Fig. 1 · Structure

Documents & Downloads

VE-821

Cat. No. A11605 CAS 1232410-49-9

ATM/ATR inhibitor

VE-821 is a potent and selective inhibitor of protein kinase ATR.

In Stock

Publications for VE-821

7 publications citing this product

  1. Yiovana Veronica Okraine, .et al. , Cell Death Dis, 2025, Jul 8;16(1):503 PMID: 40628724
  2. Atsushi Saito, .et al. , Cell Rep, 2023, May 30;42(5):112479 PMID: 37178686
  3. Mitsuru Sasaki-Honda, .et al. , Hum Mol Genet, 2018, Dec 1; 27(23): 4024-4035 PMID: 30107443
  4. Kim J, .et al. , Mol Cell, 2018, Jan 4;69(1):36-47.e7 PMID: 29249653
  5. Antonio Postigo, .et al. , Cell Rep, 2017, May 2; 19(5): 1022-1032 PMID: 28467896
  6. Nnennaya Kanu, .et al. , Genome Biol, 2016, 17: 185 PMID: 27634334
  7. Carolyn Botting, .et al. , Virol J, 2016, 13: 15 PMID: 26817608

Free Aliquoting for Your Order

Tell us your preferred amount per vial. We’ll confirm the options.

Biological Activity

Bioactivity / Mechanism

VE-821 inhibits cellular ATR-pathway signaling. In PSN-1 and MiaPaCa-2 pancreatic cancer cells, 1 µM VE-821 reduced Chk1 Ser345 phosphorylation induced by gemcitabine, radiation or both. This signaling endpoint does not provide a purified-enzyme IC50. [1]

Literature-reported observations and conditions; not Adooq-tested protocols or general treatment recommendations.

Target & Activity

Target Activity Value
ATR (Cell-free assay) Ki 13 nM

Cellular Effect

Cell Line Activity Value Description Reference
K562 ED50 448.883 μM Cytotoxicity against human K562 cells assessed as decrease in cell viability after 24 hrs by cell titer-glo luminescence assay [PMID: 27177826]
K562 ED50 71 μM Cytotoxicity against human K562 cells assessed as decrease in cell viability after 48 hrs by cell titer-glo luminescence assay [PMID: 27177826]

In Vitro Studies

VE-821 at 1 µM reduced pancreatic cancer cell clonogenic survival after irradiation under normoxia and 0.5% O2. The effect depended on scheduling: in PSN-1 cells, addition 24 h after irradiation retained radiosensitization, whereas addition at 48 h lost it. These are cell-culture findings. [1]

In MCF10A breast epithelial cells, VE821 pretreatment reduced the hydroxyurea-induced APOBEC3 deamination response measured in cell lysates. This finding supports a role for ATR signaling in that stress response; it does not establish direct APOBEC inhibition or prevention of tumor mutations. [2]

Suppression of damage-induced Chk1 phosphorylation

Cell-based study · PSN-1 and MiaPaCa-2 pancreatic cancer cells [1]

VE-821 reduced induced Chk1 Ser345 phosphorylation in cells exposed to gemcitabine, radiation or both. Total Chk1 and β-actin were shown as controls. This is a cellular signaling result, not a purified-enzyme potency measurement.

Measured endpoints — not treatment concentrations
EndpointReported resultReference
Damage-induced Chk1 Ser345 phosphorylationqualitative response Reduced with VE-821 relative to corresponding damage-treated cells without VE-821.[1]

Literature-Reported Treatment Conditions

Treatment concentration
1 µM VE-821; gemcitabine 100 nM; radiation 6 Gy
Exposure duration
Drugs added 1 h before irradiation and retained; lysates at 2 h after irradiation.
Method
Western blot of phosphorylated and total Chk1 with β-actin control.
Vehicle
DMSO stock; final vehicle percentage not specified in read methods.
Co-treatment
Gemcitabine, radiation, or both, compared with matched conditions without VE-821.
Reported limits
Exact replicate count for panel A is not separately specified; no fitted IC50 is reported for this experiment.
Methods and source locations

Compound reported in the paper: VE-821

Evidence concerns the paper’s named VE-821 material and experimental model; it does not validate the current Adooq lot or establish human efficacy.

Figure 1A and caption; Results, first paragraph; Methods, Drugs/cell lines and Western blot

Damage-induced Chk1 Ser345 phosphorylation: Western blot, with total Chk1 and β-actin shown. — Figure 1A and caption; Results, first paragraph; Methods, Drugs/cell lines and Western blot

Clonogenic radiosensitization under normoxia and hypoxia

Cell-based study · MiaPaCa-2, PSN-1, PANC-1 and primary PancM pancreatic cancer cells under normoxia; MiaPaCa-2, PSN-1 and PancM under 0.5% O2 [1]

VE-821 lowered clonogenic survival after irradiation under both oxygen conditions. Hypoxic cultures remained more radioresistant than oxic cultures. Scheduling in PSN-1 mattered: addition 24 h after radiation retained radiosensitization, whereas addition at 48 h lost it.

Measured endpoints — not treatment concentrations
EndpointReported resultReference
Colony-forming survival after radiationqualitative response Lower with 1 µM VE-821 than vehicle across the tested pancreatic models under normoxia and hypoxia; N = 3.[1]
PSN-1 clonogenic radiosensitization at 4 Gyqualitative response Retained with VE-821 addition 24 h after irradiation; lost with addition at 48 h.[1]

Literature-Reported Treatment Conditions

Treatment concentration
1 µM VE-821; radiation dose series shown at 0, 2, 4 and 6 Gy
Exposure duration
Standard schedule: added 1 h before irradiation, removed 72 h after irradiation; colonies assessed after 10–21 days. Hypoxia acclimatization 6 h before drug addition, returning to normoxia 1 h after irradiation (Figure 2 diagram).
Method
Clonogenic assay with matched vehicle and unirradiated controls; Figure 1C survival fractions account for relevant plating efficiencies.
Vehicle
DMSO-treated controls; final percentage not specified.
Co-treatment
Ionizing radiation; no gemcitabine in these selected comparisons.
Reported limits
Absolute surviving fractions and unirradiated plating efficiencies are not transcribed from curves; SI Figure S1B was not retrieved. Figure 2 caption timing is best read with its explicit -7 h to +1 h diagram.
Methods and source locations

Compound reported in the paper: VE-821

Evidence concerns the paper’s named VE-821 material and experimental model; it does not validate the current Adooq lot or establish human efficacy.

Figures 1C–D and 2A–B with captions; Results, radiosensitization and hypoxia; Methods, Clonogenic assay

Colony-forming survival after radiation: Clonogenic survival; no numerical effect size inferred from plotted curves. — Figure 1D; Figure 2A–B and captions

PSN-1 clonogenic radiosensitization at 4 Gy: Matched scheduling comparison; relevant unirradiated plating efficiency accounted for in reported surviving fraction. — Figure 1C and associated Results paragraph

ATR-pathway inhibition reduces a stress-induced cellular deamination response

Cell-based study · Non-tumorigenic MCF10A breast epithelial cells [2]

VE821 reduced the hydroxyurea-induced APOBEC3 cytidine-deamination response. ATM inhibition showed a smaller reduction in the same comparison. This cell-lysate readout does not demonstrate direct inhibition of an APOBEC enzyme or reduced mutation accumulation in tumors.

Measured endpoints — not treatment concentrations
EndpointReported resultReference
Hydroxyurea-induced APOBEC3 cytidine-deamination activity in MCF10A lysatesqualitative response Reduced following VE821 pretreatment compared with hydroxyurea-only control; ATM inhibitor produced a smaller reduction.[2]

Literature-Reported Treatment Conditions

Treatment concentration
VE821 1 µM; hydroxyurea 2 mM; comparator KU55933 10 µM
Exposure duration
ATM or ATR inhibitor pretreatment for 24 h, followed by hydroxyurea for a further 48 h before lysis.
Method
Gel-based cytidine-deamination assay on protein-normalized cell lysates.
Vehicle
Panel-specific vehicle composition not specified in the read main text.
Co-treatment
Hydroxyurea; untreated, inhibitor-only and hydroxyurea-only conditions shown in Figure 5a.
Reported limits
No panel-specific replicate number, quantitative effect size or error estimate supplied in the read Figure 5a caption. Supplementary cytotoxicity/cell-cycle and siRNA panels were not acquired and are not used to claim absence of confounding.
Methods and source locations

Compound reported in the paper: VE-821

Evidence concerns the paper’s named VE-821 material and experimental model; it does not validate the current Adooq lot or establish human efficacy.

Figure 5a and caption; Results Sec8; Methods Sec13, Sec14 and Sec17

Hydroxyurea-induced APOBEC3 cytidine-deamination activity in MCF10A lysates: Qualitative gel-based deamination readout, with untreated and inhibitor-only controls. — Figure 5a and caption; Results Sec8; Methods Sec13, Sec14 and Sec17

In Vivo Studies

In one MKN45 gastric xenograft experiment, VE-821 (3 mg/kg orally) plus cisplatin (5 mg/kg intraperitoneally), administered every 3 days for 3 weeks, reduced tumor growth and terminal tumor weights relative to either monotherapy and vehicle controls. Similar body-weight trajectories provide a limited tolerability observation. The paper’s animal replication wording is ambiguous; no exact effect size or P value is presented here. [3]

VE-821 plus cisplatin in a gastric cancer xenograft

Animal study · MKN45 subcutaneous tumors in athymic BALB/c nude mice, 4–5 weeks old; randomized at approximately 100 mm³; 20 mice, n = 5 per group [3]

The combination produced lower tumor volumes and terminal tumor weights than either monotherapy or vehicle. VE-821 alone also reduced tumor growth relative to vehicle in the displayed experiment. Body-weight trajectories were similar; this is not evidence of comprehensive safety.

Measured endpoints — not treatment concentrations
EndpointReported resultReference
Tumor volume trajectory and terminal tumor weightqualitative response Combination lower than cisplatin alone, VE-821 alone and vehicle; VE-821 monotherapy also lower than vehicle in this model.[3]
Body-weight trajectoryqualitative response No significant group difference was reported; similar trajectories over 3 weeks.[3]

Conditions shared by the study groups

Frequency
Every 3 days
Treatment course
3 weeks after initial treatment
Vehicle
Saline and CMC-Na controls; CMC-Na concentration unspecified.
Study groups and reported outcomes
Group / doseComparatorObserved resultReference
Vehicle controlReference groupGreatest tumor growth in the displayed comparison.[3]
VE-821 monotherapy
VE-821 3 mg/kg
Saline i.p. plus CMC-Na p.o.Lower tumor growth than vehicle; higher tumor burden than combination.[3]
Cisplatin monotherapy
Cisplatin 5 mg/kg
Saline i.p. plus CMC-Na p.o.Lower tumor burden than vehicle; higher than combination.[3]
VE-821 plus cisplatin
VE-821 3 mg/kg plus cisplatin 5 mg/kg
Vehicle and both monotherapy groupsLower tumor volumes and terminal weights than either monotherapy or vehicle.[3]
Vehicle control
Model: MKN45 xenograft; n = 5 mice per group
Route: Saline i.p.; CMC-Na p.o.
Reported limits: Sex and detailed oral formulation not specified in read main methods; cohort replication wording is ambiguous.
VE-821 monotherapy
Model: MKN45 xenograft; n = 5 mice per group
Route: VE-821 p.o.; saline i.p.
Reported limits: Sex and detailed oral formulation not specified in read main methods; cohort replication wording is ambiguous.
Cisplatin monotherapy
Model: MKN45 xenograft; n = 5 mice per group
Route: Cisplatin i.p.; CMC-Na p.o.
Reported limits: Sex and detailed oral formulation not specified in read main methods; cohort replication wording is ambiguous.
VE-821 plus cisplatin
Model: MKN45 xenograft; n = 5 mice per group
Route: VE-821 p.o.; cisplatin i.p.
Reported limits: Sex and detailed oral formulation not specified in read main methods; cohort replication wording is ambiguous.
Methods and source locations

Compound reported in the paper: VE-821

Evidence concerns the paper’s named VE-821 material and experimental model; it does not validate the current Adooq lot or establish human efficacy.

Figure 5A–D and caption; Results, in vivo VE-821/cisplatin; Methods, Reagents, Xenograft model and Statistical analysis

Tumor volume trajectory and terminal tumor weight: Caliper volume and harvested-tumor weights; n = 5 mice per group; no curve-derived decimals. — Figure 5A, C and D; Xenograft model

Body-weight trajectory: Body weight recorded every 3 days; narrow tolerability observation only. — Figure 5B; associated in vivo Results

Vehicle control · Figure 5A–D and caption; Results, in vivo VE-821/cisplatin; Methods, Reagents, Xenograft model and Statistical analysis

VE-821 monotherapy · Figure 5A–D and caption; Results, in vivo VE-821/cisplatin; Methods, Reagents, Xenograft model and Statistical analysis

Cisplatin monotherapy · Figure 5A–D and caption; Results, in vivo VE-821/cisplatin; Methods, Reagents, Xenograft model and Statistical analysis

VE-821 plus cisplatin · Figure 5A–D and caption; Results, in vivo VE-821/cisplatin; Methods, Reagents, Xenograft model and Statistical analysis

Specifications

Manufacturer Adooq Bioscience
Actions Inhibitor
CAS Number 1232410-49-9
Applications ATM/ATR inhibitor
Formula C18H16N4O3S
Molecular Weight 368.4
SMILES
CS(=O)(=O)C1=CC=C(C=C1)C2=CN=C(C(=N2)C(=O)NC3=CC=CC=C3)N

Storage & Solubility

In Vitro Solubility

Reported Solubility

SolventReported Solubility
DMSO 65 mg/mL (176.43 mM)
Water Insoluble
Ethanol Insoluble

Preparing Stock Solutions

Stock preparation is unavailable for this product molecular weight.

Calculated stock concentrations do not establish solvent solubility. Refer to the reported solubility data for experimental guidance.

In Vivo Preparation

Concentration
28 mg/mL
Vehicle
30% PEG400+0.5% Tween80+5% propylene glycol

Storage

Store powder at -20°C, keep desiccated.
In powder form, the chemical is stable for 36 months.
In solution, store at -20°C and use within 1 month to prevent loss of potency. Aliquot to avoid multiple freeze/thaw cycles.

Research References

  1. [1] Prevo R, Fokas E, Reaper PM, et al. The novel ATR inhibitor VE-821 increases sensitivity of pancreatic cancer cells to radiation and chemotherapy Cancer biology & therapy (2012). PMID: 22825331 DOI: 10.4161/cbt.21093 Source material
  2. [2] Kanu N, Cerone MA, Goh G, et al. DNA replication stress mediates APOBEC3 family mutagenesis in breast cancer Genome biology (2016). PMID: 27634334 DOI: 10.1186/s13059-016-1042-9 Source material
  3. [3] Su H, Yuan Y, Tang J, et al. The ATR inhibitor VE-821 increases the sensitivity of gastric cancer cells to cisplatin Translational oncology (2023). PMID: 37517142 DOI: 10.1016/j.tranon.2023.101743 Source material

Publications

7 publications citing this product

  1. Yiovana Veronica Okraine, .et al. , Cell Death Dis, 2025, Jul 8;16(1):503 PMID: 40628724
  2. Atsushi Saito, .et al. , Cell Rep, 2023, May 30;42(5):112479 PMID: 37178686
  3. Mitsuru Sasaki-Honda, .et al. , Hum Mol Genet, 2018, Dec 1; 27(23): 4024-4035 PMID: 30107443
  4. Kim J, .et al. , Mol Cell, 2018, Jan 4;69(1):36-47.e7 PMID: 29249653
  5. Antonio Postigo, .et al. , Cell Rep, 2017, May 2; 19(5): 1022-1032 PMID: 28467896
  6. Nnennaya Kanu, .et al. , Genome Biol, 2016, 17: 185 PMID: 27634334
  7. Carolyn Botting, .et al. , Virol J, 2016, 13: 15 PMID: 26817608

Added to your cart

View Cart Checkout
Loading...