No abstract

No abstract

Topographically constrained analogues of the highly mu-opioid-receptor-selective antagonist CTAP (H-D-Phe-c[Cys-Tyr-D-Trp-Arg-Thr-Pen]-Thr-NH(2), 1) were prepared by solid-phase peptide synthesis. Replacement of the D-Phe residue with conformationally biased beta-methyl derivatives of phenylalanine or tryptophan (2R,3R; 2R,3S; 2S,3R; 2S,3S) yielded peptides that displayed widely varying types of biological activities. In an effort to correlate the observed biological activities of these analogues with their structures, two-dimensional (1)H NMR and molecular modeling was performed. Unlike the parent (1), which is essentially a pure mu antagonist with weak delta agonist activities in the MVD bioassay, the diastereomeric beta-MePhe(1)-containing peptides exhibited simultaneous delta agonism and mu antagonism by the (2R,3R)-containing isomer 2; mu antagonism by the (2R,3S)-containing isomer 3; weak mu agonism by the (2S,3R)-containing isomer 4; and delta agonism by the (2S,3S)-containing isomer 5. Incorporation of beta-MeTrp isomers into position 1 led to peptides that were mu antagonists (2R,3R), 8; (2R,3S), 9, or essentially inactive (<10%) in the MVD and GPI assays (2S,3R), 10; (2S,3S), 11. Interestingly, in vivo antinociceptive activity was predicted by neither MVD nor GPI bioactivity. When D-Trp was incorporated in position 1, the result (7) is a partial, yet relatively potent mu agonist which also displayed weak delta agonist activity. Molecular modeling based on 2D NMR revealed that low energy conformers of peptides with similar biological activities had similar aromatic pharmacophore orientations and interaromatic distances. Peptides that exhibit mu antagonism have interaromatic distances of 7.0-7.9 A and have their amino terminal aromatic moiety pointing in a direction opposite to the direction that the amino terminus points. Peptides with delta opioid activity displayed an interaromatic distance of <7 A and had their amino terminal aromatic moiety pointing in the same direction as the amino terminus.

A number of alpha-melanotropin (alpha-MSH) analogues have been designed de novo, synthesized, and bioassayed at different melanocortin receptors from frog skin (fMC1R) and mouse/rat (mMC1R, rMC3R, mMC4R, and mMC5R). These ligands were designed from somatostatin by a hybrid approach, which utilizes a modified cyclic structure (H-d-Phe-c[Cys---Cys]-Thr-NH(2)) related to somatostatin analogues (e.g. sandostatin) acting at somatostatin receptors, CTAP which binds specifically to micro opioid receptors, and the core pharmacophore of alpha-MSH (His-Phe-Arg-Trp). Ligands designed were H-d-Phe-c[XXX-YYY-ZZZ-Arg-Trp-AAA]-Thr-NH(2) [XXX and AAA = Cys, d-Cys, Hcy, Pen, d-Pen; YYY = His, His(1'-Me), His(3'-Me); ZZZ = Phe and side chain halogen substituted Phe, d-Phe, d-Nal(1'), and d-Nal(2')]. The compounds showed a wide range of bioactivities at the frog skin MC1R; e.g. H-d-Phe-c[Hcy-His-d-Phe-Arg-Trp-Cys]-Thr-NH(2) (6, EC(50) = 0.30 nM) and H-d-Phe-c[Cys-His-d-Phe-Arg-Trp-d-Cys]-Thr-NH(2) (8, EC(50) = 0.10 nM). In addition, when a lactam bridge was used as in H-d-Phe-c[Asp-His-d-Phe-Arg-Trp-Lys]-Thr-NH(2) (7, EC(50) = 0.10 nM), the analogue obtained is as potent as alpha-MSH in the frog skin MC1R assay. Interestingly, switching the bridge of 6 to give H-d-Phe-c[Cys-His-d-Phe-Arg-Trp-Hcy]-Thr-NH(2) (5, EC(50) = 1000 nM) led to a 3000-fold decrease in agonist activity. An increase in steric size in the side chain of d-Phe(7) reduced the bioactivity significantly. For example, H-d-Phe-c[Cys-His-d-Nal(1')-Arg-Trp-d-Cys]-Thr-NH(2) (24) is 2000-fold less active than 9. On the other hand, H-d-Phe-c[Cys-His-d-Phe(p-I)-Arg-Trp-d-Cys]-Thr-NH(2) (23) lost all agonist activity and became a weak antagonist (IC(50) = 1 x 10(-5) M). Furthermore, the modified CTAP analogues with a d-Trp at position 7 all showed weak antagonist activities (EC(50) = 10(-6) to 10(-7) M). Compounds bioassayed at mouse/rat MCRs displayed intriguing results. Most of them are potent at all four receptors tested (mMC1R, rMC3R, mMC4R, and mMC5R) with poor selectivities. However, two of the ligands, H-d-Phe-c[Cys-His-d-Phe-Arg-Trp-Pen]-Thr-NH(2) (9, EC(50) = 6.9 x 10(-9) M, 6.4 x 10(-8) M, 2.0 x 10(-8) M, and 1.4 x 10(-10) M at mMC1R, rMC3R, mMC4R, and mMC5R, respectively) and H-d-Phe-c[Cys-His(3'-Me)-d-Phe-Arg-Trp-Cys]-Thr-NH(2) (16, EC(50) = 3.5 x 10(-8) M, 3.1 x 10(-8) M, 8.8 x 10(-9) M, and 5.5 x 10(-10) M at mMC1R, rMC3R, mMC4R, and mMC5R, respectively) showed significant selectivities for the mMC5R. Worthy of mention is that neither of these two ligands is potent in the frog skin MC1R assay (EC(50) = 10(-7) M for 9 and EC(50) = 10(-5) M for 16). These results clearly demonstrated that binding behaviors in rodent MCRs are quite different from those in the classical frog skin (R pipiens) assay.