As covalent drugs become more
accepted, covalent fragment libraries are becoming more popular: we’ve
previously written about both reversible and irreversible fragments. One
potential limitation is the number of different types of covalent modifiers, or
warheads. The program DOCKovalent, for example, only considers ten classes. György
Keserű and collaborators at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the
University of Ljubljana go some way towards expanding this list in a recent
paper in Arch Pharm Chem Life Sci.
The researchers were interested
in heterocyclic electrophiles. For heterocycles, they considered pyridines,
pyrimidines, pyrazines, imidazoles, pyrazoles, oxazoles, isoxazoles, and
thiazoles. For electrophiles, they considered chloride, bromide, iodide,
nitrile, vinyl, and ethynyl groups, often at different positions around a given
heterocycle. So for example, they chose 2, 3, and 4-chloropyridine. Not every
electrophile was available or easily synthesized for every heterocycle, so in
total they assembled a library of 84 different fragments.
The library was tested for aqueous
stability, and all but six fragments had half-lives of at least 24 hours at pH
7.4. Next, the researchers examined the intrinsic reactivities of their
molecules by reacting them with glutathione, a physiologically relevant thiol.
As might be expected, the different molecules showed a wide range of different reactivities,
all of which are reported in the paper. This is a useful list: ultimately one
wants a warhead with low or modest reactivity for better selectivity.
Next, the researchers tested their
fragments against MurA from Staphylococcus
aureus and Escherichia coli; this
enzyme is important for bacterial cell wall biosynthesis, and contains an
active-site cysteine that has previously been shown to be sensitive to
electrophiles. The reactivity patterns were similar between the two enzymes,
but they did differ somewhat from glutathione reactivity, suggesting the
possibility of molecular recognition. Dose response assays were performed on
the most potent molecules, most of which had IC50 values in the mid
to high micromolar range. These results expand on research we highlighted six years
ago showing that halopyridines could covalently modify a cysteine-dependent
enzyme.
The researchers also examined the
mechanism of their fragments by doing time-dependence and dilution experiments.
Some of the results are quite unexpected, suggesting that, for example,
4-iodopyridine is a reversible modifier, which is hard to understand
mechanistically. Perhaps, like the “universal fragment” 4-bromopyrazole, the
molecule does not act covalently, though the time dependence observed suggests
otherwise.
This is a nice example of how to
create and assess a fragment library with a particular mechanism in mind, reminiscent
of the metal-chelating fragments described by Seth Cohen and colleagues. Finally,
I’d like to note that the first author, Aaron Keeley, is part of the FragNet
training program. He and his fellow trainees will soon be looking for the next
phase in their careers, so if you’re hiring keep them in mind!
No comments:
Post a Comment