| Literature DB >> 31614517 |
Aaron Tan1, Maria V Babak2, Gopalakrishnan Venkatesan3, Clarissa Lim4, Karl-Norbert Klotz5, Deron Raymond Herr6, Siew Lee Cheong7, Stephanie Federico8, Giampiero Spalluto9, Wei-Yi Ong10, Yu Zong Chen11, Jason Siau Ee Loo12, Giorgia Pastorin13,14.
Abstract
Human A3 adenosine receptor hA3AR has been implicated in gastrointestinal cancer, where its cellular expression has been found increased, thus suggesting its potential as a molecular target for novel anticancer compounds. Observation made in our previous work indicated the importance of the carbonyl group of amide in the indolylpyrimidylpiperazine (IPP) for its human A2A adenosine receptor (hA2AAR) subtype binding selectivity over the other AR subtypes. Taking this observation into account, we structurally modified an indolylpyrimidylpiperazine (IPP) scaffold, 1 (a non-selective adenosine receptors' ligand) into a modified IPP (mIPP) scaffold by switching the position of the carbonyl group, resulting in the formation of both ketone and tertiary amine groups in the new scaffold. Results showed that such modification diminished the A2A activity and instead conferred hA3AR agonistic activity. Among the new mIPP derivatives (3-6), compound 4 showed potential as a hA3AR partial agonist, with an Emax of 30% and EC50 of 2.89 ± 0.55 μM. In the cytotoxicity assays, compound 4 also exhibited higher cytotoxicity against both colorectal and liver cancer cells as compared to normal cells. Overall, this new series of compounds provide a promising starting point for further development of potent and selective hA3AR partial agonists for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancers.Entities:
Keywords: gastrointestinal cancer; hA3AR; indolylpyrimidylpiperazines; partial agonists
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31614517 PMCID: PMC6832257 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24203661
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Experimental binding affinities of indolylpyrimidylpiperazine (IPP) (1) and decarbonyl IPP (2). Modified IPP (mIPP) (3) scaffold was derived upon shifting of carbonyl group to the position next to the indole moiety of IPP.
Figure 2Structure of compound 3 and its derivatives (4–6) bearing substituents on 7th position of the indole ring.
Scheme 1Synthetic scheme for the synthesis of compound 3.
Scheme 2Synthetic scheme for the synthesis of compounds 4 and 5.
Scheme 3Synthetic scheme for the synthesis of compound 6.
Figure 3TGFα shedding assay workflow.
Figure 4TGFα shedding assay results at the hA3AR for compounds 3–6.
Potency (EC50) and Efficacy (Emax) of compounds 3–6 on hA3AR.
| Compound | EC50 (μM) | Emax (%) |
|---|---|---|
|
| Inactive | N.A. |
|
| 2.89 ± 0.55 | 31 |
|
| 13.4 ± 2.96 | 77 |
|
| 33.2 ± 16.50 | 72 |
|
| 0.35 ± 0.03 | 100 |
Figure 5TGFα shedding assay results at the human A2AAR for compounds 3–6.
Figure 6TGFα shedding assay results at the vector-transfected HEK293 cells for compounds 3–6.
Figure 7Concentration-effect curves of compound 4 against HCT-116, Caco-2 and CCD-18Co cell lines.
Cytotoxicity assay results of compound 4 and 2-Cl-IB-MECA against HCT-116, Caco-2 and HepG2.
| IC50 (μM) | ||
|---|---|---|
| 4 | 2-Cl-IB-MECA | |
|
| 84 ± 9 | 21 ± 6 |
|
| 77 ± 10 | 31 ± 4 |
|
| 30 ± 7 | 13 ± 3 |
Figure 8Concentration-effect curve of compound 4 and 2-Cl-IB-MECA for cytotoxicity against the gastrointestinal cancer cell lines.
Figure 9(A) Overlapping docking poses of compound 1 (yellow) and compound 4 (green) in the hA3AR homology model. (B) Overlapping docking poses of compounds 3–6 in the hA3AR homology model. (C) Rotation of Trp2436.48 observed in induced-fit docking of 4, 5 and 6 (grey), absent in 3 (blue).