Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The stereochemical diversity-oriented conformational restriction strategy can be an efficient method for developing specific ligands for drug target proteins. To develop potent histamine H(3) and/or H(4) receptor ligands, a series of conformationally restricted analogs of histamine with a chiral trans- or cis-4-amino-2,3-methano-1-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)butane structure was designed based on this strategy. These stereochemically diverse compounds were synthesized from previously developed versatile chiral cyclopropane units. Among these analogs, a trans-cyclopropane-type compound, (2S,3R)-4-(4-chlorobenzylamino)-2,3-methano-1-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)butane (5b), has remarkable antagonistic activity to both the H(3) (K(i) = 4.4 nM) and H(4) (K(i) = 5.5 nM) receptors, and a cis-cyclopropane-type compound, (2R,3R)-4-amino-2,3-methano-1-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)butane (6a), is a potent and selective H(3) receptor partial agonist (K(i) = 5.4 nM). Although (2S,3R)-4-amino-2,3-methano-1-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)butane (5a) does not have a hydrophobic group which the usual H(3) receptor antagonists have, it was found to be a potent H(3) receptor antagonist (K(i) = 20.1 nM). Thus, a variety of compounds with different pharmacological properties depending on the cyclopropane backbones and also on the side-chain functional groups were identified. In addition to the previously used 1,2-methanobutane backbone, the 2,3-methanobutane backbone also worked effectively as a cyclopropane-based conformational restriction structure. Therefore, the combination of these two cyclopropane backbones increases the stereochemical and three-dimensional diversity of compounds in this strategy, which can provide a variety of useful compounds with different pharmacological properties.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Watanabe et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: