4.7 Article

Systematic Structure Modifications of Multitarget Prostate Cancer Drug Candidate Galeterone To Produce Novel Androgen Receptor Down-Regulating Agents-as an Approach to Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 56, 期 12, 页码 4880-4898

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jm400048v

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH
  2. NCI [R21 CA11791-01, 1RO1CA129379-01 A2, 5RO1CA129379-02]
  3. Jefferson School of Pharmacy, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.
  4. University of Maryland School of Medicine
  5. Center for Biomolecular Therapeutics (CBT), Baltimore, MD, U.S.
  6. University of Maryland School of Medicine Toxicology Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As part of our program to explore the influence of small structural modifications of our drug candidate 3 beta-(hydroxy)-17-(1H-benzimidazol-1-yl)androsta-5,16-diene (galeterone, 5) on the modulation of the androgen receptor (AR), we have prepared and evaluated a series of novel C-3, C-16, and C-17 analogues. Using structure activity analysis, we established that the benzimidazole moiety at C-17 is essential and optimal and also that hydrophilic and heteroaromatic groups at C-3 enhance both antiproliferative (AP) and AR degrading (ARD) activities. The most potent antiproliferative compounds were 3 beta-(1H-imidazole-1-carboxylate)-17-(1H-benzimidazol-1-yl)androsta-5,16-diene (47), 3-((EZ)-hydroximino)-17-(1H-benzimidazol-1-yl)androsta-4,16-diene (36), and 3 beta-(pyridine-4-carboxylate)-17-(1H-benzimidazol-1-yl)androsta-5,16-diene (43), with GI(50) values of 0.87, 1.91, and 2.57 mu M, respectively. Compared to 5, compound 47 was 4- and 8-fold more potent with respect to AP and ARD activities, respectively. Importantly, we also discovered that our compounds, including 5, 36, 43, and 47, could degrade both full-length and truncated ARs in CWR22rv1 human prostate cancer cells. With these activities, they have potential for development as new drugs for the treatment of all forms of prostate cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据