Umberto M Battisti1, Rocío García-Vázquez1,2, Dennis Svatunek3, Barbara Herrmann3, Andreas Löffler3, Hannes Mikula3, Matthias Manfred Herth1,2. 1. Department of Drug Design and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Jagtvej 160, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Institute of Applied Synthetic Chemistry, Technische Universität Wien (TU Wien), Getreidemarkt 9, 1060 Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
Tetrazines (Tz) have been applied as bioorthogonal agents for various biomedical applications, including pretargeted imaging approaches. In radioimmunoimaging, pretargeting increases the target-to-background ratio while simultaneously reducing the radiation burden. We have recently reported a strategy to directly 18F-label highly reactive tetrazines based on a 3-(3-fluorophenyl)-Tz core structure. Herein, we report a kinetic study on this versatile scaffold. A library of 40 different tetrazines was prepared, fully characterized, and investigated with an emphasis on second-order rate constants for the reaction with trans-cyclooctene (TCO). Our results reveal the effects of various substitution patterns and moreover demonstrate the importance of measuring reactivities in the solvent of interest, as click rates in different solvents do not necessarily correlate well. In particular, we report that tetrazines modified in the 2-position of the phenyl substituent show high intrinsic reactivity toward TCO, which is diminished in aqueous systems by unfavorable solvent effects. The obtained results enable the prediction of the bioorthogonal reactivity and thereby facilitate the development of the next generation of substituted aryltetrazines for in vivo applications.
Tetrazines (Tz) have been applied as bioorthogonal agents for various biomedical applications, including pretargeted imaging approaches. In radioimmunoimaging, pretargeting increases the target-to-background ratio while simultaneously reducing the radiation burden. We have recently reported a strategy to directly 18F-label highly reactive tetrazines based on a 3-(3-fluorophenyl)-Tz core structure. Herein, we report a kinetic study on this versatile scaffold. A library of 40 different tetrazines was prepared, fully characterized, and investigated with an emphasis on second-order rate constants for the reaction with trans-cyclooctene (TCO). Our results reveal the effects of various substitution patterns and moreover demonstrate the importance of measuring reactivities in the solvent of interest, as click rates in different solvents do not necessarily correlate well. In particular, we report that tetrazines modified in the 2-position of the phenyl substituent show high intrinsic reactivity toward TCO, which is diminished in aqueous systems by unfavorable solvent effects. The obtained results enable the prediction of the bioorthogonal reactivity and thereby facilitate the development of the next generation of substituted aryltetrazines for in vivo applications.
Bioorthogonal reactions
are molecular transformations not present
in nature.[1] The term was introduced by
Bertozzi and referred to a chemical reaction that does not interact
or interfere with biological systems and functionalities.[2] In recent years, bioorthogonal reactions have
become increasingly popular, enabling a number of applications in
various fields.[1,3] The common features of these transformations
include fast and efficient reaction at low concentrations in biological
media at physiological pH, high selectivity and no cross-reactivity
with functional groups present in biomolecules, and the formation
of stable ligation products.[1,3] Bioorthogonal reactions
have attracted increasing interest in studying biological processes
due to their unique properties.[3,4] Amongst all bioorthogonal
reactions reported so far, the [4 + 2] cycloaddition of 1,2,4,5-tetrazines
(Tz) and trans-cyclooctenes (TCOs) stands out due
to exceptional reaction kinetics (Figure ).[5,6] This inverse electron-demand
Diels–Alder (IEDDA)-initiated bioorthogonal reaction was shown
to be highly selective and compatible with biological systems, even
enabling its application in vivo.[6] In recent years, tetrazine ligations have been exploited
in biomedical research, in particular for rapid bioconjugation, drug
delivery, molecular imaging, drug-target identification, and radiochemistry.[7] Tetrazine ligations have been extensively used
in pretargeted positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in which
high reaction rate constants are essential due to the very low concentrations
of the radiolabeled compounds in vivo.[7] Several preclinical examples exist demonstrating
the potential of this approach.[8−13]
Figure 1
(A)
Tetrazine ligation mechanism. (B) Compound 1 and
the different substituents employed for the structure–kinetics
relationship on the 3-(3-fluorophenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine core.
(A)
Tetrazine ligation mechanism. (B) Compound 1 and
the different substituents employed for the structure–kinetics
relationship on the 3-(3-fluorophenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine core.Since fluorine-18 (18F) possesses almost
ideal physical
characteristics for molecular imaging, an 18F-labeled Tz
would be ideal for PET applications in a clinical setting.[14−16] However, due to the intrinsic instability of the tetrazine core
to basic conditions typically employed in direct 18F-fluorination
approaches, no 18F-tetrazine was synthesized until a few
years ago.[17−22] Recently, we reported the first direct 18F-labeling of
highly reactive tetrazines, applying copper-mediated oxidative [18F]fluorination.[23] This method
allowed us to develop a hydrophilic, fast-clearing, and highly reactive
bioorthogonal click imaging agent (1, Figure B).[23] 3-(3-Fluorophenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine, the scaffold of compound 1, could be further modified with different moieties to obtain
pretargeting agents with peculiar physicochemical parameters as we
have recently shown.[23] To enable the rational
design of tetrazines, it is, however, important to understand the
relationship of the substitution pattern of Tz derivatives and their
reactivity toward TCOs, which motivated this study (Figure ). In general, it is well known
that electron-withdrawing substituents increase, and electron-donating
groups decrease the reactivity.[24,25] Nevertheless, only
a few systematic studies of the effect of various substituents of
the phenyl ring of Tz derivatives on reaction kinetics have been reported
so far, while most of them focus on the substituents on the Tz itself.[6,26] Consequently, we prepared a library of 40 Tz derivatives with a
set of 16 different phenyl substituents and evaluated the reaction
kinetics of the ligation with TCO both in Dulbecco’s phosphate-buffered
saline (DPBS) and acetonitrile (CH3CN). Based on the obtained
data, we developed a method to predict the IEDDA reactivity of differently
substituted Tzs.
Result and Discussion
Library Design
Sixteen different moieties were chosen
to study the effect of different substituents on the reactivity of
the 3-(3-fluorophenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine core (Figure ) covering a broad set of electron-withdrawing,
electron-donating, and sterically demanding groups. In addition, 4-,
5-, and 6-modified isomers were included in the library to study the
effects of the substitution pattern.
Synthesis
For
the synthesis of tetrazines 2a–c, 3a–c, and 5–10a–c, the required nitriles
were commercially available. Boc-protected nitriles for the synthesis
of Tzs 4a–c were obtained by reacting
the corresponding bromobenzyl compounds with the phthalimide potassium
salt, followed by hydrazine deprotection.[27] The primary amines were then reacted with di-tert-butyl dicarbonate to afford the protected compounds in good overall
yields (Scheme ).
Scheme 1
Synthesis of (Aminomethyl)benzonitrile Derivatives
(a)
Phthalimide potassium salt, N,N-dimethylformamide
(DMF), 9 h, 130 °C;
(b) (i) N2H4·H2O, EtOH, reflux,
and 2 h; (ii) HCl, Et2O, 0 °C, and 1 h; and (c) Boc2O, Et3N, CH3CN, rt, and 12 h.
Synthesis of (Aminomethyl)benzonitrile Derivatives
(a)
Phthalimide potassium salt, N,N-dimethylformamide
(DMF), 9 h, 130 °C;
(b) (i) N2H4·H2O, EtOH, reflux,
and 2 h; (ii) HCl, Et2O, 0 °C, and 1 h; and (c) Boc2O, Et3N, CH3CN, rt, and 12 h.The tert-butyl ester nitriles for
the synthesis
of Tzs 12a–c were obtained from the
corresponding carboxylic acids (Scheme A).[28] Similarly, the primary
amides for Tzs 13a–c and the secondary
amides for Tzs 14a–c were obtained
in yields ranging from 76 to 80% by CDI-mediated activation of the
carboxyl group and reaction with ammonia and methylamine, respectively
(Scheme A). Boc-protection
and acylation of the corresponding aniline yielded the nitriles as
starting materials for the synthesis of Tzs 15a–c and Tzs 16a–c (Scheme B). Finally, the
sulfonamides Tzs 17a–c were prepared
using a modified Sandmeyer procedure followed by a reaction with ammonia
(Scheme B).[29]
Scheme 2
(A) Synthesis of tert-Butyl
Ester and Amide Derivatives.
(B) Synthesis of Boc-Protected Aniline, Acetamide, and Sulfonamide
Derivatives
(a) tBuOH, 4-dimethylaminopyridine
(DMAP), Boc2O, tetrahydrofuran (THF), rt, and 12 h; (b)
NH3 (35% in H2O) or CH3NH2 (40% in H2O), CDI, CH3CN, rt, and 2 h; (c)
Boc2O, Et3N, CH2Cl2, rt,
and 12 h; (d) Ac2O, CH2Cl2, rt, and
24 h; (e) (i) HCl, NaNO2, 0 °C to rt, and 2 h; (ii)
SO2, CuCl, AcOH, 0 °C to rt, and 1 h; and (f) NH3, MeOH, CH3CN, 0 °C to rt, and 2 h.
(A) Synthesis of tert-Butyl
Ester and Amide Derivatives.
(B) Synthesis of Boc-Protected Aniline, Acetamide, and Sulfonamide
Derivatives
(a) tBuOH, 4-dimethylaminopyridine
(DMAP), Boc2O, tetrahydrofuran (THF), rt, and 12 h; (b)
NH3 (35% in H2O) or CH3NH2 (40% in H2O), CDI, CH3CN, rt, and 2 h; (c)
Boc2O, Et3N, CH2Cl2, rt,
and 12 h; (d) Ac2O, CH2Cl2, rt, and
24 h; (e) (i) HCl, NaNO2, 0 °C to rt, and 2 h; (ii)
SO2, CuCl, AcOH, 0 °C to rt, and 1 h; and (f) NH3, MeOH, CH3CN, 0 °C to rt, and 2 h.Tetrazines were synthesized using a metal-free synthetic
approach
reported by Qu et al. (Scheme ).[30] 4- and 5-substituted derivatives
were isolated in modest yields using this procedure. 6-Substituted
derivatives were more difficult to prepare. Only 2c and 4c–9c could be obtained, suggesting that
bulky groups at the 6-position might hinder the reaction or generate
highly unstable tetrazines. Deprotection of Tzs 28a–c, 29a, and 29b resulted in Tzs 4a–c, 15a, and 15b in yields ranging from 46 to 97%. Methyl esters 11a and 11b were prepared by acid-catalyzed esterification
of the corresponding carboxylic acids 10a and 10b, respectively, in 85 and 66% yields.
Scheme 3
Synthesis of 3-(3-Fluorophenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine
Derivatives
(a) (i) NH2NH2·H2O, CH2Cl2, S8, EtOH, 50 °C, and 24 h; (ii) NaNO2, AcOH,
0 °C to rt, and 30 min; (b) HCl, dioxane, CH2Cl2, rt, and 2 h; (c) HCl, dioxane, MeOH, rt, and 3 h; and (d)
trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), CH2Cl2, rt, and
2 h.
Synthesis of 3-(3-Fluorophenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine
Derivatives
(a) (i) NH2NH2·H2O, CH2Cl2, S8, EtOH, 50 °C, and 24 h; (ii) NaNO2, AcOH,
0 °C to rt, and 30 min; (b) HCl, dioxane, CH2Cl2, rt, and 2 h; (c) HCl, dioxane, MeOH, rt, and 3 h; and (d)
trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), CH2Cl2, rt, and
2 h.
Reaction Kinetics
Reactivities of
the tetrazines in
the reaction with TCO were determined by pseudo-first-order measurements
in CH3CN at 25 °C and in DPBS at 37 °C by stopped-flow
spectrophotometry.[31] Solutions of TCO in
anhydrous CH3CN and axTCO-PEG4 in DPBS were
employed for the analysis.[31,32] The data obtained are
reported in Table .
Table 1
Second-Order Rate Constants for the
Reaction of Tetrazines with trans-Cyclooctenes Determined
by Stopped-Flow Spectrophotometryd
The corresponding
Tz could not be
obtained or isolated.
The
compound is not soluble in DPBS.
The compound is decomposed in DPBS.
The compound is not soluble in CH3CN.
The corresponding
Tz could not be
obtained or isolated.The
compound is not soluble in DPBS.The compound is decomposed in DPBS.The compound is not soluble in CH3CN.
Reactivity Analysis
Measured rate
constants in aqueous
solution are considerably higher with accelerations of about two orders
of magnitude compared to the aprotic and less polar acetonitrile.
This effect has been observed before and is well known for Diels–Alder
reactions between reactants that are able to form hydrogen bonds.[33−35]Importantly, the rate constants measured in CH3CN show poor correlation to those obtained in DPBS (Figure ). Several of the used tetrazines
change their protonation state between these two solvents. Carboxylic
acids (10a and 10b) are protonated in acetonitrile
but deprotonated in DPBS at pH 7.4. Similarly, phenols can be deprotonated
at this pH. We used the computational method by Shields and co-workers
to estimate the pKa of 8a–c.[36] Our calculations
gave pKa values for 8b and 8c of 11.4 and 14.5, respectively, indicating minimal deprotonation
at pH 7.4. The high pKa of 14.5 of 8c is caused by the intramolecular hydrogen bond that must
be broken to deprotonate this phenol and the unfavored high energy
anion that is formed. In the deprotonated 8c, a strong
repulsion between the negatively charged oxygen and the tetrazine
nitrogen causes the two aromatic rings to break the favorable conjugation
and rotate. The ωB97X-D/def2-TZVPD-SMD (water) calculated dihedral
angle between the two arenes is 0° in the protonated form and
46° in the anion. Tetrazine 8a is assumed to be
partly deprotonated in buffered solution based on a calculated pKa of 7.8. This deprotonation in DPBS leads to
electron donation (in contrast to the electron-withdrawing effect
of the protonated carboxyl group in acetonitrile), thus resulting
in a lower reactivity in aqueous solution. Compounds 4a–c were prepared as HCl salts. Hence, 4a was protonated in acetonitrile but mostly in its neutral state at
pH 7.4. Eliminating tetrazines with different protonation states from
the analysis results in a linear relationship between the second-order
rate constants in acetonitrile and DPBS (R2 = 0.83). The possibility of different protonation states and the
limited correlation highlights the importance of performing kinetic
measurements in aqueous and pH-controlled solutions if data is needed
to estimate the reactivity for bioorthogonal application in biological
systems. Therefore, the following analyses are based on the values
obtained in DPBS.
Figure 2
Correlation between second-order rate constants measured
in DPBS
and CH3CN. Compounds are shown in purple (a-series), green (b-series), and black (c-series), with compounds depicted in red not included in the correlation
due to different protonation states.
Correlation between second-order rate constants measured
in DPBS
and CH3CN. Compounds are shown in purple (a-series), green (b-series), and black (c-series), with compounds depicted in red not included in the correlation
due to different protonation states.The measured second-order rate constants for the reaction of tetrazines
with axTCO-PEG4 in the DPBS range from approximately 20,000
to 130,000 M–1 s–1 for 4-substituted
derivatives, while in the case of 5-substituted compounds, the values
range from 70,000 to 110,000 M–1 s–1. 6-Substituted tetrazines show lower rates in the range of 25,000
to 80,000 M–1 s–1. In most cases,
the 5-substituted derivatives show higher reactivity than the respective
4-substituted isomer, with the 6-substituted compound being the least
reactive one. A notable exception is a-series 8a–c, where 8a shows the lowest reactivity due to
the deprotonated nature of this Tz. Most substituents influence the
electronics of the π-system through resonance. These mesomeric
effects are strongest in the ortho and para positions, which explains
the stronger influence and higher variation in the a-series
(substituent in the para-position to the tetrazine) compared to compounds b (substituents in the meta-position to the tetrazine). The
reactivities of 4-substituted tetrazines correlate well with Hammett
δM parameters (Figure A and Table S2), demonstrating
a main frontier molecular orbital (FMO) control of reactivity.[37] The rate constants measured for 5- and 6-substituted
phenyltetrazines, however, did not correlate well with Hammett constants
(Figure B,C). This
model only considers the influence of one substituent in isolation,
hence not considering the fluorination of the phenyl substituent.
Figure 3
Correlation
between measured second-order rate constants and Hammett
parameters δ for (A) 4-substituted, (B) 5-substituted, and (C)
6-substituted phenyltetrazines. (D) Correlation between the steric
parameter υ and rate constants for 6-substituted phenyltetrazines.[11,37]
Correlation
between measured second-order rate constants and Hammett
parameters δ for (A) 4-substituted, (B) 5-substituted, and (C)
6-substituted phenyltetrazines. (D) Correlation between the steric
parameter υ and rate constants for 6-substituted phenyltetrazines.[11,37]In the case of 6-substituted derivatives,
we have focused on potential
steric effects, which need to be considered. Plotting the rate constants
of these tetrazines against the υ steric parameter shows that
sterically more demanding substituents lead to lower reaction rates
(Figure D and Table S2).[11]From these data, it is evident that simple models, such as the
Hammett equation, are not able to correctly predict the reactivity
of all of these tetrazines. Using density functional theory (DFT),
we investigated the reactivity of 22 tetrazines (2–9a, 2–9b, 2c, and 5–9c), selected out of our library, with trans-cyclooctene
in more detail. Gas-phase ωB97X-D/def2-TZVPD calculated reaction
barriers show no correlation to the logarithm of measured rate constants
(Figure A). While
gas-phase calculations are usually not able to reproduce accurate
barrier heights for reactions in the condensed phase, they often produce
the correct trends and relative reactivities. In addition, they provide
additional information about the reaction when compared to solution-phase
calculations. In our case, for compounds with substituents in the
6-position, the calculated barriers are underestimated by several
kcal/mol compared to 5- and 6-substituted derivatives. The reactivity
of 8a is likely to be overestimated due to the use of
the protonated species in these gas-phase calculations. Including
water solvent effects through the implicit SMD model and using deprotonated 8a, however, leads to a good correlation and a predictive
model for the reactivity of such tetrazines (Figure B).
Figure 4
(A) Correlation between the gas-phase calculated
ΔG‡ values and the natural
logarithm of
the experimental rate constant. (B) Correlation between SMD (water)
calculated ΔG‡ values and
the natural logarithm of the experimental rate constant.
(A) Correlation between the gas-phase calculated
ΔG‡ values and the natural
logarithm of
the experimental rate constant. (B) Correlation between SMD (water)
calculated ΔG‡ values and
the natural logarithm of the experimental rate constant.The discrepancy between calculations in the gas phase and
in solution
reveals two interesting effects. First, the intrinsic (gas phase)
reactivity of 6-substituted derivatives is unexpectedly high compared
to the respective 4- and 5-substituted isomers. One would expect that
a bulky substituent in the ortho-position to the tetrazine leads to
lower IEDDA reactivity due to increased steric demand, but the opposite
seems to be the case. This high intrinsic reactivity is likely based
on a distortion-lowering effect. Due to the substituent, the two aromatic
systems are not coplanar in the reactant, which leads to a reduced
energy penalty when forcing the tetrazine into transition state geometry.
This effect was recently described for 2-pyridyl-substituted tetrazines,
showing that intramolecular repulsion of the lone pairs of two nitrogen
atoms leads to a similar effect.[38] Second,
a strong solvent effect is observed in which the inclusion of a solvent
model lowers the barriers of 6-substituted tetrazines less than those
of 4- and 5-substituted derivatives. In the rate-limiting step (Tz/TCO
Diels–Alder cycloaddition), a polarized transition state is
formed, which can be stabilized through the solvent. More polar solvents
and hydrogen bonds stabilize the transition state better, which leads
to a lowered barrier and the observed acceleration in water compared
to aprotic, less polar solvents. In the case of 6-substituted tetrazines,
the substituent partially blocks solvent access to the polarized part
of the transition state structure, thus leading to less stabilization.
While the average stabilization through the introduction of the SMD
water model for 4- and 5-substituted derivatives is 3.7 kcal/mol (with
a range of 3.4–4.2 kcal/mol), the average stabilization for
6-substituted tetrazines is only 1.8 kcal/mol (ranging from 0.9 to
3.4 kcal/mol). A larger size of the substituent also results in less
solvent access, which leads to the observed correlation between the
second-order rate constants and steric parameters. A more detailed
investigation of these effects is ongoing and will be reported in
due course.For 4-substituted phenyltetrazines, the reactivity
is purely FMO
controlled, as already suspected due to the good correlation with
Hammett constants. Since the reaction is an inverse electron-demand
Diels–Alder cycloaddition, the relevant orbital of the tetrazine
is the LUMO + 1.[24] Plotting ωB97X-D/def2-TZVPD-SMD(water)
LUMO + 1 energies against calculated barriers reveals an excellent
correlation (Figure A). Calculations of orbital energies are therefore sufficient to
estimate the reactivity of these tetrazines. For 5- and 6-substituted
compounds, other effects come into play and FMO interactions are not
indicative for the reactivity (Figure B,C). Therefore, an analysis of the reaction barrier
must be conducted to correctly predict the reactivity.
Figure 5
Correlation between LUMO
+ 1 energies and calculated ΔG‡ for (A) 4-substituted, (B) 5-substituted,
and (C) 6-substituted derivatives.
Correlation between LUMO
+ 1 energies and calculated ΔG‡ for (A) 4-substituted, (B) 5-substituted,
and (C) 6-substituted derivatives.
Conclusions
Overall, our study sheds new light on the key
parameters that affect
the bioorthogonal reactivity of substituted fluorinated aryltetrazines.
Kinetic investigations using a library of synthesized compounds revealed
a substantial difference between the relative reactivities observed
in CH3CN and in DPBS. This discrepancy is higher for ionic
compounds and shows the importance of performing kinetic measurements
in an aqueous solution. Furthermore, the substitution pattern on the
phenyl moiety of the aryltetrazine scaffold plays a crucial role.
In the case of 4-substituted phenyltetrazines, the reactivity is mainly
FMO controlled and can be easily predicted based on Hammett δM parameters. In the case of 5- and 6-substituted phenyltetrazines,
more detailed studies are required. In particular, the reactivities
of 5-substituted analogues can be well explained by DFT studies in
the gas phase, while for the 6-substituted isomers, the solvent needs
to be taken into consideration. Our results indicate that the substituents
at the 6-position prevent the stabilization effect of the solvent
on the polarized transition state resulting in a lower reactivity.
Considering the recent development of radiolabeled 18F-phenyltetrazines
with improved bioorthogonal performance, our findings will aid the
design of next-generation tetrazines for in vivo pretargeting.[12,23,31]
Experimental Section
Chemistry
All reagents and solvents were dried prior
to use according to standard methods. Commercial reagents were used
without further purification. Analytical thin-layer chromatography
(TLC) was performed using silica gel 60 F254 (Merck) with detection
by UV absorption and/or by charring following immersion in a 7% ethanolic
solution of sulfuric acid or KMnO4 solution (1.5 g of KMnO4, 10 g K2CO3, and 1.25 mL 10% NaOH in
200 mL water). Purification of compounds was carried out by column
chromatography on silica gel (40–60 μm, 60 Å) or
employing a CombiFlash NextGen 300 + (Teledyne ISCO). 1H and 13C NMR spectra were recorded on Bruker (400 and
600 MHz instruments), using chloroform-d, methanol-d4, or DMSO-d6 as
a deuterated solvent and with the residual solvent as the internal
reference. For all NMR experiences, the deuterated solvent signal
was used as the internal lock. Chemical shifts are reported in δ
parts per million (ppm). Coupling constants (J values)
are given in Hertz (Hz). Multiplicities of 1H NMR signals
are reported as follows: s, singlet; d, doublet; dd, doublet of doublets;
ddd, doublet of doublets of doublets; dt, doublet of triplets; t,
triplet; q, quartet; m, multiplet; and br, broad signal. NMR spectra
of all compounds are reprocessed in MestReNova software (version 12.0.22023)
from original FID’s files. Mass spectra analysis was performed
using an Agilent 6130A and an Agilent 1200 HPLC.
The compound was obtained following the
literature procedure.[30] 3-Fluoro-4-methylbenzonitrile
(0.54 g, 4.00
mmol), CH2Cl2 (4.00 mmol, 0.256 mL), sulfur
(0.256 g, 1.00 mmol), and ethanol (4.0 mL) were mixed together in
a 20 mL microwave reaction tube. Hydrazine monohydrate (1.6 mL, 32.00
mmol) was added slowly with stirring afterward. The vessel was sealed,
and the reaction mixture was heated to 50 °C for 24 h. Then,
3 mL of CH2Cl2 and sodium nitrite (2.76 g, 40.00
mmol) in 40 mL of H2O were added to the mixture. Excess
acetic acid (14 mL) was then added slowly, during which the solution
turned bright red in color. The reaction mixture was extracted with
CH2Cl2 (3 × 30 mL). The organic phase was
dried over anhydrous MgSO4, filtered, and concentrated
under reduced pressure. The resulting residue was purified by flash
chromatography (95/5 heptane/EtOAc) to yield 0.21 g (28%) of 2a as a red solid. R = 0.4 (heptane/EtAOc
80/20); 1H NMR (400 MHz, chloroform-d)
δ 10.21 (s, 1H), 8.33 (dd, J = 8.0, 1.7 Hz,
1H), 8.27 (dd, J = 10.5, 1.7 Hz, 1H), 7.43 (t, J = 7.8 Hz, 1H), 2.41 (s, 3H); 13C NMR (101 MHz,
Chloroform-d) δ 165.80, 161.82 (d, J = 246.1 Hz), 157.83, 132.50 (d, J = 8.3
Hz), 131.11 (d, J = 8.3 Hz), 130.94 (d, J = 17.4 Hz), 123.78 (d, J = 3.5 Hz), 114.69 (d, J = 25.1 Hz), 14.92 (d, J = 3.4 Hz); MS
(ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 191.1.
The compound was obtained following the
literature
procedure with minor modifications.[27] 2-(Bromomethyl)-3-fluorobenzonitrile
(3.0 g, 14.01 mmol) was dissolved in DMF (20 mL). The phthalimide
potassium salt (2.89 g, 15.41) was added, and the mixture was stirred
for 9 h at 130 °C. After cooling to rt, the mixture was poured
on ice. The solid obtained was filtered off. Ethyl acetate (100 mL)
and water (100 mL) were added, and the organic layer was separated.
The organic phase was washed with water (2 × 50 mL), dried over
MgSO4, filtered, and evaporated to give a light brown solid.
Crystallization from EtOAc afforded 3.30 g (84%) of the desired compound
as a white solid. R = 0.24 (heptane/EtOAc
70/30); 1H NMR (400 MHz, chloroform-d)
δ 7.92–7.86 (m, 2H), 7.81–7.74 (m, 2H), 7.52–7.33
(m, 3H), 4.98 (s, 2H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 167.55, 159.99 (d, J = 252.2
Hz), 134.38, 131.80, 130.99 (d, J = 4.3 Hz), 129.06
(d, J = 14.9 Hz), 128.29 (d, J =
4.0 Hz), 123.64, 119.34 (d, J = 24.9 Hz), 117.27
(d, J = 2.9 Hz), 113.24 (d, J =
9.5 Hz), 35.09 (d, J = 4.6 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 281.1.
The compound was obtained following
the literature procedure
with minor modifications.[27] To a solution
of 4-((1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)methyl)-3-fluorobenzonitrile (3.0
g, 10.70 mmol) in EtOH (5 mL) was added hydrazine hydrate (5 mL).
The reaction mixture was then refluxed for 2 h, and a white precipitate
was formed. The reaction mixture was diluted with NaOH solution (10%,
40 mL) and extracted with EtOAc (3 × 30 mL). The organic portion
was dried over anhydrous Na2SO4, filtered, and
the solvent was evaporated to dryness under reduced pressure. The
crude was solubilized in Et2O, filtered, and treated with
HCl in Et2O (2 mL, 2 M). The solid obtained was filtered
and recrystallized from MeOH to give 1.51 g (76%) of the desired compound
as a yellow solid. 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 8.72 (s, 3H), 7.95 (d, J =
9.9 Hz, 1H), 7.90–7.77 (m, 2H), 4.13 (s, 2H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 160.13
(d, J = 249.5 Hz), 132.78 (d, J =
3.9 Hz), 129.27 (d, J = 3.9 Hz), 127.73 (d, J = 14.8 Hz), 119.87 (d, J = 25.6 Hz),
117.84 (d, J = 3.0 Hz), 113.38 (d, J = 10.3 Hz), 35.87 (d, J = 4.4 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 151.0.
tert-Butyl 4-Cyano-2-fluorobenzylcarbamate
(20a)
(4-Cyano-2-fluorophenyl)methanaminium
chloride (1.5 g, 8.04 mmol) and triethylamine (2.35 mL, 16.87 mmol)
were dissolved in anhydrous CH2Cl2 (40 mL) at
0 ° C. To this stirred solution was added di-tert-butyl dicarbonate (2.10 g, 9.64 mmol), and the reaction mixture
was allowed to warm to room temperature and was stirred for 12 h.
The reaction mixture was evaporated under reduced pressure, and the
residue was redissolved in diethyl ether (50 mL), which was washed
successively with 0.5 M aq. HCl (2 × 25 mL), saturated NaHCO3 (2 × 25 mL), and brine (25 mL). The organic layer was
dried over anhydrous MgSO4, filtered, and evaporated under
reduced pressure to give a white solid. The residue was purified by
flash column chromatography (heptane/EtOAc = 85/15) to afford 1.51
g (75%) of the desired compound as an orange solid. R = 0.24 (heptane/EtOAc 80/20); 1H NMR
(400 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 7.48–7.30
(m, 2H), 7.22 (d, J = 9.4 Hz, 1H), 5.52 (t, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H), 4.29 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 2H),
1.35 (s, 9H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 159.86 (d, J = 249.8 Hz), 155.96, 132.56
(d, J = 14.5 Hz), 130.10 (d, J =
5.0 Hz), 128.18 (d, J = 3.9 Hz), 118.69 (d, J = 25.0 Hz), 117.44 (d, J = 2.9 Hz), 112.10
(d, J = 9.5 Hz), 38.04, 28.21, MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 251.1.
The compound was obtained following the
literature
procedure.[28] 5-Cyano-3-fluorobenzoic acid
(1.09 g, 6.54 mmol) was dissolved in t-BuOH (9 mL)
and THF (3 mL). Boc anhydride (2.90 g, 13.27 mmol) was added, followed
by DMAP (0.24 g, 1.99 mmol). The mixture was stirred at rt under N2 for 12 h. The solvents were removed. The residue was dissolved
in EtOAc (30 mL) and washed with saturated aqueous NaHCO3 (2 × 30 mL) and brine (2 × 30 mL). It was dried over anhydrous
MgSO4 and concentrated under reduced pressure to give 1.42
g (97%) of the desired compound as a white solid. R = 0.32 (heptane/EtOAc 80/20); 1H NMR (400 MHz,
chloroform-d) δ 8.05 (dt, J = 4.2, 1.4 Hz, 1H), 7.93–7.85 (m, 1H), 7.54–7.45 (m,
1H), 1.59 (s, 9H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 162.40 (d, J = 3.0 Hz), 162.07
(d, J = 251.6 Hz), 135.79 (d, J =
7.3 Hz), 129.08 (d, J = 3.5 Hz), 122.49 (d, J = 25.1 Hz), 121.18 (d, J = 22.8 Hz),
116.86 (d, J = 3.0 Hz), 114.01 (d, J = 9.1 Hz), 83.06, 28.01; MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 222.1.
The compound was
obtained from tert-butyl 5-cyano-3-fluorobenzoate
(1.22 g, 5.51 mmol) following the procedure employed for 2a. Purification by flash chromatography (95/5 heptane/EtOAc) afforded
0.25 g (16%) of 12b as a red solid. R = 0.37 (heptane/EtOAc 80/20); 1H NMR (400 MHz,
chloroform-d) δ 10.32 (s, 1H), 9.04 (t, J = 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.50 (ddd, J = 9.0, 2.7,
1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.97 (ddd, J = 8.6, 2.7, 1.4 Hz, 1H),
1.66 (s, 9H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 165.31 (d, J = 3.1 Hz), 163.58 (d, J = 2.9 Hz), 163.05 (d, J = 248.6 Hz),
158.15, 135.70 (d, J = 7.3 Hz), 133.84 (d, J = 8.0 Hz), 124.92 (d, J = 3.1 Hz), 120.87
(d, J = 23.1 Hz), 118.74 (d, J =
24.4 Hz), 82.51, 28.14; MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 291.1.
tert-Butyl
2-Cyano-5-fluorobenzoate (21c)
The compound
was obtained following the literature
procedure.[28] 2-Cyano-4-fluorobenzoic acid
(1.09 g, 6.54 mmol) was dissolved in t-BuOH (9 mL)
and THF (3 mL). Boc anhydride (2.90 g, 13.27 mmol) was added, followed
by DMAP (0.24 g, 1.99 mmol). The mixture was stirred at rt under N2 for 12 h. The solvents were removed. The residue was dissolved
in EtOAc (30 mL) and washed with saturated aqueous NaHCO3 (2 × 30 mL) and brine (2 × 30 mL). It was dried over anhydrous
MgSO4 and concentrated under reduced pressure to give 1.10
g (75%) of the desired compound as a white solid. R = 0.354 (heptane/EtOAc 80/20); 1H NMR (400 MHz,
chloroform-d) δ 8.04 (dd, J = 8.8, 5.5 Hz, 1H), 7.37 (dd, J = 8.1, 2.7 Hz,
1H), 7.28 (ddd, J = 8.8, 7.7, 2.6 Hz, 1H), 1.55 (s,
9H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ
163.95 (d, J = 256.4 Hz), 162.13, 130.53 (d, J = 3.6 Hz), 121.50 (d, J = 25.1 Hz), 119.78
(d, J = 21.2 Hz), 116.46 (d, J =
2.6 Hz), 114.76 (d, J = 9.9 Hz), 83.90; MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 222.1.
2-Fluoro-4-(1,2,4,5-tetrazin-3-yl)benzamide
(13a)
4-Cyano-2-fluorobenzamide (22a)
To a solution
of 4-cyano-2-fluorobenzoic acid (0.99 g, 6.0 mmol) in acetonitrile
(20 mL) was added 1,1′-carbonyldiimidazole (1.46 g, 9.0 mmol).
The mixture was stirred at room temperature for 45 min before the
addition of aqueous ammonium hydroxide solution (35%, 20 mL). The
reaction mixture was stirred for 45 min, and ice-cold water (20 mL)
was added. The precipitate was collected by filtration and dried to
give 0.78 g (79%) of the desired compound as a white solid. R = 0.28 (heptane/EtOAc 30/70); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 8.13–7.92
(m, 2H), 7.86 (s, 0H), 7.84–7.68 (m, 2H); 13C NMR
(101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 164.56, 158.89
(d, J = 251.4 Hz), 131.56 (d, J =
4.0 Hz), 129.60 (d, J = 15.7 Hz), 129.16 (d, J = 4.0 Hz), 120.79 (d, J = 26.7 Hz), 117.68
(d, J = 2.8 Hz), 114.58 (d, J =
10.0 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 165.0.
2-Fluoro-4-(1,2,4,5-tetrazin-3-yl)benzamide
The compound
was obtained from 4-cyano-2-fluorobenzamide (0.78 g, 4.75 mmol) following
the procedure employed for 2a. Purification by flash
chromatography (98/2 CH2Cl2/MeOH) afforded 0.21
g (20%) of 13a as a red solid. R = 0.32 (heptane/EtOAc 30/70); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 10.68 (s, 1H), 8.39 (dd, J = 8.0, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 8.30 (dd, J = 11.1,
1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.97 (s, 1H), 7.93 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 1H),
7.83 (s, 1H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 165.07, 164.84 (d, J = 2.9
Hz), 159.91 (d, J = 250.1 Hz), 158.83, 136.15 (d, J = 8.5 Hz), 131.81 (d, J = 3.4 Hz), 128.25
(d, J = 15.2 Hz), 124.16 (d, J =
3.4 Hz), 115.57 (d, J = 25.4 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 220.0.
3-Fluoro-5-(1,2,4,5-tetrazin-3-yl)benzamide (13b)
5-Cyano-3-fluorobenzamide
(22b)
The compound
was obtained from 5-cyano-3-fluorobenzoic acid (0.99 g, 6.0 mmol)
as reported above for 22a to give 0.77 g (78%) of the
desired compound as a white solid. R =
0.30 (heptane/EtOAc 30/70); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 8.21 (s, 1H), 8.16 (t, J = 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.05 (ddd, J = 8.4, 2.6, 1.3 Hz,
1H), 8.01 (ddd, J = 9.6, 2.5, 1.4 Hz, 1H), 7.78 (s,
1H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 165.12 (d, J = 2.4 Hz), 162.04 (d, J = 247.5 Hz), 138.39 (d, J = 7.3 Hz),
128.11 (d, J = 3.1 Hz), 122.37 (d, J = 25.7 Hz), 120.16 (d, J = 22.9 Hz), 117.69 (d, J = 3.1 Hz), 113.52 (d, J = 9.9 Hz); MS
(ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 165.0.
3-Fluoro-5-(1,2,4,5-tetrazin-3-yl)benzamide
The compound
was obtained from 5-cyano-3-fluorobenzamide (0.75 g, 4.57 mmol) following
the procedure employed for 2a. Purification by flash
chromatography (98/2 CH2Cl2/MeOH) afforded 0.36
g (36%) of 13b as a red solid. R = 0.31 (heptane/EtOAc 30/70); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 10.69 (s, 1H), 8.88 (s, 1H), 8.48–8.20
(m, 2H), 8.16–7.92 (m, 1H), 7.71 (s, 1H); 13C NMR
(101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 166.08 (d, J = 2.3 Hz), 164.94 (d, J = 3.3 Hz), 162.85
(d, J = 245.6 Hz), 158.89, 138.32 (d, J = 6.9 Hz), 134.93 (d, J = 8.2 Hz), 123.56 (d, J = 2.9 Hz), 118.85 (d, J = 23.0 Hz), 117.31
(d, J = 24.1 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 220.0.
2-Cyano-4-fluorobenzamide
(22c)
To a solution
of 2-cyano-4-fluorobenzoic acid (0.99 g, 6.0 mmol) in acetonitrile
(20 mL) was added 1,1′-carbonyldiimidazole (1.46 g, 9.0 mmol).
The mixture was stirred at room temperature for 45 min before the
addition of aqueous ammonium hydroxide solution (35%, 20 mL). The
reaction mixture was stirred for 45 min, and ice-cold water (20 mL)
was added. The precipitate was collected by filtration and dried to
give 0.71 g (71%) of the desired compound as a white solid. R = 0.18 (heptane/EtOAc 40/60); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 10.47
(s, 1H), 9.67 (s, 1H), 8.79–7.87 (m, 2H), 7.50 (s, 1H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
172.27 (d, J = 20.8 Hz), 165.44 (d, J = 249.8 Hz), 163.41 (d, J = 9.7 Hz), 136.63, 129.38,
125.29 (d, J = 9.8 Hz), 119.66 (d, J = 23.8 Hz), 110.01 (d, J = 25.5 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 165.0.
4-Amino-3-fluorobenzonitrile (1.0 g, 7.34
mmol) was heated at reflux with Boc2O (4.81 g, 22.04 mmol)
and DMAP (0.09 g, 0.73 mmol) in THF (50 mL) overnight. The reaction
mixture was evaporated to dryness in vacuo, and the residue was dissolved
in dichloromethane (50 mL). TFA (1.6 mL) was then added. The mixture
was stirred at room temperature for 3 h. The mixture was made basic
using concentrated aqueous ammonia and then extracted with water (3
× 30 mL). The organic portion was dried over anhydrous Na2SO4, and the solvents were evaporated to dryness
under reduced pressure. The crude was purified by flash chromatography
(90/10 heptane/EtOAc) to give 1.21 g (70%) of the selected compound
as a white solid. R = 0.31 (90/10 heptane/EtOAc); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
9.54 (s, 1H), 7.99 (t, J = 8.3 Hz, 1H), 7.82 (dd, J = 10.9, 1.9 Hz, 1H), 7.67–7.56 (m, 1H), 1.48 (s,
9H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 152.87, 152.36 (d, J = 247.9 Hz), 132.59
(d, J = 11.0 Hz), 129.70 (d, J =
3.5 Hz), 122.96 (d, J = 2.7 Hz), 119.82 (d, J = 23.3 Hz), 118.43 (d, J = 2.6 Hz), 105.64
(d, J = 9.3 Hz), 80.91, 28.38; MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 237.1.
The compound was synthesized as described
in the literature.[29] A portion of glacial
acetic acid (30 mL) was
saturated for 30 min with gaseous sulfur dioxide. To the resulting
solution, cooled on an ice bath, was added under stirring an aqueous
solution of CuCl2 (1.5 g in 10 mL) (suspension A). 4-amino-3-fluorobenzonitrile
(5 g, 36.75 mmol) was dissolved in a mixture of glacial acetic acid
(30 mL) and concentrated HCl (15 mL). To the resulting solution, cooled
in an ice–salt bath (−5 °C), was added dropwise
under stirring an aqueous solution of NaNO2 (3.37 g in
10 mL, 48.88 mmol). At the end of the addition, the resulting solution
was slowly mixed with suspension A. After being stirred for 15 min,
the suspension was poured onto ice. The resulting precipitate was
collected by filtration and washed with water to give 3.09 g (40%)
of the desired compound as a white solid. 1H NMR (400 MHz,
chloroform-d) δ 8.15 (dd, J = 8.2, 6.8 Hz, 1H), 7.90–7.22 (m, 1H); 13C NMR
(101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 158.25 (d, J = 266.7 Hz), 135.53 (d, J = 13.0 Hz),
130.36, 128.61 (d, J = 4.7 Hz), 121.95 (d, J = 23.9 Hz), 120.92 (d, J = 9.4 Hz), 115.43
(d, J = 2.6 Hz).
4-Cyano-2-fluorobenzenesulfonamide
(27a)
To a solution of 4-cyano-2-fluorobenzene-1-sulfonyl
chloride (0.60
g, 2.73 mmol) in CH3CN at 0 °C was added dropwise
a solution of NH3 in MeOH (5.00 mL, 7 M). The reaction
mixture was stirred at rt for 2 h, and then the solvent was removed
under reduced pressure. The residue was solubilized in EtOAc (30 mL)
and washed with water (2 × 30 mL). The organic phase was dried
over Na2SO3, filtered, and concentrated under
reduced pressure to give 0.51 g (93%) of the desired compound as a
white solid. R: 0.38 (heptane/EtOAc 40/60); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
8.12 (dd, J = 10.0, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.03–7.92
(m, 3H), 7.89 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 158.01
(d, J = 255.5 Hz), 136.37 (d, J =
14.7 Hz), 129.94, 129.64 (d, J = 4.3 Hz), 121.76
(d, J = 25.5 Hz), 117.21 (d, J =
2.6 Hz), 116.77 (d, J = 9.8 Hz); MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 201.0.
The compound was obtained from 3-cyano-5-fluorobenzenesulfonamide
(0.49 g, 2.45 mmol) following the procedure employed for 2a. Purification by flash chromatography (98/2 CH2Cl2/MeOH) afforded 0.21 g (37%) of 17b as a red
solid. R = 0.25 (heptane/EtOAc 60/40); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
10.73 (s, 1H), 8.81 (t, J = 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (ddd, J = 9.3, 2.5, 1.4 Hz, 1H), 7.95 (ddd, J = 8.1, 2.5, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.76 (s, 2H); 13C NMR (101 MHz,
DMSO-d6) δ 164.47 (d, J = 2.9 Hz), 162.61 (d, J = 249.5 Hz), 159.00, 147.99
(d, J = 6.8 Hz), 135.87 (d, J =
8.2 Hz), 121.44 (d, J = 3.0 Hz), 118.06 (d, J = 24.2 Hz), 117.10 (d, J = 24.4 Hz);
MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 256.0.
2-Cyano-4-fluorobenzenesulfonamide
2-Cyano-4-fluorobenzene-1-sulfonyl
Chloride (26c)
The compound was obtained from
2-amino-5-fluorobenzonitrile
(5 g, 36.75 mmol) as described above for 26a to give
2.41 (30%) of the desired compound as a white solid. 1H
NMR (400 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 8.15 (dd, J = 8.2, 6.8 Hz, 1H), 7.78–7.69 (m, 2H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, chloroform-d) δ 158.25 (d, J = 266.7 Hz), 135.53 (d, J = 13.0 Hz),
130.36, 128.61 (d, J = 4.7 Hz), 121.95 (d, J = 23.9 Hz), 120.92 (d, J = 9.4 Hz), 115.43
(d, J = 2.6 Hz).
2-Cyano-4-fluorobenzenesulfonamide
(27c)
The compound was obtained from 2-cyano-4-fluorobenzene-1-sulfonyl
chloride (0.60 g, 2.73 mmol) as described above for 27a to give 0.48 g (88%) of the desired compound as a white solid. R = 0.35 (heptane/EtOAc 40/60); 1H NMR (400 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 9.04
(s, 1H), 8.90 (s, 1H), 8.15–7.96 (m, 2H), 7.69 (td, J = 8.6, 2.3 Hz, 1H); 13C NMR (101 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 164.96 (d, J = 250.9
Hz), 159.95, 138.90, 131.53 (d, J = 9.7 Hz), 123.95
(d, J = 9.9 Hz), 121.13 (d, J =
24.1 Hz), 111.22 (d, J = 26.0 Hz), MS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+: 201.0.
Stopped-Flow Kinetic measurements
Stopped-flow measurements
were performed using an SX20-LED stopped-flow spectrophotometer (Applied
Photophysics) equipped with a 535 nm LED (optical pathlength 10 mm,
full width half-maximum 34 nm) to monitor the characteristic tetrazine
visible light absorbance (520–540 nm). Solutions of TCO in
anhydrous CH3CN and axTCO-PEG4 in DPBS were
prepared at an approximate concentration above 2 mM.[32] The exact concentration was determined by absorbance titration
with 3,6-dimethyltetrazine.[39] These initial
stock solutions were diluted before stopped-flow analysis to reach
a final TCO concentration of 2 mM. Stock solutions of tetrazines were
prepared in DMSO at a concentration of 10 mM. Serial dilution into
CH3CN or DPBS (10 mM) was used to prepare solutions for
stopped-flow analysis at a Tz concentration of 100 μM and thus
well below the buffer capacity to avoid any influence of acidic/basic
Tz on the pH of the buffer. The reagent syringes were loaded with
solutions of the Tz and TCO or axTCO-PEG4, and the instrument
was primed. Subsequent data were collected in triplicate to sextuplicate
for each tetrazine. Reactions were conducted at 25 °C (CH3CN) or 37 °C (DPBS) and recorded automatically at the
time of acquisition. Data sets were analyzed by fitting an exponential
decay using Prism 6 (Graphpad) to calculate the observed pseudo-first-order
rate constants that were converted into second-order rate constants
by dividing through the concentration of excess TCO compound.
DFT
Calculations
Density functional theory calculations
were performed in Gaussian 16 Revision A.03. The ωB97X-D functional
was used in combination with the def2-TZVPD basis set.[40] The basis set definition was obtained from the
basis set exchange.[41] Solvent effects were
included using the SMD model. Conformer searches of all stationary
points (starting materials and transition states) were conducted using
CREST, and all obtained conformers were reoptimized using ωB97X-D/def2-TZVPD
with or without solvation.[42] Only the lowest
energy conformers were used for further analysis. Stationary points
were confirmed by having zero (minima) or exactly one (transition
states) imaginary frequency. Free energies were corrected using the
Truhlar quasiharmonic approximation with a cutoff of 100 cm–1 in GoodVibes.[43]pKa calculations were conducted using the method introduced
by Shields and co-workers.[36] Scheme “S7”
was used for the determination of solvation energies. Structures were
optimized using HF/6–31+G(d) with the CPCM solvent models,
and free energies were calculated at the HF/6–31G(d) level
of theory, with or without CPCM solvation to determine the solvation
energy. CBS-QB3 was used to obtain accurate free energies and corrected
using the HF-calculated solvation energies. Equation 8 in the manuscript
by Shields and co-workers was used to estimate the absolute pKa in water.[36]
Authors: Thuy G Le; Abhijit Kundu; Atanu Ghoshal; Nghi H Nguyen; Sarah Preston; Yaqing Jiao; Banfeng Ruan; Lian Xue; Fei Huang; Jennifer Keiser; Andreas Hofmann; Bill C H Chang; Jose Garcia-Bustos; Abdul Jabbar; Timothy N C Wells; Michael J Palmer; Robin B Gasser; Jonathan B Baell Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Jun Zhu; Stephen Li; Carmen Wängler; Björn Wängler; R Bruce Lennox; Ralf Schirrmacher Journal: Chem Commun (Camb) Date: 2015-08-11 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Benjamin P Pritchard; Doaa Altarawy; Brett Didier; Tara D Gibson; Theresa L Windus Journal: J Chem Inf Model Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 4.956
Authors: E Johanna L Stéen; Jesper T Jørgensen; Christoph Denk; Umberto M Battisti; Kamilla Nørregaard; Patricia E Edem; Klas Bratteby; Vladimir Shalgunov; Martin Wilkovitsch; Dennis Svatunek; Christian B M Poulie; Lars Hvass; Marina Simón; Thomas Wanek; Raffaella Rossin; Marc Robillard; Jesper L Kristensen; Hannes Mikula; Andreas Kjaer; Matthias M Herth Journal: ACS Pharmacol Transl Sci Date: 2021-02-16