Design and Synthesis of Clinical Candidate PF-06852231 (CVL-231): A Brain Penetrant, Selective, Positive Allosteric Modulator of the M4 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor

Selective activation of the M4 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor subtype offers a novel strategy for the treatment of psychosis in multiple neurological disorders. Although the development of traditional muscarinic activators has been stymied due to pan-receptor activation, muscarinic receptor subtype selectivity can be achieved through the utilization of a subtype of a unique allosteric site. A major challenge in capitalizing on this allosteric site to date has been achieving a balance of suitable potency and brain penetration. Herein, we describe the design of a brain penetrant series of M4 selective positive allosteric modulators (PAMs), ultimately culminating in the identification of 21 (PF-06852231, now CVL-231/emraclidine), which is under active clinical development as a novel mechanism and approach for the treatment of schizophrenia.

Striatal, Hippocampal, and Cortical Networks Are Differentially Responsive to the M4- and M1-Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor Mediated Effects of Xanomeline

Preclinical and clinical data suggest that muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activation may be therapeutically beneficial for the treatment of schizophrenia and Alzheimer's diseases. This is best exemplified by clinical observations with xanomeline, the efficacy of which is thought to be mediated through co-activation of the M1 and M4 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs). Here we examined the impact of treatment with xanomeline and compared it to the actions of selective M1 and M4 mAChR activators on in vivo intracellular signaling cascades in mice, including 3'-5'-cyclic adenosine monophosphate response element binding protein (CREB) phosphorylation and inositol phosphate-1 (IP1) accumulation in the striatum, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex. We additionally assessed the effects of xanomeline on hippocampal electrophysiological signatures in rats using ex vivo recordings from CA1 (Cornu Ammonis 1) as well as in vivo hippocampal theta. As expected, xanomeline's effects across these readouts were consistent with activation of both M1 and M4 mAChRs; however, differences were observed across different brain regions, suggesting non-uniform activation of these receptor subtypes in the central nervous system. Interestingly, despite having nearly equal in vitro potency at the M1 and the M4 mAChRs, during in vivo assays xanomeline produced M4-like effects at significantly lower brain exposures than those at which M1-like effects were observed. Our results raise the possibility that clinical efficacy observed with xanomeline was driven, in part, through its non-uniform activation of mAChR subtypes in the central nervous system and, at lower doses, through preferential agonism of the M4 mAChR.

Differential Pharmacology and Binding of mGlu2 Receptor Allosteric Modulators

Allosteric modulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 2 (mGlu₂) has demonstrated efficacy in preclinical rodent models of several brain disorders, leading to industry and academic drug discovery efforts. Although the pharmacology and binding sites of some mGlu₂ allosteric modulators have been characterized previously, questions remain about the nature of the allosteric mechanism of cooperativity with glutamate and whether structurally diverse allosteric modulators bind in an identical manner to specific allosteric sites. To further investigate the in vitro pharmacology of mGlu₂ allosteric modulators, we developed and characterized a novel mGlu₂ positive allosteric modulator (PAM) radioligand in parallel with functional studies of a structurally diverse set of mGlu₂ PAMs and negative allosteric modulators (NAMs). Using an operational model of allosterism to analyze the functional data, we found that PAMs affect both the affinity and efficacy of glutamate at mGlu₂, whereas NAMs predominantly affect the efficacy of glutamate in our assay system. More importantly, we found that binding of a novel mGlu₂ PAM radioligand was inhibited by multiple structurally diverse PAMs and NAMs, indicating that they may bind to the mGlu₂ allosteric site labeled with the novel mGlu₂ PAM radioligand; however, further studies suggested that these allosteric modulators do not all interact with the radioligand in an identical manner. Together, these findings provide new insights into the binding sites and modes of efficacy of different structurally and functionally distinct mGlu₂ allosteric modulators and suggest that different ligands either interact with distinct sites or adapt different binding poses to shared allosteric site(s).

Muscarinic receptor subtype distribution in the central nervous system and relevance to aging and Alzheimer's disease

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) are G proteincoupled receptors (GPCRs) that mediate the metabotropic actions of acetylcholine (ACh). There are five subtypes of mAChR, M₁ - M₅, which are expressed throughout the central nervous system (CNS) on numerous cell types and represent promising treatment targets for a number of different diseases, disorders, and conditions of the CNS. Although the present review will focus on Alzheimer's disease (AD) and amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), a number of conditions such as Parkinson's disease (PD), schizophrenia, and others represent significant unmet medical needs for which selective muscarinic agents could offer therapeutic benefits. Numerous advances have been made regarding mAChR localization through the use of subtype-selective antibodies and radioligand binding studies and these efforts have helped propel a number of mAChR therapeutics into clinical trials. However, much of what we know about mAChR localization in the healthy and diseased brain has come from studies employing radioligand binding with relatively modest selectivity. The development of subtype-selective small molecule radioligands suitable for in vitro and in vivo use, as well as robust, commercially-available antibodies remains a critical need for the field. Additionally, novel genetic tools should be developed and leveraged to help move the field increasingly towards a systems-level understanding of mAChR subtype action. Finally, functional, proteomic, and genetic data from ongoing human studies hold great promise for optimizing the design and interpretation of studies examining receptor levels by enabling patient stratification. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Neuropharmacology on Muscarinic Receptors'.

Inositol Phosphate Accumulation in Vivo Provides a Measure of Muscarinic M1 Receptor Activation

The rationale for using M₁ selective muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activators for the treatment of cognitive impairment associated with psychiatric and neurodegenerative disease is well-established in the literature. Here, we investigate measurement of inositol phosphate accumulation, an end point immediately downstream of the M₁ muscarinic acetylcholine receptor signaling cascade, as an in vivo biochemical readout for M₁ muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activation. Five brain penetrant M₁-subtype selective activators from three structurally distinct chemical series were pharmacologically profiled for functional activity in vitro using recombinant cell calcium mobilization and inositol phosphate assays, and a native tissue hippocampal slice electrophysiology assay, to show that all five compounds presented a positive allosteric modulator agonist profile, within a narrow range of potencies. In vivo characterization using an amphetamine-stimulated locomotor activity behavioral assay and the inositol phosphate accumulation biochemical assay demonstrated that the latter has utility for assessing functional potency of M₁ activators. Efficacy measured by inositol phosphate accumulation in mouse striatum compared favorably to efficacy in reversing amphetamine-induced locomotor activity, suggesting that the inositol phosphate accumulation assay has utility for the evaluation of M₁ muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activators in vivo. The benefits of this in vivo biochemical approach include a wide response window, interrogation of specific brain circuit activation, an ability to model responses in the context of brain exposure, an ability to rank order compounds based on in vivo efficacy, and minimization of animal use.