Mimouna Madaoui1, Dhrubajyoti Datta1, Kelly Wassarman1, Ivan Zlatev1, Martin Egli2, Bruce S Ross3, Muthiah Manoharan1. 1. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, 675 West Kendall Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, United States. 2. Department of Biochemistry, School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37232, United States. 3. Ross Chemistry Consulting, El Granada, California 94018, United States.
Abstract
We report a simple, postsynthetic strategy for synthesis of oligonucleotides containing 2,6-diaminopurine nucleotides and 2-aminoadenine conjugates using 2-fluoro-6-amino-adenosine. The strategy allows introduction of 2,6-diaminopurine and other 2-amino group-containing ligands. The strongly electronegative 2-fluoro deactivates 6-NH2 obviating the need for any protecting group on adenine, and simple aromatic nucleophilic substitution of fluorine makes reaction with aqueous NH3 or R-NH2 feasible at the 2-position.
We report a simple, postsynthetic strategy for synthesis of oligonucleotides containing 2,6-diaminopurine nucleotides and 2-aminoadenine conjugates using 2-fluoro-6-amino-adenosine. The strategy allows introduction of 2,6-diaminopurine and other 2-amino group-containing ligands. The strongly electronegative 2-fluoro deactivates 6-NH2 obviating the need for any protecting group on adenine, and simple aromatic nucleophilic substitution of fluorine makes reaction with aqueous NH3 or R-NH2 feasible at the 2-position.
The 2,6-diaminopurine (DAP)
nucleobase was discovered in S-L2 cyanophage DNA in 1977.[1] DAP can form three hydrogen bonds with thymidine
in DNA (Figure ) and
uridine in RNA,[2−4] enhancing duplex stability by approximately 1–2
°C per modification relative to adenine.[5,6] NMR
and circular dichroism studies showed that a duplex between DNA modified
with DAP and complementary RNA adopts the A-form conformation[7,8] and that the duplex formed between DNA modified with DAP and complementary
DNA adopts the B-form, which transitions to the A-form in high salt.[9,10] Thus, the DAP modification does not significantly alter the conformation
of nucleic acid duplexes.
Figure 1
Three hydrogen bonds between DAP (D) and thymine
as seen in the
crystal structure of [d(CDCGTG)]2 (PDB ID 1VTY).[2]
Three hydrogen bonds between DAP (D) and thymine
as seen in the
crystal structure of [d(CDCGTG)]2 (PDB ID 1VTY).[2]The DAP modification has been studied in the context
of numerous
nucleic acid sugar modifications, including 2′-O-methyl (2′-OMe),[11−13] 2′-O-allyl,[14] and 2′-O-propargyl,[15] as well as in combination with anhydrohexitol,[16,17] threose nucleic acid,[18] locked nucleic
acid (LNA),[13,19,20] unlocked nucleic acid,[21] double headed
dimers,[22] 2′-5′ linked dimers,[23−25] N3′-P5′ linked dimers,[26,27] peptide nucleic
acid,[28] and serinol nucleic acid.[29,30] Generally, DAP building blocks have been obtained from the guanosine
analogue, but yields are low.[3,4,31−34] Synthetic routes have been developed using halogenated purines such
as the 6-chloro-2-aminopurine,[11,13,14,16,17,20,35] 2,6-dicholoropurine,[36−38] and the commercially available 2,6-diaminopurine.[29,39] However, these strategies involve multiple, tedious synthetic steps.
Because of the different reactivities of the two amines, the protection
and deprotection strategies are difficult, and purification can be
a challenge.Starting from the free 2,6-diaminopurine containing
nucleosides,
various protected DAP phosphoramidites have been obtained using homoprotecting
group approaches with benzoyl,[5,19] acetyl,[13] isobutyl,[13] dimethylformamidine,[40] phenoxyacetyl,[11] or
Fmoc.[20,41,40] Again, because
of the different reactivities of the two amines, protection and deprotection
are difficult. Thus, the yields of protected DAP phosphoramidites
are generally low, and deprotection is inefficient.[42] The heteroprotecting group strategy has also been employed,
but synthesis becomes more complicated.[15,39]We previously
reported the use of 2-fluoro-6-amino purines as novel
precursors for DAP,[43,44] but these patent protocols have
not been embraced. This prompted us to revisit this area, and herein
we describe a synthetic route for simple and efficient incorporation
of DAP into oligonucleotides using a postsynthetic strategy. To avoid
oligonucleotide deprotection issues, we used the 2-fluoro-6-amino-adenosine
monomer as the oligonucleotide building block. The combination of
the fluorine inductive effect (−I) and the resonance effect
(+R) of the N6 amino meant that no protecting
group was required during phosphoramidite or solid-support synthesis.
We describe synthesis of 2′-deoxy, 2′-OMe, 2′-fluoro
(2′-F), ribo, and LNA phosphoramidites and solid supports containing
2-fluoro-6-aminopurine (Figure ). A postsynthetic treatment with ammonia yielded the DAP-modified
oligonucleotide or, if an amine functionality was used, a 2-position
conjugate.
Figure 2
2-fluoro-6-aminopurine phosphoramidites and solid supports synthesized.
2-fluoro-6-aminopurine phosphoramidites and solid supports synthesized.Two different synthetic approaches were undertaken
to afford five
different 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine nucleosides depending on the available
starting materials. For 2′-deoxy, 2′-F, and 2′-OMe
analogues, 2,6-diaminopurine nucleosides were used as the starting
material. Following the literature procedure,[45] 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine nucleosides were obtained from 2,6-diaminopurine
(Schemes and 2). Diazotization reactions of the diaminopurines 11, 12, and 14(11) in the presence of 70% HF-pyridine and tert-butyl nitrite afforded the 2-fluoro analogues. Diazotization is
highly selective for the 2-NH2 vs 6-NH2 as demonstrated
earlier.[45,46]
Scheme 1
Synthesis of Phosphoramidites 1–4 and CPGs 6–9
Reaction conditions:
(a) (i)
70% HF-pyridine, tert-butyl nitrite, (ii) DMTrCl,
pyridine for 15 (27%), 16 (66%), and 18 (60%); (b) (i) DMTrCl, pyridine; (ii) AgNO3,
pyridine, TBDMSCl, separation of 3′-isomer for 17 (17%); (c) PClN(Pr)2OCH2CH2CN, DIPEA, NMI, DCM, room temperature, 1 h for 1 (71%), 2 (84%), 3 (89%), and 4 (85%); (d) succinic anhydride, DMAP, DCM, room temperature,
3 h for 19 (71%), 20 (77%), 21 (93%), and 22 (78%); (e) NH2–CPG
(171 μmol/g), HBTU, DIPEA, acetonitrile for 6 (96
μmol/g), 7 (107 μmol/g), 8 (89
μmol/g), and 9 (124 μmol/g). Yields are over
two steps for 15–18.
Scheme 2
Synthesis of Phosphoramidite 5 and CPG 10
Reaction conditions:
(a) (i)
NaOH, MeOH, 1 M HCl, (ii) trifluoroacetic anhydride, liq. NH3, −60 °C; (b) 70% HF/30% pyridine, tert-butyl nitrite for 25 (34% over two steps); (c) PClN(Pr)2OCH2CH2CN, DIPEA, NMI, DCM, room temperature, 1 h for 5 (85%);
(d) succinic anhydride, DMAP, DCM, room temperature, 3 h for 26 (95%); (e) NH2–CPG (171 μmol/g),
HBTU, DIPEA, acetonitrile for 10 (104 μmol/g).
Synthesis of Phosphoramidites 1–4 and CPGs 6–9
Reaction conditions:
(a) (i)
70% HF-pyridine, tert-butyl nitrite, (ii) DMTrCl,
pyridine for 15 (27%), 16 (66%), and 18 (60%); (b) (i) DMTrCl, pyridine; (ii) AgNO3,
pyridine, TBDMSCl, separation of 3′-isomer for 17 (17%); (c) PClN(Pr)2OCH2CH2CN, DIPEA, NMI, DCM, room temperature, 1 h for 1 (71%), 2 (84%), 3 (89%), and 4 (85%); (d) succinic anhydride, DMAP, DCM, room temperature,
3 h for 19 (71%), 20 (77%), 21 (93%), and 22 (78%); (e) NH2–CPG
(171 μmol/g), HBTU, DIPEA, acetonitrile for 6 (96
μmol/g), 7 (107 μmol/g), 8 (89
μmol/g), and 9 (124 μmol/g). Yields are over
two steps for 15–18.
Synthesis of Phosphoramidite 5 and CPG 10
Reaction conditions:
(a) (i)
NaOH, MeOH, 1 M HCl, (ii) trifluoroacetic anhydride, liq. NH3, −60 °C; (b) 70% HF/30% pyridine, tert-butyl nitrite for 25 (34% over two steps); (c) PClN(Pr)2OCH2CH2CN, DIPEA, NMI, DCM, room temperature, 1 h for 5 (85%);
(d) succinic anhydride, DMAP, DCM, room temperature, 3 h for 26 (95%); (e) NH2–CPG (171 μmol/g),
HBTU, DIPEA, acetonitrile for 10 (104 μmol/g).The 5′-OH groups were then protected with
4,4′-dimethoxytriphenylmethyl
chloride (DMTrCl) to afford the 5′-O-DMTr-2-fluoro-6-aminopurines 15, 16, and 18, respectively. Subsequent
phosphitylation reactions of 15, 16, and 18 with 2-cyanoethyl-N,N-diisopropylchlorophosphoramidite
under basic conditions afforded the 2′-deoxy, 2′-F,
and 2′-OMe analogues of 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine phosphoramidites 1, 2, and 4, respectively, in good
yields. The 2′-ribo analogue 13 was synthesized
from the 2,6-diaminopurine ribonucleoside following the literature
procedure.[47] The 5′-OH group of 13 was protected first with DMTr, and then the 2′-OH
group was protected with TBS to afford compound 17. The
3′-O-TBS-protected minor isomer was separated
from the desired product 17 by column chromatography,
and 17 was converted to the corresponding phosphoramidite 3 in good yield. To obtain solid supports on controlled pore
glass (CPG),[48]15–18 were reacted with succinic anhydride in the presence of N,N-dimethylaminopyridine (DMAP) to afford compounds 19–22, respectively. The carboxylic acid
groups of these succinates were coupled with the free amine groups
of the CPG beads under standard coupling conditions.[49,50] Unreacted sites on CPG were then capped with acetic anhydride, and
loading values were calculated for the resulting nucleoside-modified
CPGs 6–9 (Scheme ).For the LNA analogue, commercially
available guanosine nucleoside 23 was converted to corresponding
2,6-diaminopurine compound 24 and used for the next step
without further purification.
Compound 24 was converted to the corresponding 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine
compound 25 via diazotization, followed by fluorination,
with moderate yield over the two steps. Compound 25 was
then converted to the corresponding phosphoramidite 5 and CPG 10 in good yields (Scheme ).To evaluate the efficacy of the
postsynthetic conversion of 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine
to DAP, we synthesized several oligonucleotides containing single
or multiple incorporations using standard solid-phase synthesis methods.
As models, we used previously described small interfering RNA (siRNA)
targeting mouse Ttr,[51] single stranded antisense oligonucleotides called REVERSIRs,[52] and an antagomir targeting miR-122.[53] For oligonucleotide sequences, see Supporting
Information (SI) Tables S1–S4. The
standard ammonia deprotection step at 60 °C for 5 h caused displacement
of 2-fluoro by ammonia and deprotection of the oligonucleotides and
simultaneous cleavage from solid support, yielding the DAP-modified
strands for all oligonucleotides with the exception of the oligonucleotides
modified with the ribo monomer. For the oligonucleotides modified
with the ribo 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine, ammonia treatment at room temperature
followed by Et3N.3HF treatment resulted in 2′-silyl
deprotection without 2-fluoro substitution.To overcome this
problem, a second ammonia treatment for 5 h at
60 °C was attempted; however, the second ammonia treatment led
to degradation of RNA due to base hydrolysis. Therefore, to obtain
the pure ribo-DAP-modified oligonucleotides, oligonucleotides were
first treated with ammonia at 65 °C for 5 h followed by triethylamine
trihydrofluoride treatment to yield the desired oligonucleotides (see
SI Table S3).After purification,
the strands were analyzed and characterized
by ion exchange chromatography and LCMS respectively. The LCMS analyses
of representative strands modified with deoxy-2,6-diaminopurine (ON5), 2′-F-2,6-diaminopurine (ON10), LNA-2,6-diaminopurine
(ON15), 2′-OMe-2,6-diaminopurine (ON21), and mixed 2′-F- and 2′-OMe-2,6-diaminopurine (ON22) demonstrated that 2,6-diaminopurine was present and
that there were no unexpected modifications to other positions (Figure ).
Figure 3
LCMS analysis of purified
oligonucleotides (A) ON5, (B) ON10, (C) ON15, (D) ON21, and (E) ON22 demonstrating
incorporation of 2,6-diaminopurines
with calculated (blue) and observed (green) masses. In bead diagrams
of strands, black and green indicate 2′-OMe and 2′-F
sugar modifications, respectively. Pink, red, gray, and light blue
beads represent deoxy-DAP, 2′-fluoro-DAP, LNA-DAP, and 2′-OMe-DAP,
respectively. Phosphorothioate linkages are indicated by a yellow
vertical line.
LCMS analysis of purified
oligonucleotides (A) ON5, (B) ON10, (C) ON15, (D) ON21, and (E) ON22 demonstrating
incorporation of 2,6-diaminopurines
with calculated (blue) and observed (green) masses. In bead diagrams
of strands, black and green indicate 2′-OMe and 2′-F
sugar modifications, respectively. Pink, red, gray, and light blue
beads represent deoxy-DAP, 2′-fluoro-DAP, LNA-DAP, and 2′-OMe-DAP,
respectively. Phosphorothioate linkages are indicated by a yellow
vertical line.Delivery of RNA molecules to the appropriate tissue
or cell has
been a challenge. However, liver hepatocyte-specific delivery of three
clinically approved siRNAs, givosiran, lumasiran, and inclisiran is
made possible by conjugation to N-acetylgalactosamine
(GalNAc), the ligand for the asialoglycoprotein receptor.[51] In earlier examples, conjugation to lipophilic
molecules like cholesterol and fatty acids resulted in broad tissue
distribution and cellular uptake in liver and central nervous system.[54−57] We have recently demonstrated that siRNAs can be targeted to extrahepatic
tissues using a 2′-O-lipophile-functionalized
nucleoside conjugate.[58] As fluorine is
a good leaving group for the nucleophilic aromatic substitution reaction,
we reasoned that 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine could serve as a site for
postsynthetic conjugation of lipid amines at the 2-position of adenine
of an oligonucleotide on solid support or in solution. To test this,
the 2-fluoro-6-aminopurine monomer was incorporated at the 5′
end or the 3′ end of the Ttr siRNA sense strand
or at position 5 of the Ttr siRNA antisense strand
(see SI Figure S1–S2 and Tables S5 and S6). Hexadecylamine was used as
the ligand (Figure A–C). The CPGs were first heated by microwave for 2 to 3 h.
Due to high loading and the narrow space (500 Å) of the CPG pore
size, 3′-end conjugation needed to be performed at 90 °C.
In contrast, 5′ conjugation was completed in 2 h at 75 °C.
Conjugation at an internal position was also performed at 90 °C.
Figure 4
(A–C)
Schematic of conjugation of hexadecylamine at position
2 of adenosine at (A) the 5′ end, (B) the 3′ end, and
(C) an internal position of the oligonucleotide on solid support.
(D) Schematic of solution-phase conjugation of hexadecylamine at position
2 of adenosine at the 5′ end of an oligonucleotide. Reaction
conditions: (a) 0.1 M hexadecylamine in DMSO/EtOH/H2O (v/v/v,
1:2:1), DIPEA, 90 °C, MW, 2–4 h; (b) 28–30% NH4OH, 60 °C, 5 h; (c) 28–30% NH4OH, room
temperature, 1 h.
(A–C)
Schematic of conjugation of hexadecylamine at position
2 of adenosine at (A) the 5′ end, (B) the 3′ end, and
(C) an internal position of the oligonucleotide on solid support.
(D) Schematic of solution-phase conjugation of hexadecylamine at position
2 of adenosine at the 5′ end of an oligonucleotide. Reaction
conditions: (a) 0.1 M hexadecylamine in DMSO/EtOH/H2O (v/v/v,
1:2:1), DIPEA, 90 °C, MW, 2–4 h; (b) 28–30% NH4OH, 60 °C, 5 h; (c) 28–30% NH4OH, room
temperature, 1 h.Inspired by synthesis of the 2-fluoro derivative
at the N2 position of deoxyguanosine,[59] we developed a solution route to the synthesis
of the 5′-end
conjugate ON62 (Figure D). The oligonucleotide was cleaved from solid support
by treatment with concentrated NH4OH solution for 1 h at
room temperature. Under these conditions, the 2-fluoro substituent
remained intact. Ammonia was evaporated from the solution, and conjugation
with hexadecylamine was performed. More than 80% conjugation was achieved
after 4 h at 75 °C assisted by microwave (Figure , see SI Figure S2 and Table S7).
Figure 5
(A–C) LCMS analysis
of purified (A) 5′-end conjugate ON62, (B) 3′-end
conjugate ON63, and (C)
internal conjugate ON64 obtained after on solid support
conjugation. (D) LCMS analysis of crude reaction of 5′-end
conjugate ON62 obtained by solution-phase conjugation.
Calculated masses are in blue, and observed masses are in green. In
the bead diagrams, black, green, light blue, and pink beads indicate
2′-OMe, 2′-F, 2-(-NHC16H33)-2′-O-methyl-adenosine, and 2-(-NHC16H33)-2′-fluoro-adenosine, respectively.
(A–C) LCMS analysis
of purified (A) 5′-end conjugate ON62, (B) 3′-end
conjugate ON63, and (C)
internal conjugate ON64 obtained after on solid support
conjugation. (D) LCMS analysis of crude reaction of 5′-end
conjugate ON62 obtained by solution-phase conjugation.
Calculated masses are in blue, and observed masses are in green. In
the bead diagrams, black, green, light blue, and pink beads indicate
2′-OMe, 2′-F, 2-(-NHC16H33)-2′-O-methyl-adenosine, and 2-(-NHC16H33)-2′-fluoro-adenosine, respectively.In summary, we have described the synthesis of
2-fluoro-6-aminopurine
nucleoside phosphoramidites and CPG building blocks with five different
sugar modifications (2′-H, 2′-OH, 2′-OMe, 2′-F,
and LNA) and their use in oligonucleotide synthesis. No protecting
groups were required on the 2-fluoro-6-amino-adenosine. Oligonucleotides
containing these monomers were also conjugated to an amine-containing
lipophilic ligand to yield oligonucleotide conjugates at the position
2 of the adenine by the displacement of fluorine. Conjugation was
carried out both on solid support and in solution. Work to use this
conjugation strategy to attach bulky ligands, such as trivalent GalNAc,[51] in the minor groove is in progress. We also
anticipate that strategic placement of conjugate within both sense
strand and antisense strands of siRNAs apart from terminal ends will
be valuable.[60,61] The effect of the DAP modification
on RNAi activity is also under investigation. Based on our previous
work, chemical modifications are tolerated in most of the positions
by the enzymes of the RNAi machinery,[61] and the stabilizing effect of DAP on duplex formation may enhance
siRNA activity in strategic positions. Overall, our methodologies
will enable synthesis of oligonucleotides containing DAP, various
N2-position minor groove conjugates, and other modifications for therapeutic
and diagnostic applications and also for structural studies.
Authors: Kirk M Brown; Jayaprakash K Nair; Maja M Janas; Yesseinia I Anglero-Rodriguez; Lan T H Dang; Haiyan Peng; Christopher S Theile; Elena Castellanos-Rizaldos; Christopher Brown; Donald Foster; Jeffrey Kurz; Jeffrey Allen; Rajanikanth Maganti; Jing Li; Shigeo Matsuda; Matthew Stricos; Tyler Chickering; Michelle Jung; Kelly Wassarman; Jeff Rollins; Lauren Woods; Alex Kelin; Dale C Guenther; Melissa W Mobley; John Petrulis; Robin McDougall; Timothy Racie; Jessica Bombardier; Diana Cha; Saket Agarwal; Lei Johnson; Yongfeng Jiang; Scott Lentini; Jason Gilbert; Tuyen Nguyen; Samantha Chigas; Sarah LeBlanc; Urjana Poreci; Anne Kasper; Arlin B Rogers; Saeho Chong; Wendell Davis; Jessica E Sutherland; Adam Castoreno; Stuart Milstein; Mark K Schlegel; Ivan Zlatev; Klaus Charisse; Mark Keating; Muthiah Manoharan; Kevin Fitzgerald; Jing-Tao Wu; Martin A Maier; Vasant Jadhav Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 68.164
Authors: Mark K Schlegel; Maja M Janas; Yongfeng Jiang; Joseph D Barry; Wendell Davis; Saket Agarwal; Daniel Berman; Christopher R Brown; Adam Castoreno; Sarah LeBlanc; Abigail Liebow; Tara Mayo; Stuart Milstein; Tuyen Nguyen; Svetlana Shulga-Morskaya; Sarah Hyde; Sally Schofield; John Szeto; Lauren Blair Woods; Vedat O Yilmaz; Muthiah Manoharan; Martin Egli; Klaus Charissé; Laura Sepp-Lorenzino; Patrick Haslett; Kevin Fitzgerald; Vasant Jadhav; Martin A Maier Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 19.160