Mutations of isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) are frequently found in certain cancers such as glioma. Different from the wild-type (WT) IDH1, the mutant enzymes catalyze the reduction of α-ketoglutaric acid to d-2-hydroxyglutaric acid (D2HG), leading to cancer initiation. Several 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one compounds were identified to be inhibitors of IDH1(R132H). A total of 61 derivatives were synthesized, and their structure-activity relationships were investigated. Potent IDH1(R132H) inhibitors were identified with Ki values as low as 140 nM, while they possess weak or no activity against WT IDH1. Activities of selected compounds against IDH1(R132C) were found to be correlated with their inhibitory activities against IDH1(R132H), as well as cellular production of D2HG, with R(2) of 0.83 and 0.73, respectively. Several inhibitors were found to be permeable through the blood-brain barrier in a cell-based model assay and exhibit potent and selective activity (EC50 = 0.26-1.8 μM) against glioma cells with the IDH1 R132H mutation.
Mutations of isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) are frequently found in certain cancers such as glioma. Different from the wild-type (WT) IDH1, the mutant enzymes catalyze the reduction of α-ketoglutaric acid to d-2-hydroxyglutaric acid (D2HG), leading to cancer initiation. Several 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds were identified to be inhibitors of IDH1(R132H). A total of 61 derivatives were synthesized, and their structure-activity relationships were investigated. Potent IDH1(R132H) inhibitors were identified with Ki values as low as 140 nM, while they possess weak or no activity against WT IDH1. Activities of selected compounds against IDH1(R132C) were found to be correlated with their inhibitory activities against IDH1(R132H), as well as cellular production of D2HG, with R(2) of 0.83 and 0.73, respectively. Several inhibitors were found to be permeable through the blood-brain barrier in a cell-based model assay and exhibit potent and selective activity (EC50 = 0.26-1.8 μM) against gliomacells with the IDH1R132H mutation.
Isocitrate dehydrogenase
(IDH) is one of the key enzymes in the
tricarboxylic acidcycle, which provides aerobic organisms the majority
of energy by oxidation of the acetyl group derived from, for example,
carbohydrates and fats. IDHcatalyzes the oxidative decarboxylation
of isocitric acid (ICT) to α-ketoglutaric acid (α-KG)
using Mg2+ and NADP+ (or NAD+) as
cofactors,[1] as shown in Figure 1A. There are three IDH isozymes in humans, with
IDH1 located in cytoplasm and IDH2 and 3 in mitochondria.[2,3] Moreover, α-KG, the product of the IDHcatalyzed reaction,
is used as a common cofactor by ∼60 dioxygenases, including
important epigenetic enzymes such as the JmjD family of histone demethylases.
Therefore, the function of IDH enzymes is of importance to normal
physiology.
Figure 1
(A) Reaction catalyzed by WT IDH enzymes in tricarboxylic acid
cycle, (B) reaction catalyzed by mutant IDH enzymes, and (C) structures
of current inhibitors of mutant IDH1.
(A) Reaction catalyzed by WT IDH enzymes in tricarboxylic acidcycle, (B) reaction catalyzed by mutant IDH enzymes, and (C) structures
of current inhibitors of mutant IDH1.Recent genetic studies have identified frequent mutations
in IDH
genes in several types of cancer.[4−6] For example, IDH1 mutations
are found in ∼75% of low-grade gliomas (grade II and III),
as well as secondary glioblastoma multiforme, the grade IV glioma
developed from the low-grade tumors.[7,8] The R132H mutation
is predominant (>90%) in these gliomas. Mutations of IDH1 or IDH2
have also been found in ∼20% acute myeloid leukemia and many
sarcomas.[6,9−11] The IDH mutations occur
at an early stage of these cancers, suggesting they could play important
roles in cancer initiation. Of particular interest is that all characterized
IDH mutant proteins, such as IDH1(R132H) and IDH1(R132C), almost lose
the catalytic function of wild-type (WT) IDH, but obtain a new capability:
they can catalyze the reduction of α-KG to d-2-hydroxyglutaric
acid (D2HG) using Mg2+ and NADPH as cofactors,[6,12,13] as shown in Figure 1B. These IDH mutant enzymes therefore cause elevated D2HGconcentrations in cell and plasma. Further studies show a high level
of D2HG is very harmful and could be the culprit for the initiation
of the cancer. Due to its structural similarity to α-KG, D2HG
is a broad inhibitor of α-KG-dependent dioxygenases including
histone demethylases and the TET-family of 5-methylcytosine hydroxylases,[5] which are important enzymes keeping a balanced
histone and DNA methylation status. Overexpression of IDH1(R132H)
can cause hypermethylation of histone and DNA and block cell differentiation.[14,15] These findings suggest mutant IDH is a novel drug target for intervention,[16−18] and its inhibitors represent useful probes for the investigation
of the biological functions of IDH mutation as well as potential therapeutics
for this type of cancer.A series of diamidecompounds, such
as compound 1 shown
in Figure 1C, were reported to be the first
inhibitors of mutant IDH1 with IC50 values as low as 70
nM.[19,20] Compound 1 is able to reduce
the cellular D2HGconcentration and slow the proliferation of IDH1
mutated cancercells. We also reported several 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds,[21] such as compounds 2 and 3 (Figure 1C), are potent
inhibitors of mutant IDH1 with inhibition constant (Ki) values as low as 190 nM, which exhibit very weak activity
against WT IDH1 showing a high selectivity of >60-fold. In addition,
we determined the X-ray crystal structures of IDH1(R132H) in complex
with inhibitors 2 and 3, which reveal the
exact binding mode of these two compounds as well as the structural
basis for the high selectivity.Here, we report the inhibitor
discovery, design, synthesis, and
structure–activity relationships (SAR) of several series of
1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds targeting cancer-associated mutant
IDH1. Several inhibitors of mutant IDH1 show potent and selective
activity against gliomacells with the IDH1R132H mutation.
Results
and Discussion
Identification of the Initial Inhibitors
of IDH1(R132H)
Our previous research in developing inhibitors
of 1-deoxyxylulose-5-phosphate
reductoisomerase,[22−24] another reductase using Mg2+ and NADPH
as cofactors, provided an enriched source of compounds that could
inhibit mutant IDH1. By screening this focused library of ∼130
compounds against recombinant humanIDH1(R132H), the predominant mutation
found in the majority of the gliomas, followed by validation, we found
several 5- and 6-substituted 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds to be
low micromolar inhibitors. The structures and activities of these
compounds are shown in Chart 1, together with
those of inactive analogs in the library that are useful for SAR analysis.
Chart 1
Structures and Ki Values of Initial Inhibitors
of IDH1(R132H)
5-Benzyl-1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
(4) was found to be
an inhibitor of IDH1(R132H) with a Ki value
of 8.2 μM, while compound 5 with a 5-phenyl group
has a very weak activity. Compound 6 with an -O- linkage
exhibits a Ki of 46 μM, suggesting
that an electron-rich core is not favored. Compounds 7 and 8 with a 6-substituent possess an improved activities
(Ki = 5.9 and 4.5 μM) compared with
that of 4. Ciclopirox (9), an antifungal
drug, with 4-methyl and 6-cyclohexyl substituents is inactive against
IDH1(R132H).
Medicinal Chemistry To Find Potent IDH1(R132H)
Inhibitors
With the identification of 5- and 6-substituted
1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds, that is, 4, 7, and 8, as the lead inhibitors of IDH1(R132H), systematic medicinal chemistry
studies were performed in an effort to find compounds with improved
activity. Four series of compounds, including 5-, 6-, and 4-methyl-6-
and 4-methyl-3-substituted 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds, have
been designed, synthesized, and tested against IDH1(R132H).Table 1 shows the structures and activities
of 5- or 6-substituted 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds. Compounds 10 and 11, having 5-(2-phenylethyl) and 5-(3-phenylpropyl)
substituents, respectively, lose the inhibitory activity. In addition,
compounds 12–14 containing a 5-hydroxamate,
amide, and reversed amide group, respectively, are also inactive.
For 6-substituted 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds, compounds 15 and 16 bearing a 6-phenyl and 6-(1-phenylethyl)
group, respectively, are inactive against IDH1(R132H). Compound 17 with a 2-phenylethyl group exhibits less activity (Ki = 10 μM) compared with compound 7 with a 6-benzyl group. Compound 18, which has
an additional -CO2Me, is considerably less active than 17. These results, together with those of compounds 4–7, suggest that 6-benzyl is more favorable.
In addition, despite the good activity of compound 8 with
a 6-hydroxamic acid (Ki = 4.5 μM),
we did not pursue this compound further due to the high polarity as
well as poor pharmacokinetics of the hydroxamate group.
Table 1
Structures and Ki Values of 5- or 6-Substituted
Compounds against IDH1(R132H)
R5
R6
Ki (μM)
5
-Ph
-H
∼50
4
-Bn
-H
8.2
10
-(CH2)2Ph
-H
>50
11
-(CH2)3Ph
-H
>50
6
-OPh
-H
46
12
-CONHOH
-H
>50
13
-CONHBn
-H
>50
14
-NHCOBn
-H
>50
15
-H
-Ph
>50
7
-H
-Bn
5.9
16
-H
–CH(CH3)Ph
>50
17
-H
-(CH2)2Ph
10
18
-H
-(CH2)2(4-CO2Me-Ph)
27
8
-H
-CONHOH
4.5
Compound 2, obtained by replacing the 6-cyclohexyl
group of the inactive compound 9 with a benzyl substituent,
was found to be a potent inhibitor of IDH1(R132H) with a Ki value of 190 nM, as shown in Table 2. It is ∼30× more active than the analogous compound 7 without a 4-methyl group, showing the 4-Me is important
for the activity. Compound 19 with 4-methyl-6-phenoxymethyl
substituents was found to inhibit IDH1(R132H) with a Ki of 870 nM, ∼4× less active than 2. Compound 20 having 4,6-dimethyl substituents was found
to be inactive. These results demonstrate that the combination of
the 4-methyl and 6-benzyl substituents is needed to achieve a high
inhibition.
Table 2
Structures and Ki Values of 3-, 4-, and 6-Substituted Compounds against IDH1(R132H)
R3
R4
R6
Ki (μM)
9
-H
-Me
-cyclohexyl
>50
2
-H
-Me
-Bn
0.19
19
-H
-Me
-CH2OPh
0.87
20
-H
-Me
-Me
>50
30
-Bn
-Me
-H
9.5
31
-CH2(3-OMe-Ph)
-Me
-H
16.2
32
-CH2(3-OH-Ph)
-Me
-H
13.6
33
-H
-i-Pr
-Bn
9.5
34
-H
-OH
-Bn
0.38
35
-H
-OMe
-Bn
5.5
36
-H
-CH2OH
-Bn
5.6
37
-H
-CH2OAc
-Bn
4.5
38
-H
-Me
-CH2(4-OMe-Ph)
0.56
3
-H
-Me
-CH2(4-OH-Ph)
0.28
39
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-OMe-Ph)
0.15
40
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-OH-Ph)
0.14
41
-H
-Me
-CH2(2-OMe-Ph)
0.49
42
-H
-Me
-CH2(2-OH-Ph)
0.65
43
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-F-Ph)
2.2
44
-H
-Me
-CH2(penta-F-Ph)
2.2
45
-H
-Me
-CH2(4-CN-Ph)
12.5
46
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-CN-Ph)
1.6
47
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-COOH-Ph)
>50
48
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-CONH2-Ph)
8.5
49
-H
-Me
-CH2(4-CF3-Ph)
3.2
50
-H
-Me
-CH2(3,5-diMe-Ph)
3.1
51
-H
-Me
-CH2(thiophen-3-yl)
0.95
52
-H
-Me
-CH2(3-biphenyl)
0.60
53
-H
-Me
-CH2(4-OPh-Ph)
0.75
54
-H
-Me
-CH2(naphth-1-yl)
0.95
55
-H
-Me
-CH2(6-OMe-naphth-1-yl)
40.5
56
-H
-Me
-CH2(6-OH-naphth-1-yl)
27.5
57
-H
-Me
-CH2(benzothiophen-2-yl)
22.5
58
-H
-Me
-CH2[4-(4-OMe-Ph)-Ph]
0.34
59
-H
-Me
-CH2[4-(4-OH-Ph)-Ph]
0.25
60
-H
-Me
-CH2[4-(3-OMe-Ph)-Ph]
0.14
61
-H
-Me
-CH2[4-(3-OH-Ph)-Ph]
0.27
62
-H
-Me
-CH2(3,5-diPh-Ph)
0.30
With the potent inhibitor 2 in hand, efforts were
next made to optimize the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore structure. Chart 2 shows the structures and activities of compounds 21–29, each of which has a different aromaticcore
structure, while contains a benzyl substituent for SAR analysis. Compared
with compound 4, lack of activity for compound 21 clearly indicates the importance of N-OH
group. Greatly reduced activities for compounds 22–24 with a C-substituted -OH group suggest that the N-substituted
-OH in compound 2 increases the binding affinity to IDH1(R132H).
In addition, compared with compound 7 (Chart 1), lack of activity for compounds 25 and 26 suggests the reversely positioned N-OH and carbonyl functionalities are disfavored. Furthermore, compared
with compound 2, a 20-fold activity reduction for compound 27 (Ki = 3.8 μM) with an N-NH2 group again underscores the critical role
of the N-OH group of the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore.
Compounds 28 and 29 having a 2-pyrone and
2-thiopyrone ring, respectively, are also inactive. These SAR studies
show that the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one ring represents the most potent
core structure for the inhibition of IDH1(R132H).
Chart 2
Structures of 21–29 and Their Ki Values against IDH1(R132H)
X-Ray Structure of Inhibitor Bound IDH1(R132H) and Structure
Based Rationalization of SAR
We determined the X-ray structures
of IDH1(R132H) in complex with NADPH and the potent inhibitors 2 and 3 at 3.3 Å,[21] to a similar resolution as the previously reported structures.[25] Detailed structural information has been reported
in our previous communication,[21] while
the interactions between the protein and 2 are briefly
summarized to facilitate rationalization of SARs as well as inhibitor
design described below. As shown in Figure 2a, the 4-methyl-1-hydroxypyridin-2-one ring of compound 2 is located in a pocket surrounded by Arg100, Ser94, Thr77, Asn96,
Arg109, and NADPH. The planar -CONH2 of Asn96 is located
right underneath the pyridine ring of 2, with the distance
of ∼4.1 Å. The two O atoms of the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore form two H-bonds with the two N atoms of the guanidinium group
of Arg100. The calculated pKa of 6.1 for 2 suggests that the N-OH group may be deprotonated,
which, together with the (partially negative) O atom of the 2-oxo
group, also provides strong electrostatic interactions with the positively
charged side chain of Arg100. This should explain why the core structures
in compounds 21–24 and 27–29 with either a single O atom or a higher pKa value are considerably less potent. The 4-methyl
group is nicely fitted into a mainly hydrophobiccavity, ∼3.7–4.2
Å from -CH3 of Thr77 and -CH2- and -O-
of Ser94. Loss of these favorable interactions should account for
the reduced activity of compound 7. The phenyl ring of
the 6-benzyl has favorable hydrophobic (as well as electrostatic)
interactions with the nicotinamide ring of NADPH, while the other
side of the phenyl ring is ∼5 Å away from the side chain
of Arg109. In addition, the C4 atom of the phenyl ring is ∼11
Å away from Leu250′ (omitted in Figure 2a for clarity) from the other monomeric protein. Therefore,
Arg109, Leu250′, and NADPH form a relatively large pocket that
could be explored for inhibitor design (described below). The crystal
structures show compounds bearing a branched 6-substituent, such as 9, 15, and 16, would cause severe
stericconflicts with NADPH if their 4-methyl-1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
ring maintains the favorable interactions with the protein. This should
account for the loss of activity for 9, 15, and 16.
Figure 2
X-ray crystal and docking structures of inhibitors
of IDH1(R132H).
(A) The close-up view of the active site of the crystal structure
of IDH1(R132H)/2, with the backbone of one monomeric
protein shown in blue lines and that of the other monomer in yellow.
Compound 2 is shown as a ball and stick model. Only selected
residues with the interactions with 2 are shown for clarity.
(B) Ten docking structures of compound 30 (with C atoms
in green), superimposed with the crystal structure of 2 (in yellow), showing that the 3-benzyl group of 30 is
predicted to occupy an empty pocket. (C) Ten docking structures of
compound 34 (with C atoms in green), superimposed with
the crystal structure of 2 (in yellow), showing the 4-OH
group of 34 is predicted to have favorable interactions
with Thr77. (D) Ten docking structures of compound 39 (with C atoms in green), superimposed with the crystal structure
of 2 (in yellow), showing the 6-(3-OMe-Ph) group of 39 is predicted to have favorable interactions with Arg109.
X-ray crystal and docking structures of inhibitors
of IDH1(R132H).
(A) The close-up view of the active site of the crystal structure
of IDH1(R132H)/2, with the backbone of one monomeric
protein shown in blue lines and that of the other monomer in yellow.
Compound 2 is shown as a ball and stick model. Only selected
residues with the interactions with 2 are shown for clarity.
(B) Ten docking structures of compound 30 (with C atoms
in green), superimposed with the crystal structure of 2 (in yellow), showing that the 3-benzyl group of 30 is
predicted to occupy an empty pocket. (C) Ten docking structures of
compound 34 (with C atoms in green), superimposed with
the crystal structure of 2 (in yellow), showing the 4-OH
group of 34 is predicted to have favorable interactions
with Thr77. (D) Ten docking structures of compound 39 (with C atoms in green), superimposed with the crystal structure
of 2 (in yellow), showing the 6-(3-OMe-Ph) group of 39 is predicted to have favorable interactions with Arg109.
Structure Guided Inhibitor
Development and SAR
In the
structure of the IDH1(R132H)/2 complex, there is a pocket
near the 3-position of the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore, surrounded
by Gly97, Lys93, Arg100, and Asn101. Compound 30, having
a 3-benzyl as well as the favorable 4-methyl group, was designed and
synthesized. Although it can be docked into the structure of IDH1(R132H)/2 with the binding pose of 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore similar
to that of 2 (Figure 2b), compound 30 exhibits a moderate inhibitory activity with a Ki of 9.5 μM (Table 2), being 50× less active than compound 2. Compounds 31 and 32 with additional meta-substituted -OMe
and -OH are less active than 30. These results indicate
that a benzyl group at the 3-position of the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
ring is considerably less favorable than that at the 6-position.We next sought to optimize the 4-position of the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
ring. The IDH1(R132H)/2 structure reveals that the 4-Me
group has favorable interactions with the side chains of Thr77 and
Ser94. Compared with 2, compound 33 with
a 4-isopropyl group was found to exhibit a 50-fold activity loss (Ki = 9.5 μM), indicating that isopropyl
is too bulky for the pocket. Compound 34 with a 4-hydroxyl
group was found to be also a potent inhibitor of IDH1(R132H) with
a Ki of 380 nM, being comparable to compound 2. Introducing the -OH was intended to have favorable interactions
(e.g., H-bond) with the side chains of Thr77 (or Ser94), with the
docking results of 34 shown in Figure 2c. However, the 4-OH in compound 34 is not superior
to the 4-Me in 2. In addition, the 4-methoxy group in
compound 35 (Ki = 5.5 μM)
considerably reduces the inhibitory activity. Compound 36 with a 4-hydroxymethyl, as well as its acetyl ester 37, also have moderate potency with Ki values
of 5.6 and 4.5 μM, respectively. These results show that only
small substituents with a single heavy atom, such as -Me and -OH,
are favorable for the 4-position of 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one ring. Because
1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds with a 4-methyl group is considerably
easier to synthesize and might be more cell permeable than those with
a 4-hydroxyl, we decided to keep the 4-Me for further SAR studies.The SAR studies for the 6-position of compound 2 were
performed to find a substituent that can provide increased potency.
First, we wanted to explore how electron density of the phenyl ring
affects the activity. Compound 38 with a para-OMe group in its 6-benzyl group exhibits less activity than does
its parent compound 2, while 3 having a para-OH maintains a comparable activity (Ki = 290 nM). Of interest are the higher inhibitory potencies
of compounds 39 and 40 (Ki = 150 and 140 nM) having a meta-substituted
OMe and OH group, respectively, showing that these two groups are
more favorable. Changing the OMe and OH groups to the ortho-position for compounds 41 and 42 resulted
in ∼2× activity reductions with their Ki values of 490 and 650 nM, respectively. On the other
hand, an electron-withdrawing fluoro substituent in 43 and 44 (Ki = 2.2 μM)
was found to be highly disfavored, leading to ∼10-fold activity
decrease. A similar trend can be observed for compounds 45–49 (Ki 1.6 to >50
μM) bearing electron-withdrawing -CN, -CO2H, -CONH2, and -CF3 groups, showing that strongly electron-deficient
phenyl ring can reduce the inhibitory activity of this series of compounds.
Compound 50 having two meta-substituted
methyl groups possesses a moderate activity of 3.1 μM. Compound 51 bearing a thiophenyl side chain was found to be a good
inhibitor (Ki = 950 nM). The increased
activity for compounds 39 and 40 might be
due to increased interactions with Arg109, as show in Figure 2d for the docking results of 39. Introducing
strong electron-withdrawing groups (e.g., -F, -CF3, and
-CN) for compounds 43–49 is disfavored
because this could reduce the electrostatic interactions between the
phenyl rings and the electron-deficient nicotinamide ring of NADPH.Analogs with two or more aromatic rings at the 6-position of 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
were synthesized because of the relatively large pocket surrounded
by NADPH, Arg109, and Leu250′ described above. Compounds 52, 53, and 54 having a meta-biphenyl, para-phenoxyphenyl, and
1-naphthyl group, respectively, were found to be strong inhibitors
with Ki values of 600, 750, and 950 nM.
However, compounds 55 and 56, which are
derivatives of 54 with a 6-OMe or -OH in the naphthyl
ring, respectively, exhibit very weak activity (Ki > 25 μM). Similarly weak activity was observed
for the benzothiophenyl derivative 57 (Ki = 22.5 μM). These three compounds are >23×
less active than their parent compounds 54 and 51. Compounds 58 and 59 with a para-OMe and para-OH substituted para-biphenyl group were, however, found to be potent inhibitors
of IDH1(R132H) with Ki values of 340 and
250 nM, respectively. Moving the OMe and OH groups to the meta-position for compounds 60 and 61 resulted in more potent inhibition, with the Ki values of these two compounds being 140 and 270 nM, respectively.
Finally, compound 62 bearing a meta-terphenyl
group was found to be still a potent inhibitor (Ki = 300 nM). Activity data of these compounds show a large
variety of substituents with different sizes can replace the phenyl
moiety of compound 2 while maintaining comparable or
having even improved activity. More modifications at this position
could further improve the inhibitory activity.
Inhibition of IDH1(R132C)
and WT IDH1
Although rare
in glioma, Arg132 mutation to cysteine in IDH1 is frequently found
in acute myeloid leukemia and sarcomas.[6,9−11] The mutant protein IDH1(R132C) possesses the same enzymatic function
as IDH1(R132H) (Figure 1C) with comparable
kinetic parameters.[6] The R132C mutation
also causes elevated levels of D2HG in these cancerpatients.We selected 10 representative IDH1(R132H) inhibitors, with Ki values ranging from 0.14 to 9.5 μM,
and tested the activity of these compounds against recombinant IDH1(R132C),
using our previous method.[21] The results,
together with their Ki values against
IDH1(R132H), are summarized in Table 3. These
compounds were found to also be inhibitors of IDH1(R132C) with Ki values ranging from 0.12 to 14.7 μM,
which shows a good correlation with those for the R132H mutant enzyme,
with R2 of 0.83 as well as slope of 1.04
(Figure 3A). These results suggest that the
residue Cys132 seems to have a similar function as His132 does for
catalyzing the reduction of α-KG to D2HG.
Table 3
Activity of Selected Inhibitors of
Mutant IDH1
IDH enzyme Ki (μM)
WT
R132H
R132C
IC50 (μM)
for inhibition of D2HG
2
12.3 ± 3.1
0.19 ± 0.04
0.12 ± 0.03
2.4 ± 0.5
3
16.8 ± 3.0
0.28 ± 0.07
0.27 ± 0.07
8.5 ± 2.5
4
>50
8.2 ± 2.1
6.6 ± 2.6
a
7
>50
5.9 ± 1.3
10.5 ± 3.2
>30
8
>50
4.5 ± 1.7
2.4 ± 0.4
a
33
>50
9.5 ± 2.9
14.7 ± 6.3
>30
34
>30
0.38 ± 0.08
1.8 ± 0.5
9.7 ± 1.8
39
>30
0.15 ± 0.05
0.26 ± 0.07
1.1 ± 0.2
40
>30
0.14 ± 0.07
0.42 ± 0.11
3.8 ± 0.8
58
14.0 ± 2.9
0.34 ± 0.08
0.80 ± 0.31
1.1 ± 0.3
59
15.2 ± 5.1
0.25 ± 0.1
0.56 ± 0.24
3.2 ± 0.3
60
13.0 ± 3.5
0.14 ± 0.04
0.62 ± 0.21
6.3 ± 0.8
Not tested.
Figure 3
Correlations between inhibition of IDH1(R132C)
and that of (A)
IDH1(R132H) and (B) cellular production of D2HG.
Not tested.Correlations between inhibition of IDH1(R132C)
and that of (A)
IDH1(R132H) and (B) cellular production of D2HG.Next, given that WT IDH1 plays an important role in normal
physiology,
an ideal inhibitor should have a good selectivity for the mutant IDH1
enzymes. The inhibitory activities of the above 10 compounds were
tested against recombinant WT IDH1 and the results are also shown
in Table 3. Compounds 2, 3, and 58–60 were found to
have only weak inhibitory activities (Ki 12.3–16.8 μM) against WT IDH1, while compounds 7, 33, 34, 39, and 40 do not inhibit the enzyme. Selectivity of >41-fold was
observed for these compounds, compared with their Ki values against IDH1(R132H),.The activities of
these compounds against the three IDH1 enzymes
indicate that Arg132 exhibits a drastically different role from His132
or Cys132. Previous structural studies of WT and R132H mutant IDH1
show IDH1(R132H) has two ligand binding sites, I and II (Supporting Information Figure S1A),[25] with the site II being the catalytic site ∼6.5
Å away from site I, while WT IDH1 only has the binding site II.
ICT binds to site I in IDH1(R132H), while α-KG occupies the
catalytically active, binding site II.[12,25] His132 is
not involved in the binding of either ICT or α-KG. ICT is located
in site II in WT IDH1. The function of Arg132 is to have two H-bonds
as well as an electrostatic interaction with the two carboxyl groups
of ICT, which can enhance the binding of ICT in site II as well as
stabilize the overall structure of the IDH1/ICTcomplex. Due to the
shorter length as well as the chemical nature of the side chain, His132
(as well as Cys132) cannot play the same role as Arg132. This explains
why R132H and R132C mutant proteins have the similar function, while
WT IDH1 having Arg132 is a different enzyme. It is noted that the
two binding sites I and II do not coexist in IDH1(R132H). With ligand
induced protein conformational changes, IDH1(R132H) exhibits either
its binding site I or II.Our X-ray crystallographic studies
showed that compounds 2 and 3 are located
in the ligand binding site
I of IDH1(R132H) (Supporting Information Figure S1B,C).[21] The R132H (as well as
R132C) mutation causes the mutant protein to bind ICT/2/3 in the binding site I, while R132 in WT IDH1can
induce protein conformational changes and stabilize the binding of
ICT/α-KG in the site II. Our modeling studies show that the
distinct environment for binding site I represents the structural
basis for the high selectivity of inhibitors 2 and 3 for mutant IDH1.[21]
Inhibition
of Cellular Production of D2HG
The hallmark
of IDH mutated cancer is the significantly elevated D2HGconcentrations
in cancercells as well as in plasma. We next measured the ability
of the 10 inhibitors in Table 3 to reduce the
cellular production of D2HG. HumanfibrosarcomaHT1080cells, which
harbor the IDH1R132C mutation,[26] were
treated with increasing concentrations of these compounds for 48 h.
No significant cytotoxicity to HT1080cells was observed for up to
30 μM. D2HGconcentrations of the cells were quantitatively
determined by using HPLC-MS. Are shown in Table 3, except for the weak inhibitors 7 and 33 (used as negative controls), inhibitors of IDH1(R132C) were able
to inhibit the production of D2HG in HT1080 with the IC50 values of 1.1–9.7 μM. In addition, the cell activities
of these compounds also exhibit a good correlation with their enzyme
activity, showing a R2 value of 0.73 (Figure 3B).
In vitro Blood–Brain Barrier (BBB)
Permeability
Since inhibitors of mutant IDH1 are required
to penetrate the blood–brain
barrier (BBB) for glioma treatment, a cell-based model system using
MDCK-MDR1cells[27,28] was used to determine the BBB
permeability potential for selected compounds 2 and 39, as well as for the known inhibitor 1 as a
comparison. The cells are grown on polycarbonate supports separating
two chambers to allow compound flux in either direction, apical [A]
to basolateral [B] and vice versa, to be measured. The cells are highly
confluent to approximate the tight junctions characteristic of endothelial
cells that comprise the BBB. In addition, the multidrug resistance
1 (MDR1) gene is overexpressed in the cell, producing
a high level of P-glycoprotein (the product of MDR1), a known BBB efflux pump, on the apical side that limits brain
distribution for many low molecular weight drugs.As can be
seen in Table 4, 1-hydroxy-pyridin-2-onecompounds 2 and 39 were both found to have analogous cell
permeability values of 5.45 and 5.39, respectively, in the A →
B direction, and possessed comparable rates of 6.34 and 8.88 for the
reverse direction. The low efflux ratios (1.3 and 1.7) due to the
comparable directional permeability rates suggest that these two compounds
are not likely substrates for P-glycoprotein. On the other hand, compound 1 exhibited a low rate of cell permeability (0.15) in the
A → B direction and much higher rate of 10.4 in the B →
A direction leading to a high efflux ratio of 72.6, suggesting that
compound 1 is a substrate of P-glycoprotein and likely
BBB impermeable.
Table 4
Cell Permeability Rates (10–6 cm/s) for Mutant IDH1 Inhibitors
rate (apical
to basolateral)
rate (basolateral
to apical)
efflux ratioa
1
0.15
10.4
72.6
2
5.45
6.34
1.3
39
5.39
8.88
1.7
Measured as rate(B→A)/rate(A→B).
Measured as rate(B→A)/rate(A→B).
Selective Activity against Glioma Stem-Like
Cells with IDH1
R132H Mutation
Next, we examined the activity of the IDH1(R132H)
inhibitors against BT-142gliomacells having the R132HIDH1 mutation,[29] as well as two gliomacells, BXD-4687 and -3752,
without an IDH1 mutation as controls.[30,31] Unlike normal
cell culture conditions under which cells are grown as a monolayer
attached to a plate, these gliomacells were cultured in serum-free
media and grown as neurospheres, colonies of gliomacells with a diameter
of 30–300 μm. The so-called cancer stem cells (CSC) are
enriched in these neurospheres.[32−34] CSCs represent a small fraction
of cancercells with a distinct phenotype that can form new tumors
when transplanted into immunocompromised mice.[30,35−37] While proliferating rapidly, the bulk non-stem cancercells fail to do so. CSCs possess certain key traits as normal stem
cells, including the ability to unlimitedly self-renew and differentiate.
It has now well documented that CSCs play important roles in antitumor-drug
resistance, cancer relapse, and metastasis. It is therefore important
to find compounds having selective activity against CSCs.The
most potent IDH1(R132H) inhibitors 2, 39, 40, 58, and 59 were tested
to inhibit the formation of neurospheres of the three gliomacells.
Also included in the assay are compound 1 and temozolomide,
the first-line chemotherapy for glioblastoma. As shown in Table 5, all of the three clinical glioblastomacells are
resistant to temozolomide (EC50 > 50 μM), suggesting
that these cells overexpress MDR1, which is the main
cause for temozolomide resistance. Compound 1 exhibits
no activity against BXD-4687 and -3752 (without an IDH1 mutation)
and normal fibroblast WI-38 cells. For BT-142gliomacells with the
IDH1R132H mutation, 1 was found to inhibit neurosphere
formation by ∼40% at 2 μM, but increase of the concentration
of 1 to 20 μM did not result in higher inhibition,
presumably due to the high efflux or poor permeability of 1 (Table 4). Consistent with the results in
Table 4, activity of compound 2 (as well as other 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one analogs) is not affected
by these factors. Compound 2 exhibited potent activity
against IDH1(R132H)-containing BT-142cells with an EC50 of 370 nM, while it had significantly weaker activity against BXD-4687
and -3752 without an IDH1 mutation (EC50 6.8 and 5.9 μM,
respectively), showing a high selectivity of ∼16-fold. In addition,
compound 2 possesses negligible cytotoxicity against
the proliferation of normal fibroblast WI-38 cells (EC50 > 50 μM, Table 4). These results
show
that potent IDH1(R132H) inhibitor 2 possesses selective
activity against the proliferation of CSCs of BT-142, which is dependent
upon the cellular environment caused by a high concentration of D2HG.
The moderate activity of 2 against BXD-4687 and -3752
suggests the compound could have nonspecific activity against the
proliferation of these two gliomacells. Indeed, while inactive against
IDH1(R132H), compound 9 (ciclopirox) was reported to
have similar (low micromolar) antiproliferative activity against,
for example, breast cancer and leukemiacells.[38,39] This suggests compound 2 exerts dual activities on
BT-142cells, that is, by inhibiting IDH1(R132H) and blocking rapid
proliferation simultaneously, which could provide a synergistic (or
additive) effect. This could explain the high potency of the dual-role
compound. Similarly, compounds 39, 40, 58, and 59 exhibited selective activity against
BT-142gliomacells, with compound 58 being the most
potent. It inhibited neurosphere formation of BT-142 with an EC50 of 260 nM, while it showed >10-fold less activity against
the two gliomacells without an IDH1 mutation. Moreover, none of these
compounds possess significant cytotoxicity against the proliferation
of normal fibroblast WI-38 cells, showing potentially low toxicity.
Given temozolomide resistance in a significant portion of glioma/glioblastoma
as well as poor BBB permeability and weak antiglioma activity of compound 1, these results demonstrate the importance for further development
of these 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one inhibitors as potential therapeutics
for IDH1 mutated glioma.
Table 5
EC50 Values
(μM)
of Selected Inhibitors against Glioma and Normal Fibroblast WI-38
Cells
BT-142
BXD-4687
BXD-3752
WI-38
temozolomide
>50
>50
>50
b
1
>20a
>20
>20
>50
2
0.37 ± 0.2
6.8 ± 1.2
5.9 ± 1.1
>50
39
0.63 ± 0.2
1.2 ± 1.3
2.5 ± 1.3
>50
40
1.8 ± 0.6
7.5 ± 3.1
6.2 ± 1.2
>50
58
0.26 ± 0.2
7.6 ± 1.4
2.8 ± 1.3
>50
59
0.69 ± 0.4
16 ± 2.0
5.1 ± 1.1
>50
EC50 of 1 cannot
be accurately determined; 1 (2 μM) exhibited
∼40% of inhibition, but increasing to 20 μM still showed
∼40% inhibition.
Not tested.
EC50 of 1 cannot
be accurately determined; 1 (2 μM) exhibited
∼40% of inhibition, but increasing to 20 μM still showed
∼40% inhibition.Not tested.
Chemistry
Scheme 1 shows the
general methods for the synthesis of the 4-methyl-6-substituted 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
and related compounds, which include the most active inhibitors (e.g., 2 and 39) of mutant IDH1. An acyl chloride was
reacted with ethyl 3-methyl-2-butenate in the presence of AlCl3 to produce a mixture of stereoisomericesters, which without
purification were cyclized under acidicconditions to generate a single
compound, pyron-2-one 63, with a yield of 50–85%
from the acyl chloride. Because the reaction of 63 with
hydroxylamine occurred in a very poor yield (0–20%), compound 63 was converted to more reactive pyron-2-thione 64,[40] which reacted readily with hydroxylamine
or hydrazine to give 4-methyl-6-substituted 1-hydroxy (or amino)-pyridin-2-onecompounds in 67–73% yield. We found that compound 63a with a 6-chloromethyl group is a useful common intermediate, which
can undergo a mild Suzuki coupling reaction to give 63b. With this route, compounds 3 and 38–62 were synthesized without each starting from a different
acyl chloride. In addition, strong acid sensitive R-groups, for example,
thiophenyl in 51, can be introduced.
Scheme 1
Synthesis for 4-Methyl-6-substituted
1-Hydroxypyridin-2-one and Related
Compounds
Reagents and conditions: (i)
AlCl3, CH2Cl2, reflux; (ii) H2SO4/HOAc; (iii) P4S10, benzene,
reflux; (iv) NH2OH or NH2NH2, pyridine,
reflux; (v) R-B(OH)2, Pd(dppf)Cl2, dioxane,
reflux.
Synthesis for 4-Methyl-6-substituted
1-Hydroxypyridin-2-one and Related
Compounds
Reagents and conditions: (i)
AlCl3, CH2Cl2, reflux; (ii) H2SO4/HOAc; (iii) P4S10, benzene,
reflux; (iv) NH2OH or NH2NH2, pyridine,
reflux; (v) R-B(OH)2, Pd(dppf)Cl2, dioxane,
reflux.The majority of the mono-5- or 6-substituted
1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds were synthesized using a palladiumcatalyzed coupling reaction
starting from a bromo-substituted 2-methoxypyridine (Scheme 2). By our previous methods,[21] the 2-methoxypyridine moiety of the coupling products was converted
to the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore by oxidation with 3-chloroperoxybenzoic
acid followed by treatment with acetyl chloride. To synthesize compounds 36 and 37, 2,6-dihydroxyisonicotinic acid was
heated with POBr3 followed by methanolysis to give 2,6-dibromo
ester 65, which was reduced, protected with a methoxymethyl
(MOM) group, and treated with NaOMe to produce compound 66 with the desired 2-OMe and 6-Br. Treatment with BuLi followed by
benzaldehyde afforded a secondary alcohol, whose -OH was reduced by
the reaction with Et3SiH and trifluoroacetic acid[41] to give compound 67. Deprotection
of MOM as well as conversion to 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one led to the
formation of compound 37. Hydrolysis of 37 with NaOH produced compound 36. Compounds 34 and 35 were prepared from 2,6-dibromopyridine (Scheme 2). The oxidation of the pyridine ring facilitated
the nitration at the 4-position of 2,6-dibromopyridine to give compound 68. Upon reduction of the pyridine-oxide, treatment with NaOMe
resulted in double substitutions of the 2-Br and 4-NO2 groups
to give 6-bromo-2,4-dimethoxypyridine (70). A palladiumcatalyzed reaction to introduce the 6-benzyl group followed by conversion
to 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one gave rise to compound 35, whose
-Me was removed by treatment with BBr3 to produce compound 34.
Scheme 2
Synthesis for Other Compounds
Reagents
and conditions: (i)
a Pd-catalyzed coupling reaction, for example, Suzuki or Heck reaction;
(ii) 3-chloroperoxybenzoic acid; (iii) AcCl, reflux, then MeOH; (iv)
POBr3, 130 °C, then MeOH; (v) NaBH4, reflux;
(vi) MOMCl, Et3N; (vii) NaOMe, reflux; (viii) BuLi, −78
°C, then PhCHO, 25 °C; (ix) Et3SiH, trifluoroacetic
acid, 50 °C; (x) 3 N HCl; (xi) NaOH; (xii) H2O2, TFA, reflux; (xiii) HNO3, H2SO4; 60 °C; (xiv) PBr3; (xv) NaOMe, MeOH/THF,
40 °C; (xvi) BnZnBr, Pd(PPh3)4, THF, reflux;
(xvii) BBr3, CH2Cl2.
Synthesis for Other Compounds
Reagents
and conditions: (i)
a Pd-catalyzed coupling reaction, for example, Suzuki or Heck reaction;
(ii) 3-chloroperoxybenzoic acid; (iii) AcCl, reflux, then MeOH; (iv)
POBr3, 130 °C, then MeOH; (v) NaBH4, reflux;
(vi) MOMCl, Et3N; (vii) NaOMe, reflux; (viii) BuLi, −78
°C, then PhCHO, 25 °C; (ix) Et3SiH, trifluoroacetic
acid, 50 °C; (x) 3 N HCl; (xi) NaOH; (xii) H2O2, TFA, reflux; (xiii) HNO3, H2SO4; 60 °C; (xiv) PBr3; (xv) NaOMe, MeOH/THF,
40 °C; (xvi) BnZnBr, Pd(PPh3)4, THF, reflux;
(xvii) BBr3, CH2Cl2.
Conclusion
IDH1 mutations at the residue Arg132 are
frequently found in low
grade gliomas/secondary glioblastomas (∼75%), AML (∼20%),
and certain sarcomas. Studies have shown that these mutant proteins
acquire a new enzyme function, that is, the reduction of α-KG
to D2HG, causing D2HG accumulation in the patients. High concentrations
(in millimolar levels) of D2HGcan inhibit a broad range of α-KG-dependent
dioxygenases, including histone demethylases and DNA hydroxylases,
leading to abnormal levels of histone/DNA methylation, which block
cell differentiation and eventually cause cancer initiation. Mutant
IDH1 proteins are therefore drug targets for these types of cancer.
Upon screening of compounds targeting another Mg2+/NADPH-dependent
enzyme, 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecompounds 4 and 7 were identified to be low micromolar inhibitors of IDH1(R132H).
Guided by SAR as well as the X-ray structure of the IDH1(R132H)/2 complex, a total of 61 derivatives were designed and synthesized,
among which several potent inhibitors were identified with Ki values of 140–270 nM. SAR analysis
shows that (1) the 1-hydroxypyridin-2-onecore structure is required
to be active, (2) a very small group such as -Me or -OH at the 4-position
of the core is needed to achieve a submicromolar potency, (3) a (substituted)
benzyl group at the 6-position of 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one is more favored
compared with a phenyl or other groups at the 3- and 5-positions,
and (4) strongly electron-withdrawing groups are disfavored as a substituent
for the 6-benzyl, while -OMe or -OH, for example, that in compounds 39, 40, and 60, provides an improved
activity. Ten selected compounds were tested for their activity in
inhibiting IDH1(R132C), as well as the production of D2HG in HT1080fibrosarcomacells, and the results indicate that there are good correlations
between these inhibitory activities. In addition, these compounds
exhibit potent and selective activity in inhibiting the proliferation
of BT-142gliomacells with the R132HIDH1 mutation, with the most
potent compound 58 having EC50 of 0.26 μM,
while it is considerably less active against two gliomacells without
an IDH1 mutation (EC50 2.8 and 7.6 μM), showing a
selectivity of >10-fold. Low cytotoxicity (EC50 >
50 μM)
of these compounds against normal fibroblast WI-38 cells was observed.
Moreover, using a cell based BBB model assay, 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one
inhibitors were found to be BBB permeable, while inhibitor 1 with another chemo-type has a high efflux ratio, which might be
responsible for the observed weak activity of 1 (EC50 > 20 μM) against BT-142gliomacells. All these
results
suggest that this work could lead to a new treatment for IDH1 mutated
glioma and further development of 1-hydroxypyridin-2-one inhibitors
is warranted.
Experimental Section
All reagents were purchased from Alfa Aesar (Ward Hill, MA) or
Aldrich (Milwaukee, WI). Compounds were characterized by 1H NMR on a Varian (Palo Alto, CA) 400-MR spectrometer, and the purities
monitored by a Shimadzu Prominence HPLC with a PhenomenexC18 column
(4.6 mm × 250 mm, methanol/H2O 60:40, monitored at
254 and 280 nm). The purities of all compounds were found to be >95%.
Synthesis
and Characterization of Compounds 2–62
Details of compound synthesis and characterization
can be found in Supporting Information,
Experimental Section.
Expression and Purification of Human WT and
R132H Mutant IDH1
The wild-type IDH1 gene was cloned using
5′-GATCCGAATTCGATGTCCAAAAAAATCAGTG-3′
and 5′-TGGTGCTCGAGTAAGTTTGGCCTGAGCTAG-3′
as forward and reverse primers, respectively, and inserted into pET-24b
vector. Correctness of the inset was verified by sequencing. Escherichia coli BL21-CodonPlus strain (Agilent) was transformed
with the plasmid and cultured at 37 °C in LB mediumcontaining
kanamycin (50 μg/mL) and chloramphenicol (34 μg/mL). Upon
reaching an optical density of ∼0.6 at 600 nm, IDH1 expression
was induced by addition of 0.1 mM isopropylthiogalactoside at 18 °C
for 20 h. Cells were harvested, lysed, and centrifuged at 20000 rpm
for 20 min, and the supernatant was collected and purified using Ni-affinity
(HisTrap HP, GE Healthcare) followed by Superdex 75 (GE Healthcare)
columnchromatography. WT-IDH1 was obtained with ∼90% purity
(SDS-PAGE).R132H and R132C mutant IDH1 genes were generated
from the wild-type IDH1 plasmid, using QuikChange site-directed mutagenesis
kit (Agilent) following the manufacturer’s protocol. Correctness
of the gene sequences was verified. The mutant genes were then transferred
to pGEX-KG vector for better expression. Expression of mutant IDH1
enzymes were performed similarly to that for the wild-type protein.
Cells were harvested, lysed, and centrifuged at 20000 rpm for 20 min,
the supernatant was collected, and the recombinant protein was trapped
in glutathionesepharose resin (GE Healthcare). The GST-IDH1 fusion
protein was eluted with 10 mM glutathione solution, and the GST tag
was removed by thrombin digestion overnight at 4 °C. IDH1(R132H)
and IDH1(R132C) were obtained in ∼90% purity (SDS-PAGE) using
a glutathionesepharosecolumn followed by Superdex 75 gel filtration
columnchromatography.
Enzyme Inhibition Assays
Determination
of the activity
and inhibition of IDH1(R132H) and IDH1(R132C) is based on the initial
linear consumption of NADPH in the reaction. The enzyme activity assay
was performed in a 96-well microplate using the purified IDH1 mutant
(100 nM), 4 mM MgCl2, 1 mM α-KG, and 100 μM
NADPH (≫Km for NADPH) in 50 mM
4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid (HEPES) buffer
(pH = 7.5) containing 0.1 mg/mL bovine serum albumin. For inhibition
assays, triplicate samples of compounds were incubated with the protein
for 5 min before addition of α-KG to initiate the reaction.
The optical absorbance of each well was monitored every 30 s at 340
nm, where NADPH has maximum absorption, using a Beckman DTX-880 microplate
reader. The data were imported into Prism (version 5.0, GraphPad),
and the IC50 values were calculated with a standard dose–response
curve fitting. For compounds with IC50 values much greater
than the enzyme concentration, Ki values
were calculated using the Cheng–Prusoff equation Ki = IC50/(1 + [S]/Km), where [S] is the concentration of α-KG (1 mM) and Km is the literature value of 0.965 mM for R132H[12] and 0.295 mM for R132C.[6] For compounds with IC50 < 1 μM, Ki values were calculated using the Morrison tight inhibition
modeling in Prism.Determination of the activity/inhibition
of WT-IDH1 is based on the initial linear production of NADPH. In
brief, the enzyme activity assay was performed in a 96-well microplate
using the purified IDH1 (15 nM), 4 mM MgCl2, 200 μM
sodium d-isocitrate (Km = 65
μM),[12] and 1 mM NADP+ (≫Km for NADP) in 50 mM HEPES buffer (pH = 7.5).
The reaction can be readily monitored by an increase in optical absorbance
at 340 nm. Activity and compound inhibition can be determined similarly
as described for mutant IDH1 using Prism 5.0.
Docking
Docking
studies were performed with our previous
methods[21−23] using the Schrödinger suite (version 2013,
Schrödinger, LLC, New York, NY, 2013), which includes all of
the programs described below. The crystal structure of IDH1(R132H)/2 (PDB 4I3L) was prepared using the module “protein preparation wizard”
in Maestro (version 9.5) using default protein parameters, with all
water molecules removed, hydrogens added, inhibitor extracted, and
NADPH retained in the protein structure for docking. H-bonds were
then optimized, and the protein was energy-minimized using OPLS-2005
force field. A receptor grid, which is large enough to contain the
whole active site, was generated using Glide (version 5.5) without
constraints. Compounds were built, minimized using OPLS-2005 force
field in Maestro, and then docked into the prepared protein structure
using Glide (docking parameters: standard-precision and dock flexibly).
Cell Growth Inhibition
The cytotoxicity assay was done
using our previous method.[21,22] In brief, 105 WI-38 fibroblast cells were inoculated into each well of a 96-well
plate and cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
(DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum at 37 °C in a
5% CO2 atmosphere with 100% humidity overnight for cell
attachment. After addition of compounds (from 1 to 50 μM), plates
were incubated for 48 h, after which cell viability was assessed by
the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT)
assay, using a commercially available kit (Sigma). IC50 value of each compound was calculated from dose–response
curves by Prism 5.0.
D2HG Production Inhibition in HT1080 Cells
The HT1080fibrosarcomacell line, which harbors an IDH1(R132C) mutation, was
obtained from ATCC (Manassas, VA). The D2HG production inhibition
assay followed our previous protocol.[21] In brief, 105 cells/well were seeded into wells of a
six-well plate and cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s
medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% dialyzed fetal bovine serum at
37 °C in a 5% CO2 atmosphere with 100% humidity overnight
for cell attachment. Cells were treated with an increasing concentration
of compounds in 2 mL of culture medium for 48 h. Medium was collected
and diluted with 8 mL of MeOH. After shaking, the mixture was centrifuged
to remove any precipitate, and the supernatant was subjected to HPLC-MS
to separate and quantitate the amount of D2HG. HPLC was run using
a PhenomenexC18 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with 50%
tributylamine buffer/50% MeOH as an eluent at a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min
(tributylamine buffer: 10 mM tributylamine, 15 mM acetic acid, 3%
MeOH in water). A single ion monitoring (SIM) for 147 Da was used
to detect and quantitate the amount of D2HG (parameters: interface
voltage, −4.2 kV; detector voltage, 1.3 kV; nebulizing gas,
1.5 L/min; drying gas, 15 L/min; desolvation line temperature, 250
°C; heat block temperature, 200 °C; Pirani gauge vacuum,
102 Pa; ion gauge vacuum: 5 × 10–4 Pa). AuthenticD2HG purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St Louis, MO) was used to validate
and calibrate the HPLC-MS assay conditions before measuring the D2HGconcentrations secreted by the HT1080cells untreated or treated with 2. EC50 was calculated from the dose–response
curve by Prism 5.0.
In Vitro Blood–Brain Barrier (BBB)
Permeability Assay
MDCK-MDR1cells were obtained from NIH
(Bethesda, MD) and maintained
in DMEM with 10% standard fetal bovine serum, 100 U/mL penicillin,
100 μg/mL streptomycin, and 80 ng/mL colchicine. For transport
experiments, cells with passage numbers of 24–33 were seeded
at a density of 60000 cells/cm2 on Transwell plates (pore
size 0.4 μm; diameter 6.5 mm; insert growth area 0.33 cm2; Costar, Pittston, PA) and maintained in culture as previously
described.[28] In brief, confluent MDCK-MDR1
monolayers expressing P-glycoprotein were obtained 3–4 days
postseeding, and their integrity was assessed by measurement of the
transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER, Ω·cm2) with a volt–ohm meter (Millicell-ERS, Millipore Corpration,
Billerica, MA). After subtraction of the background TEER (i.e., the
resistance exhibited by the filter alone), only MDCK-MDR1cell monolayers
that exhibited a TEER > 1000 Ω·cm2 throughout
[measured before and after the study] the experiments were used.Drug transport across the cell monolayers was measured in both apical
to basolateral (A-B) and basolateral to apical (B-A) directions. Experiments
were performed in HBSS (Hank’s balanced salt solution containing
50 mM HEPES buffer, pH ≈ 7.4) at 37 °C using monolayers
that were preincubated for 30 min with prewarmed HBSS. At the start
of the experiment, fresh HBSS was added to the receiver compartments,
and the compounds were independently added to the donorcompartments
at an initial concentration of 10 μM (diluted from 10 mM DMSO
stock to a final DMSOconcentration of 0.1%) and then incubated at
37 °C for 90 min, after which samples were collected from both
the receiver and donorcompartments.Detection and quantification
of the compounds were performed with
an LC/MS/MS system (HPLC, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan; MS, QTrap 5500,
Applied Biosystems, Foster City, California) using an electrospray
ionization (ESI) interface and operated in positive ion mode. Instrument
control, data acquisition, and processing for both chromatography
and MS were performed using the Analyst 1.5.1 software (Applied Biosystems
MDS Sciex, Ontario, Canada). The chromatographic separation system
consisted of a guard cartridge (C18, 4.0 × 2.0 mm2; Phenomenex, Torrance, California), an analyticcolumn (Luna C18,
3 μm particle size, 50 × 2.0 mm2; Phenomenex),
and a mobile phase of acetonitrile/10 mM ammonium formate (65:35,
v/v), delivered isocratically at a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min. To 10
μL samples from both the apical or basolateral sides, 40 μL
of cold acetonitrile was added; samples were mixed and centrifuged
at 15000 rpm for 5 min; 10 μL of the resultant supernatant was
injected into the LC/MS-MS system. Compound quantification was performed
by ESI-selected reaction monitoring. The column effluent was monitored
at the following precursor–product ion transitions: m/z 214.9 → 197.1 for compound 2, m/z 244.9 → 212.3
for 39, and m/z 463.2
→ 123.0 for 1 with a dwell time of 100 ms for
each ion transition.The apparent permeability, Papp (cm/s)
was calculated as Papp = dQ/(dt × 1/(AC0)), where dQ/dt is
the transport rate of the compound (mol/s), A is
the area of the cell monolayer (cm2), and C0 is the initial donorconcentration (mol/L).
Inhibition
of the Proliferation of Glioma Cells
Two
glioma neurosphere cultures, Baylor xenograft derived BXD-4687 and
BXD-3752, were initiated from patienttumor-derived orthotopic xenograft
mouse models.[30,31] These cells were cultured in
serum-free cell growth medium consisting of neurobasal media, N2 and
B27 supplements (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY), recombinant
humanbFGF and EGF (50 ng/mL each; R&D Systems Inc., Minneapolis,
MN), 200 units/mL penicillin, and 200 μg/mL streptomycin at
37 °C in a 5% CO2 atmosphere with 100% humidity as
we described previously.[30,31] BT-142gliomacells,[29] which have an endogenous R132H mutation in IDH1,
aggressive tumor-initiating capacity, and 2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG)
production, were obtained from ATCC (Manassas, VA) and maintained
in above-mentioned serum-free stem cell growth medium with additional
supplements, including 100 ng/mL recombinant human platelet-derived
growth factor-AA, 25 μg/mL insulin, 100 μg/mL transferrin,
15 μM putrescine, 30 nM selenite, 2 μg/mL heparan sulfate,
0.9% glucose, 4 mM l-glutamine, and 20 nM progesterone. To
measure antiproliferative activity, 2000 cells/well were seeded into
96-well plates and treated with 0.002, 0.02, 0.2, 2, and 20 μM
of the selected compounds in 100 μL of culture medium for up
to 13 days. Cell viability was measured at days 4, 7, 10, and 13 by
Cell Counting Kit-8 (Dojindo Molecular Technologies, Rockville, MD)
according to the manufacturer’s instructions as we described
previously.[31,35]
Authors: Dan Rohle; Janeta Popovici-Muller; Nicolaos Palaskas; Sevin Turcan; Christian Grommes; Carl Campos; Jennifer Tsoi; Owen Clark; Barbara Oldrini; Evangelia Komisopoulou; Kaiko Kunii; Alicia Pedraza; Stefanie Schalm; Lee Silverman; Alexandra Miller; Fang Wang; Hua Yang; Yue Chen; Andrew Kernytsky; Marc K Rosenblum; Wei Liu; Scott A Biller; Shinsan M Su; Cameron W Brennan; Timothy A Chan; Thomas G Graeber; Katharine E Yen; Ingo K Mellinghoff Journal: Science Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Zhigang Liu; Xiumei Zhao; Hua Mao; Patricia A Baxter; Yulun Huang; Litian Yu; Lalita Wadhwa; Jack M Su; Adekunle Adesina; Lazlo Perlaky; Mary Hurwitz; Neeraja Idamakanti; Seshidhar Reddy Police; Paul L Hallenbeck; Richard L Hurwitz; Ching C Lau; Murali Chintagumpala; Susan M Blaney; Xiao-Nan Li Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Julian R Levell; Thomas Caferro; Gregg Chenail; Ina Dix; Julia Dooley; Brant Firestone; Pascal D Fortin; John Giraldes; Ty Gould; Joseph D Growney; Michael D Jones; Raviraj Kulathila; Fallon Lin; Gang Liu; Arne Mueller; Simon van der Plas; Kelly Slocum; Troy Smith; Remi Terranova; B Barry Touré; Viraj Tyagi; Trixie Wagner; Xiaoling Xie; Ming Xu; Fan S Yang; Liping X Zhou; Raymond Pagliarini; Young Shin Cho Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: Qian Zhao; James R Manning; James Sutton; Abran Costales; Martin Sendzik; Cynthia M Shafer; Julian R Levell; Gang Liu; Thomas Caferro; Young Shin Cho; Mark Palermo; Gregg Chenail; Julia Dooley; Brian Villalba; Ali Farsidjani; Jinyun Chen; Stephanie Dodd; Ty Gould; Guiqing Liang; Kelly Slocum; Minying Pu; Brant Firestone; Joseph Growney; Tycho Heimbach; Raymond Pagliarini Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2018-06-11 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: Young Shin Cho; Julian R Levell; Gang Liu; Thomas Caferro; James Sutton; Cynthia M Shafer; Abran Costales; James R Manning; Qian Zhao; Martin Sendzik; Michael Shultz; Gregg Chenail; Julia Dooley; Brian Villalba; Ali Farsidjani; Jinyun Chen; Raviraj Kulathila; Xiaoling Xie; Stephanie Dodd; Ty Gould; Guiqing Liang; Tycho Heimbach; Kelly Slocum; Brant Firestone; Minying Pu; Raymond Pagliarini; Joseph D Growney Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 4.345