Fig. 4 The spatial distribution JNK-IN-8 clinical trial of pharmacophore properties on a background of compound I X-ray diffraction structure.

A green square depicts the plane of a phenyl ring (Color figure online) Fig. 5 The spatial distribution of pharmacophore properties on a background of compound II X-ray diffraction structure. A green square depicts the plane of a phenyl ring (Color figure online) Fig. 6 The spatial distribution of pharmacophore properties of D2 receptor ligands. A green square depicts the plane of a phenyl ring. The yellow sphere stands for hydrophobic—aliphatic property (Color figure online) Table 2 Pharmacophore properties of compound I and II Pharmacophore feature/property Compound I Compound II

Positive ionization (red) Nitrogen atom Nitrogen atom Hydrogen bond acceptor (HBA, green) Carbonyl group of amide bond Carbonyl group of amide bond Aromatic ring (orange) Benzene ring substituted with methoxy group Benzene ring substituted with two methoxy groups Hydrophobic, aromatic (pale blue) Furane ring Furane ring Hydrophobic, aliphatic (ultramarine) One methyl https://www.selleckchem.com/products/AC-220.html group in methoxy moiety attached to the benzene ring Two methyl groups in methoxy moieties attached to the benzene ring The geometry of a spatial distribution of pharmacophore properties in obtained models is an exact reflection of the X-ray diffraction structure of compounds I and II (Table 3). It is worthy to note that in spite of the high similarity of chemical structures of these compounds, that their conformations significantly differ each from other. Consequently, filipin these differences distinctly appear in pharmacophore models. Obviously, it should be taken into account some flexibility of the spatial pharmacophore geometry and possibility of its change during docking of studied compounds to particular receptors. However, such changes are often possible only to small degree or impossible at all on account

of the high energetic rotation barriers. In this context, the presence of two separate aliphatic—hydrophobic centers in pharmacophore of compound II takes on a special importance for explanation of very high affinity of this compound, in contrast to compound I, for D2 receptor. It is likely that just second methoxy group in compound II molecule underlies its high binding to D2 receptor while the same group do not affect the affinity of compound II to 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptors. The comparative analysis of the D2 receptor ligand pharmacophore (Fig. 6) and pharmacophores of compounds I and II also leads to the same conclusion (Figs. 4 and 5). The pharmacophore of D2 ligand quite well matches the pharmacophore of compound II but does not the pharmacophore of compound I (c.f. Fig. 7).