4.7 Article

Evaluation of the Structure-Activity Relationship of Microtubule-Targeting 1,2,4-Triazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidines Identifies New Candidates for Neurodegenerative Tauopathies

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 64, 期 2, 页码 1073-1102

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c01605

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH/NIA [AG061173, AG044332]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Triazolopyrimidines compounds show potential in treating Alzheimer's disease and neurodegenerative tauopathies, with the fragment at C6 playing a critical role in determining MT stability and integrity in cells. A new set of structurally modified analogues has been designed, synthesized, and evaluated, showing improved properties, activity, and pharmacokinetics compared to existing lead compounds.
Studies in tau and A beta plaque transgenic mouse models demonstrated that brain-penetrant microtubule (MT)-stabilizing compounds, including the 1,2,4-triazolo[1,5-a]-pyrimidines, hold promise as candidate treatments for Alzheimer's disease and related neurodegenerative tauopathies. Triazolopyr-imidines have already been investigated as anticancer agents; however, the antimitotic activity of these compounds does not a always correlate with stabilization of MTs in cells. Indeed, previous studies from our laboratories identified a critical role for the fragment linked at C6 in determining whether triazolopyrimidines promote MT stabilization or, conversely, disrupt MT integrity in cells. To further elucidate the structure-activity relationship (SAR) and to identify potentially improved MT stabilizing candidates for neurodegenerative disease, a comprehensive set of 68 triazolopyrimidine congeners bearing structural modifications at C6 and/or C7 was designed, synthesized, and evaluated. These studies expand upon prior understanding of triazolopyrimidine SAR and enabled the identification of novel analogues that, relative to the existing lead, exhibit improved physicochemical properties, MT-stabilizing activity, and pharmacokinetics.

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