Thomas Lanyon-Hogg1, Naoko Masumoto1, George Bodakh1, Antonio D Konitsiotis2, Emmanuelle Thinon1, Ursula R Rodgers2, Raymond J Owens3, Anthony I Magee2, Edward W Tate1. 1. Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, SW7 2AZ, UK; Institute of Chemical Biology, Imperial College London, SW72AZ, UK. 2. Molecular Medicine Section, National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK. 3. Oxford Protein Production Facility UK, The Research Complex at Harwell, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Harwell Science & Innovation Centre, Harwell OX11 0FA, UK.
Abstract
In this data article we describe synthetic and characterisation data for four members of the 5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridine (termed "RU-SKI") class of inhibitors of Hedgehog acyltransferase, including associated NMR spectra for final compounds. RU-SKI compounds were selected for synthesis based on their published high potencies against the enzyme target. RU-SKI 41 (9a), RU-SKI 43 (9b), RU-SKI 101 (9c), and RU-SKI 201 (9d) were profiled for activity in the related article "Click chemistry armed enzyme linked immunosorbent assay to measure palmitoylation by Hedgehog acyltransferase" (Lanyon-Hogg et al., 2015) [1]. (1)H NMR spectral data indicate different amide conformational ratios between the RU-SKI inhibitors, as has been observed in other 5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridines. The synthetic and characterisation data supplied in the current article provide validated access to the class of RU-SKI inhibitors.
In this data article we describe synthetic and characterisation data for four members of the 5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridine (termed "RU-SKI") class of inhibitors of Hedgehog acyltransferase, including associated NMR spectra for final compounds. RU-SKI compounds were selected for synthesis based on their published high potencies against the enzyme target. RU-SKI 41 (9a), RU-SKI 43 (9b), RU-SKI 101 (9c), and RU-SKI 201 (9d) were profiled for activity in the related article "Click chemistry armed enzyme linked immunosorbent assay to measure palmitoylation by Hedgehog acyltransferase" (Lanyon-Hogg et al., 2015) [1]. (1)H NMR spectral data indicate different amide conformational ratios between the RU-SKI inhibitors, as has been observed in other 5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridines. The synthetic and characterisation data supplied in the current article provide validated access to the class of RU-SKI inhibitors.
Validated synthetic route to substituted
5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridines.The synthesised compounds can be used as inhibitors
of Hedgehog acyltransferase (Hhat), termed “RU-SKI”
inhibitors.Synthetic data provides route for development of
other Hhat inhibitors based on this molecular core with improved
activity profiles.NMR spectral data demonstrate biologically active
RU-SKI compounds possess variable amide conformational preferences,
which can be modulated.
Data
This article describes the synthesis and characterisation of
four 5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridine (“RU-SKI”)
inhibitors of Hedgehog acyltransferase (Hhat) which were employed in
dose–response analysis in the related article “Click-chemistry armed enzyme
linked immunosorbent assay to measure palmitoylation by Hedgehog
acyltransferase” [1]. The
RU-SKI inhibitors were identified and developed by Resh and co-workers
[2], [3], and the
compounds with the highest published potencies against Hhat were selected for
synthesis. RU-SKI 41 (9a), RU-SKI 43 (9b),
RU-SKI 101 (9c) and RU-SKI 201 (9d) were
synthesised according to our previously reported synthetic strategy to access
the 5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridine core scaffold
[4]. Inhibitors were
analysed in our Click Chemistry Armed Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay,
displaying low- and sub-micromolar IC50 values against Hhat
[1].As demonstrated in our previous study of the
5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridine core
[4], the amide in the
RU-SKI compounds also adopts two conformations (Fig. 1). The
conformational preference is affected by non-covalent interactions between the
amide carbonyl and neighbouring substituents [4]. Altered conformational ratios are observed
in the 1H NMR data of the RU-SKI compounds
(Table 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 6, Fig. 10, Fig. 14). The
synthetic, characterisation and conformational data of compounds
9a–9d is reported here, along with NMR
spectra of final RU-SKI inhibitors.
Fig. 1
E- and
Z-amide conformations adopted by the
5-acyl-6,7-dihydrothieno[3,2-c]pyridine core of the
RU-SKI compounds.
Table 1
Amide conformational ratio data from RU-SKI inhibitors
estimated by 1H NMR spectroscopy measured at
400 MHz in CDCl3 (Fig. 2, Fig. 6, Fig. 10, Fig. 14).
Compound
Observed E:Z
RU-SKI 41 (9a)
1:1
RU-SKI 43 (9b)
4:6
RU-SKI 101 (9c)
2:8
RU-SKI 201 (9d)
7:3
Fig. 2
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) of RU-SKI 41
(9a).
Fig. 6
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) of RU-SKI 43
(9b).
Fig. 10
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) of RU-SKI 101
(9c).
Fig. 14
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) of RU-SKI 201
(9d).
Experimental design, materials and
methods
Materials
Materials and equipment were as previously described
[4].
Synthesis of RU-SKI 41, 43, 101 and 201 followed our
previously reported synthetic strategy (Scheme 1) [4].
General procedure A (ethyl phenoxy acetate
preparation)
2-Bromoethylacetate (0.66 mL, 5.99 mmol, 1 eq) was added dropwise to a
solution of K2CO3 (1660 mg, 12.0 mmol, 2 eq) and phenol
(5.99 mmol, 1 eq) in acetone
(25 mL) and stirred at room temperature overnight. The
reaction mixture was concentrated in vacuo then
dissolved in brine and extracted with ethyl acetate. The combined organic
layers were dried over Na2SO4 and the
solvent removed in vacuo. The phenyl ether was used
without further purification.
General procedure B (thiophene ethylamide
preparation using sodium methoxide)
Phenoxyethyl acetate (3.91 mmol, 1 eq) was dissolved in methanol (20 mL), and
sodium methoxide solution (0.5 M, 2.12 mL, 19.5 mmol, 5 eq) added dropwise to
the reaction mixture. 2-(3-Thienyl)ethylamine (0.47 mL,
508 mg, 3.91 mmol, 1 eq) was added dropwise and stirred overnight at room
temperature. The solvent was removed in vacuo and the
resulting crude material was dissolved in brine, extracted with ethyl
acetate and the combined organic layers washed with water. The organic layer
was dried over Na2SO4, concentrated
in vacuo and the crude residue purified by flash
column chromatography.
General procedures C, D, E, F, and
N
General procedures C, D, E, F, and N were performed as
previously described [4].
General procedure G
General procedure G was performed as previously described
[5].
General procedure H
General procedure G was performed as previously described
[6].
General procedure I (ester hydrolysis of ethyl
aminoacetate/preparation of ethyl amino acetic acid)
Boc-protected ethyl aminoacetate (0.15 mmol, 1 eq) was dissolved in THF (5 mL), lithium hydroxide (1 M solution, 0.4 mL, 0.40 mmol, 3.8 eq)
added and the reaction stirred overnight at room temperature. If necessary,
more lithium hydroxide was added to the reaction mixture in order to drive
the reaction to completion. The reaction was acidified with concentrated
hydrochloric acid (pH 2) and extracted in ethyl acetate. The combined
organic layers were dried over Na2SO4,
concentrated in vacuo, and purified by column
chromatography or used without further purification.
General procedure J (coupling of the side chain
using PyBOP) (RU-SKI 41/43)
The amine obtained from general procedure F (0.11 mmol, 1 eq) was added to a solution of the
acid obtained from general procedure I (0.12 mmol,
1.1 eq), DIPEA (52 μL, 0.30 mmol, 2.75 eq) and PyBOP (56 mg, 0.11 mmol, 1 eq) in
DCM (5 mL) and the reaction stirred overnight at room
temperature. The reaction was quenched by addition of water and extracted in
ethyl acetate. The combined organic layers were washed with water and brine,
dried over Na2SO4, concentrated
in vacuo, and purified by flash column
chromatography.
General procedure K (coupling of the side chain
using EDC/HOBt) (RU-SKI 101/201)
The amine obtained from general procedure F (0.043 mmol, 1 eq) and the Boc-protected acetic
acid obtained from general procedure I (0.043 mmol,
1 eq) were dissolved in DMF (~2 mL).
HOBt (5.8 mg, 0.043 mmol, 1 eq), DIPEA (15 μL, 0.086 mmol, 2 eq) and EDC (12.4 mg, 0.065 mmol, 1.5 eq) were added to the
reaction mixture and the reaction stirred overnight at room temperature. DCM
was added and the solution washed with aqueous LiCl (5% w/w) and brine. The
organic layer was dried over Na2SO4,
concentrated in vacuo, and purified by flash column
chromatography.
General procedure L (Boc deprotection by
TFA)
The amide obtained from general procedure J or K
(0.049 mmol, 1 eq) was dissolved in
1:1 mixture of DCM and TFA (5 mL). Afterwards, the solvent
was removed in vacuo and the residual was neutralised
by saturated sodium hydrogen carbonate, extracted with DCM three times and
dried over MgSO4. The required amine was isolated using
strong cation exchange resin and eluted with ammonia (2 M)
in methanol to recover the free amine, and purified by flash column
chromatography.
General procedure M (Boc deprotection by HCl in
dioxane)
The amide obtained from general procedure J or K
(0.18 mmol, 1 eq) was stirred in
4 M HCl-Dioxane (~5 mL) for 2 h at room temperature. The solvent was removed in
vacuo and the residue dissolved in ethyl acetate, washed
with water and brine and dried over MgSO4. The required
amine was isolated using strong cation exchange resin and eluted with
ammonia (2 M) in methanol to recover the free amine, and
purified by flash column chromatography.
General procedure N (coupling of the side chain
using acid chlorides)
The amine obtained from general procedure F (0.09 mmol, 1 eq) and TEA (25 μL, 18 mg, 0.18 mmol, 2 eq) were dissolved in dry DCM (1 mL). The
corresponding acid chloride (0.11 mmol, 1.2 eq) was added
and the reaction mixture stirred at room temperature for 2 h. The solvent was removed in vacuo, and the
residue purified by flash column chromatography.
RU-SKI synthetic data
RU-SKI 41 synthetic data
Ethyl
(p-chlorophenoxy)acetate
(1a)
The ethyl
(p-chlorophenoxy)acetate (1a)
was obtained from 4-chlorophenol (0.59 mL, 770 mg, 5.99 mmol, 1 eq)
and 2-bromoethylacetate (1 g, 5.99 mmol, 1 eq) using general procedure A as a white solid
(1.28 g, 5.87 mmol, 98%).
1H NMR (400 MHz,
CDCl3) δ=7.31–7.22 (m, 2H), 6.91–6.82 (m, 2H), 4.61
(s, 2H), 4.29 (q, J=7.1 Hz, 2H), 1.31 (t, J=7.1 Hz, 3H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3) δ=168.61, 156.46, 129.46,
126.70, 116.02, 65.63, 61.48, 14.15; IR υMAX
(neat)/cm−1: 2986 (CH3,
-CH2-, alkyl), 1755.14 (C=O stretch, ester),
1595.32, 1584.14, 1489.92, 1441.44, 1379.18, 1292.86, 1192.13, 1171.21,
1075.91, 1026.29, 1006.67, 929.80, 872.46, 719.30; HRMS (ESI,
m/z) calcd. for
C10H15NO3Cl+
[M+NH4]+, 232.0740; found,
232.0738 [M+NH4]+.
Authors: Thomas Lanyon-Hogg; Markus Ritzefeld; Naoko Masumoto; Anthony I Magee; Henry S Rzepa; Edward W Tate Journal: J Org Chem Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 4.354
Authors: Thomas Lanyon-Hogg; Naoko Masumoto; George Bodakh; Antonio D Konitsiotis; Emmanuelle Thinon; Ursula R Rodgers; Raymond J Owens; Anthony I Magee; Edward W Tate Journal: Anal Biochem Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 3.365
Authors: Thomas Lanyon-Hogg; Markus Ritzefeld; Leran Zhang; Sebastian A Andrei; Balazs Pogranyi; Milon Mondal; Lea Sefer; Callum D Johnston; Claire E Coupland; Jake L Greenfield; Joshua Newington; Matthew J Fuchter; Anthony I Magee; Christian Siebold; Edward W Tate Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 16.823
Authors: Ursula R Rodgers; Thomas Lanyon-Hogg; Naoko Masumoto; Markus Ritzefeld; Rosemary Burke; Julian Blagg; Anthony I Magee; Edward W Tate Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Anna Kotulak-Chrzaszcz; Agnieszka Rybarczyk; Jakub Klacz; Marcin Matuszewski; Zbigniew Kmiec; Piotr M Wierzbicki Journal: Int J Mol Med Date: 2022-03-10 Impact factor: 4.101
Authors: Thomas Lanyon-Hogg; Neki V Patel; Markus Ritzefeld; Katherine J Boxall; Rosemary Burke; Julian Blagg; Anthony I Magee; Edward W Tate Journal: SLAS Discov Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 3.341