| Literature DB >> 34349922 |
James H Hunter1, Matthew J Anderson1, Isaline F S F Castan1, Jessica S Graham1, Catherine L A Salvini1, Harriet A Stanway-Gordon1, James J Crawford2, Andrew Madin3, Garry Pairaudeau4, Michael J Waring1.
Abstract
DNA encoded libraries (Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34349922 PMCID: PMC8278914 DOI: 10.1039/d1sc03007h
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1Structures of headpieces: carboxy-PEG4-hexylamido-DNA 1, carboxy-C14-hexylamidoDNA 2 and amino-C11-hexylamidoDNA 3.
Conditions: 2 (10 nmol), DIPEA (1.2 M) or 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), coupling agent (0.5 M), 30 μl total volume, 16 h; remaining material is starting material except for a14% and b33% of an unidentified side product
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coupling agent | Base | Temp/°C | % Product | |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
| HATU | DIPEA | 20 | 57 | 15 | 45 | — |
| EDC/HOAt | DIPEA | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| DMT-MM | DIPEA | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| HATU | DIPEA | 40 | 90 | 10 | 90 | 10 |
| HATU | Lutidine | 40 | 97 | 92 | 56a | 42b |
Fig. 2Optimisation of temperature, surfactant strength (% TPGS) and base concentration by factorial experimental design, conditions: 2 (10 nmol), 2,6-lutidine, HATU (0.5 M), 30 μl total volume, 16 h; (a) cube plots showing modelled conversions; (b) % conversion responses for each parameter; (c) response surfaces showing the 2-dimensional relationship between conversion and temperature/base concentration. For full results see Table S2.†
Coupling of amino-C11-hexylamidoDNA 3 with a diverse set of acids. Conditions: 3 (5 nmol), acid (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (2 M), HATU (0.5 M), 3.5% TPGS, 30 μl total volume, 45 °C, 16 h
| Acids | % Conversion | % Product | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 100 | 100 |
| 2 |
| 100 | 98 |
| 3 |
| 97 | 94 |
| 4 |
| 93 | 93 |
| 5 |
| 100 | 100 |
| 6 |
| 100 | 98 |
| 7 |
| 100 | 97 |
| 8 |
| 100 | 98 |
| 9 |
| 100 | 97 |
| 10 |
| 100 | 98 |
| 11 |
| 100 | 89 |
| 12 |
| 100 | 100 |
| 13 |
| 94 | 94 |
| 14 |
| 100 | 95 |
| 15 |
| 100 | 100 |
Fig. 3Optimisation of temperature, surfactant strength (% TPGS) and base concentration by factorial experimental design, conditions: 2 (10 nmol), amine (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine, DIC (0.5 M), 30 μl total volume, 3 h; (a) cube plots showing modelled conversions; (b) % conversion responses for each parameter; (c) response surfaces showing the 2-dimensional effect of temperature and surfactant concentration on conversion. Data shown are fitted using a least squares model (r2 = 0.95, RMSE = 12). For full results see Table S6.†
Scope of the coupling conditions optimised by factorial design. Conditions: 2 (5 nmol), amine (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, 30 μl total volume, 45 °C, 3 h. Reactions proceeded to full conversion. Percentage of the by-product shown in parentheses
| Amine | % Conversion | % Product | Amine | % Conversion | % Product | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 100 | 100 | 18 |
| 100 | 100 |
| 2 |
| 100 | 100 | 19 |
| 100 | 95 |
| 3 |
| 100 | 100 | 20 |
| 100 | 86 |
| 4 |
| 100 | 96 | 21 |
| 100 | 85 |
| 5 |
| 100 | 100 | 22 |
| 100 | 58 |
| 6 |
| 100 | 98 | 23 |
| 98 | 84 |
| 7 |
| 100 | 100 | 24 |
| 91 | 86 |
| 8 |
| 100 | 100 | 25 |
| 98 | 94 |
| 9 |
| 100 | 100 | 26 |
| 93 | 93 |
| 10 |
| 100 | 100 | 27 |
| 98 | 98 |
| 11 |
| 100 | 100 | 28 |
| 98 | 98 |
| 12 |
| 100 | 100 | 29 |
| 94 | 94 |
| 13 |
| 100 | 100 | 30 |
| 98 | 97 |
| 14 |
| 100 | 100 | 31 |
| 100 | 87 |
| 15 |
| 100 | 100 | 32 |
| 100 | 95 |
| 16 |
| 100 | 100 | 33 |
| 100 | 35 |
| 17 |
| 100 | 100 | 34 |
| 100 | 58 |
Fig. 4Characterisation of reaction media by negatively stained transmission electron microscopy. (a) 2.5% aqueous TPGS-750-M; (b) 0.1 mM amino-C11-hexylamidoDNA 3 in water; (c) 0.1 mM amino-C11-hexylamidoDNA 3 in 3.5% aqueous TPGS-750-M.
Scheme 1(a) Synthesis of representative encoded compound using 3 cycles of sequential amide couplings. Conditions: (i) glycine ethyl ester (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, (30 μl), 45 °C, 3 h, then 0.25 M LiOH (0.25 M), 1 h, 63% overall yield; (ii) threonine methyl ester (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, (30 μl), 45 °C, 3 h, then LiOH (0.25 M), 1 h, 27% overall yield; (iii) 3-bromopropargylamine (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, (30 μl), 45 °C, 3 h, 75%. (b) Synthesis of representative encoded compound using 3 cycles of sequential amide couplings. Conditions: (i) ligation (primer and BB1 codon), then glycine ethyl ester (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, (30 μl), 45 °C, 3 h, 94% yield for 2 steps; (ii) 0.25 M LiOH (0.25 M), 1 h, 100% yield; (iii) ligation (BB2 codon), then threonine methyl ester (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, (30 μl), 45 °C, 3 h, then LiOH (0.25 M), 1 h, 51% yield for 3 steps; (iv) ligation (BB3 codon and closing primer sequence), then 4-fluoroaniline (0.5 M), 2,6-lutidine (1.5 M), DIC (0.5 M), HOAt (0.5 M), 4.5% TPGS, (30 μl), 45 °C, 3 h, 63% yield for 2 steps. Yields determined by Nanodrop™ spectrophotometry.