Electrophilic probes that covalently modify a cysteine thiol often show enhanced pharmacological potency and selectivity. Although reversible Michael acceptors have been reported, the structural requirements for reversibility are poorly understood. Here, we report a novel class of acrylonitrile-based Michael acceptors, activated by aryl or heteroaryl electron-withdrawing groups. We demonstrate that thiol adducts of these acrylonitriles undergo β-elimination at rates that span more than 3 orders of magnitude. These rates correlate inversely with the computed proton affinity of the corresponding carbanions, enabling the intrinsic reversibility of the thiol-Michael reaction to be tuned in a predictable manner. We apply these principles to the design of new reversible covalent kinase inhibitors with improved properties. A cocrystal structure of one such inhibitor reveals specific noncovalent interactions between the 1,2,4-triazole activating group and the kinase. Our experimental and computational study enables the design of new Michael acceptors, expanding the palette of reversible, cysteine-targeted electrophiles.
Electrophilic probes that covalently modify a cysteine thiol often show enhanced pharmacological potency and selectivity. Although reversible Michael acceptors have been reported, the structural requirements for reversibility are poorly understood. Here, we report a novel class of acrylonitrile-based Michael acceptors, activated by aryl or heteroaryl electron-withdrawing groups. We demonstrate that thiol adducts of these acrylonitriles undergo β-elimination at rates that span more than 3 orders of magnitude. These rates correlate inversely with the computed proton affinity of the corresponding carbanions, enabling the intrinsic reversibility of the thiol-Michael reaction to be tuned in a predictable manner. We apply these principles to the design of new reversible covalent kinase inhibitors with improved properties. A cocrystal structure of one such inhibitor reveals specific noncovalent interactions between the 1,2,4-triazole activating group and the kinase. Our experimental and computational study enables the design of new Michael acceptors, expanding the palette of reversible, cysteine-targeted electrophiles.
Chemical probes that
bind covalently to a protein target often
have prolonged target-residence times, resulting in increased potency.[1−3] Covalent probes can also be highly selective, especially when designed
to react with a protein nucleophile that is not essential for enzymatic
catalysis and poorly conserved among closely related proteins.[4] Examples of covalent kinase inhibitors that target
a noncatalytic cysteine thiol include the BTK inhibitor, ibrutinib,[5] and the EGFR inhibitor, afatinib,[6] recently approved for advanced B cell and lung cancers,
respectively. Both of these drugs employ an α,β-unsaturated
carboxamide to form an irreversible covalent bond with a poorly conserved
cysteine in the kinase active site.[7]Despite their advantages, covalent drugs are seldom developed for
diseases other than cancer because of the potential for adverse effects
caused by irreversible modification of off-target nucleophiles.[8−13] Exceptions to this trend include older drugs whose covalent mechanism
was initially unknown (e.g., clopidogrel[14] and omeprazole[15]), as well as recently
developed protease inhibitors that form reversible covalent bonds
with catalytically essential nucleophiles (e.g., telaprevir,[16] odanacatib,[17] and
saxagliptin[18]). The latter compounds employ
weak electrophiles such as ketones or nitriles, which have not found
general utility outside the specific context of protease targets.[19] A major challenge in the field of covalent inhibitor
design is the identification of electrophiles that can form energetically
favorable yet reversible covalent bonds with noncatalytic cysteines,
which are often less nucleophilic than catalytic cysteines.Activated acrylonitriles bearing a carboxylic ester or carboxamide
α-substituent have been reported to react rapidly and reversibly
with thiols.[20,21] The thiol-Michael adducts could
not be isolated and, upon dilution, underwent β-elimination
to form the starting cyanoacrylates/amides. Reversible thiol reactivity
appears to be a general property of cyanoacrylamides, and this insight
led to the design of reversible, cysteine-targeted kinase inhibitors
such as cyanoacrylamide 1 (Figure 1a), which inhibits RSK1/2/4 kinases in the picomolar to low nanomolar
range.[21] Recently, we took advantage of
the intrinsic reversibility of thiol/cyanoacrylamide reactions to
develop an electrophilic fragment-based approach to ligand discovery.
This strategy led to the first cysteine-targeted inhibitor of the
MSK1 C-terminal kinase domain.[22] The cyanoacrylamide
inhibitors exhibit slow off-rates when bound to the intact, folded
kinase domain, yet dissociate rapidly when the protein is unfolded
or degraded by proteases. As revealed by the cocrystal structure of
cyanoacrylate 2 bound to RSK2, the pyrrolopyrimidine
scaffold forms specific noncovalent interactions with the kinase,
orienting the electrophile and cooperatively stabilizing the covalent
complex. In addition, interactions between the tert-butyl ester group and the glycine-rich loop of RSK2 likely contribute
to the slow off-rate.
Figure 1
Reversible covalent binding of activated Michael acceptors to cysteine
thiols. (a) RSK2 inhibitors, 1 and 2. A
cocrystal structure (PDB code: 4D9U) reveals hydrophobic interactions between
the tert-butyl group of 2 and the glycine-rich
loop of RSK2. (b) Reversible covalent binding of an activated acrylonitrile
to a hypothetical cysteine-containing protein. In this example, the
electron-withdrawing group (EWG) and the β-substituent (R) both
contribute to the free energy of binding by providing favorable noncovalent
interactions with the protein.
The latter observation suggested the possibility
of exploiting
the electron-withdrawing groups not only for their ability to activate
the olefin toward conjugate addition but also for their potential
to contribute specific noncovalent interactions (Figure 1b). More generally, we recognized that, in many targets, the
orientation of the cysteine relative to the binding site would be
such that one of the olefin activating groups could serve as the primary
noncovalent recognition element. While electrophilic olefins such
as α-cyanoenones,[23] alkylidene rhodanines,[24] and alkylidene thiazolidine diones[25] have also been found to form reversible covalent
adducts with protein thiols, little is known about the relationship
between an activated olefin’s electron-withdrawing substituents
and its propensity to react reversibly with thiols.[26]Reversible covalent binding of activated Michael acceptors to cysteinethiols. (a) RSK2 inhibitors, 1 and 2. A
cocrystal structure (PDB code: 4D9U) reveals hydrophobic interactions between
the tert-butyl group of 2 and the glycine-rich
loop of RSK2. (b) Reversible covalent binding of an activated acrylonitrile
to a hypothetical cysteine-containing protein. In this example, the
electron-withdrawing group (EWG) and the β-substituent (R) both
contribute to the free energy of binding by providing favorable noncovalent
interactions with the protein.
Results and Discussion
Kinetic and Computational Studies of Model
Thiol/Acrylonitrile
Adducts
To expand the structural diversity of reversible
cysteine-targeted electrophiles, we replaced the carboxamide group
of 2-cyanoacrylamides with aryl or heteroaryl activating groups. The
nitrile group was retained because of its small size and ability to
form both polar and hydrophobic interactions with proteins.[27] At the outset, it was not obvious how different
aryl, or especially heteroaryl, activating groups would affect the
intrinsic reversibility of the thiol-Michael reaction, i.e., the rate
of thiol elimination from acrylonitrile-derived Michael adducts. To
our knowledge, no systematic studies on the reactivity of such compounds
toward thiols have been reported. With the goal of establishing kinetic
trends that could be extrapolated to more complex structures, we synthesized
a series of model acrylonitriles (3–9) bearing different aryl or heteroaryl activating groups at the α-position
and a phenyl group at the β-position (Table 1). We then measured β-elimination rates of the corresponding
Michael adducts derived from the simple thiol, β-mercaptoethanol
(BME). These rates should reflect the relative propensity of α-activated
acrylonitriles to dissociate from cysteines in unstructured regions
of proteins (spurious off-target adducts) or from unfolded globular proteins prior to their degradation by cellular proteases.
Table 1
β-Elimination
Rates and Calculated
Proton Affinities of BME/Acrylonitrile Adducts 3a–9a
Determined
by 1H NMR
for adducts 3a–6a and 10a–11a after dilution into DMSO-d6/PBS-d (3:1 v/v) and by LC-MS for adducts 7a–9a and 12a after dilution
into PBS. Diastereomeric ratios of 3a–6a, 8a, and 10a–11a remained
constant after dilution, suggesting rapid interconversion. The diastereomers
of 7a and 12a were not separable during
LC-MS analysis. For 9a, a 1:1 ratio of diastereomers
was subjected to the β-elimination reaction.
Proton affinities in water (ΔGaq) were calculated for syn- and anti-diastereomers of thioethers 3a–12a using the B3LYP/6-311+G(d), IEFPCM method.
ΔΔGaq values relative to 3a are shown.
After reacting the acrylonitriles (3–9) with excess BME, we diluted the isolated adducts (7a–9a), or equilibrium mixtures in the
case of nonisolable adducts (3a–6a), into pH 7.4 buffer (with DMSO cosolvent) to promote thiol elimination.
β-elimination rates were determined by monitoring the disappearance
of the adducts and reappearance of the acrylonitriles by NMR or LC/MS
(Supplementary Figures S1–S10).
Depending on the activating group, the half-times for thiol elimination
varied from less than 1 min to more than 2 days (Table 1 and Supplementary Table S1). Among
the aryl/heteroaryl activating groups tested, the methylthiazole (4a) exhibited the greatest intrinsic reversibility (fastest
elimination rate, t1/2 < 1 min); the
3-pyridyl (7a) and 1,2,4-triazol-1-yl (8a) adducts reverted to the starting acrylonitriles with intermediate
rates, whereas the pyrazol-1-yl adduct (9a) was essentially
irreversible (t1/2 > 58 h).To
explore the potential for structural variation at the electrophilic
β-position, we tested three heteroaryl-activated acrylonitriles
(10–12) bearing a cyclopropyl in
place of a phenyl group (Table 1). Although
elimination from the cyclopropyl-substituted BME adducts was 2–3
times slower than the corresponding phenyl-substituted adducts, the
results demonstrate that an aromatic substituent in the β-position
is not essential for reversibility of thiol-Michael reactions with
activated acrylonitriles. A smaller cyclopropyl group might be preferred
in reversible acrylonitrile-based ligands in which the β-substituent
is solvent-exposed and the α-activating group serves as the
primary noncovalent recognition element.Determined
by 1H NMR
for adducts 3a–6a and 10a–11a after dilution into DMSO-d6/PBS-d (3:1 v/v) and by LC-MS for adducts 7a–9a and 12a after dilution
into PBS. Diastereomeric ratios of 3a–6a, 8a, and 10a–11a remained
constant after dilution, suggesting rapid interconversion. The diastereomers
of 7a and 12a were not separable during
LC-MS analysis. For 9a, a 1:1 ratio of diastereomers
was subjected to the β-elimination reaction.Proton affinities in water (ΔGaq) were calculated for syn- and anti-diastereomers of thioethers 3a–12a using the B3LYP/6-311+G(d), IEFPCM method.
ΔΔGaq values relative to 3a are shown.We
used a computational approach to gain insight into the structure/reactivity
trends (Table 1), reasoning that increased
acidity of the α-carbon bearing the nitrile and the second electron-withdrawing
group would lead to faster thiol elimination via an E1cB mechanism.[28−31] Using density functional theory, we calculated the proton affinities[32] in aqueous solution for the conjugate base (α-carbanion)
of each BME/acrylonitrile adduct (expressed as ΔΔGaq, relative to the cyanoacrylamide-derived
adduct 3a, Table 1). Similar trends
were observed using calculated proton affinities for either the syn- or anti-diastereomers of the BME adducts.
A Brønsted-type plot[33] revealed a
linear correlation between the calculated proton affinities and a
three-log range of experimental rate constants for thiol β-elimination
(R2 = 0.96, Figure 2 and Supplementary Figure S11). This combined
computational/empirical analysis suggests the possibility of predicting
the approximate rate of thiol elimination from adducts bearing novel,
as-yet-uncharacterized activating groups (Supplementary
Table S2), simply by calculating the proton affinity of the
corresponding α-carbanion (ΔGaq). To test this, we prepared a new β-phenyl-substituted acrylonitrile
bearing a pyrazine activating group. The calculated ΔΔGaq for the derived BME adduct is −3.4
kcal/mol; fitting this value to the Brønsted relationship shown
in Figure 2 led to a predicted β-elimination t1/2 of 6.1 min. Using NMR spectroscopy, we determined
the t1/2 for BME β-elimination to
be 7.2 min (k = 0.096 min–1), close
to the predicted value (Supplementary Figure S12).
Figure 2
Brønsted-type plot of computed proton affinity (ΔΔGaq for syn-diastereomers) vs
β-elimination rate (log k, min–1) for BME/acrylonitrile adducts 5a–12a (Table 1). Adducts 3a and 4a are not shown, as only the upper limit of their t1/2 values (<1 min) could be determined.
BME/acrylonitrile adducts with higher proton affinity (more negative
ΔΔGaq) undergo β-elimination
at slower rates. Plotting ΔΔGaq for the anti-diastereomers affords a similar correlation
(Supplementary Figure S11).
Brønsted-type plot of computed proton affinity (ΔΔGaq for syn-diastereomers) vs
β-elimination rate (log k, min–1) for BME/acrylonitrile adducts 5a–12a (Table 1). Adducts 3a and 4a are not shown, as only the upper limit of their t1/2 values (<1 min) could be determined.
BME/acrylonitrile adducts with higher proton affinity (more negative
ΔΔGaq) undergo β-elimination
at slower rates. Plotting ΔΔGaq for the anti-diastereomers affords a similar correlation
(Supplementary Figure S11).BME has a pKa of 9.6,[34] toward the high end of the range for surface
cysteines
(from a recent study of surface cysteines: mean pKa 9.3, range 8.2–9.9).[35] To test the effect of decreasing the pKa of the thiolate leaving group, we purified and characterized the
cysteamine (pKa 8.4)[36] adducts of triazole 8 and pyrazole 9. Upon dilution into pH 7.4 buffer, we found that the β-elimination
rates were 11.2- and 15.8-fold faster, respectively, than the corresponding
BME adducts (Supplementary Figures S13 and S14). These results imply that more intrinsically reactive surface cysteines
(or cysteines in unfolded regions of proteins), i.e., those with a
lower pKa, are less likely to form long-lived
adducts with heteroaryl-acrylonitriles and more likely to dissociate
upon dilution or clearance of the inhibitor. It is important to note,
however, that we do not anticipate any correlation between the elimination
rates of model thiol/acrylonitrile adducts (Table 1 and Figure 2) and the potency of inhibitors
bearing these electrophiles. This is because potency will be affected
by noncovalent interactions (and clashes) between the acrylonitrile
activating group and the protein target, in addition to the rates
of covalent bond formation and dissociation with the active-site cysteine.
Application of Heteroaryl-Activated Acrylonitriles to Covalent
Kinase Inhibitors
We next sought to employ these novel Michael
acceptors in the design of reversible, cysteine-targeted kinase inhibitors.
We synthesized acrylonitriles 13–18, all of which bear an aryl/heteroaryl activating group, analogous
to the model compounds in Table 1. A pyrrolopyrimidine
moiety attached to the electrophilic β-carbon serves as the
primary noncovalent recognition element (Figure 3a), analogous to the cyanoacrylamideRSK2 inhibitors reported previously.[21] In addition to the activating groups studied
above (Table 1), we tested pyrazine 14 and pyridine 15 (Figure 3a),
as they were both predicted to react reversibly with thiols on the
basis of their computed proton affinity (Supplementary
Table S2 and Figure S12).
Figure 3
Targeting RSK2 kinase
with aryl/heteroaryl-activated acrylonitriles.
(a) Half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50, mean ±
s. d.) of acrylonitriles 13–18 in
kinase assays with wild-type RSK2 (WT) and the Cys436Val mutant (C436V).
(b) Binding of acrylonitriles 13–18 (0.1 and 1.0 μM) and FMK (1.0 μM, positive control)
to endogenous RSK1 and RSK2 in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells, assayed
by competitive labeling with the irreversible fluorescent probe, BODIPY-FMK.
Cells were incubated with acrylonitriles 13–18 for 2 h prior to treatment with BODIPY-FMK for 1 h. Cells
were lysed and proteins were analyzed by gel electrophoresis, followed
by fluorescence scanning and immunoblotting for RSK1/2. (c) Dose response
for RSK1/2 occupancy in MDA-MB-231 cells by 13 and 14 (RSK1/2 immunoblot: green and red respectively).
In kinase assays with the RSK2
C-terminal kinase domain, pyrazine 14 was the most potent
inhibitor (IC50 = 12 nM), whereas the p-cyanophenyl compound 18 was the least potent (IC50 = 770 nM). All of the inhibitors showed reduced potency
toward the Cys436 to Val mutant, consistent with covalent bond formation
with Cys436. We speculate that noncovalent interactions contribute
to the differential potency of compounds 13–18, with thiazole 13 and pyrazine 14 having the best steric and electrostatic complementarity to the
RSK2 active site. To test whether acrylonitriles 13–18 bind RSK1/2 in cells, we used a competitive labeling assay
with the fluorescent affinity probe, BODIPY-FMK.[21] Labeling of RSK1/2 was significantly reduced in cells that
were pretreated with compounds 13–16, whereas compounds 17 and 18 were less
effective (Figure 3b). Thiazole 13 and pyrazine 14 were especially potent, blocking endogenous
RSK1/2 at low nanomolar concentrations (EC50 ≈ 5
nM, Figure 3c).Targeting RSK2 kinase
with aryl/heteroaryl-activated acrylonitriles.
(a) Half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50, mean ±
s. d.) of acrylonitriles 13–18 in
kinase assays with wild-type RSK2 (WT) and the Cys436Val mutant (C436V).
(b) Binding of acrylonitriles 13–18 (0.1 and 1.0 μM) and FMK (1.0 μM, positive control)
to endogenous RSK1 and RSK2 in MDA-MB-231breast cancer cells, assayed
by competitive labeling with the irreversible fluorescent probe, BODIPY-FMK.
Cells were incubated with acrylonitriles 13–18 for 2 h prior to treatment with BODIPY-FMK for 1 h. Cells
were lysed and proteins were analyzed by gel electrophoresis, followed
by fluorescence scanning and immunoblotting for RSK1/2. (c) Dose response
for RSK1/2 occupancy in MDA-MB-231 cells by 13 and 14 (RSK1/2 immunoblot: green and red respectively).A desirable attribute of our previously
described cyanoacrylamide
inhibitors is their ability to dissociate from Cys436 (and presumably
any off-target thiols) after unfolding or proteolysis of the intact
RSK2 kinase domain.[21,22] Our model studies with activated
acrylonitriles and BME (Table 1) suggested
that inhibitors 13–18 would share
this property. To test this, we incubated each inhibitor (1.6 μM)
with excess RSK2 (3.2 μM), resulting in quantitative formation
of the complex based on the kinase activity assays (Figure 3a). RSK2/inhibitor complexes were then treated with
3 M guanidine (pH 7.4) to unfold the kinase domain, and the released
inhibitor was quantified by LC-MS. Similar to our previously reported
cyanoacrylamide inhibitors, acrylonitriles 13–18 were recovered in 84–93% yields after guanidine-mediated
unfolding of the inhibitor-bound RSK2 kinase domain (Supplementary Table S3).We recently developed an electrophilic
fragment-based approach
to ligand discovery, and we used this method to develop potent inhibitors
of the MSK1 C-terminal kinase domain.[22] These compounds also inhibit RSK2 and are thus useful for interrogating
signaling events downstream of the closely related MSK/RSK subfamily
of kinases in cellular assays of short duration (<2 h). However,
unlike our previously developed pyrrolopyrimidine-based
cyanoacrylamides,[21] the indazole-based
cyanoacrylamides (e.g., compound 19, Figure 4) lose activity over a period of 12–24 h
and are degraded in cell culture by unknown mechanisms (unpublished
results).
Figure 4
Potent,
selective, and durable inhibition of RSK2 by a 1,2,4-triazole-activated
acrylonitrile, 20. (a) Dose–response curves for 20 in kinase assays with RSK2, NEK2, and PLK1 (IC50 values for compound 19 reproduced from ref (22)). (b) RSK1/2 occupancy
was determined 2 and 24 h after treating cells with 19 and 20 (1 μM) by competitive labeling with BODIPY-FMK
(RSK1/2 immunoblot: red and green, respectively). (c) Overlay of 20/RSK2 cocrystal structure (this work) with NEK2 (red, PDB
code: 2WQO),
highlighting Leu546 of RSK2 and the structurally homologous residue
Phe148 of NEK2. The side chain of NEK2 Phe148 would clash with the
1,2,4-triazole.
Remarkably, we were able to solve this problem by
replacing the
carboxamide with a 1,2,4-triazole as the acrylonitrile activating
group. Although triazole 20 is somewhat less potent than 19 in RSK2 kinase assays (IC50 = 47 vs 3 nM, respectively), 20 has similar or better selectivity over NEK2 and PLK1, unrelated
kinases with a homologous cysteine in the ATP binding site (Figure 4a). Moreover, the cellular efficacy of 20 was dramatically enhanced, as shown by sustained RSK1/2 occupancy
and the absence of compound degradation during a 24 h experiment.
By contrast, RSK1/2 occupancy by cyanoacrylamide 19 was
lost after 24 h (Figure 4b), correlating with
its disappearance from the cell culture medium. Similar to 19, triazole 20 potently inhibited MSK1 autophosphorylation
in cells (Supplementary Figure S15) and
had no significant effect when tested against a panel of 18 additional
kinases, 10 of which contain an active-site cysteine (Supplementary Table S4). Despite the selectivity
observed with this panel of cysteine-containing kinases, we cannot
rule out binding of 20 to other cellular targets besides
MSK/RSK. As expected on the basis of our BME reactivity studies, binding
of triazole 20 to RSK2 was reversible upon unfolding
the kinase domain (t1/2 ≈ 1 h at
room temperature), albeit with slower kinetics relative to 19. By contrast, the corresponding pyrazole-acrylonitrile S3 was essentially irreversible in this assay, showing ∼2% dissociation
after 4 h (Supplementary Figure S16).Potent,
selective, and durable inhibition of RSK2 by a 1,2,4-triazole-activated
acrylonitrile, 20. (a) Dose–response curves for 20 in kinase assays with RSK2, NEK2, and PLK1 (IC50 values for compound 19 reproduced from ref (22)). (b) RSK1/2 occupancy
was determined 2 and 24 h after treating cells with 19 and 20 (1 μM) by competitive labeling with BODIPY-FMK
(RSK1/2 immunoblot: red and green, respectively). (c) Overlay of 20/RSK2 cocrystal structure (this work) with NEK2 (red, PDB
code: 2WQO),
highlighting Leu546 of RSK2 and the structurally homologous residue
Phe148 of NEK2. The side chain of NEK2Phe148 would clash with the
1,2,4-triazole.A cocrystal structure
of triazole 20 bound to RSK2
(PDB: 4M8T)
confirmed the covalent bond with Cys436 and revealed specific noncovalent
interactions between the trimethoxyphenyl indazole scaffold and the
kinase active site (Figure 4c). The 1,2,4-triazole
projects from the newly formed sp3-carbon toward the floor
of the ATP binding site, forming close contacts (4–5 Å)
with the methyl groups of Leu546. The analogous region of both PLK1
and NEK2 is occupied by a larger phenylalanine residue, which would
likely clash with the triazole. Thus, despite sharing a homologous
cysteine, PLK1 and NEK2 are apparently unable to accommodate the triazole
upon nucleophilic attack and protonation of the acrylonitrile. The
1,2,4-triazole substituent in 20 serves three critical
functions: (1) it activates the acrylonitrile toward reversible nucleophilic
attack by Cys436; (2) it enhances selectivity via polar and hydrophobic
interactions with RSK2 and a steric clash with PLK1 and NEK2; and
(3) it increases cellular stability and potency.
Conclusions and
Perspective
In this study, we have characterized a series
of aryl- and heteroaryl-activated
acrylonitriles, with the ultimate goal of applying these novel electrophiles
to the design of reversible, cysteine-targeted probes. We focused
our attention on the kinetic stability of the corresponding thiol-Michael
adducts, reasoning that electrophiles with greater intrinsic reversibility
(i.e., giving rise to kinetically less stable thiol adducts) are less
likely to form permanent covalent adducts with off-target cysteines.[9] As with irreversible covalent inhibitors, the
maximum residence time of reversible covalent inhibitors is limited
by the turnover rate of the target. Hence, the reversible covalent
strategy would have a limited pharmacodynamic advantage when targeted
against a protein with a short half-life, although the selectivity
advantage gained by targeting a noncatalytic cysteine would still
apply. High intrinsic reversibility may also be advantageous in electrophilic
fragment-based screens, although a recently published screen of irreversible
acrylate-based fragments suggests that reversible electrophiles may
not be required.[37] With intrinsically reversible
electrophiles, fragment binding would be under thermodynamic control
and would require specific noncovalent interactions to cooperatively
stabilize a high-affinity covalent interaction with the target.[22] Our DFT calculations on thiol/acrylonitrile
adducts and their derived carbanions revealed a strong correlation
between computed proton affinities and experimental β-elimination
rates. Based on this analysis, we can now estimate the relative reversibility
of thiol-Michael adducts derived from novel acrylonitriles before
synthesizing and testing them. Acrylonitriles activated by 1,2,4-
or 1,3,4-oxadiazoles, for example, are predicted to form rapidly reversible
thiol adducts (Supplementary Table S2),
motivating the synthesis of electrophilic fragment libraries bearing
these and similarly activating heteroaryl substituents for future
cysteine-targeting applications.
Authors: Lecia V Sequist; James Chih-Hsin Yang; Nobuyuki Yamamoto; Kenneth O'Byrne; Vera Hirsh; Tony Mok; Sarayut Lucien Geater; Sergey Orlov; Chun-Ming Tsai; Michael Boyer; Wu-Chou Su; Jaafar Bennouna; Terufumi Kato; Vera Gorbunova; Ki Hyeong Lee; Riyaz Shah; Dan Massey; Victoria Zazulina; Mehdi Shahidi; Martin Schuler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: John C Byrd; Richard R Furman; Steven E Coutre; Ian W Flinn; Jan A Burger; Kristie A Blum; Barbara Grant; Jeff P Sharman; Morton Coleman; William G Wierda; Jeffrey A Jones; Weiqiang Zhao; Nyla A Heerema; Amy J Johnson; Juthamas Sukbuntherng; Betty Y Chang; Fong Clow; Eric Hedrick; Joseph J Buggy; Danelle F James; Susan O'Brien Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kristine Senkane; Ekaterina V Vinogradova; Radu M Suciu; Vincent M Crowley; Balyn W Zaro; J Michael Bradshaw; Ken A Brameld; Benjamin F Cravatt Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Lucía Turell; Darío A Vitturi; E Laura Coitiño; Lourdes Lebrato; Matías N Möller; Camila Sagasti; Sonia R Salvatore; Steven R Woodcock; Beatriz Alvarez; Francisco J Schopfer Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2016-12-06 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Brian F Kiesel; Robert A Parise; Alvin Wong; Kiana Keyvanjah; Samuel Jacobs; Jan H Beumer Journal: J Pharm Biomed Anal Date: 2016-11-22 Impact factor: 3.935