Comment by A_D_E_P_T

If you're OP and you're considering clinical trials... well.... I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you've got another problem. The compound you've described was also described in the scientific literature (back in the 90s) and it's in at least one patent application:

> https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/37/75/89/204db4e...

See claim 16 and "compound 102." So, unfortunately, fatal prior art exists. (On the bright side, those scientists arrived at exactly your hypothesis.)

My own hypothesis, that deuteration would be useful, is also in the patent literature: https://patents.google.com/patent/US10406155

As is the deuterated isopropoxy!

I'd suggest an alternative, but merely mentioning it here might constitute prior art. If you're interested in discussing, my email is in my profile.