Total Synthesis of (±)-Communesin F via a Cycloaddition with Indol-2-one

Johannes Belmar and Raymond L. Funk

 DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja307277w

It has been some time since my last entry. I was very busy with moving to the US and starting my master’s thesis. But as you can see after about 12 weeks I am back. I chose a rather short synthesis but there is still some work to be covered within the next weeks which should result in much more detailed write-ups.

The communesins are known to the synthetic community for quite a while and were the targets of extensive research and synthetic studies. The current paper utilized some nice methodology developed by the group and published in an earlier synthesis of perophoramidine. [1]

The synthesis begins with the union of azide 1 and bromooxindole 2. Because their initially reported conditions did not give any product at all it was found that the reaction proceeded smoothly in the presence of substoichiometric amounts of silver carbonate yielding 3. After tosylation the mixture was exposed to methanolysis to produce the backbone structure 4 of communesin F. Methylation with Meerweins’s salt, hydrogenolysis of the azide with subsequent Boc-protection and detosylation furnished amide 5.

 Scheme 1

The bromine was then used as a handle to introduce the prenyl sidechain with a Heck reaction to give an intermediate allylic alcohol. In the presence of mercury salts a cyclization took place constructing the crucial seven-membered amine ring. Deprotection of the amine under mild conditions using TBSOTf was followed by amide formation with some help from trimethylaluminium. The second side-chain was introduced in the usual sequence of deprotonation and subsequent alkylation with iodoacetonitrile.

 Scheme 2

The last ring was closed in a straightforward manner. Reduction of the nitrile to the aldehyde and the amide to the hemiaminal gave tetrahydrofuran 9. Reductive amination and acetylation finally produced communesin F in an overall yield of 6.7 %.

Scheme 3

The mechanism of the key step is pretty straightforward but nevertheless a nice one. After tosylating the oxindole nitrogen the resulting amide can be cleaved by methoxide to give an anilide anion which undergoes intramolecular attack on the indolenine 2 position to close the ring.

Scheme 4

[1] J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 5068

Yeah… that is it for the moment. I found some new interesting stuff to write-up, so I promise I will be up to date from now on J

Total Synthesis of Akuammiline Alkaloid (−)-Vincorine via Intramolecular Oxidative Coupling

Total Synthesis of Akuammiline Alkaloid (−)-Vincorine via Intramolecular Oxidative Coupling

Weiwei Zi, Weiqing Xie, and Dawei Ma

 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja303602f

Vincorine is a rather young target for the synthetic community of which only a racemic synthesis has been published by the Qin group (J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2009, 131, 6013). Besides vincorine the akuammiline alkaloid family contains several interesting members like strictamine, scholarisine and aspidophylline. Total syntheses of most of the family members have been published within the last 20 years.

The group planned to access the crucial C-C bond marked in orange via an oxidative coupling. From the earlier synthesis of communisine A and B the group gained some experience with this kind of coupling reaction. ^[1] The remaining disconnections are straightforward leading to the key building blocks O-methyl-serotonin, a selenoaldehyde and ethyl acrylate.

 Scheme 1

First serotonin derivative 1 was double protected with Boc₂O and oxidatively coupled to ethyl acrylate via a formal C-H activation under Pd(II) catalysis. ^[2] Hydrogenation of the

double bond and reduction of the ester gave alcohol 3 which was oxidized to the aldehyde and reacted with dimethyl malonate to give Michael acceptor 4. This was used in a highly stereoselective prolinol ether catalyzed Michael addition with the selenoaldehyde shown. Oxidation and base induced elimination furnished an exo-methylene group which shifted under the reaction conditions into conjugation but with the wrong geometry. Under UV-light irradiation the cis-double bond was changed into trans-configuration yielding key intermediate 6 in almost quantitative yield.

 Scheme 2

 

Going on with the synthesis the aldehyde was reduced, silylated, and the resulting ether heated on silica gel to remove selectively the indole Boc protecting group. In the presence of 2 equivalents of LHMDS and 1 equivalent of iodine the group was able to perform an awesome coupling reaction giving them almost the whole framework in one single step. Finally the least hindered methyl ester was removed under Krapcho’s decarboxylation conditions.

Scheme 3

 

The last ring was closed after direct conversion of the TBS ether into allyl chloride 10, Boc-removal with TMSOTf, and intramolecular alkylation to give 11. After reductive amination with formalin the group isolated (-)-Vincorine with an overall yield of 5 % over 18 steps in the longest linear sequence.

 Scheme 4

 

But how does the oxidative coupling work? The authors state that it might work through a radical mechanism as proposed in their communesin A and B syntheses. In the present publication no mechanism is given only some sort of transition state structure as is reproduced below. According to their postulation the doubly deprotonated starting material reacts through a Zimmermann-Traxler-like transition state stitching both ends together via intermediate radicals formed by two SET to iodine. In the last step the pyrrolidine ring is closed as usual.

 Scheme 5

 

During a group meeting we discussed the mechanistic rationale behind this reaction and came up with a mechanism like that shown below which is better harmonized with the usual reactivity observed in halogenation reactions with indoles. So after double deprotonation with LHMDS the indole 3-position is iodinated to form an indoline system which undergoes pyrrolo-indoline formation. The former indole nitrogen can then kicks out the iodide through a S_N2’-type reaction. Now the malonate anion attacks the former 3-position of the indole and closes stereospecifically to give the expected product. The obvious problem is the source of stereocontrol.

 Scheme 6

 

If you perform a minimization of the starting material then you will recognize that the unsaturated side chain with the bulky TBS group shields the upper face of the indole. I would think that this bulkiness is responsible for the observed facial selectivity of the iodine addition. The remaining steps are now stereospecific and can only lead to the product.

 Scheme 7

Or can someone offer me a better explanation with respect to the stereoselectivity observed?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Addendum:

As Dave suggested a lithium aggregate might be respsonsible for the oberserved stereoselectivity of the iodine attack. So I created the following 3D model and minimized it with ChemDraw. Given that lithium couples the enolate and the deprotonated indole nitrogen and is additionally coordinated by two THF molecules then you get this prediction. Maybe this offers another explanation for the observed stereoselectivity though I am still not satisfied with both models. Nevertheless big thanks for this suggestion.

Scheme 8

 Big THX to Bobby for proofreading and questions.

[1] http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/anie.201106205

[2] http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/anie.200500468

Synthesis of Dragmacidin D via Direct C-H Couplings

Debashis Mandal, Atsushi D. Yamaguchi, Junichiro Yamaguchi, and Kenichiro Itami

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja209945x

I thought about writing this review a few months ago but never found the time to get it done. But here it is and I hope you enjoy this cool paper as I did. I am a big fan of “flat” chemistry and C-H activation so naturally this piece had to be reviewed. Dragmacidin D itself shows some promising activity in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease. Only one total synthesis has been published by the Stoltz group in 2002 so there is still room for improvement. Retrosynthetically the group planned to stick all parts together via C-H activation/C-C coupling reactions.

 Scheme 1

The “sticky” –positions are marked in blue. As can be seen from this picture almost all crucial bonds can be formed through C-H activation (except the iodide).

Indole 1 was carboxylated to block the 3 position of the indole which would normally undergo iodination in the presence of NIS. Removal of the carboxyl group after halogenation gave indole 3. Tosylation was accomplished under standard conditions yielding the first coupling partner 4. Thiophene boronic acid 5 was oxidized to the corresponding alcohol to furnish after TIPS protection coupling partner 6. In the presence of Pd^II and silver(I) as the re-oxidant thiophene 7 formed in good yield on a gram scale. Desilylation and reductive desulfuration with Raney-Ni was followed by global deprotection and double MOM-protection to produce ketone 8. ^[1]

 Scheme 2

Next the 3 position of the indole moiety was again functionalized. This time pyrazine N-oxide was used in the presence of Pd^II to give 9. A TFAA mediated Polonovski-Potier rearrangement gave pyrazinone 10 which was used in a Friedel-Crafts-like acylation with 6-bromoindole to furnish 11 in good yield. Bromination of the ketone was accomplished via the TMS-enolate and NBS mediated bromination yielding 12. In the presence of Boc-guanidine Dragmacidin D was formed after deprotection.

 Scheme 3

 

Short and very efficient I would say. The only drawback might be that Dragmacidin D is formed in both enantiomeric forms. I was wondering how much silver the group stores in their laboratories J.

[1] Really a nice method to introduce the side chain on the indole. The net result is the reaction of an umpoled ketone with the aromatic ring.