Search

We have designed and synthesized several cyclic disulfide-containing peptide analogs of dynorphin A (Dyn A) which are conformationally constrained in the putative "address" segment of the opioid ligand. Several of these Dyn A analogs exhibit unexpected apparent selectivities for the kappa and mu opioid receptors(s) of the central vs peripheral nervous systems. Thus, incorporation of conformational constraint in the putative "address" segment of Dyn A analogs has resulted in the kappa/mu opioid receptor ligands [L-Pen5,Cys11]Dyn A1-11-NH2 (4), [Cys5,Cys10]Dyn A1-11-NH2 (5), [Cys5,Cys9]DynA1-11-NH2 (6), and [Cys4,Cys9,Arg10]DynA1-11-NH2(7). All of these analogs possess high kappa and mu opioid receptor affinities for the central receptor (guinea pig brain), but effect only weak potency at peripheral kappa and mu opioid receptors (GPI). In fact cyclic dynorphin A analog 4 shows > 19,000-fold differences between central kappa opioid affinity and potency in the guinea pig ileum (GPI). Additionally analog 4 is not an antagonist in the GPI, suggesting possible receptor differences between these sites. Substitution of Tyr1 by Phe1 in the cyclic 1-11 series gave the analog [Phe1,Cys5,Cys11]Dyn A1-11-NH2 (1) that was surprisingly potent in the guinea pig brain binding assay (IC50 = 15.1 nM) at the kappa receptor, but was inactive in the GPI and mouse vas deferens bioassays. D-Ala2 and Tic4 analogs of 1 had lower affinity at brain kappa receptors and had very weak potencies in the GPI and MVD bioassays. On the other hand, [Cys6,Cys10]DynA1-11-NH2 (8), [Cys8,D-Cys13]DynA1-13-NH2 (9), [D-Cys8,D-Cys12]DynA1-13-NH2 (10), and [D-Pro10,Cys5,Cys13]-Dyn A1-13-NH2 (11) were surprisingly potent in the GPI bioassay, though considerable apparent selectivity for central receptors is still retained. The apparent lack of correlation between the pharmacological profiles observed in smooth muscle and in the brain binding assays, particularly with 1 and 4, may suggest the existence of different subtypes of the kappa and mu opioid receptors in the brain and peripheral systems.

The conformationally restricted, cyclic disulfide-containing delta opioid receptor selective enkephalin analogue [D-Pen2,D-Pen5]enkephalin (1, DPDPE) was systematically modified topographically by addition of a methyl group at either the pro-S or pro-R position of the beta carbon of an L-Phe4 or D-Phe4 residue to give [(2S,3S)-beta-MePhe4]DPDPE (2), [(2R,3R)-beta-MePhe4]DPDPE (3), [(2S,3R)-beta-MePhe4]DPDPE (4), and [(2R,3S)-beta-MePhe4]DPDPE (5). The four corresponding isomers were prepared in which the beta-methylphenylalanine residue was p-nitro substituted, that is with a beta-methyl-p-nitrophenylalanine (beta-Me-p-NO2Phe) residue, to give [(2S,3S)-beta-Me-p-NO2Phe4]DPDPE (6), [(2R,3R)-beta-Me-p-NO2Phe4]DPDPE (7), [(2S,3R)-beta-Me-p-NO2Phe4] DPDPE (8), and [(2R,3S)-beta-Me-p-NO2Phe4]DPDPE (9), respectively. The potency and selectivity (delta vs mu opioid receptor) were evaluated by radioreceptor binding assays in the rat brain using [3H]CTOP (mu ligand) and [3H]DPDPE (delta ligand) and by bioassay with mouse vas deferens (MVD, delta receptor assay) and guinea pig ileum (GPI, mu receptor assay). The eight analogues of DPDPE showed highly variable binding and bioassay activities particularly at the delta opioid receptor (4 orders of magnitude), but also at the mu opioid receptor, which led to large differences (3 orders of magnitude) in receptor selectivity. For example, [(2S,3S)-beta-MePhe4]DPDPE (2) is 1800-fold selective in binding to the delta vs mu receptor, making it one of the most selective delta opioid receptor ligands in the enkephalin series as assessed by the rat brain binding assay, whereas the corresponding (2R,3R)-beta-Me-p-NO2Phe-containing analogue 9 is only 4.5-fold selective (nonselective) in this same assay. On the other hand, in the bioassay systems, [(2S,3S)-beta-Me-p-NO2Phe4]DPDPE (5) is more potent than DPDPE and 8800-fold selective for the MVD (delta receptor) vs the GPI (mu receptor), making it the most highly selective ligand in this series for the delta opioid receptor on the basis of these bioassays. In these assay systems, the (2R,3S)-beta-MePhe4-containing analogue 5 had very weak potency and virtually no receptor selectivity (4.4-fold). These results demonstrate that topographical modification alone in a conformationally restricted peptide ligand can significantly modulate both potency and receptor selectivity of peptide ligands that have multiple sites of biological activity and suggest that this approach may have general application to peptide ligand design.