C-6α and C-7α androstanes were studied to disclose which position among them is more convenient to functionalize to reach superior aromatase inhibition. In the first series, the study of C-6 versus C-7 methyl derivatives led to the very active compound 9 with IC50 of 0.06 μM and Ki = 0.025 μM (competitive inhibition). In the second series, the study of C-6 versus C-7 allyl derivatives led to the best aromatase inhibitor 13 of this work with IC50 of 0.055 μM and Ki = 0.0225 μM (irreversible inhibition). Beyond these findings, it was concluded that position C-6α is better to functionalize than C-7α, except when there is a C-4 substituent simultaneously. In addition, the methyl group was the best substituent, followed by the allyl group and next by the hydroxyl group. To rationalize the structure–activity relationship of the best inhibitor 13, molecular modeling studies were carried out.
C-6α- vs C-7α-Substituted Steroidal Aromatase Inhibitors: Which Is Better? Synthesis, Biochemical Evaluation, Docking Studies, and Structure-Activity Relationships / Roleira, Fmf; Varela, C; Amaral, C; Costa, Sc; Correia-da-Silva, G; Moraca, F; Costa, G; Alcaro, S; Teixeira, Naa; Tavares da Silva, Ej. - In: JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY. - ISSN 1520-4804. - 62:7(2019), pp. 3636-3657. [10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b00157]
C-6α- vs C-7α-Substituted Steroidal Aromatase Inhibitors: Which Is Better? Synthesis, Biochemical Evaluation, Docking Studies, and Structure-Activity Relationships
Moraca F;
2019
Abstract
C-6α and C-7α androstanes were studied to disclose which position among them is more convenient to functionalize to reach superior aromatase inhibition. In the first series, the study of C-6 versus C-7 methyl derivatives led to the very active compound 9 with IC50 of 0.06 μM and Ki = 0.025 μM (competitive inhibition). In the second series, the study of C-6 versus C-7 allyl derivatives led to the best aromatase inhibitor 13 of this work with IC50 of 0.055 μM and Ki = 0.0225 μM (irreversible inhibition). Beyond these findings, it was concluded that position C-6α is better to functionalize than C-7α, except when there is a C-4 substituent simultaneously. In addition, the methyl group was the best substituent, followed by the allyl group and next by the hydroxyl group. To rationalize the structure–activity relationship of the best inhibitor 13, molecular modeling studies were carried out.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
acs.jmedchem.9b00157.pdf
non disponibili
Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipologia:
Documento in Post-print
Licenza:
Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
2.94 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.94 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.