphthalazine[28] (300
mg, 1.54 mmol) was dissolved in propanoic acid (3 mL), and the solution
was heated to reflux. The reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion,
the solvent was removed in vacuo, and the residue was purified by
flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 20:1) to provide the intermediate
6-chloro-3-ethyl-[1,2,4]triazolo[3,4-a]phthalazine
(20) (149 mg, 42%). A mixture of compound 20 (45 mg, 0.21 mmol), boronate 35 (50 mg, 0.17 mmol),
Pd(PPh3)4 (20 mg), and K2CO3 (58 mg, 0.43 mmol) in dioxane and water was heated and stirred under
argon at 120 °C. The reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion,
water was added and the mixture was extracted with DCM. The organic
layers were combined, washed with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were removed in vacuo, and the residue
was purified by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 30:1) to give
the title compound 24 (30 mg, 33%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C24H21N5O2S + H)+ 444.1, found 443.9. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.62 (1H,
d, J = 7.8), 8.12–7.80 (6H, m), 7.69 (1H,
d, J = 8.4), 7.25–7.18 (5H, m), 4.12 (2H,
s), 3.14 (2H, q, J = 7.5), 1.42 (3H, t, J = 7.8). HPLC retention time 3.088 min.
Following the same procedure as for 24, the title
compound was obtained in 80% yield via compound 21. MS
(ESI): m/z calcd for (C25H21N5O2S + H)+ 456.1,
found 455.9. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.59 (1H, d, J = 7.2), 8.10–8.04
(3H, m), 7.95 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 7.91–7.80
(2H, m), 7.66 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 7.25–7.17
(5H, m), 4.11 (2H, s), 2.45 (1H, m), 1.21–1.15 (4H, m).
Following the same procedure as for 24, title compound 26 was obtained in 37% yield via compound 22.
MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C23H19N5O3S + H)+ 446.1,
found 446.1. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.65 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 8.14–8.04
(3H, m), 7.99–7.90 (2H, m), 7.83 (1H, t, J = 7.8), 7.69 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 7.25–7.18
(5H, m), 4.96 (2H, s), 4.11 (2H, s).
1-Chloro-4-hydrazinylphthalazine[28] (1.6
g, 8.24 mmol) and Boc-glycine (7.2 g, 40 mmol) were dissolved in THF
(150 mL), and the mixture was stirred at reflux. The reaction was
monitored by TLC. Upon completion, the mixture was concentrated in
vacuo, followed by dilution with H2O (50 mL) and extraction
with DCM (3 × 20 mL). The combined organic layers were dried
(Na2SO4), concentrated in vacuo, and the residue
was purified by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 30:1) to provide
the intermediate 23 (237 mg, 39%).A mixture of
tricyclic triazole 23 (169 mg, 0.51 mmol), boronate 35 (162 mg, 0.56 mmol), Pd(PPh3)4 (58
mg, 0.1 equiv), and K2CO3 (175 mg, 1.27 mmol)
in dioxane (5 mL) and water (0.5 mL) was stirred and heated under
argon at 120 °C. The reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion,
water (20 mL) was added and the mixture was extracted with DCM (3
× 20 mL). The combined organic layers were dried (Na2SO4), concentrated in vacuo, and the residue was purified
by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 40:1) to give the title compound 27 (80 mg, 29%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C28H28N6O4S + H)+ 545.2, found 545.1. 1H NMR (CDCl3): δ 8.72 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.17 (1H,
m), 8.09 (1H, m), 7.95 (1H, m), 7.87 (1H, m), 7.76–7.72 (3H,
m), 7.26–7.22 (5H, m), 5.47 (2H, br), 4.92 (2H, d, J = 5.7), 4.27 (2H, d, J = 6.3), 1.42 (9H,
s).
Compound 27 (42 mg, 0.08 mmol) was dissolved in a solution of HCl in
EtOAc. The mixture was stirred at room temperature, and the reaction
was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, the precipitate was filtered
to afford the title compound (40 mg, 100%) as the HCl salt. MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C23H20N6O2S + H)+ 445.1, found 445.1. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6): δ 8.70
(1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.17 (1H, m), 8.10–8.07
(2H, m), 8.01–7.98 (2H, m), 7.85 (1H, m), 7.75 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 7.27–7.22 (5H, m), 4.65 (2H, s), 4.12 (2H,
s).
Benzenesulfonyl chloride (0.26 mL, 2 mmol) was added to
a mixture of 3-bromo-5-chloroaniline (350 mg, 1.7 mmol) and pyridine
(0.16 mL, 2 mmol) in THF (8 mL), and the resulting mixture was stirred
at room temperature for 6 h. Water was added, and the aqueous layer
was extracted with DCM. The organic layers were combined, washed with
brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvent was removed
in vacuo, and the residue was purified by flash column chromatography
(EtOAc:petroleum ether 8:1) to give the intermediate N-(3-bromo-5-chlorophenyl)-benzene sulfonamide (380 mg).A mixture
of the sulfonamide from the preceding reaction (180 mg, 0.52 mmol),
bis(pinacolato)diboron (145 mg, 0.57 mmol), KOAc (101 mg, 1.04 mmol),
and Pd(dppf)Cl2 (11 mg, 0.016 mmol) in p-dioxane (3 mL) and DMSO (0.1 mL) was degassed with argon and heated
at 85 °C for 26 h. The reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion,
the solvents were removed in vacuo, aqueous NaOH (2 M, 20 mL) was
added to the residue, and the mixture was stirred for 10 min at room
temperature. The mixture was extracted with EtOAc, 6 M HCl was added
to the aqueous layer to adjust the pH to 3–4, and it was then
extracted with EtOAc. The organic layer was washed with brine, dried
(Na2SO4), concentrated in vacuo, and purified
by flash column chromatography to provide the compound 36 (126 mg).A mixture of tricyclic triazole 19 (40
mg, 0.19 mmol),
boronate 36 (70 mg, 0.18 mmol), Pd(PPh3)4 (20 mg), and K2CO3 (6 mg, 0.43 mmol)
in dioxane and water was stirred and heated under argon at 120 °C.
The reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was added
and the aqueous layer was extracted with DCM. The organic layers were
combined, washed with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were removed in vacuo, and the residue was purified
by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 30:1) to give title compound 29 (20 mg, 25%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C22H16ClN5O2S + H)+ 450.1 (35Cl) and 452.1 (37Cl), found 449.8 (35Cl) and 451.9 (37Cl). 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.57 (1H,
d, J = 7.2), 8.06 (1H, t, J = 7.2),
7.81–7.77 (3H, m), 7.64–7.51 (5H, m), 7.34–7.27
(2H, m), 2.69 (3H, s).
A mixture of tricyclic triazole 19 (500 mg, 2.28 mmol), 2-chloro-5-nitrophenylboronic acid
(690 mg, 3.43 mmol), Pd(PPh3)4 (264 mg, 10%),
and K2CO3 (789 mg, 5.72 mmol) in dioxane and
water was stirred and heated under argon at 120 °C. The reaction
was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was added and the aqueous
layer was extracted with DCM. The organic layers were combined, washed
with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents
were removed in vacuo, and the residue was purified by flash column
chromatography (EtOAc:petroleum ether 10:1) to give the title compound
(307 mg, 39%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd
for (C16H10ClN5O2 + H)+ 340.0 (35Cl) and 342.0 (37Cl), found
339.9 (35Cl) and 341.9 (37Cl). 1H
NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.79 (1H, d, J = 7.8),
8.46–8.42 (2H, m), 7.99 (1H, m), 7.82 (1H, d, J = 9.6), 7.74 (1H, m), 7.43 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 2.84
(3H, s).
A mixture of tricyclic
triazole
from step 1 (115 mg, 0.34 mmol) and SnCl2 (381 mg, 1.69
mmol) in ethanol was stirred under reflux for 5 h. Water was added,
the pH was adjusted to 7–8 using saturated aqueous NaHCO3, and the aqueous layers were extracted with DCM. The organic
layers were combined, washed with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were removed in vacuo, and the residue
was purified by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 20:1) to give
the title compound (100 mg, 95%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C16H12ClN5 + H)+ 310.0 (35Cl) and 312.0 (37Cl), found 309.9 (35Cl) and 311.9 (37Cl). 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.71 (1H, m), 7.91 (1H, m),
7.70 (1H, m), 7.56 (1H, m), 7.33 (1H, d, J = 8.7),
6.86 (1H, dd, J = 8.4, 2.7), 6.79 (1H, d, J = 2.7), 3.63 (2H, br s), 2.83 (3H, s).
Step 3
Benzene sulfonyl chloride (0.03 mL, 0.24 mmol)
was added to a solution of aniline from step 2 (50 mg, 0.16 mmol)
in anhydrous THF (3 mL), followed by addition of pyridine (0.026 mL,
0.32 mmol). The resultant mixture was stirred at room temperature,
and the reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was
added and the aqueous layer was extracted with DCM. The organic layers
were combined, washed with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were removed in vacuo, and the residue was
purified by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 30:1) to give title
compound 30 (30 mg, 42%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C22H16ClN5O2S + H)+ 450.1 (35Cl) and
452.1 (37Cl), found 449.9 (35Cl) and 451.9 (37Cl). 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.58 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.07 (1H, t, J = 7.8), 7.85–7.79 (3H, m), 7.71–7.57 (4H,
m), 7.39 (1H, dd, J = 8.7, 2.7), 7.32 (1H, d, J = 2.7), 7.19 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 2.69 (3H,
s).
A mixture of tricyclic triazole 19 (24 mg, 0.11 mmol), boronic acid 38 (21 mg,
0.12 mmol), Pd(PPh3)4 (13 mg, 0.1 equiv), and
K2CO3 (37 mg, 0.27 mmol) in dioxane and water
was stirred and heated under argon at 120 °C. The reaction was
monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was added and the aqueous
layers were extracted with DCM. The organic layers were combined and
dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were removed in
vacuo, and the residue was purified by flash column chromatography
(DCM:MeOH 30:1) to give the Suzuki adduct methyl 3-(3-methyl-[1,2,4]triazolo[3,4-a]phthalazin-6-yl)benzoate (29 mg, 83%). The intermediate
ester (29 mg, 0.09 mmol) was dissolved in methanol (14 mL), and KOH
(99 mg, 1.76 mmol) was added. The reaction was monitored by TLC, and
upon completion water (21 mL) was added. The mixture was adjusted
to pH 3–4 with 6 M HCl and extracted with DCM. The combined
organic layers were dried (Na2SO4), and the
solvent was removed in vacuo to give the title compound 31 (26 mg, 95%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd
for (C17H12N4O2 + H)+ 305.1, found 305.1. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.60 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.25–8.19
(2H, m), 8.08 (1H, m), 7.98 (1H, m), 7.88 (1H, m), 7.80–7.76
(2H, m), 2.72 (3H, s).
Following the same procedure as for
compound 31 step 1, the methyl ester hydrolyzed under
the reaction conditions to yield title compound 32 directly
(35%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C17H11N5O4 + H)+ 350.1, found 350.0. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.84–8.79 (2H, m), 8.64–8.60 (2H,
m), 8.09 (1H, m), 7.90–7.80 (2H, m), 2.73 (3H, s).
Tricyclic triazole 19 and boronic acid 40 were coupled and hydrolyzed using
the same procedures as for compound 31 give the desired
compound (Suzuki, 53%; hydrolysis, 73%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C18H14N4O2 + H)+ 319.1, found 319.1. 1H NMR (DMSO-d6) δ 8.58 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.21 (1H, m), 7.94–7.76 (2H, m), 7.69–7.46
(4H, m), 3.75 (2H, s), 2.72 (3H, s).
1-Hydrazino-4-phenyl-phthalazine (300 mg,
1.27 mmol) was dissolved in acetic acid (3 mL) and refluxed for 2
h. The reaction mixture was concentrated in vacuo and the residue
purified by flash column chromatography (EtOAc:petroleum ether 1:3)
to give title compound 34 (269 mg, 81% yield). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C16H12N4 + H)+ 261.1, found 261.0. 1H
NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.67 (1H, d, J = 6.0),
7.89–7.82 (2H, m), 7.64–7.49 (6H, m), 2.77 (3H, s).
4-(4-Bromo-2-nitrophenyl)morpholine[29] (1.03 g) was treated with bis(pinacolato)diboron
(1 g, 3.94 mmol), KOAc (703 mg, 7.16 mmol), and Pd(dppf)Cl2 (89 mg) in p-dioxane (20 mL) and DMSO (0.5 mL)
and heated to reflux under argon overnight. After removal of the solvents
in vacuo, aqueous NaOH (2 M, 10 mL) was added to the residue and the
mixture was stirred for 30 min at room temperature. The mixture was
extracted with EtOAc, and 6 M HCl was added to the aqueous layer to
adjust the pH to 3–4. The precipitate formed was collected
by filtration and dried then purified by flash column chromatography
(DCM:MeOH 50:1) to provide the corresponding boronate (860 mg, 72%)
which was used directly.A mixture of aryl chloride 19 (59 mg, 0.27 mmol), boronate from the previous reaction (100 mg,
0.30 mmol), K2CO3 (94 mg, 0.68 mmol), and Pd(PPh3)4 (31 mg) in p-dioxane (5 mL)
and water (0.5 mL) was heated to reflux under argon. The reaction
was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, the mixture was filtered, and
the filtrate was evaporated to dryness. The residue was partitioned
between EtOAc and water. The organic layer was washed with brine,
dried (Na2SO4), concentrated in vacuo, and the
crude residue was purified by flash column chromatography (petroleum
ether:EtOAc 1:10) to give the title compound 47 (50 mg,
50%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C20H18N6O3 + H)+ 391.1, found 390.9. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ
8.81 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 8.19 (1H, d, J = 2.1), 8.02–7.77 (4H, m), 7.34 (1H, d, J = 8.7), 3.92 (4H, t, J = 4.5), 3.23 (4H, t, J = 4.5), 2.86 (3H, s).
A mixture of nitrophenyl 45 (50 mg, 0.13 mmol) and SnCl2 (144 mg, 0.64 mmol) in ethanol
was stirred under reflux for 5 h. Water was added, and the pH was
adjusted to 7–8 by adding saturated aqueous NaHCO3. The mixture was filtered to remove the precipitate, and the filtrate
was extracted with DCM. The organic layers were combined, washed with
brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were
removed in vacuo, and the residue was purified by flash column chromatography
(DCM:MeOH 60:1) to give title compound 48 (12 mg, 26%).
MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C20H20N6O + H)+ 361.1, found 361.1. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.72 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 7.99 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 7.91 (1H, t, J = 7.5), 7.71 (1H, t, J = 7.8), 7.17 (1H,
m), 7.05–7.04 (2H, m), 3.92 (4H, t, J = 4.2),
3.04 (4H, t, J = 4.2), 2.83 (3H, s).
Et3N (36 μL, 0.249 mmol)
was added to a solution of 48 (30 mg, 0.083 mmol) in p-dioxane (5 mL), followed by addition of p-toluenesulfonyl chloride (36 mg, 0.19 mmol). The reaction mixture
was stirred at room temperature and monitored by TLC. Upon completion,
water was added and the aqueous layers were extracted with DCM. The
organic layers were combined, washed with brine, and dried (Na2SO4). The solvents were removed in vacuo, and the
residue was purified by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH 60:1)
to give title compound 49 (27 mg, 63%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C27H26N6O3S + H)+ 515.1, found 514.9. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.78 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.01–7.70 (7H, m), 7.39–7.25 (3H, m), 3.86
(4H, t, J = 4.2), 2.84 (3H, s), 2.74 (4H,t, J = 4.2), 2.40 (3H, s).
Methanesulfonyl chloride (14 mg, 0.12 mmol)
was added to a solution of 48 (22 mg, 0.06 mmol) in DCM
(1.6 mL), followed by addition of pyridine (15 μL, 0.03 mmol).
The resulting mixture was stirred at room temperature, and the reaction
was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was added and the aqueous
layers were extracted with DCM. The organic layers were combined and
dried (Na2SO4). The solvent was removed in vacuo,
and the residue was purified by flash column chromatography (DCM:MeOH
30:1) to give compound 50 (16 mg, 60%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C21H22N6O3S + H)+ 439.1, found 439.1. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.79 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.00–7.94 (2H, m), 7.90–7.85 (2H, m), 7.78
(1H, m), 7.48 (2H, m), 3.98–3.95 (4H, m), 3.20 (3H, s), 3.04–3.01
(4H, m), 2.86 (3H, s).
Following the same procedure as for compound 50 gave compound 51 (29 mg, 81%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C26H23ClN6O3S + H)+ 535.1 for 35Cl and 537.1 for 37Cl, found 535.0 and 537.0. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.80 (2H, m), 8.13 (1H, d, J = 7.4), 7.96 (1H, m), 7.79–7.64 (3H, m), 7.56–7.45
(2H, m), 7.41–7.30 (3H, m), 3.98–3.87 (4H, m), 3.05–2.90
(4H, m), 2.80 (3H, s).
Following the same procedure as for compound 50 gave compound 52 (36 mg, 78%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C26H23ClN6O3S + H)+ 535.1 for 35Cl and 537.1 for 37Cl, found 535.0 and 537.0. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.77 (1H, d, J =
8.0), 8.09 (1H, s), 7.96 (1H, m), 7.88–7.81 (2H, m), 7.81–7.70
(3H, m), 7.55 (1H, m), 7.40 (3H, m), 3.95–3.79 (4H, m), 2.82
(3H, s), 2.78–2.66 (4H, m).
Following the same procedure as for compound 50 gave compound 53 (37 mg, 64%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C26H23ClN6O3S + H)+ 535.1 for 35Cl and 537.1 for 37Cl, found 535.1 and 537.0. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.83 (1H, d, J =
7.8), 8.06 (1H, s), 7.98 (1H, m), 7.85–7.69 (5H, m), 7.46–7.34
(4H, m), 3.93–3.81 (4H, m), 2.85 (3H, s), 2.81–2.70
(4H, m).
Following the same procedure as for compound 50 gave compound 54 (33 mg, 64%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C26H22Cl2N6O3S + H)+ 569.1
for 35Cl2 and 571.1 for 35Cl37Cl, found 569.0 and 571.0. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ 8.76 (1H, d, J = 7.9), 8.17 (1H, br s),
7.95 (1H, m), 7.86–7.61 (5H, m), 7.54 (1H, m), 7.48–7.32
(2H, m), 3.90 (4H, m), 2.83 (3H, s), 2.77 (4H, m).
5-Bromo-2-morpholinoaniline[29]44 (640 mg, 2.49 mmol), bis(pinacolato)diboron
(945 mg, 3.73 mmol), Pd(dppf)Cl2 (91 mg), and KOAc (610
mg, 6.23 mmol) were dissolved in dioxane (30 mL) and DMSO (1 mL) and
heated to 85 °C under argon. The reaction was stirred and monitored
by TLC; upon completion, the solvent was removed in vacuo and the
residue was dissolved in 2 N NaOH (20 mL) and stirred for 10 min.
The mixture was extracted with diethyl ether, and the combined organic
layers were dried (Na2SO4). After removal of
the solvent in vacuo, the residue was purified by flash column chromatography
(petroleum ether:EtOAc 4:1) to give the intermediate boronate (960
mg, 100%).4-Chlorobenzene-1-sulfonyl chloride (435 mg, 2.06
mmol) was added to a solution of the boronate from the previous reaction
(314 mg, 1.03 mmol) in DCM (5 mL), followed by addition of pyridine
(0.25 mL, 3.09 mmol). The mixture was stirred at room temperature,
and the reaction was monitored by TLC. Upon completion, water was
added and the aqueous layer was extracted with DCM. The combined organic
layers were dried (Na2SO4), and the solvent
was removed in vacuo. The residue was purified by flash column chromatography
(petroleum ether:EtOAc 6:1) to give the sulfonamide (232 mg, 47%),
which was coupled to the heteroaryl chloride 22 as in
the preparation of compound 26 to give the title compound 56 (23 mg, 62%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C26H23ClN6O4S + H)+ 551.1 for 35Cl and 553.1 for 37Cl, found 551.1 and 553.1. 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.87 (1H, d, J = 7.8), 8.05 (2H, m), 7.89–7.81(5H,
m), 7.49 (2H, d, J = 8.7), 7.44–7.37 (2H,
m), 5.33 (2H, s), 3.91 (4H, m), 2.82 (4H, m).
Following analogous procedures as for the
preparation of compound 56 gave compound 57 from compound 44 (16 mg, 60%). MS (ESI): m/z calcd for (C26H24ClN7O3S + H)+ 550.1 for 35Cl
and 552.1 for 37Cl, found 550.1 and 552.0. 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3/CD3OD) δ 8.65 (1H,
d, J = 8.1), 8.02 (1H, m), 7.84 (2H, d, J = 4.2), 7.64 (3H, m), 7.43 (1H, d, J = 8.1), 7.36–7.32
(3H, m), 4.64 (2H, s), 3.75 (4H, br s), 2.73 (4H, br s).
Biological
Evaluation
Protein Expression and Purification
Proteins were cloned,
expressed, and purified as previously described.[7]
Peptides
H4Ac4 peptide (BRD4 and
CECR2 assays, H2N-YSGRGK(Ac)GGK(Ac)GLGK(Ac)-GGAK(Ac)RHRK-(Biotin)-CO2H), H3K56(Ac) peptide (CREBBP assay, H2N-ALREIRRYQK(Ac)-STELLIRKLK(Biotin)-CO2H), H2K9(Ac)K13(Ac)K15(Ac) peptide (BRD9 assay, H2N-YSGRGKQGGK(Ac)ARAK(Ac)AK(Ac)TRSSRA-biotin), H3K14(Ac) peptide (BAZ2B,
PB1(5) and TIF1α assays, H2N-YQTARKSTGGK(Ac)APRKQLATKA-K(biotin)-CO2H) were synthesized by Tufts University Core Facility, Pepceuticals,
or Alta Biosciences.
DSF Tm Shift
Assay
Bromodomain
DSF Tm shift assays were carried out as
previously described.[8a]
AlphaScreen
Peptide Displacement Assay
Bromodomain
AlphaScreen assays were carried out as previously described.[8a] All experiments were carried out in duplicate
on the same plate.
CREBBP Fluorescence Recovery After Photobleaching
(FRAP) Assay
FRAP studies were performed using a protocol
modified from previous
studies.[7,30,31] In brief,
U2OS cells were transfected (Lipofectamine 2000, Life Technologies)
with mammalian overexpression constructs encoding a GFP chimera with
three tandem repeats of the CREBBP bromodomain (corresponding to amino
acids 869–1341, with or without N1168F mutagenesis, of RefSeq
CREBBP (NM_004380)) in pcDNA6.2/N-EmGFP-DEST (Life Technologies).
SAHA was added 4 h post transfection and compounds as indicated 16
h post transfection The FRAP and imaging system consisted of a Zeiss
LSM 710 scanhead (Zeiss GmbH, Jena, Germany) coupled to an inverted
Zeiss Axio Observer.Z1 microscope equipped with a high-numerical-aperture
(NA 1.3) 40× oil immersion objective (Zeiss GmbH, Jena, Germany)
equipped with a heated chamber set at 37 °C. FRAP and GFP fluorescence
imaging were carried out with an argon-ion laser (488 nm) and with
a piezomultiplier tube (PMT) detector set to detect fluorescence between
500 and 550 nm. A 27.5 μm2 region of a GFP-positive
nucleus was selected, and after 5 prescans, the region was bleached.
A time-lapse series was then taken to record GFP recovery using 1%
of the power used for bleaching with an interval time of ∼0.25
s. The image data sets and fluorescence recovery data were exported
from ZEN 2009, the microscope control software, into Microsoft Excel.
The average intensity at each imaging time point was measured for
three regions of interest: the bleached region (It), the total cell nucleus (Tt), and a random region outside of the cell for background subtraction
(BG). The relative fluorescence signal in the bleached region was
calculated for each time point t, with the following equation:[32]The baseline was normalized
to zero
and the prebleach to 1. Normalized data was imported into GraphPad
Prism 6.0, and half times of recovery were calculated from individual
single exponential curve fittings and presented as the mean. P Values were calculated using the unpaired t test.
X-ray Crystallography
Crystallization
Aliquots of the purified proteins were
set up for crystallization using a mosquito crystallization robot
(TTP Labtech, Royston UK). Coarse screens were typically set up onto
Greiner 3-well plates using three different drop ratios of precipitant
to protein per condition (100 + 50 nL, 75 + 75 nL, and 50 + 100 nL).
Initial hits were optimized further by scaling up the drop sizes.
All crystallizations were carried out using the sitting drop vapor
diffusion method at 4 °C. Crystals of BRD4(1) with compound 51 were grown by mixing 200 nL of the protein (9.2 mg/mL and
5 mM final ligand concentration) with 100 nL of reservoir solution
containing 0.1 M SPG pH 8.0 and 60% MPD. BRD9 crystals with compound 51 were grown by mixing 100 nL of protein (14.9 mg/mL and
5 mM final ligand concentration) with 200 nL of reservoir solution
containing 0.2 M KSCN and 20% PEG3350. In both cases, diffraction
quality crystals grew within a few days.
Data Collection and Structure
Solution
BRD9 crystals
were cryoprotected using the well solution supplemented with additional
ethylene glycol and were flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen. BRD4 crystals
were frozen without any additional cryoprotection. Data were collected
in-house on a Rigaku FRE rotating anode system equipped with a RAXIS-IV
detector at 1.52 Å. Indexing and integration was carried out
using MOSFLM,[33] and scaling was performed
with SCALA.[34] Initial phases were calculated
by molecular replacement with PHASER[35] using
the known models of BRD4(1) (PDB ID 2OSS) and BRD9 (PDB ID 3HME). Initial models
were built by ARP/wARP,[36] followed by manual
building in COOT.[37] Refinement was carried
out in REFMAC5.[38] In all cases, thermal
motions were analyzed using TLSMD[39] and
hydrogen atoms were included in late refinement cycles. Data collection
and refinement statistics can be found in Table 3. The models and structure factors have been deposited with PDB accession
codes: 4NQM (BRD4(1)/compound 51), 4NQN (BRD9/compound 51).
Table 3
Data Collection and
Refinement Statistics
for BRD4(1) and BRD9 Complexes
Data Collection
PDB ID
4NQM
4NQN
protein
BRD4(1)
BRD9
ligand
compd 51
compd 51
space group
P212121
P212121
cell dimensions
a, b, c (Å)
45.51, 46.57, 62.38
47.12, 48.42, 69.32
α, β,
γ (deg)
90.00, 90.00, 90.00
90.00,
90.00, 90.00
resolution* (Å)
1.58 (1.66–1.58)
1.73 (1.82–1.73)
unique observations*
18694 (2514)
17147 (2438)
completeness* (%)
98.7 (93.5)
99.9 (99.8)
redundancy*
3.9 (2.8)
4.4 (4.1)
Rmerge*
0.049 (0.439)
0.060 (0.523)
I/σI*
15.7 (2.0)
12.6 (2.0)
Values in parentheses correspond
to the highest resolution shell.
Values in parentheses correspond
to the highest resolution shell.
Authors: Francine Sternfeld; Robert W Carling; Richard A Jelley; Tamara Ladduwahetty; Kevin J Merchant; Kevin W Moore; Austin J Reeve; Leslie J Street; Desmond O'Connor; Bindi Sohal; John R Atack; Susan Cook; Guy Seabrook; Keith Wafford; F David Tattersall; Neil Collinson; Gerard R Dawson; José L Castro; Angus M MacLeod Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2004-04-22 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: C A French; C L Ramirez; J Kolmakova; T T Hickman; M J Cameron; M E Thyne; J L Kutok; J A Toretsky; A K Tadavarthy; U R Kees; J A Fletcher; J C Aster Journal: Oncogene Date: 2007-10-15 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Natalie H Theodoulou; Paul Bamborough; Andrew J Bannister; Isabelle Becher; Rino A Bit; Ka Hing Che; Chun-wa Chung; Antje Dittmann; Gerard Drewes; David H Drewry; Laurie Gordon; Paola Grandi; Melanie Leveridge; Matthew Lindon; Anne-Marie Michon; Judit Molnar; Samuel C Robson; Nicholas C O Tomkinson; Tony Kouzarides; Rab K Prinjha; Philip G Humphreys Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2015-04-30 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Sara Sdelci; Charles-Hugues Lardeau; Cynthia Tallant; Freya Klepsch; Björn Klaiber; James Bennett; Philipp Rathert; Michael Schuster; Thomas Penz; Oleg Fedorov; Giulio Superti-Furga; Christoph Bock; Johannes Zuber; Kilian V M Huber; Stefan Knapp; Susanne Müller; Stefan Kubicek Journal: Nat Chem Biol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 15.040
Authors: Fleur M Ferguson; David M Dias; João P G L M Rodrigues; Hans Wienk; Rolf Boelens; Alexandre M J J Bonvin; Chris Abell; Alessio Ciulli Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2014-10-15 Impact factor: 3.162