A selection of compounds from a proprietary library, based on chemical diversity and various biological activities, was evaluated as potential inhibitors of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a phenotypic-based screening assay. A compound based on a 2-phenylquinoline scaffold emerged as the most promising hit, with EC50 and CC50 values of 6 and 18 μM, respectively. The subsequent selection of additional analogues, along with the synthesis of ad hoc derivatives, led to compounds that maintained low μM activity as inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 replication and lacked cytotoxicity at 100 μM. In addition, the most promising congeners also show pronounced antiviral activity against the human coronaviruses HCoV-229E and HCoV-OC43, with EC50 values ranging from 0.2 to 9.4 μM. The presence of a 6,7-dimethoxytetrahydroisoquinoline group at the C-4 position of the 2-phenylquinoline core gave compound 6g that showed potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 helicase (nsp13), a highly conserved enzyme, highlighting a potentiality against emerging HCoVs outbreaks.
A selection of compounds from a proprietary library, based on chemical diversity and various biological activities, was evaluated as potential inhibitors of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a phenotypic-based screening assay. A compound based on a 2-phenylquinoline scaffold emerged as the most promising hit, with EC50 and CC50 values of 6 and 18 μM, respectively. The subsequent selection of additional analogues, along with the synthesis of ad hoc derivatives, led to compounds that maintained low μM activity as inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 replication and lacked cytotoxicity at 100 μM. In addition, the most promising congeners also show pronounced antiviral activity against the human coronaviruses HCoV-229E and HCoV-OC43, with EC50 values ranging from 0.2 to 9.4 μM. The presence of a 6,7-dimethoxytetrahydroisoquinoline group at the C-4 position of the 2-phenylquinoline core gave compound 6g that showed potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 helicase (nsp13), a highly conserved enzyme, highlighting a potentiality against emerging HCoVs outbreaks.
Currently,
the world is in full
pandemic crisis due to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus
2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19. Since its first appearance
in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, SARS-CoV-2 has rapidly spread around
the globe, seriously affecting global health. On March 11, 2020, the
World Health Organization declared the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak as a pandemic
that had affected an estimated 250 million persons and caused more
than 5 million deaths worldwide by January 2022.[1,2]SARS-CoV-2 belongs to the human coronaviruses (HCoVs), which are
a large family of crown-shaped, enveloped, single-stranded, positive-sensed
RNA zoonotic viruses that cause various illnesses ranging from a simple
cold to a severe acute respiratory syndrome. Other members of the
HCoV family include HCoV-229E and HCoV-OC43, causative agents of common
cold, and, two highly pathogenic HCoVs, the Middle East Respiratory
Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
Coronavirus 1 (SARS-CoV-1), both responsible for previous epidemics
and associated with high morbidity, clearly demonstrating the need
for antiviral agents to combat CoV infections. However, the rapid
resolution of these epidemics, in combination with a low worldwide
spread, led to a global under-investment in CoV drug discovery. As
a result, there were no appropriate antiviral drugs available at the
time of the COVID-19 outbreak, which now would have paved the way
for the control of this pandemic.The development of vaccines
is undoubtedly essential to contain
the diffusion of the current virus, and a joint effort never seen
before led to a worldwide vaccination campaign in less than 1 year
after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. The success of this approach in reducing
deaths and hospitalization is increasingly evident. However, vaccines
may be less effective or even ineffective against emerging variants
of SARS-CoV-2. In addition, and most importantly, it is still to be
determined how long this vaccine-induced immunity will last, and at
least one booster vaccination is essential. Therefore, the development
of antiviral drugs targeting SARS-CoV-2 is absolutely necessary. During
the lag time needed to produce a new vaccine, antiviral drugs are
the only weapon to rapidly control viral infections. Moreover, the
development of an antiviral therapy is of paramount importance for
unvaccinated people and for the treatment of viral infections caused
by emerging SARS-CoV-2 strains that evade the vaccine antibody response.
Preferably, new antiviral agents should possess broad-spectrum antiviral
activity against various HCoVs, since this will increase the likelihood
that these drugs will be active against future outbreaks.The
quickest way to find effective COVID-19 treatment options is
the drug repurposing approach, enabling the fast introduction of drugs
into clinical settings.[3] Various molecules,
including many antiviral drugs, have been already evaluated in large
randomized clinical trials,[4] with the first
two drugs receiving marketing approval. The monophosphoramidate
nucleoside prodrug remdesivir, originally developed for Ebola virus
infections, was the first drug that received emergency use authorization
for the treatment of patients with severe manifestations of COVID-19.[5] Another viral RNA polymerase inhibitor, molnupiravir,
originally developed to treat influenza virus infections, has just
received approval for oral use in people who have mild to moderate
COVID-19 and at least one risk factor for developing severe illness.[6]Over the years, our laboratory has worked
extensively on the design
and synthesis of biologically active compounds, resulting in an in-house
library that mainly consists of structurally diverse, small heterocyclic
molecules. Notably, this library is rich in agents with proven activity
against various viruses such as the human immunodeficiency virus,[7] the hepatitis C virus,[8] flaviviruses,[9] human cytomegalovirus,[10] and the influenza virus.[11,12]In this Letter, our efforts toward finding novel anti-SARS-CoV-2
agents, based on a first set of proprietary compounds followed by
ad hoc synthesis, are described. In addition, preliminary mode-of-action
studies were performed in order to elucidate the molecular target
of the identified compounds.
SARS-CoV-2 Screening—Hit Identification
In a
first round of screening, approximately 100 compounds from our internal
library were selected, based on chemical diversity and being endowed
with various biological activities (see list of compounds in Table S1). These were evaluated for their antiviral
activity against SARS-CoV-2, using SARS-CoV-2-infected VeroE6 cells
constitutively expressing an enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP),
allowing for high-content imaging readout of the virus-induced cytopathic
effect.[13] The cytotoxicity of the compounds
in uninfected VeroE6 cells was determined in parallel. GS-441524,[14] the parent nucleoside analogue of remdesivir,
and chloroquine (CQ)[15] were included as
positive controls and reference compounds. From this initial screening,
two structurally related hits were identified (Figure ). The 2-phenylquinolone derivative
WRNA10, originally designed as an HIV-1 TAR RNA binder,[16] showed an EC50 value of 10 μM
and CC50 = 40 μM, while the 2-phenylquinoline
analogue PQQ4O[17] (1a) was
endowed with EC50 and CC50 values of 6 μM
and 18 μM, respectively.
Figure 1
Hits from the primary screening.
Hits from the primary screening.Compound 1a belongs to a large series
of variously
functionalized 2-phenylquinolines (2-PhQs) that have been developed
as S. aureus NorA efflux pump inhibitors, with compounds
that are able to restore very efficiently the ciprofloxacin
antibacterial activity coupled with a good safety profile and metabolic
stability.[17,18]Based on the easier synthetic
feasibility and availability of more
analogues within the proprietary library, the focus was directed toward
hit compound 1a.
Hit Exploration
The two hits that
emerged from this
primary screening shared a very similar quinoline core functionalized
with a 2-phenyl ring. Of note, only one other compound based on 2-PhQ
was initially assayed, the 4-hydroxyquinoline 1(17) (Table ), which was completely inactive, highlighting the
importance of the basic side chain in imparting antiviral activity.
Based on these preliminary insights, a new set of analogues of hit 1a was selected from the in-house library. In parallel, new
congeners were designed and synthesized in order to complete the structure–activity
relationship (SAR) study.
Table 1
Structure, Anti-SARS-CoV-2
Activity,
and Cytotoxicity of 2-PhQs
EC50 = concentration
of compound that gives 50% rescue of the virus-reduced eGFP signals
as compared to the untreated virus-infected control cells.
CC50 = 50% cytotoxic
concentration, as determined by measuring the cell viability with
the colorimetric formazan-based MTS assay. The values represent the
means ± SD of data derived from duplicate experiments.
SI = selectivity index calculated
as the ratio between CC50 and EC50 of each compound.
Ref (17).
Ref (19).
Ref (18).
Ref (20).
Ref (21).
EC50 = concentration
of compound that gives 50% rescue of the virus-reduced eGFP signals
as compared to the untreated virus-infected control cells.CC50 = 50% cytotoxic
concentration, as determined by measuring the cell viability with
the colorimetric formazan-based MTS assay. The values represent the
means ± SD of data derived from duplicate experiments.SI = selectivity index calculated
as the ratio between CC50 and EC50 of each compound.Ref (17).Ref (19).Ref (18).Ref (20).Ref (21).All the quinolines studied,
either available from the library (1b–h, 2a, 3b, 4g, 5a,g,i, 6a,g, 8a,k, 9a,g, 11l, 13a, 14k) or synthesized ad hoc (5f,j, 6f,j,m–o,
7a,j,k, 8j, 9f,j, 10a, 12a) (Table ), were decorated at the C-4
position with various
moieties with different basicity, such as (cyclo)alkylamines
and aromatic amines, but also bulkier substituents such as a dimethoxytetrahydroisoquinoline
or a benzylpiperazine. The moieties were linked to the quinoline
scaffold via an ether linker, mostly represented by an ethoxy linker,
but longer or shorter spacers were also present in a few cases. In
the majority of the derivatives, the quinoline core was decorated
with one or two methoxy groups at various positions. The presence
of a 2-p-propoxyphenyl moiety was characteristic
for all the tested compounds, with the exception of compounds 12a, 13a, and 14k.Compounds 5f,j, 6f,j,m–o, 8j, 9f,j, and 12a (Scheme ) were prepared
by alkylation of mono- and
dimethoxy-2-(4-propoxyphenyl)quinolin-4-ol scaffolds 15–18 and commercial quinoline 19 with appropriate chloroalkylamines, in moderate yields
ranging from 25% to 51%. However, this rather low yield was not due
to competitive N-alkylation, since this was prevented by the presence
of a bulky phenyl ring at the C-2 position.
Scheme 1
Reagents
and conditions: (i) 1-(2-chloroethyl)amines
(for R, see Table ), K2CO3, dry DMF, 80 °C, 4–24
h, 25–51%.
Reagents
and conditions: (i) 1-(2-chloroethyl)amines
(for R, see Table ), K2CO3, dry DMF, 80 °C, 4–24
h, 25–51%.For the synthesis of 5,8-dimethoxy-2-(4-propoxyphenyl)quinoline
derivatives 7a,j,k, the key
intermediate 23 was prepared as shown in Scheme . Acrylate 20(19) was reacted with 2,5-dimethoxyaniline 21 in the presence of catalytic p-TsOH in
dry benzene, affording aminoacrylate 22 that was
heated in a mixture of diphenyl and diphenyl oxide (Dowtherm A) at
240 °C, yielding the 5,8-dimethoxyquinoline 23. The subsequent reaction with various chloroalkylamines
furnished the target compounds 7a,j,k.
Scheme 2
Reagents and conditions: (i) p-TsOH, dry benzene, reflux, 24 h, 22%;
(ii) Dowtherm A, 240 °C, 1.5 h, 52%; (iii) 1-(2-chloroethyl)-amines (for R, see Table ), K2CO3, dry DMF, 80 °C, 4–24 h, 20–38%.
Reagents and conditions: (i) p-TsOH, dry benzene, reflux, 24 h, 22%;
(ii) Dowtherm A, 240 °C, 1.5 h, 52%; (iii) 1-(2-chloroethyl)-amines (for R, see Table ), K2CO3, dry DMF, 80 °C, 4–24 h, 20–38%.The synthesis of the trimethoxy derivative 10a is
depicted in Scheme . Intermediate 26, which was obtained by reacting p-propoxybenzoyl chloride 24 with 3,4,5-trimethoxyaniline 25, was subjected to a Friedel–Crafts acylation with
acetyl chloride and SnCl4 in dry CH2Cl2 to give compound 27. Cyclization of 27 in the presence of t-BuOK in t-BuOH yielded quinoline 28, which was alkylated with
1-(2-chloroethyl)diethylamine to give target compound 10a.
Scheme 3
Reagents and conditions: (i) Et3N, dry THF, 0 °C → rt, 12 h,
98%; (ii) SnCl4, acetyl chloride, dry
CH2Cl2, 0 °C → rt, 24 h, 35%; (iii) t-BuOK, t-BuOH, 90
°C, overnight, 68%, (iv) 1-(2-chloroethyl)diethylamine,
K2CO3, dry DMF, 80 °C, 3 h, 60%.
Reagents and conditions: (i) Et3N, dry THF, 0 °C → rt, 12 h,
98%; (ii) SnCl4, acetyl chloride, dry
CH2Cl2, 0 °C → rt, 24 h, 35%; (iii) t-BuOK, t-BuOH, 90
°C, overnight, 68%, (iv) 1-(2-chloroethyl)diethylamine,
K2CO3, dry DMF, 80 °C, 3 h, 60%.
Antiviral Activity against SARS-CoV-2
Compounds 1–14 were tested as inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2
replication, and the data are reported in Table . Compounds 9j, 6f,g, 5a, 1f, and 9a showed antiviral activity, with EC50 values ranging from
5.9 to 13.0 μM (Figure S1 reports
an example of a microscopic picture of GFP-based phenotypic screening),
without any sign of cytotoxicity, even at the highest tested concentration
of 100 μM. The highest selectivity index (SI) values were observed
for compounds that have a couple of methoxy groups on the quinoline
ring, such as compounds 9j (6,8-dimethoxy) and 6f,g (5,7-dimethoxy). Other derivatives, such
as 8k, 7k, 7a, 8a, 5i, 8j, 10a, and 7j, also showed good antiviral activity (with EC50 values
from 2.6 to 11.3 μM), but they displayed a more pronounced cytotoxicity
for the VeroE6 cells (CC50 = 11.1–89.8 μM).Among the basic side chains in C-4, the piperidine moiety emerged
as the most promising to yield antiviral activity, since compounds 7k and 8k were the most potent in the SARS-CoV-2
antiviral assay. On the other hand, the presence of a benzylpiperazine
moiety, such as in compounds 1f, 5f, 6f. and 9f, had a variable effect on the antiviral
activity, depending on the substitution pattern on the quinoline scaffold,
although all of these analogues lacked cytotoxicity. Any other structural
variation of hit compound 1a was unfruitful. Indeed,
a loss of activity was observed when (i) the ethoxy
spacer was replaced by an amide linker (11l); (ii) the p-propoxy group at the 2-phenyl
ring was removed (12a); or (iii) the p-propoxyphenyl ring was replaced by a 5-chlorothienyl
(13a) or 2-pyridinyl (14k) moiety.Overall, the 2-PhQ scaffold emerged as a privileged structure to
impart SARS-CoV-2 inhibitory activity. A number of structural features
allow us to tune the antiviral activity as well as the cytotoxicity,
such as the p-propoxyphenyl moiety at C-2 of
the quinoline scaffold, the methoxy groups on the quinoline nucleus,
and the O-alkyl basic side chain at C-4.The
2-PhQs with the best profile against SARS-CoV-2 (compounds 1f, 5a,i, 6f,6g, 7a,j,k, 8a,k, and 9a,j) were also tested
against other HCoVs to evaluate potential broad-spectrum anti-coronavirus
activity. An α-coronavirus (HCoV-229E) and another β-coronavirus
(HCoV-OC43), which are both causative agents of a common cold, were
selected. The antiviral activity, as well as their cytotoxicity, was
measured on HEL 299 cells, along with those of CQ and GS-441524, which
were used as positive controls (Table ). Most analogues were active against HCoV-229E and
HCoV-OC43, with EC50 values ranging from 0.2 to 9.4 μM
(for 229E) and from 0.6 to 7.7 μM (for OC43). In general, the
2-PhQs are more active on these two viruses than on SARS-CoV-2, with
the exception of compounds 1f and 9j. Compounds 8k, 5i, 7j, and 7a were
more active (EC50 = 0.2–0.7 μM) than CQ (EC50 = 1.3 μM) and GS-441524 (EC50 = 0.9 μM)
against 229E, with compound 8k emerging as the most potent,
analogously to what is observed for SARS-CoV-2, even if endowed with
some cytotoxicity. Most of the 2-PhQs were more cytotoxic in HEL 299
cells when compared to VeroE6 cells. However, their improved antiviral
activity still yields favorable SI values.
Table 2
Antiviral
Activity against HCoV-229E
and HCoV-OC43 and Cytotoxicity on HEL 299 Cells of Selected 2-PhQs
compd
HEL 299 cells CC50a (μM)
HCoV-229E EC50b (μM)
SIc
HCoV-OC43 EC50b (μM)
SIc
1f
>100
61.3 ± 32.2
>1.6
92.3 ± 11.0
>1.2
5a
10.4 ± 0.8
1.3 ± 0.9
8.2
0.6 ± 0.1
17.0
5i
8.0 ± 1.3
0.3 ± 0.05
25.6
1.7 ± 0.2
4.7
6g
26.7 ± 4.1
2.9 ± 0.05
9.1
1.5 ± 0.1
18.0
6f
35.6 ± 0.2
2.2 ± 0.7
16.4
1.9 ± 0.2
18.6
7a
9.9 ± 0.8
0.7 ± 0.3
13.8
2.0 ± 0.2
5.1
7j
8.7 ± 0.8
0.6 ± 0.3
13.4
1.8 ± 0.7
4.7
7k
95.3 ± 3.3
9.4 ± 3.6
10.2
7.7 ± 3.3
12.5
8a
9.2 ± 0.1
1.8 ± 0.4
5.2
1.9 ± 0.4
4.9
8k
12.3 ± 1.1
0.2 ± 0.2
52.4
1.6 ± 0.2
7.9
9a
43.5 ± 5.6
3.5 ± 2.7
12.4
2.2 ± 0.5
19.8
9j
>100
40.0 ± 20.8
>2.5
22.7 ± 2.8
>4.4
chloroquine
33.6 ± 1.3
1.3 ± 0.1
25.1
<0.8
>40.8
GS-441524
>100
0.9 ± 0.1
>112.4
1.3 ± 0.07
>80.0
CC50 = 50% cytotoxic
concentration, as determined by measuring the cell viability with
the colorimetric formazan-based MTS assay.
EC50 = Effective concentration
producing 50% inhibition of virus-induced cytopathic effect, as determined
by measuring the cell viability with the colorimetric formazan-based
MTS assay. The values represent the means ± SD of data derived
from duplicate experiments.
SI = Selectivity index calculated
as the ratio between CC50 and EC50.
CC50 = 50% cytotoxic
concentration, as determined by measuring the cell viability with
the colorimetric formazan-based MTS assay.EC50 = Effective concentration
producing 50% inhibition of virus-induced cytopathic effect, as determined
by measuring the cell viability with the colorimetric formazan-based
MTS assay. The values represent the means ± SD of data derived
from duplicate experiments.SI = Selectivity index calculated
as the ratio between CC50 and EC50.Overall, the 2-PhQs are a promising
compound class with pan-anti-CoV
activity.
Mode of Action Study
To date, no quinoline derivatives
functionalized with a phenyl ring at C-2 have been reported as possessing
anti-CoV activity.[22] However, other quinoline
analogues endowed with a plethora of pharmacological activities, including
antiviral properties,[23] such as the anti-malarial
drugs CQ and hydroxychloroquine, display pronounced in vitro
activity against SARS-CoV-1, MERS, and SARS-CoV-2.[24] Although their clinical use was revoked for safety issues,[25] more than 90 clinical trials are still in progress
to elucidate their therapeutic value.[4] Among
the several hypotheses that have been put forward to explain their
antiviral mechanism of action,[26,27] inhibition of autophagy
by impairing autophagosome fusion with lysosomes and thereby
stalling the autophagic flux received most attention.[28]Since the 2-PhQs and CQ share the same quinoline
scaffold, a selection of 2-PhQs (5g, 6f,g, and 9g,j) was evaluated for autophagy
inhibition in VeroE6 cells, and compared to CQ (Figure ). Confocal microscopy was used in which
light chain 3-II (LC3-II, a well-known marker of autophagy) was visualized
by immunofluorescence staining, whereas the nuclei were visualized
by fluorescent staining with 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI). Treatment of VeroE6 cells with CQ as positive control led
to a 9-fold increase in the intensity of the cytoplasmic LC3 puncta.
The tested 2-PhQs demonstrated a less pronounced increased intensity
of the cytoplasm of LC3-positive puncta, with compounds 5g and 9g, that are devoid of antiviral activity, that
showed a minimal effect on the autophagy. Overall, these results show
that inhibition of autophagy marginally contributes to the antiviral
activity, suggesting that alternative molecular targets might be responsible
for the antiviral efficacy of the 2-PhQs.
Figure 2
Chloroquine (CQ) treatment
(10 μM for 4 h) of VeroE6 cells
leads to accumulation of light chain 3-II (LC3-II, red) as visualized
by immunofluorescence staining (A, first panel). Treatment with 10
μM of 2-phenylquinolines 9j, 6f, and 6g leads to a similar but less pronounced inhibition of these
fusion events. Untreated control cells are shown in the bottom panel;
LC3-II localization is shown in red, and nuclei were visualized with
DAPI (blue), scale bar 25 μm. High content analysis of the treated
cells allows to measure and quantify the increase in cytoplasmic LC3
puncta (B).
Chloroquine (CQ) treatment
(10 μM for 4 h) of VeroE6 cells
leads to accumulation of light chain 3-II (LC3-II, red) as visualized
by immunofluorescence staining (A, first panel). Treatment with 10
μM of 2-phenylquinolines 9j, 6f, and 6g leads to a similar but less pronounced inhibition of these
fusion events. Untreated control cells are shown in the bottom panel;
LC3-II localization is shown in red, and nuclei were visualized with
DAPI (blue), scale bar 25 μm. High content analysis of the treated
cells allows to measure and quantify the increase in cytoplasmic LC3
puncta (B).Recently, many quinoline and quinazoline
derivatives have been
tested in a cell-based SARS-CoV-2 RdRp reporter system, with a few
quinolines being active.[29] This prompted
us to investigate the most potent 2-PhQs (compounds 6f,g, 7k, and 9j) as potential
SARS-CoV-2 RdRp inhibitors via a fluorescent-based assay, including
non-nucleotide inhibitor F243[30] as a positive
control. All the tested compounds lacked activity against RdRp at
the highest tested concentration of 30 μM (Table ).
Table 3
Inhibitory
Activity of Selected 2-PhQs
against SARS-CoV-2 Non-structural Proteins
helicase
compd
RdRpa IC50 (μM)
unwindingb IC50 (μM)
ATPasec IC50 (μM)
6f
>30 (100%)d
>30 (55%)d
>30 (96%)d
6g
>30 (62%)d
0.42 ± 0.23
>30 (90%)d
7k
>30 (100%)d
1.41 ± 0.64
>30 (100%)d
9j
>30 (100%)d
>30 (57%)d
>30 (100%)d
SSYA10-001
ND
0.046 ± 0.015
>3 (90%)d
F243
53 ± 3
ND
ND
Compound concentration required
to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 RdRp-associated activity by 50%.
Compound concentration required
to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 nsp13 helicase-associated activity by 50%.
Compound concentration required
to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 nsp13 ATPase-associated activity by 50%.
Percentage of control measured
in
the presence of the highest concentration of tested compound.
Compound concentration required
to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 RdRp-associated activity by 50%.Compound concentration required
to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 nsp13 helicase-associated activity by 50%.Compound concentration required
to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 nsp13 ATPase-associated activity by 50%.Percentage of control measured
in
the presence of the highest concentration of tested compound.The same set of compounds was also
evaluated as potential inhibitors
of another validated drug target, the NTPase/helicase (nsp13), using
the triazole-based compound SSYA10-001,[31] known for its inhibitory activity against helicase of SARS-CoV-1
and MERS-CoV, as reference compound. The SARS-CoV-2 nsp13 helicase
uses the energy derived from the hydrolysis of nucleotides to unwind
the double-stranded nucleic acids in two single strands along the
5′→3′ direction and possesses two associated
activities: RNA unwinding and 5′-triphosphatase (NTPase).[32]While all the compounds were inactive
against the unwinding independent
ATPase activity, compounds 6g and 7k showed
promising activity against the helicase unwinding activity with IC50 values of 0.42 and 1.41 μM, respectively. The other
analogues showed only moderate nsp13 inhibition, reducing the enzymatic
activity by 45% at 30 μM (Table ).Thus, the 2-PhQ scaffold seems to have emerged
as suitable to inhibit
the nsp13 helicase activity, with various potency depending on the
substitution patterns around the quinoline ring.Based on the
results achieved on helicase, to better elucidate
the role of the dimethoxy tetrahydroisoquinoline of the most
potent 6g, a few analogs were designed by removing one
or both of the methoxy groups, as in compounds 6m and 6n, or by reducing the size of the bicycle, giving the dihydroisoindole
derivative 6o. All these structure modifications gave
compounds devoid of any activity on SARS-CoV-2 replication (Table ), confirming 6g as the right combination to impart both antiviral and anti-helicase
activity.In conclusion, screening a proprietary compound library
as potential
inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 replication led to the identification of
the 2-PhQ 1a, displaying an EC50 value of
6 μM and a low SI of 3. The subsequent testing of close analogues,
along with the synthesis of properly designed derivatives, confirmed
the 2-PhQ scaffold as being very suitable to impart anti-SARS-CoV-2
activity. The correct functionalization of the quinoline core with
two methoxy groups coupled with a C-2 p-propoxyphenyl
ring and a suitable basic ethoxy side chain at C-4 yielded derivatives
showing EC50 values ranging from 2.6 to 13 μM and
lacking cytotoxicity (CC50 > 100 μM). Most analogues
were also active against other HCoVs (such as OC43 and 229E) with
low μM activity (0.2–9.4 μM), thus emerging as
pan-CoV inhibitors with the potential to hit also future HCoV outbreaks.Preliminary studies on the mechanism of action revealed that 2-PhQs
were weak inhibitors of the autophagy pathway and were inactive as
RdRp inhibitors; on the other hand, some analogues inhibited the helicase
unwinding activity of nsp13 with low μM potency. Nsp13 helicase
is a very promising target, being highly conserved, with a 99.8% sequence
identity shared between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1, suggesting that
drugs targeting nsp13 will be active against emerging HCoVs outbreaks.
For compounds 6g and 7k, the helicase inhibition
appears to mainly contribute to the antiviral activity, with bis-dimethoxyquinoline
derivative 6g emerging as the most promising.The
synthesis of a few analogues of 6g, compounds 6m–o, gave clear insights on the essential
role of the 6,7-dimethoxytetrahydroisoquinoline moiety
in conferring antiviral activity through the helicase unwinding inhibition.
The co-crystallographic experiments, in progress for 6g, will establish the importance of this group for nsp13 inhibition
and will guide the design of improved 2-PhQ derivatives.
Authors: Sudeep Pushpakom; Francesco Iorio; Patrick A Eyers; K Jane Escott; Shirley Hopper; Andrew Wells; Andrew Doig; Tim Guilliams; Joanna Latimer; Christine McNamee; Alan Norris; Philippe Sanseau; David Cavalla; Munir Pirmohamed Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2018-10-12 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Martin J Vincent; Eric Bergeron; Suzanne Benjannet; Bobbie R Erickson; Pierre E Rollin; Thomas G Ksiazek; Nabil G Seidah; Stuart T Nichol Journal: Virol J Date: 2005-08-22 Impact factor: 4.099
Authors: Anwar M Hashem; Badrah S Alghamdi; Abdullah A Algaissi; Fahad S Alshehri; Abdullah Bukhari; Mohamed A Alfaleh; Ziad A Memish Journal: Travel Med Infect Dis Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 6.211