Over 200 synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs) have been identified as new psychoactive substances. Effective monitoring and characterization of SCRAs are hindered by the rapid pace of structural evolution. Ahead of possible appearance on the illicit drug market, new SCRAs were synthesized to complete a systematic library of cumyl-indole- (e.g., CUMYL-CPrMICA, CUMYL-CPMICA) and cumyl-indazole-carboxamides (e.g., CUMYL-CPrMINACA, CUMYL-CPMINACA), encompassing butyl, pentyl, cyclopropylmethyl, cyclobutylmethyl, cyclopentylmethyl, and cyclohexylmethyl tails. Comprehensive pharmacological characterization was performed with three assay formats, monitoring the recruitment of either wild-type or C-terminally truncated (βarr2d366) β-arrestin2 to the activated cannabinoid 1 receptor (CB1) or monitoring Gβγ-mediated membrane hyperpolarization. Altered compound characterization was observed when comparing derived potency (EC50) and efficacy (Emax) values from both assays monitoring the same or a different signaling event, whereas ranges and ranking orders were similar. Structure-activity relationships (SAR) were assessed in threefold, resulting in the identification of the pendant tail as a critical pharmacophore, with the optimal chain length for CB1 activation approximating an n-pentyl (e.g., cyclopentylmethyl or cyclohexylmethyl tail). The activity of the SCRAs encompassing cyclic tails decreased with decreasing number of carbons forming the cyclic moiety, with CUMYL-CPrMICA showing the least CB1 activity in all assay formats. The SARs were rationalized via molecular docking, demonstrating the importance of the optimal steric contribution of the hydrophobic tail. While SAR conclusions remained largely unchanged, the differential compound characterization by both similar and different assay designs emphasizes the importance of detailing specific assay characteristics to allow adequate interpretation of potencies and efficacies.
Keywords: functional assays; membrane potential; molecular docking; new psychoactive substances; structure−activity relationship; βarrestin2 recruitment.