• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | someguyontheinternet

Bromidol

haribo1

haribo1

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
4,826
That super-potent mu agonist invented by Daniel Lednicer looks like this. All I can say is a)Wow, that's potent & b)it was never developed that far, so nobody has tried adding to, say, the cyclohexane ring (like 3-methyl fentanyl)

Bromidol.png


Has anyone come up with others working on these type of structures? I know the chinese replaced the phenylethyl group with a 2 thienyl ethyl group which was about 1/2 as potent. Beta -OH side-chain? WHo knows, but I suspect that this is the basis of a totally new class, rather than this 1 compound. At the very least, a 4-Fl group on the phenylethyl should help things a little. What is the radius of the bromine? Can pseudohalogens be used in place? Questions just keep popping up in my limited noggin...
 
Grünenthal has done some work on this structural class and published some patents.
 
I HAVE the patents & Lednicers work. Neither party got any further refinements than this. Lednicer points out 'The extreme in vivo potency & high binding affinity indicate that this compound is capable of conforming very precisely to the analgesic opiate receptor'. The compound can be shown to superimpose over the endogenous peptide enkephalin'.

Can anyone point me at a chemoffice model of enkephalin so I can see the conformation?
 
bet it's on the pdb, but probably isn't energy minimized and certainly isn't docked. looking at a ligand as large as a peptide without knowing it's binding conformation won't tell you the truth
 
The peptide is 5 amino acids big, so it is possible and, indeed, people do...
 
I got some more papers from the man himself. Daniel Lednicer is a very nice gentleman. It seems that 'bromidol' is x1200 morphine in potency. That's some way off ohmefentanyl so I suspext that the molecule can be further refined. Substitution on the cyclohexane ring hasn't been tried, for a starter...
 
it may be a good idea to stop using his name so much on the forum...he's nice enough to give you papers and communicate with you, but he may not be so interested in a google search turning up his name repeatedly here :)
 
All the papers I have seen filed the claim (either rightly or wrongly) that bromadol has a potency equivalent to 10,000 x morphine, making it approximately equipotent to carfentanil.
 
And it looks like a very "fat soluble " molecule. This means that, like fentanyl, (and cannabinoids) it builds up in fatty tissue. The effects of this are obvious, long half-life, if tested for , you'll ring the bell, months after using.
 
huh, you're right. I didn't realize the transdermal administration increased it so much. It makes sense, though. There's no way for the body to metabolize it when it's sitting in the skin and fat, so until the blood comes and removes it, it's just sitting there.
 
Lednicer contacted me THROUGH the site and he cannot fail to know WHAT this site is for.
 
fastandbulbous said:
It doesn't fit the standard opioid structure requirements, but then again that was devised a long time ago (comparitively) when there were less chemically distinct classes of opioid drugs
Click to expand...

Neither does fentanyl, but that doesnt mean that there cant be room for quantum mechanical garbage.
 
Yeah, but taking into account the conformation that the fentanyl molecule can assume, it's still capable of fitting the opioid pharmacophore (as does etonitazene etc); bromidol doesn't even seen to come close to fitting that particular model though - in fact structurally it has a lot more in common with dissociatives like PCP than it does with any known mu agonist
 
Last edited:
Well, the inventor showed that it could overlay the fentanyl skeleton almost perfectly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top