USP7 (IC50 = 0.75 μM); USP7 (IC50 = 0.43 μM); USP43 (IC50 = 20.3 μM); Ub-MDM2 (IC50 = 0.23 μM)

GNE-6640 encourages the natural ubiquitination of MDM2 through Lys48 (K48)-linked polyubiquitin chains, thereby guiding the process of proteasomal degradation13. GNE-6640 focuses on the p53, MDM2, and USP7 signaling pathways in cells. With an IC50 ≤ 10 μM, GNE-6640 reduces the viability of 108 cell lines. Combining GNE-6640 with DNA-damaging drugs like doxorubicin or cisplatin may trigger the p53 response and improve the effectiveness of USP7 inhibitors. GNE-6640 may cause the death of tumor cells. PIM kinase inhibitors and other targeted substances, such as chemotherapeutic agents, increase the cytotoxicity of GNE-6640[1].

GNE-6640, another novel selective and non-covalent inhibitor of USP7, has IC50 values of 0.75 μM (full length USP7), 0.43 μM (USP7 catalytic domain), and 20.3 μM (full length USP43). Ubiquitin-specific protease-7 (USP7) controls the stability of the p53 tumor suppressor and various other proteins critical for tumor cell survival. GNE-6640 facilitates endogenous MDM2 ubiquitination and targets cellular USP7 and p53 signaling pathways, inducing tumor cell death, enhancing cytotoxicity, and decreasing the viability of around 108 cell lines with IC50 ≤ 10 μM with chemotherapeutic agents such as PIM kinase inhibitors[2].

---

USP7 enzymatic analysis[1]
Michaelis–Menten kinetic measurements with full-length USP7 were performed using 1 nM USP7 with a series of ubiquitin–AMC substrate titrations. The initial rate of substrate hydrolysis was determined using the Magellan software on a Tecan Safire2 plate reader, and kinetic parameters modelled using nonlinear regression analysis with GraphPad Prism software. Standard error was calculated from three technical replicates. For studies using the USP7 D305/E308 mutant, samples were reacted in a buffer consisting of 50 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), 100 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM dithiothreitol, and 0.1% (w/v) bovine gamma globulin. The starting substrate concentration of ubiquitin-Rho110 used for the Michaelis–Menten analysis was 100 μM serial diluted to 781 nM. Reactions were performed for 1 h at room temperature with a final enzyme concentration of 100 nM (three independent experiments, see symbols in plots), in black 100-μl volume 96-well half area plates. The enzymatic activity was calculated by fitting the data using the initial velocity with the linear V0 values measured by analysing the fluorescence signal of cleaved Rho-110 using excitation at 485 nm and emission at 535 nm.

---

Deubiquitinase selectivity analysis[1]
Recombinant deubiquitinase di-ubiquitin mass spectrometry cleavage assay. The MALDI–TOF DUB assay was performed using the indicated concentrations of recombinant deubiquitinases, di-ubiquitin substrates, and USP7 inhibitor compounds as described previously. The inhibition efficiency for GNE-6640 and GNE-6776 against the UCHl family members was monitored on Ub-Ube2W (Ub-E2), an alternative substrate to di-ubiquitin.

Tumour cell-line panel viability. [1]
GNE-6640 and GNE-6641 were profiled for 3 days across 441 cell lines, and GNE-6776, GNE-6640, and GNE-6641 were profiled for 5 days across a subset of 185 cell lines as previously described26. In brief, compounds were screened in nine-point dose–response using a threefold dilution. Cells were seeded into 384-well plates 24 h before compound addition. Cells were then incubated with compound for 72 h or 120 h before assaying viability. Assays were performed in biological triplicate. Cells were incubated (37 °C, 5% CO2) in RPMI-1640, 2.5% FBS (72 h assay) or 5% FBS (120 h assay), and 2 mM glutamine throughout the assay. The reported IC50 and mean viability metrics were as follows: IC50 was the dose at which the estimated inhibition was 50% relative to untreated wells (that is, absolute IC50).

---

Primary combination screen. [1]
A compound library comprising 589 compounds arrayed in nine-point dose–response was screened in the absence or presence of fixed doses of GNE-6776 (0 nm, 125 nM, 250 nM, 500 nM, 1,000 nM, and 2,000 nM) or GNE-6640 (400 nM). In brief, 5,000 EOL-1 cells were seeded into 384-well plates, and compound was added 24 h later. Cell viability was determined 120 h after compound addition (CellTiter-Glo). Curves were fitted, and both IC50 and mean viability metrics were calculated. The IC50 was the dose at which inhibition was 50% relative to untreated wells. The mean viability was the average of the fitted viabilities at each tested dose. Mean viability was equivalent to the area under the log-dose/viability curve divided by the total number of tested doses. Mean viability values were used for the analysis described in Extended Data Fig. 6g. All data were fitted using Genedata Screener software.

---

Primary combination screen analysis. [1]
Normalized mean viabilities were determined in the EOL-1 cell line for 574 compounds that have known protein or mechanistic targets, in the presence of DMSO or increasing concentrations of GNE-6776 (100 nM, 250 nM, 500 nM, 1,000 nM or 2,000 nM) or 400 nM of GNE-6640. For each compound, we assessed the difference in mean viability between USP7 inhibitor treatment and the DMSO treatment. For targets targeted by three or more compounds, we calculated the enrichment of high mean viability difference for each concentration of USP7 inhibitor by using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. For visualization purposes, we combined the results of all concentrations by taking the mean of the −log10(transformed P values) for each target.

[1]. USP7 small-molecule inhibitors interfere with ubiquitin binding. Nature. 2017 Oct 26;550(7677):534-538.

[2]. The role of deubiquitinating enzymes in cancer drug resistance. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2020 Apr;85(4):627-639

The ubiquitin system regulates essential cellular processes in eukaryotes. Ubiquitin is ligated to substrate proteins as monomers or chains and the topology of ubiquitin modifications regulates substrate interactions with specific proteins. Thus ubiquitination directs a variety of substrate fates including proteasomal degradation. Deubiquitinase enzymes cleave ubiquitin from substrates and are implicated in disease; for example, ubiquitin-specific protease-7 (USP7) regulates stability of the p53 tumour suppressor and other proteins critical for tumour cell survival. However, developing selective deubiquitinase inhibitors has been challenging and no co-crystal structures have been solved with small-molecule inhibitors. Here, using nuclear magnetic resonance-based screening and structure-based design, we describe the development of selective USP7 inhibitors GNE-6640 and GNE-6776. These compounds induce tumour cell death and enhance cytotoxicity with chemotherapeutic agents and targeted compounds, including PIM kinase inhibitors. Structural studies reveal that GNE-6640 and GNE-6776 non-covalently target USP7 12 Å distant from the catalytic cysteine. The compounds attenuate ubiquitin binding and thus inhibit USP7 deubiquitinase activity. GNE-6640 and GNE-6776 interact with acidic residues that mediate hydrogen-bond interactions with the ubiquitin Lys48 side chain, suggesting that USP7 preferentially interacts with and cleaves ubiquitin moieties that have free Lys48 side chains. We investigated this idea by engineering di-ubiquitin chains containing differential proximal and distal isotopic labels and measuring USP7 binding by nuclear magnetic resonance. This preferential binding protracted the depolymerization kinetics of Lys48-linked ubiquitin chains relative to Lys63-linked chains. In summary, engineering compounds that inhibit USP7 activity by attenuating ubiquitin binding suggests opportunities for developing other deubiquitinase inhibitors and may be a strategy more broadly applicable to inhibiting proteins that require ubiquitin binding for full functional activity.[1]

---

Herein we describe GNE-6640 and GNE-6776, selective USP7 inhibitors that possess a structurally defined mechanism of inhibition. Establishing stringent screening cascades was critical for selecting and optimizing on-target inhibitors. Combination studies revealed a previously undescribed intersection between USP7 deubiquitinase activity and PIM kinases in regulating cell viability. Co-crystal structures of GNE-6640 or GNE-6776 pointed to the importance of the complementary charged interactions between USP7-D305/E308 and ubiquitin-K48 side chains, which we confirmed using mutational analysis. Notably, D305G has been identified as a somatic loss-of-function mutant in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia21. NMR analysis of USP7 binding to native mono-ubiquitin and differentially labelled di-ubiquitins revealed that USP7 preferentially interacts with ubiquitin moieties having free K48 side chains. It has been proposed that the inefficiency of some deubiquitinases to depolymerize longer substrate-conjugated K48-linked chains enables a threshold for proteasome-targeting polyubiquitination22; our studies substantiate this idea and provide a biophysical mechanism. Numerous proteins, including other deubiquitinases, ubiquitin ligases, DNA repair and endocytosis machinery, and epigenetic regulators are functionally dependent on ubiquitin binding23. Developing selective inhibitors that attenuate ubiquitin binding is an effective strategy for USP7 inhibition. Our studies demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, which may have broader applications for inhibiting other classes of ubiquitin-binding proteins. [1]

---

Drug resistance is a well-known phenomenon leading to a reduction in the effectiveness of pharmaceutical treatments. Resistance to chemotherapeutic agents can involve various intrinsic cellular processes including drug efflux, increased resistance to apoptosis, increased DNA damage repair capabilities in response to platinum salts or other DNA-damaging drugs, drug inactivation, drug target alteration, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), inherent cell heterogeneity, epigenetic effects, or any combination of these mechanisms. Deubiquitinating enzymes (DUBs) reverse ubiquitination of target proteins, maintaining a balance between ubiquitination and deubiquitination of proteins to maintain cell homeostasis. Increasing evidence supports an association of altered DUB activity with development of several cancers. Thus, DUBs are promising candidates for targeted drug development. In this review, we outline the involvement of DUBs, particularly ubiquitin-specific proteases, and their roles in drug resistance in different types of cancer. We also review potential small molecule DUB inhibitors that can be used as drugs for cancer treatment.[2]

C20H18N4O

330.383123874664

330.15

C, 72.71; H, 5.49; N, 16.96; O, 4.84

2009273-67-8

122531786

White to off-white solid powder

3.8

3

4

3

25

439

0

ZHYXJQQBKROZDX-UHFFFAOYSA-N

InChI=1S/C20H18N4O/c1-2-16-17(13-5-8-18-14(9-13)10-23-24-18)11-22-20(21)19(16)12-3-6-15(25)7-4-12/h3-11,25H,2H2,1H3,(H2,21,22)(H,23,24)

4-[2-amino-4-ethyl-5-(1H-indazol-5-yl)pyridin-3-yl]phenol

2934.99.03.00

Powder      -20°C    3 years

                     4°C     2 years

In solvent   -80°C    6 months

                  -20°C    1 month

Room temperature (This product is stable at ambient temperature for a few days during ordinary shipping and time spent in Customs)

Note: Listed below are some common formulations that may be used to formulate products with low water solubility (e.g. < 1 mg/mL), you may test these formulations using a minute amount of products to avoid loss of samples.

---

Injection Formulation 1: DMSO : Tween 80： Saline = 10 : 5 : 85 (i.e. 100 μL DMSO stock solution → 50 μL Tween 80 → 850 μL Saline)
*Preparation of saline: Dissolve 0.9 g of sodium chloride in 100 mL ddH ₂ O to obtain a clear solution.
Injection Formulation 2: DMSO : PEG300 ：Tween 80 : Saline = 10 : 40 : 5 : 45 (i.e. 100 μL DMSO → 400 μLPEG300 → 50 μL Tween 80 → 450 μL Saline)
Injection Formulation 3: DMSO : Corn oil = 10 : 90 (i.e. 100 μL DMSO → 900 μL Corn oil)
Example: Take the Injection Formulation 3 (DMSO : Corn oil = 10 : 90) as an example, if 1 mL of 2.5 mg/mL working solution is to be prepared, you can take 100 μL 25 mg/mL DMSO stock solution and add to 900 μL corn oil, mix well to obtain a clear or suspension solution (2.5 mg/mL, ready for use in animals).

View More

Injection Formulation 4: DMSO : 20% SBE-β-CD in saline = 10 : 90 [i.e. 100 μL DMSO → 900 μL (20% SBE-β-CD in saline)]
*Preparation of 20% SBE-β-CD in Saline (4°C，1 week): Dissolve 2 g SBE-β-CD in 10 mL saline to obtain a clear solution.
Injection Formulation 5: 2-Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin : Saline = 50 : 50 (i.e. 500 μL 2-Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin → 500 μL Saline)
Injection Formulation 6: DMSO : PEG300 : castor oil : Saline = 5 : 10 : 20 : 65 (i.e. 50 μL DMSO → 100 μLPEG300 → 200 μL castor oil → 650 μL Saline)
Injection Formulation 7: Ethanol : Cremophor : Saline = 10： 10 : 80 (i.e. 100 μL Ethanol → 100 μL Cremophor → 800 μL Saline)
Injection Formulation 8: Dissolve in Cremophor/Ethanol (50 : 50), then diluted by Saline
Injection Formulation 9: EtOH : Corn oil = 10 : 90 (i.e. 100 μL EtOH → 900 μL Corn oil)
Injection Formulation 10: EtOH : PEG300：Tween 80 : Saline = 10 : 40 : 5 : 45 (i.e. 100 μL EtOH → 400 μLPEG300 → 50 μL Tween 80 → 450 μL Saline)

---

Oral Formulation 1: Suspend in 0.5% CMC Na (carboxymethylcellulose sodium)
Oral Formulation 2: Suspend in 0.5% Carboxymethyl cellulose
Example: Take the Oral Formulation 1 (Suspend in 0.5% CMC Na) as an example, if 100 mL of 2.5 mg/mL working solution is to be prepared, you can first prepare 0.5% CMC Na solution by measuring 0.5 g CMC Na and dissolve it in 100 mL ddH2O to obtain a clear solution; then add 250 mg of the product to 100 mL 0.5% CMC Na solution, to make the suspension solution (2.5 mg/mL, ready for use in animals).

View More

Oral Formulation 3: Dissolved in PEG400
Oral Formulation 4: Suspend in 0.2% Carboxymethyl cellulose
Oral Formulation 5: Dissolve in 0.25% Tween 80 and 0.5% Carboxymethyl cellulose
Oral Formulation 6: Mixing with food powders

---

Note: Please be aware that the above formulations are for reference only. InvivoChem strongly recommends customers to read literature methods/protocols carefully before determining which formulation you should use for in vivo studies, as different compounds have different solubility properties and have to be formulated differently.

---

 (Please use freshly prepared in vivo formulations for optimal results.)