Within the spectrum of kinase inhibitors, covalent-reversible inhibitors (CRIs) provide a valuable alternative approach to classical covalent inhibitors. This special class of inhibitors can be optimized for an extended drug-target residence time. For CRIs, it was shown that the fast addition of thiols to electron-deficient olefins leads to a covalent bond that can break reversibly under proteolytic conditions. Research groups are just beginning to include CRIs in their arsenal of compound classes, and, with that, the understanding of this interesting set of chemical warheads is growing. However, systems to assess both characteristics of the covalent-reversible bond in a simple experimental setting are sparse. Here, we have developed an efficient methodology to characterize the covalent and reversible properties of CRIs and to investigate their potential in targeting clinically relevant variants of the receptor tyrosine kinase EGFR.
Within the spectrum of kinase inhibitors, covalent-reversible inhibitors (CRIs) provide a valuable alternative approach to classical covalent inhibitors. This special class of inhibitors can be optimized for an extended drug-target residence time. For CRIs, it was shown that the fast addition of thiols to electron-deficient olefins leads to a covalent bond that can break reversibly under proteolytic conditions. Research groups are just beginning to include CRIs in their arsenal of compound classes, and, with that, the understanding of this interesting set of chemical warheads is growing. However, systems to assess both characteristics of the covalent-reversible bond in a simple experimental setting are sparse. Here, we have developed an efficient methodology to characterize the covalent and reversible properties of CRIs and to investigate their potential in targeting clinically relevant variants of the receptor tyrosine kinase EGFR.
Pinpointing the molecular mechanisms of cancer has led to the identification of
protein kinases that can be targeted selectively for a more effective
treatment.[1,2] Covalent targeting of noncatalytic cysteines
in dysregulated kinases represents a successful strategy in a broad
variety of indications,[3] including the
application of ibrutinib to inhibit BTK in chronic lymphocytic leukemia,[4,5] as well as afatinib[6] and AZD9291 (osimertinib)[7] in EGFR-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
to name just a few. In the case of EGFR-dependent NSCLC, the sequential
occurrence of somatic activating mutations in the kinase domain exemplified
the need for an ever-evolving generation of new inhibitors.[8−14] The 4-aminoquinazoline-based first-generation reversible EGFR inhibitors,
such as erlotinib and gefitinib,[10] showed
significant clinical response rates between 50 and 80%. However, owing
to a secondary point mutation located at the gatekeeper position (T790M)
in the kinase domain, patients acquired resistance and suffered from
a dramatic relapse within 18 months of treatment.[13,15,16] Inhibitors of the second generation (e.g.,
afatinib[6]) contain electrophilic Michael-acceptor
systems to address a unique cysteine (Cys797) located at the lip of
the ATP-binding side on top of αHelix-D. The covalent modification
resulting in an increased target residence time was thought to overcome
T790M drug resistance.[3,17,18] Afatinib proved to be equally potent against EGFRL858R/T790M and EGFRWT resulting in various side effects at clinical
doses.[19−24] The benefits of afatinib compared to the first-generation reversible
inhibitors was considered slight.[25] The
third-generation inhibitors (e.g., osimertinib[7]), characterized by its pyrimidine scaffold and therefore different
orientation in the active site, were demonstrated to effectively inhibit
the proliferation of drug-resistant EGFRL858R/T790M cell
lines.[3,7,24,26,27] Osimertinib showed
excellent results in clinical studies as well as reduced on-target
toxicity and was approved by the FDA as tagrisso in 2015.[28−30]Despite the success of targeted covalent inhibitors, the alternative
concept of covalent-reversible modification[31−35] was recently introduced to the field of kinase inhibitors
by Taunton et al.[36,37] Numerous studies have shown that
compounds equipped with the α-cyano-α,β-unsaturated
carbonyl moiety can undergo rapid, reversible Michael addition with
thiols.[37−40] The reversible nature of this modification is hoped to reduce the
risk of unspecific covalent modification and, therefore, potentially
lowers the risk of severe side effects while maintaining the desirable
maximum drug-target residence time on the target of interest.[17,31,41,42]The electron-withdrawing substituents in these compounds render
the β-keto position more susceptible to nucleophilic attack,
thus accelerating the addition reaction to form a covalent bond with
the target protein. In addition, these substituents increase the acidity
of the Cα-H in the covalently bound inhibitor, which,
in turn, facilitates a rapid elimination of the proton upon changes
in the protein-inhibitor environment.[37,43] Thus, the
presence of electron-withdrawing groups could eliminate the disadvantages
of covalent inhibitors, namely, the generation of non-endogenous protein
fragments after proteasomal degradation.[40] In various mass spectrometry (MS) experiments, the covalent nature
of these compounds was confirmed, whereas the reversible features
could be observed via UV–vis spectroscopy by treating the cyanoacrylamides
with β-mercaptoethanol, which led to a disappearance of the
characteristic absorption peak.[37] Dilution
of the sample resulted in a reappearance or increase of this peak.[37] This two-step characterization of CRIs still
raises many questions, for example, whether the reversible properties
of these cyanoacrylamides can also be observed when bound to a protein?
Given the limited availability of methodologies to rapidly characterize
the binding properties of CRIs,[44,45] we set out to develop
a straightforward MS-based approach, which is based on competition
experiments with covalent-irreversible inhibitors and allows to dissect
the covalent and reversible binding characteristics of CRIs.In the search for a suitable set of probe molecules to investigate
the covalent and reversible properties, we combined the established
synthesis schemes from previous publications of our group. We used
4-amino pyrazolopyrimidines that feature an acrylamide warhead as
a Michael acceptor and bulky aromatic ring systems in the 3-position
as a starting point. We could show that these inhibitors showed excellent
inhibitory effects against drug-resistant EGFRL858R/T790M cell lines, as well as demonstrating a highly promising selectivity
toward the drug-resistant variants and a favorable kinetic profile.[46] We combined these findings with lessons learned
from Basu et al., wherein we developed CRIs based upon the third-generation
EGFRL858R/T790M inhibitor, WZ 4002.[38] Herein, we were able to show that a small library of CRIs
inhibited the drug-resistant variants of EGFR better than their reversible
analogs. MS experiments with cSrc-mutants showed that these inhibitors
alkylated the protein of interest. Furthermore, we verified the predominant E-configuration of the double bond of the Michael acceptor
through nuclear Overhauser effect (NOE) experiments.[38] In the present study, we investigated the inhibitory impact
of our newly developed probe molecules toward EGFR and its mutant
variants (L858R, L858R/T790M). Subsequently, we used this focused
library to investigate the covalent and reversible properties of CRIs
with a single MS experiment.
Results and Discussion
Structure-Based Design
of Covalent-Reversible Inhibitors (CRIs)
We designed CRIs
based on the crystal structures of covalent pyrazolo[3,2-d]pyrimidines (PDB: 5j9y), which showed excellent inhibition of
drug-resistant EGFRT790M both in biochemical and cellular assays (Figure ).[46] We chose
to focus on bulky aromatic ring systems as substituents at the 3-position
to extend the inhibitor into the lipophilic pocket adjacent to the
gatekeeper residue (Met790) and to achieve mutant selectivity by favorable
interactions. To render the inhibitor covalent-reversible, we modified
the attached Michael acceptor by inserting an electron-withdrawing
group. We chose the cyano moiety, which was superior with respect
to potency when compared to that of alternative moieties such as trifluoromethyl.[38] To avoid possible unfavorable interactions with
Arg841 near Cys797 (Figure S2), while hoping
to maintain the activity against the different EGFR mutant variants,
as shown by Basu et al., we chose cyclopropyl over different aromatic
substituents or small aliphatic groups as a second electron-withdrawing
group.[38]
Figure 1
(A) Structures of first-, second-, and
third-generation EGFR inhibitors.
Chemical structure of the CRIs synthesized in this article. (B) Crystal
structures of pyrazolo[3,4-d]-pyrimidine 7c in a complex with drug-resistant EGFRT790M (PDB: 5i9y). (C) Model of 1c in EGFRT790M (PDB: 5i9y). The pyrazolo[3,4-d]-pyrimidine scaffold forms a distinct hydrogen bond (illustrated
in red dotted lines) to the backbone nitrogen of Met793 within the
hinge region. The covalent-reversible Michael acceptor forms a covalent
bond with Cys797. The structural elements comprising the N-lobe as
well as αHelix-C and -D are displayed in white. Green and yellow
highlights indicate the covalent and covalent-reversible bond with
Cys797, respectively.
(A) Structures of first-, second-, and
third-generation EGFR inhibitors.
Chemical structure of the CRIs synthesized in this article. (B) Crystal
structures of pyrazolo[3,4-d]-pyrimidine 7c in a complex with drug-resistant EGFRT790M (PDB: 5i9y). (C) Model of 1c in EGFRT790M (PDB: 5i9y). The pyrazolo[3,4-d]-pyrimidine scaffold forms a distinct hydrogen bond (illustrated
in red dotted lines) to the backbone nitrogen of Met793 within the
hinge region. The covalent-reversible Michael acceptor forms a covalent
bond with Cys797. The structural elements comprising the N-lobe as
well as αHelix-C and -D are displayed in white. Green and yellow
highlights indicate the covalent and covalent-reversible bond with
Cys797, respectively.
Synthesis of a Focused Library
We synthesized a focused
library of EGFR inhibitors (Table ). The synthesis began with 4-amino-1H-pyrazolo-[3,4-d]-pyrimidine (2), which
was treated with N-iodosuccinimide to accomplish
a regioselective iodination at the 3-position affording 3-iodo-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-4-amine (3, Scheme ). To bring about the essential R-configuration
of the linker segment that introduced the covalent-reversible warhead, tert-butyl-(S)-3-hydroxypiperidine-1-carboxylate
was coupled to N1 by the Mitsunobu reaction. In line
with the mechanism, the reaction proceeded with a clean inversion
of the stereogenic center, and, therefore, the right orientation (R) was ensured. Highly pure tert-butyl-(R)-3-(4-amino-3-iodo-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-1-yl)piperidine-1-carboxylate (4) was obtained by conducting multiple cycles of column chromatography
using different solvent systems to eliminate the inevitably formed
triphenylphosphine oxide. Subsequent Suzuki coupling was performed
under standard coupling conditions using Pd(PPh3)4 and sodium carbonate in dimethyl glycol and ethanol (3:1 v/v) to
obtain 5a–e. After acidic Boc-deprotection
of the secondary piperidine-amine, the attachment of the covalent-reversible
warhead was achieved in a two-step sequence. First, the electron-withdrawing
cyano-group was introduced with cyanoacetic acid via a standard acid–amine
coupling protocol (EDC, HOBt,
DIPEA). To finally obtain our desired CRIs, we performed an aldol
condensation with cyclopropanecarbaldehyde and compound 6 using piperidine as a base in refluxing ethanol to afford the desired
products predominantly as trans-olefins.[38] The exclusive (E) stereochemistry
was determined in preceding experiments by monitoring NOE cross peaks
in NMR studies to discriminate cis- and trans-geometry (1, Scheme ).[38]
Table 1
Half-Maximal Inhibitory Concentrations
(IC50) Determined for Reference Compounds and CRIs 1a–e and Their Covalent Analogues 7a–fa
compound
EGFR
IC50 (nM)
Ki (nM)
kinact (min–1)
kinact/Ki (μM–1 s–1)
1a
WT
5385 ± 3889
L858R
229 ± 62
L858R/T790M
4541 ± 543
1b
WT
>10 μM
L858R
385 ± 207
L858R/T790M
2543 ± 420
1c
WT
102 ± 75
64 ± 1
0.03 ± 0.01
0.01 ± 0.01
L858R
21 ± 20
14 ± 2
0.04 ± 0.03
0.68 ± 0.25
L858R/T790M
80 ± 51
15 ± 3
0.11 ± 0.01
0.73 ± 0.16
1d
WT
96 ± 26
265 ± 1
0.04 ± 0.01
0.01 ± 0.01
L858R
10 ± 8
37 ± 6
0.18 ± 0.02
0.20 ± 0.01
L858R/T790M
20 ± 13
51 ± 2
0.17 ± 0.08
0.05 ± 0.02
1e
WT
338 ± 69
1674 ± 450
0.17 ± 0.06
0.01 ± 0.01
L858R
85 ± 34
79 ± 9
0.12 ± 0.01
0.26 ± 0.07
L858R/T790M
213 ± 49
83 ± 10
0.13 ± 0.04
0.36 ± 0.02
7a
WT
136 ± 58
L858R
11 ± 3.0
L858R/T790M
243 ± 42
7b
WT
366 ± 91
L858R
27 ± 1.9
L858R/T790M
223 ± 75
7c
WT
58 ± 13
47 ± 5.8
0.13 ± 0.05
0.05 ± 0.04
L858R
1.0 ± 0.3
44 ± 6.5
0.25 ± 0.06
0.10 ± 0.06
L858R/T790M
1.9 ± 0.8
58 ± 3.3
0.31 ± 0.04
0.09 ± 0.02
7d
WT
13 ± 3.0
L858R
2.0 ± 0.8
L858R/T790M
2.7 ± 0.3
7e
WT
35 ± 14
25 ± 7.2
0.11 ± 0.03
0.08 ± 0.02
L858R
3.8 ± 2.8
19 ± 3.1
0.17 ± 0.08
0.14 ± 0.07
L858R/T790M
2.5 ± 1.4
16 ± 5.2
0.29 ± 0.02
0.36 ± 0.09
7f
WT
16 ± 5.6
15 ± 3.2
0.19 ± 0.12
0.21 ± 0.05
L858R
1.1 ± 0.6
1.6 ± 0.4
0.14 ± 0.01
1.60 ± 0.53
L858R/T790M
<1
1.5 ± 0.8
0.17 ± 0.02
3.42 ± 1.44
osimertinib
WT
1.6 ± 0.2
13.5 ± 2.30
0.43 ± 0.11
0.52 ± 0.05
L858R
1.3 ± 0.4
1.58 ± 0.19
0.30 ± 0.01
3.24 ± 0.46
L858R/T790M
0.3 ± 0.02
1.46 ± 0.07
0.33 ± 0.06
3.75 ± 0.39
WZ 4002
WT
14 ± 7
L858R
0.06 ± 0.04
L858R/T790M
0.9 ± 1.2
gefitinib
WT
274 ± 151
L858R
0.02 ± 0.004
L858R/T790M
55.27 ± 48.03
Additional
kinetic parameters Ki, kinact, and kinact/Ki determined
for reference compounds and CRIs 1c–e and their covalent analogues 7c, e, and f, on EGFRWT, EGFRL858R, and EGFRL858R/T790M. The data represents the mean ± SD of three
observations. Data for 7c, e, and f and osimertinib were taken from Engel et al.[46]
Scheme 1
Synthetic Route To
Generate CRIs 1a–e
Reagents
and conditions: (i) N-iodosuccinimide, DMF, 85 °C,
20 h; (ii) tert-butyl-(S)-3-hydroxypiperidine-1-carboxylate,
triphenylphosphine,
diisopropyl azodicarboxylate (DIAD), 0 °C to room temperature
(rt), 18 h; (iii) boronic acid/pinacol ester, Pd(PPh3)4, sat. Na2CO3, DME/EtOH (3:1, v/v),
90 °C, 12 h; (iv) 20% TFA in DCM, 12 h; (v) cyanoacetic acid,
EDC·HCl, HOBt, DIPEA, DCM, rt, 12 h; (vi) cyclopropanecarbaldehyde,
piperidine, EtOH, 80 °C, 16 h.
Synthetic Route To
Generate CRIs 1a–e
Reagents
and conditions: (i) N-iodosuccinimide, DMF, 85 °C,
20 h; (ii) tert-butyl-(S)-3-hydroxypiperidine-1-carboxylate,
triphenylphosphine,
diisopropyl azodicarboxylate (DIAD), 0 °C to room temperature
(rt), 18 h; (iii) boronic acid/pinacol ester, Pd(PPh3)4, sat. Na2CO3, DME/EtOH (3:1, v/v),
90 °C, 12 h; (iv) 20% TFA in DCM, 12 h; (v) cyanoacetic acid,
EDC·HCl, HOBt, DIPEA, DCM, rt, 12 h; (vi) cyclopropanecarbaldehyde,
piperidine, EtOH, 80 °C, 16 h.Additional
kinetic parameters Ki, kinact, and kinact/Ki determined
for reference compounds and CRIs 1c–e and their covalent analogues 7c, e, and f, on EGFRWT, EGFRL858R, and EGFRL858R/T790M. The data represents the mean ± SD of three
observations. Data for 7c, e, and f and osimertinib were taken from Engel et al.[46]
Biochemical
Characterization of CRIs toward EGFR
The
binding properties of the focused CRI library toward the different
EGFR mutants were evaluated using an activity-based assay quantifying
the relative phosphorylation of an artificial peptidic substrate in
a time-resolved FRET manner. Positive controls were defined by WZ
4002, gefitinib, and osimertinib. The determined IC50 values
(Table ) were consistent
with data reported in the literature.[38]We found that all CRIs inhibited different EGFR mutants. To
our dismay, we did not achieve selectivity toward EGFRL858R/T790M. Compared to our previously reported inhibitors (7a–f), we observed a more than 20-fold decrease
in activity. We speculate that the proximity between Cys797 and Arg841,
observed in previously published crystal structures (PDB: 5j9z and 5j9y),[46] could force the covalent-reversible warhead, with its bulky
cyclopropyl moiety, into a slightly different conformation, which,
in turn, leads to a repositioning near the gatekeeper residue. Further
experiments were conducted to determine the kinetic parameters, Ki and kinact, wherein Ki reflects the reversible binding affinity and kinact describes the rate of covalent bond formation.
To analyze binding characteristics of our best compounds, we monitored
IC50 values of 1c–e in
different EGFR variants in a time-dependent manner, from which Ki and kinact can
be deduced as described previously.[47] As
the kinetic parameters of 1c–e suggest
a rather slow covalent bond formation, with kinact values of 0.13 min–1 against the double
mutant of EGFR (1e), one could speculate that the competition
with ATP in the active site plays a role in the rather modest activity
values of this compound.[48] Comparison between 1a and 1c provided clear evidence that bulkier
substituents were crucial for potent inhibition of the different EGFR
mutants. Inhibitor 1d illustrated the most potent inhibitory
effect on each EGFR mutant. A feasible explanation for this observation
might be based on the straight orientation of the azaindole moiety
pointing into the back pocket and stacking favorably between Met790
and Lys745 (Figure S2). In addition, the
secondary amine is spatially oriented in proximity to Glu762, thereby
forming an additional hydrogen bond and ultimately stabilizing the
conformation of the protein–ligand complex.For the investigation
of the selectivity profile of our CRI scaffold,
we implemented SelectScreen profiling (Life Technologies) of compound 1d at a concentration of 1 μM against a panel of 100
kinases (including selected mutants; Figure S1). Compound 1d inhibited EGFRT790M and EGFRL858R/T790M close to 90%. Almost all kinases that harbor a
cysteine comparable to C797 in the hinge region (see Table S1) were inhibited more than 50% and rank in the top
25% of the tested kinase set. The biochemically observed trend that 1d shows a good selectivity toward the gatekeeper mutant variant
of EGFR was confirmed in this screen. Thus, the selectivity profile
of 1d underlines the biochemically observed selectivity
toward EGFRT790M.
MS Experiments
To verify the covalent-reversible nature of the
synthesized inhibitors, 1a–e, we
developed a new MS experiment (Figure ). We claim that the reversible properties of these
inhibitors make it possible to displace the CRIs with classical covalent
inhibitors. By measuring the protein mass before and after the addition
of the classical covalent inhibitors, it should be possible to show
the covalent and reversible properties of this novel class of inhibitors.
Figure 2
Experimental
setting for characterizing CRIs. (A) Schematic representation
of the proposed mechanism of the CRI (highlighted in yellow) binding
and subsequent displacement with covalent inhibitors (highlighted
in green). (B) Expected MS results after the experiments. From left
to right: Apo protein will result in a single mass peak with a defined m/z value, treatment with CRI will lead
to a complete labeling and, therefore, to a characteristic shift of
the peak corresponding to the molar mass of the CRI (Δ = CRI).
After incubation with a covalent inhibitor, we expect a complete displacement
of the CRI and therefore, yet another shift of the mass peak after
complete labeling of the protein, resulting in a peak that corresponds
to the mass of the apo protein labeled with a covalent inhibitor (Δ
= COV).
Experimental
setting for characterizing CRIs. (A) Schematic representation
of the proposed mechanism of the CRI (highlighted in yellow) binding
and subsequent displacement with covalent inhibitors (highlighted
in green). (B) Expected MS results after the experiments. From left
to right: Apo protein will result in a single mass peak with a defined m/z value, treatment with CRI will lead
to a complete labeling and, therefore, to a characteristic shift of
the peak corresponding to the molar mass of the CRI (Δ = CRI).
After incubation with a covalent inhibitor, we expect a complete displacement
of the CRI and therefore, yet another shift of the mass peak after
complete labeling of the protein, resulting in a peak that corresponds
to the mass of the apo protein labeled with a covalent inhibitor (Δ
= COV).In a newly developed experimental
setting, we were able to verify
our hypothesis. The entire set of CRIs (1a–e) showed complete single-labeled EGFRL585R/T790M, as compared to control EGFRL585R/T790M treated with
DMSO, indicating a covalent adduct with our protein of interest. The
subsequent treatment with covalent inhibitors (7a–f, Figure ) displaced the CRI and led to a shift in protein mass.
Figure 3
Structures
of covalent inhibitors used in the mass experiments.
Structures
of covalent inhibitors used in the mass experiments.This shift was consistent with the expected mass
values of single-labeled
EGFRL585R/T790M with only the classical covalent inhibitors
(Figure ). For comparison,
we incubated EGFRL585R/T790M with a moderately active covalent
inhibitor (7b) and tried to displace it with a covalent
inhibitor that was biochemically more active (7f). Here,
no shift in protein mass could be observed, which leads to the conclusion
that the shift in protein mass for the CRIs can only be attributed
to the reversible nature of this class of compounds (Figure ).
Figure 4
Deconvoluted mass spectra
of EGFRL858R/T790M incubated
with DMSO (top), CRI (middle), and a covalent counterpart (bottom).
Mass differences in relation to the DMSO-treated control are displayed
as Δ values and demonstrate covalent-reversible modification
of EGFRL858R/T790M with compounds 1a–e and the subsequent displacement with 7a–e. (A–E, CRIs 1a–e; F, control experiment). For full spectra, see Figures S3–S8.
Deconvoluted mass spectra
of EGFRL858R/T790M incubated
with DMSO (top), CRI (middle), and a covalent counterpart (bottom).
Mass differences in relation to the DMSO-treated control are displayed
as Δ values and demonstrate covalent-reversible modification
of EGFRL858R/T790M with compounds 1a–e and the subsequent displacement with 7a–e. (A–E, CRIs 1a–e; F, control experiment). For full spectra, see Figures S3–S8.To further validate our methodology, we incubated the protein
of
interest with reversible ATP-competitive inhibitors (a pyrazolopyrimidine
and gefitinib) and added to each experiment either a CRI (1a,
1c) or the covalent inhibitor (8c) and analyzed
the samples via MS-spectrometry. Furthermore, we incubated EGFRL858R/T790M with CRI 1c and displaced it with
a covalent inhibitor of a different core motif (amino pyrimidine,
osimertinib) (Figures S9–S12).
Conclusions
The occurrence of drug-resistant mutations in
EGFR during the progression
of NSCLS still poses a major challenge in the development of effective
inhibitors. Here, we present a subset of EGFR inhibitors that contain
chemically tuned electrophilic moieties that combine the advantageous
properties of both covalent and reversible inhibition strategies.
To determine the biochemical potential, our focused library of synthesized
CRIs was evaluated in an activity-based assay system and confirmed
moderate to good inhibitory potential. SAR studies clearly illustrated
that bulkier substituents at the 3-position of the pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidine scaffold considerably increased the inhibitory
potential. Starting with the phenyl moiety, we extended the molecule
with a trifluoromethyl moiety, further into the pocket next to the
gatekeeper residue. The rotatable residue did not improve the selectivity
between the EGFR variants. Therefore, we chose the rigid bicyclic
aromatic moieties to facilitate the positioning between the gatekeeper
and Lys845. With these compounds, we were able to achieve a minimum
20-fold improvement of the activity compared to that of the monocyclic
aromatic residues. Although the mutant selectivity of the compounds
revealed a distinct trend, further optimization is needed to improve
the activity and selectivity for the different EGFR variants. A promising
starting point for further developments could be 1d.
The optimization of 1d would lead to a better understanding
of the narrow back pocket close to the gatekeeper. This would help
to elucidate the binding modes in different oncogenic mutants. Furthermore,
the area surrounding Arg848 is speculated to be crucial for generating
additional contacts to stabilize a prearrangement of the CRI before
covalently modifying its target. Therefore, a reassessment of the
covalent-reversible warhead could lead to more selective inhibitors
owing to the possible repositioning of the molecule in its binding
pocket. Finally, we were able to verify the covalent and reversible
nature of this novel class of inhibitors within the setting of an
MS experiment. We were able to develop a method that can show the
covalent modification of drug-resistant EGFR variants with CRIs and
their subsequent displacement with classical covalent inhibitors,
which proves their reversible nature. This new methodology will help
characterize the binding characteristics of CRIs in a simple and straightforward
manner.Further investigations of the covalent-reversible warhead
are needed
to achieve a better inhibitory effect when targeting EGFR and its
mutants. However, our newly developed methodology offers an elegant
and easy way to characterize the complete set of binding characteristics
of CRIs.
Experimental Section
Activity-Based Assay for IC50 Determination
and Kinetic
Characterization
IC50 determinations for EGFR
and its mutants (Carna Biosciences, lot13CBS-0005K for EGFRWT; Invitrogen, lot279551C for EGFRL858R and Invitrogen,
lot350247C for EGFRL858R/T790M) were performed with the
HTRF KinEASE-TK assay from Cisbio according to the manufacturer’s
instructions. Briefly, the amount of EGFR in each reaction well was
set to 0.60 ng of EGFRWT (0.67 nM), 0.10 ng of EGFRL858R (0.11 nM), or 0.07 ng of EGFRL858R/T790M (0.08
nM). An artificial substrate peptide (TK-substrate from Cisbio) was
phosphorylated by EGFR. After completion of the reaction (reaction
times: 25 min for WT, 15 min for L858R, and 20 min for T790M/L858R),
the reaction was stopped by the addition of a buffer containing EDTA,
as well as an antiphosphotyrosine antibody labeled with europium cryptate
and streptavidin labeled with the fluorophore XL665. FRET between
europium cryptate and XL665 was measured after an additional hour
of incubation to quantify the phosphorylation of the substrate peptide.
ATP concentrations were set at their respective Km values (9.5 μM for EGFRWT, 25 μM
for EGFRL858R, and 20 μM for EGFRL858R/T790M) while a substrate concentration of 1 μM, 225 nM, and 275
nM, respectively, was used. Kinase and the inhibitor were preincubated
for 30 min before the reaction was started by the addition of ATP
and a substrate peptide. An EnVision multimode plate reader (Perkin
Elmer) was used to measure the fluorescence of the samples at 620
nm (Eu-labeled antibody) and 665 nm (XL665 labeled streptavidin) 50
μs after excitation at 320 nm. The quotient of both intensities
for reactions made with eight different inhibitor concentrations was
then analyzed using the Quattro Software Suite for IC50 determination. Each reaction was performed in duplicate, and at
least three independent determinations of each IC50 were
made.For kinetic characterization (Ki, kinact) of covalent bond formation,
the corresponding inhibitors were incubated with EGFRWT, EGFRL858R, and EGFRL858R/T790M over different
periods of time (0.5–90 min), whereas the duration of the enzymatic
and stop reaction were kept constant. IC50 values were
determined for the 12 different incubation times as described above
and afterward plotted accordingly. Kinetic parameters were calculated
with XLfit (version 5.4.0.8; IDBS, Munich, Germany) as reported by
Krippendorff et al.[47]We used the drug-resistant mutant variant,
EGFRL858R/T790M, for MS experiments. We incubated 26 μM
of the protein with 132 μM of the covalent-reversible inhibitor
in a buffer (25 mM Tris, 250 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 1 mM TCEP, pH
8) on ice for 3 h. Then, an aliquot of 15 μL was treated with
66 μM of the covalent inhibitor and again incubated in ice for
1 h. We analyzed the aliquots by MS using a Thermo Fisher Scientific
Ultimate 3000 HPLC system connected to a Thermo Fisher Scientific
Velos Pro (2d ion trap). A 5 μL sample was injected and separated
using a Vydac 214TP C4 5 μm column (150 mm × 2.1 mm) starting
at 20% solvent B for 5 min, followed by a gradient up to 90% solvent
B over 14 min with a flow rate of 210 μL/min, with 0.1% formic
acid in water as solvent A and 0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile as
solvent B. A mass range of 700–2000 m/z was scanned, and raw data were deconvoluted and analyzed
with MagTran software (version 1.02).[49] The deconvoluted spectra were smoothed and fitted to a mass range
of 37 750–38 550 m/z with mMass software (version 5.50).
Chemistry
Unless
otherwise noted, all reagents and
solvents were purchased from Acros, Fluka, Sigma, Aldrich, or Merck
and used without further purification. Dry solvents were purchased
as anhydrous reagents from commercial suppliers. 1H and 13C NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker Avance DRX 400 or
Bruker Avance DRX 500 spectrometer at 400 or 500 MHz and 101 or 125
MHz, respectively. 1H chemical shifts are reported in δ
(ppm) as s (singlet), d (doublet), dd (doublet of doublet), t (triplet),
q (quartet), m (multiplet), and bs (broad singlet) and are referenced
to the residual solvent signal: CDCl3 (7.26), DMSO-d6 (2.50). Coupling constants (J) are expressed in hertz (Hz). 13C spectra are referenced
to the residual solvent signal: CDCl3 (77.0) or DMSO-d6 (39.0). All final compounds were purified
to >95% purity as determined by high-performance liquid chromatography
(HPLC). The purity was measured using Agilent 1200 series HPLC systems
with UV detection at 210 nm (system: Agilent Eclipse XDB-C18 4.6 mm
× 150 mm, 5 μM, 10–100% CH3CN in H2O, with 0.1% TFA, for 15 min at 1.0 mL/min). Analytical TLC
was carried out on Merck 60 F245 aluminum-backed silica gel plates.
Compounds were purified by column chromatography using Baker silica
gel (40–70 μm particle size) or Flash Chromatography
on a Biotage Isolera One using Biotage SNAP, SNAP Ultra, ZIP Sphere,
or ZIP KP-Sil columns (25, 10, 5, or 120 g, respectively) monitored
by UV at λ = 254 and 280 nm. Preparative HPLC was conducted
on an Agilent HPLC system (1200 series) with a VP 250/21 nucleodur
C18 column from Macherey-Nagel and monitored by UV at λ = 254
nm.
General Procedure A
Suzuki Cross-Coupling of Iodinated Pyrazolopyrimidines
with
Various Boronic Acids
tert-Butyl-(R)-3-(4-amino-3-iodo-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-1-yl)piperidine-1-carboxylate (3) and the corresponding boronic acid (a–e) were dissolved in a mixture of DME and ethanol (4 mL, 3/1,
v/v) and treated with a saturated sodium carbonate solution. The reaction
mixture was flushed with Argon for 5 min. After that tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium(0)
was added. The mixture was heated to 90 °C and stirred for 12
h under argon atmosphere. The reaction mixture was filtered through
a plug of Celite and after that washed usig the saturated sodium hydrogen
carbonate solution and extracted three times with ethyl acetate and
washed with water and saturated sodium chloride solution. The combined
organic layers were dried over anhydrous sodium sulfate and evaporated
to dryness. The resulting crude product was purified via flash chromatography
(normal and reversed phase).
General Procedure B
Deprotection
of the Secondary Amine
The protected pyrazolopyrimidines
(4a–e) were dissolved in DCM and
cooled to 0 °C. To this stirred solution, TFA in DCM (20/80,
v/v) was added dropwise. The reaction mixture was warmed to rt and
stirred overnight. The volatiles were evaporated, and the residue
was taken up in DCM. The product was separated between sodium hydrogen
carbonate and a solution of 10% MeOH in DCM. The organic phase was
separated, and the volatiles were removed in vacuo to obtain the designated
product.
General Procedure C
Amide Coupling
A solution of (R)-1-(piperidin-3-yl)-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-4-amines (5a–e) was charged with 2-cyanoacetic acid,
HOBt, and DIPEA, and, after stirring under argon atmosphere for 10
min, EDC·HCl in DCM was added. The reaction mixture was stirred
at rt for 12 h under an argon atmosphere. The reaction mixture was
quenched using saturated sodium hydrogen carbonate and extracted three
times with ethyl acetate and washed with water and saturated sodium
chloride solution. The combined organic layers were dried over anhydrous
sodium sulfate and evaporated to dryness.
General Procedure
D
Condensation with Cylcopropylcarbaldehyde
The respective
nitriles (6a–e) were dissolved in
EtOH and treated with piperidine. After stirring under argon atmosphere
for 5 min, cyclopropanecarbaldehyde was added at rt. The reaction
mixture was then stirred at 80 °C for 16 h under argon atmosphere.
The reaction mixture was quenched using saturated sodium hydrogen
carbonate and extracted three times with ethyl acetate and washed
with water and saturated sodium chloride solution. The combined organic
layers were dried over anhydrous sodium sulfate and evaporated to
dryness to obtain the crude product. The resulting crude product was
purified via flash chromatography (normal phase) to obtain the title
compound.
3-Iodo-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-4-amine
(3)
4-Amino-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]-pyrimidine (2, 5.0 g, 37.0 mmol, 1 equiv)
and N-iodosuccinimide (12.5 g, 55.5 mmol, 1.5 equiv)
were dissolved in 40 mL of DMF, heated to 85 °C, and stirred
for 20 h. After completion of the reaction, the mixture was cooled
to rt to obtain a solid precipitate. The precipitate was filtered
and thoroughly washed with 2-propanol and ice-cold methanol. The light
yellow solid was dried in vacuo to afford title compound 3 (8.8 g, 32.8 mmol, 88.7% yield). The product was used without further
purification.LC–MS: Rt =
3.61 min, [M + H] = 262 g/mol.
A solution of 3-iodo-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-4-amine (3, 7.5 g, 28.7 mmol, 1 equiv) and tert-butyl-(S)-3-hydroxypiperidine-1-carboxylate (8.3 g, 40.2 mmol,
1.4 equiv) in anhydrous THF was stirred at rt under argon atmosphere.
To the pale yellow suspension, triphenylphosphine (11.3 g, 43.1 mmol,
1.5 equiv) was added, and the resulting solution was cooled to 0 °C
in an ice bath. To this solution, DIAD (8.5 mL, 43.1 mmol, 1.5 equiv)
was added. The reaction mixture was warmed to rt and stirred for 18
h under argon atmosphere. After completion of the reaction, the reaction
mixture was quenched using saturated sodium hydrogen carbonate and
extracted three times with ethyl acetate and washed with water and
saturated sodium chloride solution. The combined organic layers were
dried over anhydrous sodium sulfate and evaporated to dryness to obtain
a yellow oil. The crude product was purified by column chromatography
(DCM/EtOAc (60/40, v/v) + 1% MeOH as additive). Title compound 4 was obtained as a pale yellow solid (5.4 g, 28.7 mmol, 42%
yield).1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 8.21 (s, 9H), 7.04 (s, 2H), 4.64–4.57 (m,
1H), 3.99 (d, J = 11.8 Hz, 1H), 3.80 (d, J = 13.2 Hz, 1H), 3.11 (s, 2H), 2.20–2.10 (m, 1H),
2.10–2.02 (m, 1H), 1.94–1.85 (m, 1H), 1.60–1.48
(m, 1H), 1.37 (s, 9H).13C NMR (126 MHz, CDCl3) δ 154.6, 152.9,
151.5, 145.5, 102.6, 88.9, 80.5, 77.4, 77.3–77.1 (m), 76.9,
32.1, 30.4, 29.8, 28.6, 24.3, 22.8.HRMS (ESI-MS) calcd: 445.08434
g/mol for C15H21IN6O6,
[M + H]+ = 445.08403 g/mol.
Deprotected 5a was prepared according to General Procedure
B using 5a (300.9 mg, 0.79 mmol, 1.00 equiv) and
treated with 2 mL of TFA solution as described. The solid obtained
was dried in vacuo to afford the title compound in a quantitative
yield. The product was used without further purification.LC–MS: Rt = 2.06 min, [M + H] = 295 g/mol.
Deprotected 5b was prepared according to General Procedure B using 5b (373.2
mg, 0.76 mmol, 1.00 equiv) and treated with 2 mL of TFA solution as
described. The solid obtained was dried in vacuo to afford the title
compound in a quantitative yield. The product was used without further
purification.LC–MS: Rt =
2.83 min, [M + H] = 363 g/mol.
Deprotected 5c was prepared according to General Procedure B using 5c (388.8
mg, 0.87 mmol, 1.00 equiv) and treated with 2 mL of TFA solution as
described. The solid obtained was dried in vacuo to afford the title
compound in a quantitative yield. The product was used without further
purification.LC–MS: Rt =
2.61 min, [M + H] = 345 g/mol.
Deprotected 5d was prepared according to General Procedure
B using 5d (1.10 g, 2.53 mmol, 1.00 equiv) and
treated with 6 mL of TFA solution as described. The solid obtained
was dried in vacuo to afford the title compound (666.00 mg, 1.99 mmol,
79% yield). The product was used without further purification.LC–MS: Rt = 1.94 min, [M + H]
= 335 g/mol.
Deprotected 5e was prepared according to General Procedure B using 5e (222.7
mg, 0.50 mmol, 1.00 equiv) and treated with 2 mL of TFA solution as
described. The solid obtained was dried in vacuo to afford the title
compound in a quantitative yield. The product was used without further
purification.LC–MS: Rt =
2.48 min, [M + H] = 348 g/mol.
Compound 6e was prepared according
to General Procedure C using deprotected 5e (175.00 mg, 0.50 mmol, 1 equiv), cyanoacetic acid (65.58
mg, 0.76 mmol, 1.50 equiv), HOBt (102.10 mg, 0.76 mmol, 1.50 equiv),
DIPEA (442.87 μL, 2.52 mmol, 5.00 equiv), and EDC·HCl (147.80
mg, 0.76 mmol, 1.50 equiv). Yield: 129.10 mg (62%). The product was
used without further purification.LC–MS: Rt = 3.60 min, [M + H] = 415 g/mol.
Authors: Julian Engel; André Richters; Matthäus Getlik; Stefano Tomassi; Marina Keul; Martin Termathe; Jonas Lategahn; Christian Becker; Svenja Mayer-Wrangowski; Christian Grütter; Niklas Uhlenbrock; Jasmin Krüll; Niklas Schaumann; Simone Eppmann; Patrick Kibies; Franziska Hoffgaard; Jochen Heil; Sascha Menninger; Sandra Ortiz-Cuaran; Johannes M Heuckmann; Verena Tinnefeld; René P Zahedi; Martin L Sos; Carsten Schultz-Fademrecht; Roman K Thomas; Stefan M Kast; Daniel Rauh Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2015-08-31 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Lecia V Sequist; Benjamin Besse; Thomas J Lynch; Vincent A Miller; Kwok K Wong; Barbara Gitlitz; Keith Eaton; Charles Zacharchuk; Amy Freyman; Christine Powell; Revathi Ananthakrishnan; Susan Quinn; Jean-Charles Soria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-05-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Edmund K Bartlett; Kristina D Simmons; Heather Wachtel; Robert E Roses; Douglas L Fraker; Rachel R Kelz; Giorgos C Karakousis Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Annette O Walter; Robert Tjin Tham Sjin; Henry J Haringsma; Kadoaki Ohashi; Jing Sun; Kwangho Lee; Aleksandr Dubrovskiy; Matthew Labenski; Zhendong Zhu; Zhigang Wang; Michael Sheets; Thia St Martin; Russell Karp; Dan van Kalken; Prasoon Chaturvedi; Deqiang Niu; Mariana Nacht; Russell C Petter; William Westlin; Kevin Lin; Sarah Jaw-Tsai; Mitch Raponi; Terry Van Dyke; Jeff Etter; Zoe Weaver; William Pao; Juswinder Singh; Andrew D Simmons; Thomas C Harding; Andrew Allen Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2013-09-24 Impact factor: 39.397
Authors: Michael L Wang; Simon Rule; Peter Martin; Andre Goy; Rebecca Auer; Brad S Kahl; Wojciech Jurczak; Ranjana H Advani; Jorge E Romaguera; Michael E Williams; Jacqueline C Barrientos; Ewa Chmielowska; John Radford; Stephan Stilgenbauer; Martin Dreyling; Wieslaw Wiktor Jedrzejczak; Peter Johnson; Stephen E Spurgeon; Lei Li; Liang Zhang; Kate Newberry; Zhishuo Ou; Nancy Cheng; Bingliang Fang; Jesse McGreivy; Fong Clow; Joseph J Buggy; Betty Y Chang; Darrin M Beaupre; Lori A Kunkel; Kristie A Blum Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245