• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

Common & psychoactively inert alkyloids/chemcials whose stereoisomers are CNS-active.

Nagelfar

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
2,527
Location
Vancouver, Washington USA
Common & psychoactively inert alkyloids/chemcials whose stereoisomers are CNS-active.

I was curious about this, seeing as how most stereoisomers of active drugs are inert.

Are there common chemicals in, perhaps, house-plants or abundant in nature in general, that if were made as their stereoisomer, would have a psychoactive CNS affective profile that would be highly subjectively noticeable?

How likely is it that there are *many* we have no clue about because they haven't been synthesized for demonstratable testing?
 
Aren't the stereoisomers of active drugs more often just less active, rather than inactive? It's interesting to think about why the stereochemistry of natural drugs is 'right' so often though, I guess it's because the organisms have evolved to produce active drugs because they serve a purpose. So I doubt there are many compounds that would be better as the other stereoisomer, though you might get different effects.
 
Aren't the stereoisomers of active drugs more often just less active, rather than inactive?

I suppose this is true in a way, but it's usually thousandths less affinity or tens of thousands times less active, than the active isomer, so as to be basically negligible or practically inactive. How would one notice something that would need be taken in such quantity, to prove activity in another stereoisomeric configuration? You do have a point there about evolution tending toward activity; but activity for a plant's dynamic processes, may be in enough difference parallel to have an alternate isomer more abuseable for humans, I am guessing, somewhere out there.
 
I was curious about this, seeing as how most stereoisomers of active drugs are inert.

Are there common chemicals in, perhaps, house-plants or abundant in nature in general, that if were made as their stereoisomer, would have a psychoactive CNS affective profile that would be highly subjectively noticeable?

How likely is it that there are *many* we have no clue about because they haven't been synthesized for demonstratable testing?

Sometimes, a compound's enantiomer has no effect, sometimes it has different effects. Often, regardless of the effect of one enantiomer, both will be selectively prepared and patented, along with the racemate.

This Wikipedia page is remarkably informative:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enantiopure_drug

(See especially the list of drugs whose enantiomers have remarkably different effects)

Actually we synthesise most drugs enantioselectively, nowadays, owing to the superior activity (or more beneficial activity) of one enantiomer vs another (or owing to the toxicity of one enantiomer over another).

The FDA mandated a while ago that for racemic drugs, the activity of the constituent isomers be measured. Few drugs are developed for which the therapeutic value of one enantiomer isn't known.

The same goes for atropoisomers, despite there being no mandate from any regulatory agencies to test the therepeutic activity of one over another.

In nature I can think of the atropoisomers michellamine A and B...each conformer has such a high thermal barrier of atropisomeric interconversion that they can be functionally said to exist as atropoisomers with differing optical activity.
Here's another example:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16007983

Substituted biphenyl I (BMS-207940), a selective antagonist of the endothelin A (ETA) receptor, has been proposed for the treatment of congestive heart failure. The structure of I possesses a stereogenic axis due to the hindered rotation about the biphenyl bond in the presence of its large ortho-substituents. As a result, I exhibits atropisomerism in which two nonplanar, axially enantiomers exist, which will be generically referred to as isomers A and B. Within the pharmaceutical industry, both from a scientific and regulatory point of view, characterization of enantiomeric drugs has become an important step in the development process.

As the paper suggests, they tested the effect of various conditions on the rate of enantiomeric interconversion. Likely they will attempt to alter the compound such that a barrier to interconversion exists, and the atropoisomers can be separately evaluated for therapeutic activity if this wasn't already done.

When searching for novel drugs, say via high-throughput screening which we use to check for novel molecules with high potential for biological activity, asymmetry is always considered: if a novel compound emerges which is potentially optically active, then the effect of both optical isomers will be examined.

It's a rather interesting field, especially I think, atropoisomerism.
 
Thank you for that thorough input. I was vaguely aware of most of it myself ("atropoisomerism" as studied exhaustively with all man made drugs), which is why I brought the topic up on (for the possibly more complex spectrum of) natural plant alkaloids. There are so many millions of plants that are not psychoactive, but so many of which contain novel molecular constituents, that what I am asking should conceivably be true somewhere amongst them.
 
Well, atropoisomerism is only assigned if the molecule has a molecule has axial chirality. A common example is BINAP (the picture is of a Ruthenium complex of BINAP):

http://pubs.acs.org/appl/literatum/...duction/images/medium/om-2007-00360r_0007.gif

Axial rotation around the bond linking the napthalene segments is limited (here is an article with an image of modified BINAP ligands):

http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/chemistry/chemical-synthesis/technology-spotlights/takasago-ligands.html

According to the helical rotation, absolute stereochemistry is assigned as P (plus) or M (minus) - plus for a right handed helix an minus for a left-handed helix.

There is also inherent chirality, which is exhibited in 1,4-benzodiazepines: check out this monograph
www.elsevierdirect.com/brochures/CompHeterocyclic/PDFs/01206.pdf

The 2,3-dihydro-1,4-benzodiazepin-2-ones exist in two conformers, the M and the P



because of inherent chirality in the N(1)-C(7)-C(8) dihedral angle. The barrier for interconversion between the isomers is large enough that the two isomers are separable by chiral chromatography and, according to the authors,
"have been shown to be differentiated by both biological receptors and human serum albumin".

As for natural products, this book (http://books.google.com/books/about/Bioactive_natural_products.html?id=In8kaHnX5gUC p211 specifically (the title is 'Bioactive Natural Products - detection, isolation and structure determination'),

suggests isolation of natural products has been conducted in many areas without examination of the optical activity of the product - that it may have been assumed to have been racemic, and no enantiomeric/diastereomeric excess has been measured for a great many bioactive compounds.

I believe many natural products predominate as single enantiomers - if their opposite enantiomers were asymmetrically synthesised and screened, as you mentioned, what activity they would show I couldn't say, but it's certainly something to think about.
 
suggests isolation of natural products has been conducted in many areas without examination of the optical activity of the product - that it may have been assumed to have been racemic, and no enantiomeric/diastereomeric excess has been measured for a great many bioactive compounds.

I believe many natural products predominate as single enantiomers - if their opposite enantiomers were asymmetrically synthesised and screened, as you mentioned, what activity they would show I couldn't say, but it's certainly something to think about.

Indeed. I am glad you share my interest.
 
Nice posts :)

suggests isolation of natural products has been conducted in many areas without examination of the optical activity of the product - that it may have been assumed to have been racemic, and no enantiomeric/diastereomeric excess has been measured for a great many bioactive compounds.

I'd assume they'd generally be enantiopure, I guess that's what you meant? Weather that's always the case, I don't know...
 
Natural product discovery is often plagued by identification of incorrect stereochemistry around bonds, and the associated publication of incorrect assignments to a given new molecule.

I'd have to guess that a large number of components of plant extracts sold for various purposes have biologically active molecules that we have no clue what their stereochemistry is. This certainly would plague attempts to recreate inconsistent effects reported for plant products by isolating and resynthesizing a supposed component.

It is certainly possible that a plant makes an active molecule that has a variable stereocenter where one isomer is more active than another.
 
Top