Corticotropin releasing factor (CRF) is a 41-peptide amide which stimulates the release of ACTH (Vale et al. Science 1981, 213, 1394). CRF has been postulated to assume an alpha-helical conformation upon binding to its pituitary receptor (Hernandez et al. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36, 2860). We have exploited this hypothesis in the design of a limited series of cyclic analogues and have taken into consideration the effects of side-chain deletion (Alanine scan, Kornreich et al. J. Med. Chem. 1992, 35, 1870) as well as of changes in chirality (Rivier et al. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36, 2851), with the rationale that side chains necessary for binding could also be replaced by side-chain bridges. In particular, we have used computer modeling to predict likely side chain bridging opportunities and evaluated the effects of such replacements by correlating biological results with those derived from CD spectroscopy. We have synthesized 38 monocyclic peptide amides, competitive antagonists of human/rat CRF, using solid-phase methodology on MBHA resin. After purification by preparative RP-HPLC, the peptides were analyzed by RP-HPLC and capillary zone electrophoresis and characterized by mass spectroscopy and amino acid analysis. CRF antagonists were tested for their ability to interfere with CRF-induced release of ACTH by rat anterior pituitary cells. In most cases, one of the bridge heads was located at a position where substitution by a D-residue was tolerated (i.e., positions 12 and 20). It has become clear that careful optimization of bridge length and chirality is critical. This is best exemplified by the fact that out of the 38 analogues that were synthesized and tested, only two, [cyclo(20-23)[DPhe12,Glu20,Lys23, Nle21,38]h/rCRF12-41 and cyclo(20-23)[DPhe12,Glu20,Orn23,Nle21,38] h/rCRF12-41], were found to be more potent (3 and 2 times, respectively) than [DPhe12,Nle21,38]h/rCRF12-41, the parent compound. Six analogues belonging to two different families were found to be half as potent as the standard, 18 had 2-20% of the potency of the standard, and the others were significantly less potent. CD results of all analogues in 50% TFE (a concentration of TFE that induced nearly maximum helicity of [DPhe12,Nle21,38]h/rCRF12-41) suggest that while helicity may be an important factor for CRF analogue recognition, little correlation is found between percent helicity as determined by spectral deconvolution and biological activity in vitro.

In three earlier publications (Miranda et al. J. Med. Chem. 1994, 37, 1450-1459; 1997, 40, 3651-3658; Gulyas et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 10575-10579) we have hypothesized that covalent constraints such as side-chain-to-side-chain lactam rings would stabilize an alpha-helical conformation shown to be important for the recognition and binding of the CRF C-terminus 30 residues, to CRF receptors. These studies led to the discovery of useful CRF antagonists such as alpha-helical CRF (alpha-hel-CRF) and Astressin both in vitro and in vivo. To test the hypothesis that such lactam rings may also be modulating activation of the receptor when introduced at the N-terminus of CRF, we studied the influence of the successive introduction from residues 4 to 14 of a cyclo(i, i+3)[Lysi-Glu(i+3)] and a cyclo(i,i+3)[Glui-Lys(i+3)] bridge on the in vitro potency of the agonist [Ac-Pro4,dPhe12,Nle21,38]hCRF(4-41) and related compounds. We have also introduced the favored cyclo(Glu30-Lys33) substitution found to be remarkable in several families of antagonists (such as Astressin) and in a number of CRF agonists and investigated the role of residues 4-8 on receptor activation using successive deletions. Earlier studies had shown that in both oCRF and alpha-helical CRF, deletion of residues 1-6, 1-7, and 1-8 led to gradual loss of intrinsic activity (IA) (from 50% IA to <10% IA) resulting in alpha-hel-CRF being a potent competitive antagonist. We show that acetylation of the N-terminus of these fragments generally increases potency by a factor of 2-3 with no influence on IA. While cyclo(30-33)[Ac-Leu8,dPhe12,Nle21, Glu30,Lys33,Nle38]hCRF(8-41) (30) is the shortest reported analogue of CRF to be equipotent to CRF (70% IA), the corresponding linear analogue (31) is 120 times less potent (59% IA). Addition of one amino acid at the N-terminus ¿cyclo(30-33)[Ac-Ser7,dPhe12,Nle21, Glu30,Lys33,Nle38]hCRF(7-41) (28)¿ results in a 5-fold increase in agonist potency and full intrinsic activity (113%). The most favored modifications were also introduced in other members of the CRF family including sauvagine (Sau), urotensin (Utn), urocortin (Ucn), and alpha-hel-CRF. Parallel and consistent results were obtained suggesting that the lactam cyclization at residues 29-32 and 30-33 (for the members of the CRF family with 40 and 41 amino acid residues, respectively) will induce (in the shortened agonists) a structural constraint (alpha-helix) that stabilizes a bioactive conformation similar to that shown in the Astressin family of CRF antagonists and that residue 8 (leucine or isoleucine) bears the sole responsibility for activation of the receptor since deletion of that residue leads to potent antagonists (Gulyas et al. Proc. Natl. Acad.Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 10575-10579).

With the ultimate goal of identifying a consensus bioactive conformation of GnRH antagonists, the compatibility of a number of side chain to side chain bridges in bioactive analogues was systematically explored. In an earlier publication, cyclo[Asp(4)-Dpr(10)]GnRH antagonists with high potencies in vitro and in vivo had been identified.(1) Independently from Dutta et al. (2) and based on structural considerations, the cyclic [Glu(5)-Lys(8)] constraint was also found to be tolerated in GnRH antagonists. We describe here a large number of cyclic (4-10) and (5-8) and dicyclic (4-10/5-8) GnRH antagonists optimized for affinity to the rat GnRH receptor and in vivo antiovulatory potency. The most potent monocyclic analogues were cyclo(4-10)[Ac-DNal(1), DFpa(2),DTrp(3),Asp(4),DArg(6),Xaa(10)]GnRH with Xaa = D/LAgl (1, K(i) = 1.3 nM) or Dpr (2, K(i) = 0.36 nM), which completely blocked ovulation in cycling rats after sc administration of 2.5 microgram at noon of proestrus. Much less potent were the closely related analogues with Xaa = Dbu (3, K(i) = 10 nM) or cyclo(4-10)[Ac-DNal(1), DFpa(2),DTrp(3),Glu(4),DArg(6),D/LAgl(10)]GnRH (4, K(i) = 1.3 nM). Cyclo(5-8)[Ac-DNal(1),DCpa(2),DTrp(3),Glu(5),DArg++ +(6),Lys(8), DAla(10)]GnRH (13), although at least 20 times less potent in the AOA than 1 or 2 with similar GnRHR affinity (K(i) = 0.84 nM), was found to be one of the most potent in a series of closely related cyclo(5-8) analogues with different bridge lengths and bridgehead chirality. The very high affinity of cyclo(5,5'-8)[Ac-DNal(1), DCpa(2),DPal(3),Glu(5)(betaAla),DArg(6),(D or L)Agl,(8)DAla(10)]GnRH 14 (K(i) = 0.15 nM) correlates well with its high potency in vivo (full inhibition of ovulation at 25 microgram/rat). Dicyclo(4-10/5-8)[Ac-DNal(1),DCpa(2),DTrp(3),Asp (4),Glu(5),DArg(6), Lys(8),Dpr(10)]GnRH (24, K(i) = 0.32 nM) is one-fourth as potent as 1 or 2, in the AOA; this suggests that the introduction of the (4-10) bridge in 13, while having little effect on affinity, restores functional/conformational features favorable for stability and distribution. To further increase potency of dicyclic antagonists, the size and composition of the (5-8) bridge was varied. For example, the substitution of Xbb(5') by Gly (30, K(i) = 0.16 nM), Sar (31, K(i) = 0.20 nM), Phe (32, K(i) = 0.23 nM), DPhe (33, K(i) = 120 nM), Arg (36, K(i) = 0.20 nM), Nal (37, K(i) = 4.2 nM), His (38, K(i) = 0.10 nM), and Cpa (39, K(i) = 0.23 nM) in cyclo(4-10/5,5'-8)[Ac-DNal(1),DCpa(2),DPal(3),Asp(4),G lu(5)(Xbb(5')), DArg(6),Dbu,(8)Dpr(10)]GnRH yielded several very high affinity analogues that were 10, ca. 10, 4, >200, 1, ca. 4, >2, and 2 times less potent than 1 or 2, respectively. Other scaffolds constrained by disulfide (7, K(i) = 2.4 nM; and 8, K(i) = 450 nM), cyclo[Glu(5)-Aph(8)] (16, K(i) = 20 nM; and 17, K(i) = 0.28 nM), or cyclo[Asp(5)-/Glu(5)-/Asp(5)(Gly(5'))-Amp(8)] (19, K(i) = 1.3 nM; 22, K(i) = 3.3 nM; and 23, K(i) = 3.6 nM) bridges yielded analogues that were less potent in vivo and had a wide range of affinities. The effects on biological...

Careful analysis of the NMR structures of cyclo(4-10)[Ac-Delta(3)Pro(1),DFpa(2),DTrp(3),Asp(4),DNal (6), Dpr(10)]GnRH, dicyclo(4-10/5-8)[Ac-DNal(1),DCpa(2),DTrp(3), Asp(4), Glu(5),DArg(6),Lys(8),Dpr(10)]GnRH, and dicyclo(4-10/5, 5'-8)[Ac-DNal(1),DCpa(2),DPal(3),Asp(4), Glu(5)(Gly),DArg(6),Dbu(8), Dpr(10)]GnRH showed that, in the N-terminal tripeptide, a type II beta-turn around residues 1 and 2 was probable along with a gamma-turn around DTrp(3)/DPal(3). This suggested the possibility of constraining the N-terminus by the introduction of a cyclo(1-3) scaffold. Optimization of ring size and composition led to the discovery of cyclo(1-3)[Ac-DAsp(1),DCpa(2),DLys(3),DNal(6), DAla(10)]GnRH (5, K(i) = 0.82 nM), cyclo(1,1'-3)[Ac-DAsp(1)(Gly), DCpa(2),DOrn(3),DNal(6),DAla(10)]GnRH (13, K(i) = 0.34 nM), cyclo(1, 1'-3)[Ac-DAsp(1)(Gly),DCpa(2),DLys(3),DNal(6),DA la(10)]GnRH (20, K(i) = 0.14 nM), and cyclo(1,1'-3)[Ac-DAsp(1)(betaAla), DCpa(2), DOrn(3),DNal(6),DAla(10)]GnRH (21, K(i) = 0.17 nM), which inhibited ovulation significantly at doses equal to or lower than 25 microgram/rat. These results were particularly unexpected in view of the critical role(s) originally ascribed to the side chains of residues 1 and 3.(1) Other closely related analogues, such as those where the [DAsp(1)(betaAla), DOrn(3)] cycle of 21 was changed to [DOrn(1)(betaAla), DAsp(3)] of cyclo(1,1'-3)[Ac-DOrn(1)(betaAla), DCpa(2),DAsp(3),DNal(6),DAla(10)]GnRH (22, K(i) = 2.2 nM) or where the size of the cycle was conserved and [DAsp(1)(betaAla), DOrn(3)] was replaced by [DGlu(1)(Gly), DOrn(3)] as in cyclo(1, 1'-3)[Ac-DGlu(1)(Gly),DCpa(2),DOrn(3),DNal(6),DA la(10)]GnRH (23, K(i) = 4.2 nM), were approximately 100 and 25 times less potent in vivo, respectively. Analogues with ring sizes of 18 ¿cyclo(1, 1'-3)[Ac-DGlu(1)(Gly),DCpa(2),DLys(3),DNal(6),DA la(10)]GnRH (24)¿ and 19 ¿cyclo(1,1'-3)[Ac-DGlu(1)(betaAla),DCpa(2),DLys( 3),DNal(6), DAla(10)]GnRH (25)¿ atoms were also less potent than 21 with slightly higher K(i) values (1.5 and 2.2 nM, respectively). These results suggested that the N-terminal tripeptide was likely to assume a folded conformation favoring the close proximity of the side chains of residues 1 and 3. The dicyclic analogue dicyclo(1-3/4-10)[Ac-DAsp(1),DCpa(2),DLys(3),Asp (4),DNal(6), Dpr(10)]GnRH (26) was fully active at 500 microgram, with a K(i) value of 1 nM. The in vivo potency of 26 was at least 10-fold less than that of monocyclic cyclo(1-3)[Ac-DAsp(1),DCpa(2),DLys(3),DNal(6), DAla(10)]GnRH (5); this suggested the existence of unfavorable interactions between the now optimized and constrained (1-3) and (4-10) cyclic moieties that must interact as originally hypothesized. Tricyclo(1-3/4-10/5-8)[Ac-DGlu(1),DCpa(2), DLys(3),Asp(4),Glu(5), DNal(6),Lys(8),Dpr(10)] GnRH (27) was inactive at 500 microgram/rat with a corresponding low affinity (K(i) = 4.6 nM) when compared to those of the most potent analogues (K(i) < 0.5 nM).