2005
DOI: 10.1021/jm0504407
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structure−Activity Relationship of Triazafluorenone Derivatives as Potent and Selective mGluR1 Antagonists

Abstract: SAR (structure-activity relationship) studies of triazafluorenone derivatives as potent mGluR1 antagonists are described. The triazafluorenone derivatives are non-amino acid derivatives and noncompetitive mGluR1 antagonists that bind at a putative allosteric recognition site located within the seven-transmembrane domain of the receptor. These triazafluorenone derivatives are potent, selective, and systemically active mGluR1 antagonists. Compound 1n, for example, was a very potent mGluR1 antagonist (IC50 = 3 nM… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
67
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
67
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is a nice example of species differences in the effects of allosteric modulators arising from the fact that the 7TM region of mGlu receptors is less conserved than the orthosteric ligand binding site. Subsequently, several novel negative allosteric mGlu1 receptor modulators (Table 6) were described that in functional in vitro assays had high potencies with IC 50 values in the low nanomolar range: (3,4- (Lavreysen et al, 2004), 6-amino-N-cyclohexyl-N,3-dimethylthiazolo [3,2-a]benzimidazole-2-carboxamide hydrochloride (YM-298198) (Kohara et al, 2005) (Kohara et al, 2007), FTIDC (Suzuki et al, 2007a), 3-cyclohexyl-5-fluoro-6-methyl-7-(2-morpholin-4-ylethoxy)-4H-chromen-4-one (Fukuda et al, 2009) and compounds IX (Micheli et al, 2003) and X (Zheng et al, 2005) in Table 6. A number of additional negative allosteric mGlu1 receptor modulators (not shown in Table 6) have been described; their structures are given in the respective references (Mabire et al, 2005;Micheli et al, 2006;Di Fabio et al, 2007;Owen et al, 2007;Vanejevs et al, 2008;Sasikumar et al, 2009;Satoh et al, 2009).…”
Section: Allosteric Modulators Of the Mglu1 Receptor A Negative Allomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is a nice example of species differences in the effects of allosteric modulators arising from the fact that the 7TM region of mGlu receptors is less conserved than the orthosteric ligand binding site. Subsequently, several novel negative allosteric mGlu1 receptor modulators (Table 6) were described that in functional in vitro assays had high potencies with IC 50 values in the low nanomolar range: (3,4- (Lavreysen et al, 2004), 6-amino-N-cyclohexyl-N,3-dimethylthiazolo [3,2-a]benzimidazole-2-carboxamide hydrochloride (YM-298198) (Kohara et al, 2005) (Kohara et al, 2007), FTIDC (Suzuki et al, 2007a), 3-cyclohexyl-5-fluoro-6-methyl-7-(2-morpholin-4-ylethoxy)-4H-chromen-4-one (Fukuda et al, 2009) and compounds IX (Micheli et al, 2003) and X (Zheng et al, 2005) in Table 6. A number of additional negative allosteric mGlu1 receptor modulators (not shown in Table 6) have been described; their structures are given in the respective references (Mabire et al, 2005;Micheli et al, 2006;Di Fabio et al, 2007;Owen et al, 2007;Vanejevs et al, 2008;Sasikumar et al, 2009;Satoh et al, 2009).…”
Section: Allosteric Modulators Of the Mglu1 Receptor A Negative Allomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The recently reported novel mGluR1 antagonist YM-298198 is thought to be a selective mGluR1 antagonist with oral activity while only potency toward rat, but not human, mGluR1 has been reported previously (Kohara et al, 2005). More recently, a new mGluR1 antagonist, A-841720, has been shown to be systemically active in rodent pain models (Zheng et al, 2005;El-Kouhen et al, 2006). However, the antagonistic activity of the compound toward human mGluR1 is 10-fold less potent than that toward rat mGluR1 and its selectivity between human mGluR1 and mGluR5 is not very high (about 30-fold) comparing other known noncompetitive mGluR1 antagonists.…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The program GOLD (Genetic Optimisation for Ligand Docking) was used for docking the inhibitors into the ATP site of the Pim-1 kinase protein [16]. GOLD is an extensively used docking program used for assessing ligand protein interaction.…”
Section: Molecular Dockingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, there is evidence that the Hsp90 protein is accountable for correct folding and stabilization of the Pim-1 protein [15][16][17][18][19]. The underlying mechanisms have not been investigated and remain to be discovered.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%