Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Apr 7;13(13):4041-50.
doi: 10.1039/c5ob00184f.

Acyclic cucurbit[n]uril-type molecular containers: influence of glycoluril oligomer length on their function as solubilizing agents

Affiliations

Acyclic cucurbit[n]uril-type molecular containers: influence of glycoluril oligomer length on their function as solubilizing agents

Laura Gilberg et al. Org Biomol Chem. .

Abstract

We present the synthesis of a series of six new glycoluril derived molecular clips and acyclic CB[n]-type molecular containers (1–3) that all feature SO3(−) solubilizing groups but differ in the number of glycoluril rings between the two terminal dialkoxyaromatic sidewalls. We report the X-ray crystal structure of 3b which shows that its dialkoxynaphthalene sidewalls actively define a hydrophobic cavity with high potential to engage in π–π interactions with insoluble aromatic guests. Compounds 1–3 possess very good solubility characteristics (≥38 mM) and undergo only very weak self-association (Ks < 92 M(−1)) in water. The weak self-association is attributed to unfavorable SO3(−)···SO3(−) electrostatic interactions in the putative dimers 12–42. Accordingly, we created phase solubility diagrams to study their ability to act as solubilizing agents for four water insoluble drugs (PBS-1086, camptothecin, β-estradiol, and ziprasidone). We find that the containers 3a and 3b which feature three glycoluril rings between the terminal dialkoxy-o-xylylene and dialkoxynaphthalene sidewalls are less efficient solubilizing agents than 4a and 4b because of their smaller hydrophobic cavities. Containers 1 and 2 behave as molecular clip type receptors and therefore possess the ability to bind to and thereby solubilize aromatic drugs like camptothecin, ziprasidone, and PBS-1086.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Structures of solubilizing molecular containers.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Structures of insoluble drugs used in this study.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Cross eyed stereoviews of the x-ray crystal structures of: a) 1ester, b) 2ester, c) 3b, d) 4b. Color code: C, gray; H, white; N, blue; O, red; S, yellow.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Structures of comparison compounds.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Illustration of the packing of molecules of 3b into linear assemblies along the b-axis. Color code: C, gray; H, white; N, blue; O, red; S, yellow.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Plot of chemical shift versus [2a]. The solid line represents the best global fit of the data to a two-fold self-association model with Ks = 12 M−1. Conditions: 20 mM sodium phosphate buffered D2O, pD 7.4, room temperature. Key: Ha, ■; Hb, ●; Hc, ▲.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Idealized phase solubility diagrams.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Phase solubility diagrams created for: a) 14 with β-estradiol, b) 1b and 4b with camptothecin, and c) 1a, 2, 3, and 4a with camptothecin. Conditions: 20 mM sodium phosphate buffer, room temperature, pD 7.4. Symbols: 1a, ◆; 1b, ◇; 2a, ■; 2b, □; 3a, ▲; 3b, △; 4a, ●; 4b, ○. Data points colored red were not used for linear fitting.
Scheme 1
Scheme 1
Synthesis of new containers 13. Conditions: a) TFA/Ac2O (1:1), 70 °C, 5; b) TFA/Ac2O (1:1), 70 °C, 6; c) TFA, paraformaldehyde, reflux; d) 1CE, MeSO3H, 10°C to 23 °C.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lipinski CA. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2000;44:235–249. - PubMed
    2. Hauss DJ. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2007;59:667–676. - PubMed
    1. Leuner C, Dressman J. Eur J Pharmaceut Biopharmaceut. 2000;50:47–60. - PubMed
    2. Muller RH, Keck CM. J Biotechnol. 2004;113:151–170. - PubMed
    1. Patri AK, Kukowska-Latallo JF, Baker JR. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2005;57:2203–2214. - PubMed
    2. Blagden N, de Matas M, Gavan PT, York P. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2007;59:617–630. - PubMed
    3. Serajuddin ATM. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2007;59:603–616. - PubMed
    4. Stella VJ, Nti-Addae KW. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2007;59:677–694. - PubMed
    1. Okimoto K, Rajewski RA, Uekama K, Jona JA, Stella VJ. Pharm Res. 1996;13:256–264. - PubMed
    2. Rajewski RA, Stella VJ. J Pharm Sci. 1996;85:1142–1169. - PubMed
    3. Stella VJ, Rajewski RA. Pharm Res. 1997;14:556–567. - PubMed
    4. Rekharsky MV, Inoue Y. Chem Rev. 1998;98:1875–1917. - PubMed
    1. Freeman WA, Mock WL, Shih NY. J Am Chem Soc. 1981;103:7367–7368.
    2. Kim J, Jung IS, Kim SY, Lee E, Kang JK, Sakamoto S, Yamaguchi K, Kim K. J Am Chem Soc. 2000;122:540–541.
    3. Day A, Arnold AP, Blanch RJ, Snushall B. J Org Chem. 2001;66:8094–8100. - PubMed
    4. Liu S, Zavalij PY, Isaacs L. J Am Chem Soc. 2005;127:16798–16799. - PMC - PubMed
    5. Day AI, Blanch RJ, Arnold AP, Lorenzo S, Lewis GR, Dance I. Angew Chem, Int Ed. 2002;41:275–277. - PubMed
    6. Cheng XJ, Liang LL, Chen K, Ji NN, Xiao X, Zhang JX, Zhang YQ, Xue SF, Zhu QJ, Ni XL, Tao Z. Angew Chem, Int Ed. 2013;52:7252–7255. - PubMed

Publication types