The structurally conserved lipopolysaccharide core region of many Gram-negative bacteria is composed of trisaccharides containing 4-O-phosphorylated L-glycero-D-manno-heptose (L,D-Hep) units, which act as ligands for antibodies and lectins. The disaccharides Glc-(1→3)-Hep4P Hep-(1→3)-Hep4P and Hep-(1→7)-Hep4P and the branched trisaccharide Glc-(1→3)-[Hep-(1→7)]-Hep4P, respectively, have been synthesized from a methyl heptopyranoside acceptor in less than 10 steps. The synthetic strategy was based on the early introduction of a phosphotriester at position 4 of heptose followed by a regioselective opening of a 6,7-O-(1,1,3,3-tetraisopropyl-1,3-disiloxane-1,3-diyl) group allowing for a straightforward access to glycosylation at position 7. Perbenzylated N-phenyl trifluoroacetimidate glucosyl and heptosyl derivatives served as α-selective glycosyl donors.
The structurally conserved lipopolysaccharide core region of many Gram-negative bacteria is composed of trisaccharides containing 4-O-phosphorylated L-glycero-D-manno-heptose (L,D-Hep) units, which act as ligands for antibodies and lectins. The disaccharides Glc-(1→3)-Hep4P Hep-(1→3)-Hep4P and Hep-(1→7)-Hep4P and the branched trisaccharide Glc-(1→3)-[Hep-(1→7)]-Hep4P, respectively, have been synthesized from a methyl heptopyranoside acceptor in less than 10 steps. The synthetic strategy was based on the early introduction of a phosphotriester at position 4 of heptose followed by a regioselective opening of a 6,7-O-(1,1,3,3-tetraisopropyl-1,3-disiloxane-1,3-diyl) group allowing for a straightforward access to glycosylation at position 7. Perbenzylated N-phenyl trifluoroacetimidate glucosyl and heptosyl derivatives served as α-selective glycosyl donors.
Lipopolysaccharide
(LPS) is a biomedically highly relevant glycolipid
located in the outer leaflet of the cell membrane of Gram-negative
bacteria.[1,2] LPS is essential for many functions of the
bacterial membrane, providing stability, a protective shield, and
permeation control, and is thus indispensable for the viability of
bacteria.[3] LPS is also a major virulence
factor which is involved in a multitude of interactions with the adaptive
and innate immune system of respective host organisms.[4,5] In structural terms, LPS of Enterobacteriaceae comprises a highly
variable O-antigenic polysaccharide chain followed by a core region
which provides the link to the endotoxic lipid A domain.[6−8] Within the core region, the inner part of enterobacterial LPS is
composed of the higher carbon sugars3-deoxy-d-manno-oct-2-ulosonic acid (Kdo) and l-glycero-d-manno-heptose (l,d-Hep) residues.[9] Specifically, phosphorylated
heptosyl units are important antigens suitable for the development
of vaccines against pathogenic bacteria such as Haemophilus
influenzae and Neisseria meningitidis.[10,11] A prototype phosphorylated heptose core structure as found in Escherichia coli and Salmonella entericaLPS is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Common inner core oligosaccharide
domains in enterobacterial LPS.
Common inner core oligosaccharide
domains in enterobacterial LPS.The branched 4-O-phosphorylated heptosyl
trisaccharide
core domain has recently been reported as essential part mediating
the binding to the cross-reactive antibacterial monoclonal antibody
WN1 222-5.[12−15] Of note, the paratope of this antibody mimics the receptor binding
site of Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR-4), wherein the 4-O-phosphoryl heptosyl domains are involved in multiple ionic and hydrogen-bonded
interactions.[16] In addition, l,d-heptosyl residues have recently been reported to interact
with C-type lectins such as lung surfactant protein D (SP-D), concanavalin
A, as well as bacterial lectins from Burkholderia cenocepacia.[17−20]Thus, the chemical synthesis of defined heptosyl oligosaccharides
is a challenging task in order to further elucidate the molecular
basis of these biomedically relevant protein–LPS interactions
and to provide ligands for immunochemical applications to be translated
into future vaccine development.[21] The
chemical synthesis of suitably protected heptosyl building blocks
has been accomplished by de novo approaches as well as by exquisite
orthogonal protecting group manipulations followed by selective glycosylation
strategies to produce spacer-equipped oligosaccharides corresponding
to LPS-inner core part structures related to Yersinia pestis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, N. meningitidis, and H. influenzae antigens.[22−26] The latter target structures comprised 4-O-β-d-glucopyranosylheptosyl units with 6-O-phosphorylethanolamine substitution introduced at the
neighboring l,d-Hep residue.[27,28]The disaccharide fragment Hep4P-(1→3)-Hep4P has previously
been synthesized from an orthogonally protected disaccharide precursor
which was phosphorylated following cleavage of the respective protective
group at either of the 4-positions.[29] Herein
we disclose a highly convergent approach allowing access to α-glucosylated
4-O-phosphorylated heptosides based on an early introduction
of a 4-O-phosphotriester moiety, thereby minimizing
the number of protection and deblocking steps. In addition, in combination
with a regioselective opening of a 1,1,3,3-tetraisopropyldisiloxane-1,3-diyl
(TIPDS) protecting group to give O-7 acceptor heptoside derivatives,
a straightforward assembly of several (1→7)- and (1→3)-linked
4-O-phosphorylated heptosides, has been elaborated.
Results
and Discussion
The common enterobacterial heptose region
as shown in Figure 1 reveals a repetitive substitution
pattern comprising
two heptosyl units harboring a 4-O-phosphoryl substituent
which are extended at position 3 by another glycose residue (note:
a reversed pattern is seen in N. meniningitidis and H. influenzaeLPS, wherein a β-d-glucopyranosyl
residue is present at O-4). The 3-O-α-d-glucosyl substituted heptose residue is additionally substituted
at O-7 by a second heptose unit. Thus, retrosynthetic analysis would
suggest assembling these ligands from a side-chain protected heptoside
precursor to be converted into the corresponding 4-O-phosphotriester intermediate (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Retrosynthetic
analysis for the synthesis of 4-O-phosphorylated
heptosyl glycosides.
Retrosynthetic
analysis for the synthesis of 4-O-phosphorylated
heptosyl glycosides.Regioselective 2,3-O-orthoester opening
should
then allow for extension at O-3, while regioselective opening of the
protecting group at the side chain would generate a 7-OHglycosyl
acceptor. Thus, several phosphorylated heptosyl LPS ligands would
be accessible from a common 4-O-phosphorylated building
block, thereby minimizing the number of protecting group manipulations—a
highly important issue in current oligosaccharide synthesis.[30] The presence of a protected phosphate moiety
to be kept throughout the synthesis, however, clearly implicates additional
synthetic challenges to be met during the assembly of the oligosaccharide.Methyl l-glycero-d-manno-heptopyranoside 1, obtained previously by the Brimacombe
approach,[31] was used for the regioselective
protection of the side-chain diol at C6 and C7. Reaction of crystalline 1 with TIPDSCl2 in the presence of imidazole gave
directly the 6,7-O-TIPDS-protected derivative 2 in 87% yield (Scheme 1).
Scheme 1
Synthesis
of Fully Differentiated 4-O-Phosphorylated
Heptoside Acceptor Derivatives
Starting from the TIPDS-protected heptoside 2, two
approaches for the differentiation of the remaining hydroxyl groups
were developed via initial selective syn-2,3-O-orthoester formation. The first approach utilized the
2,3-O-orthobenzoate as a temporary protecting group
that is sufficiently stable to allow phosphorylation using phosphoramidite-based
coupling methodology. Indeed, reaction of the intermediate orthoester
with dibenzyl N,N-diisopropylaminophosphoramidite/1H-tetrazole[32] followed by oxidation
with m-CPBA gave a separable mixture of the two diastereomers 3a/3b (∼3:1) in 89% yield. The phosphoester substitution
at position 4 was confirmed by the respective heteronuclear 1H/31P and 13C/31P spin-coupling
interactions. Selective acid-induced orthoester opening then furnished
2-O-benzoate 4 in 72% yield together
with minor amounts of the corresponding 3-O-benzoate 5. The orthoester mixture was also directly converted into
2,3-di-O-benzoate 6 in a two-step yield
of 89%. Alternatively, the intermediate orthobenzoate was directly
opened by the action of camphorsulfonic acid to give 2-O-benzoate 7 (82%) which was further transformed into
the 3-O-Lev-protected compound 8 via
a Steglich-type protocol in 96% yield. Almost complete regioselectivity
in the latter step was achieved by gradually treating the reaction
mixture with a solution of DCC (note: the 3,4-di-O-levulinated byproduct, however, was readily formed when the reaction
was performed under conventional reaction conditions). Formation of
the corresponding 4-O-Lev-protected isomer was not
observed. Subsequent phosphotriester formation at position 4 of the
3-O-Lev derivative 8 was uneventful
and delivered the orthogonally protected compound 9 in
81% yield.Next, the 7-OH acceptor derivatives 10 and 11 were approached by a selective partial cleavage
of the 6,7-O-TIPDS group of fully protected intermediates 6 and 9, respectively. This methodology was originally
developed by the group of Ziegler[33,34] for hexopyranosides
and has so far been exclusively used in this context. Initially, this
protodesilylation was attempted with HF-pyridine as reagent, according
to the published protocol, but turned out to be difficult to elaborate
into a reliable procedure for the regioselective opening of the exocyclic
TIPDS group in heptoside derivatives 6 and 9, respectively. Even when the reagent was added in moderate excess
and at low temperatures, the undesirable cleavage of both silyl ether
groups could not be completely suppressed. Still, by close monitoring
of the reaction and careful handling during the workup, a good selectivity
and high isolated yield could be achieved for compound 10. Eventually, exchange of the reagent to triethylamine trihydrofluoride
(TREAT) allowed for a better control of the reaction progress and
resulted in a reliable and scalable preparation of 10 and 11, respectively, since complete desilylation by
TREAT would require substantially more reagent amounts, higher temperatures,
and extended reaction times.[35] The 6-O-FTIPDS-protected acceptor 10 was stable
upon storage for several months in a refrigerator. Also, a trial experiment
of acceptor 11 under glycosylation conditions (at −40
°C in the presence of boron trifluoride etherate) indicated that
the 6-O-FTIPDS group was not affected.The
4-O-phosphorylated heptoside acceptor derivatives 4, 10, and 11 then served as versatile
precursors for ready attachment of sugars at O-3 (4)
as well as O-7 (10, 11), allowing also for
subsequent coupling steps to give O-7/O-3 disubstituted products.For the synthesis of heptosyl oligosaccharides, trihaloacetimidate
leaving groups developed by Schmidt have mainly been used.[36,37] Initially, the readily available per-O-acetylated N-phenyltrifluoroacetimidatedonor 13 was tested,
since it usually provides a good stereocontrol in the glycosylation
step via 2-O-acyl group participation leading to
1,2-trans glycosides. Several glycosylation attempts
utilizing 13 and the glycosyl acceptor molecules 4 or 10, however, produced mainly orthoester
species accompanied by other byproducts which were not further analyzed.
As the imidate 13 has recently been reported to be a
suitable donor for the glycosylation of a 2,3,4,6-tetra-O-acetylheptoside acceptor,[38] the poor
outcome of the glycosylation reactions at the primary alcohol position
of 10 may thus have been due to the steric bulk imposed
by the adjacent FTIPDS group. Hence, an “armed” per-O-benzylated heptosyl donor was envisaged to be more effective
and was prepared in a straightforward sequence from the known[31] hexa-O-acetyl heptose derivative 12 (Scheme 2). First, treatment of 12 with thiophenol in the presence of excess boron trifluoride
etherate gave a separable mixture of the anomeric phenyl 1-thioglycoside
in 88% yield. The anomeric mixture as well as the isolated α-glycoside 14 was then processed into the phenyl penta-O-benzyl-1-thioglycoside 16 in a combined yield of 80%
via sodium methoxide catalyzed transesterification to give 15 followed by benzylation. Subsequent hydrolysis of the thioglycoside
with NBS gave the lactol 17 in 85% yield, which was eventually
converted into the N-phenyltrifluoroacetimidate (NPTFA)
derivative 18. The corresponding tetra-O-benzyl d-glucopyranosyl NPTFAdonor 19 was
prepared according to published procedures.[39] Depending on the mode of activation of the leaving group of donor 19 and the solvent used, highly selective glucosylation reactions
have been reported leading to either β- or α-selective
glycoside formation.[39,40]
Scheme 2
Synthesis of Heptosyl and Glucosyl Donors
Glycosylation of alcohol 10 using a slight excess
of heptosyl donor 18 was performed in dichloromethane
in the presence of 0.05 equiv of TMSOTf. The coupling step proceeded
smoothly and gave a separable 4.9:1 anomeric mixture of disaccharides 20a and 20b in 83% yield (Scheme 3). No relevant side reaction was observed when working at
a temperature of −78 °C. TLC indicated that the glycosylation
reaction was already complete within 20 min. The α-anomeric
configuration of the distal heptose unit in 20a was inferred
from the value of the heteronuclear JC-1,H-1 coupling constant (172 Hz)—being in the expected range for
an α-d-manno-configuration—in
contrast to 20b, which had a JC-1,H-1 coupling constant of 153.5 Hz. In addition, the assigned substitution
at position 7 was supported by HMBC correlation signals from H-1 of
the distal heptose (δ 5.02) to C-7 (δ 66.9) of the methyl
heptoside unit in 20a as well as, conversely, from H-7b
(δ 3.74) to the anomeric carbon of the distal heptose unit in 20b, respectively. Similarly, the glycosylation reaction of
the 3-O-levulinoyl derivative 11 was
performed at −39 °C and provided a 4.1:1 anomeric mixture
(ratio based on the integration values of the downfield-shifted H-2
signals) of 21a and 21b in 72% yield. Disaccharide 21a was isolated by HPLC and was then subjected to treatment
with hydrazine acetate to furnish the glycosyl acceptor derivative 22 in 84% yield.
Scheme 3
Synthesis of the (1→7) Linked 4-O-Phosphorylated
Heptobioside
In contrast to the
smooth glycosylation of the primary alcohol 10, glycosylation
at position 3 of acceptor 4 using heptosyl imidate 18 met with difficulties (Scheme 4).
Specifically, the reaction required a higher
temperature, and the donor 18 was consumed by debenzylation
at O-6/intramolecular cyclization with formation of the known[24] 1,6-anhydro sugar 25. In order
to suppress this side reaction, heptosyl donor 18 (2
equiv) was slowly added to a mixture of acceptor and promotor, but
the isolated yield of pure α-anomer 24 did not
exceed 36% under various reaction conditions tested. In contrast,
the synthesis of the related 3-O-glucosyl derivative 23 using donor 19 was robust (∼75% glycosylation
yield) and gave good isolated yields of the pure α-anomer (>60%)
with a temperature-dependent α to β ratio between 3:1
to 5:1 (with slightly increased α-selectivity observed for glycosylations
at higher temperatures). The α-anomeric configuration of the d-glucosyl residue in compound 23 was inferred
from the JH-1,H-2 coupling
constant (3.4 Hz).
Scheme 4
Synthesis of (1→3) Linked 4-O-Phosphorylated Heptoside
Derivative
Based on the results
obtained for the synthesis of the disaccharides,
trisaccharide 27 was targeted via a short route by converting
α-glucosyl-(1→3)-heptoside 23 into the corresponding
7-O-acceptor 26 (Scheme 5). Again, regioselective TIPDS cleavage of 23 by the action of TREAT was accomplished in high yield thereby providing
evidence that this methodology is also applicable at the disaccharide
stage. Gratifyingly, the 6-O-FTIPDS group was compatible with the
ensuing coupling step using 1.5 equiv of donor 18 and
0.05 equiv of TMSO-triflate as promotor. Additional promotor, however,
had to be added, and the temperature was gradually raised from −40
to 0 °C in order to drive the reaction to completion. Thus, a
3.3:1 α/β anomeric mixture of trisaccharides was formed
in 69% yield, from which the α-glycoside 27 was
eventually isolated in 51% yield by HPLC separation. As minor byproducts,
the 1,6-anhydroheptose derivative 25 and a 7-O-trimethylsilyl acceptor derivative were also isolated.
Scheme 5
Two Synthetic Pathways toward Phosphorylated Trisaccharide 27
Alternatively, the
glycosylation sequence was reversed and the
(1→7)-linked heptobioside 22 was subjected to
glycosylation with the trifluoroacetimidate glucosyl donor 19. The coupling reaction of 19 with 22 produced
a separable mixture of the anomeric trisaccharides in 82% yield and
in high α-selectivity (α/β = 9:1). The trisaccharide 27 was eventually obtained after HPLC purification in 74%
isolated yield. Both pathways delivered the protected trisaccharide 27 in comparable overall yield (17% versus 19%) but in a different
number of steps (five versus seven steps when starting from 2).In summary, the side-chain TIPDS protecting group
pattern turned
out as a versatile means for chain elongation at the primary alcohol
group of l,d-heptose. No evidence for 6-O-glycosylated products was found throughout these glycosylation
steps.Global deprotection of 6, 20a, 23, 24, and 27 was performed
by
initial desilylation, followed by hydrogenation and final alkaline
saponification of the benzoate ester groups, and was optimized using
monosaccharide 6 (Scheme 6). The
choice to first cleave the silyl-protecting group allowed for an additional
chromatographic purification step prior to final deprotection. However,
careful optimization of the desilylation conditions and close monitoring
was necessary to prevent partial debenzylation of the phosphate moiety[41,42] forming water-soluble compounds, in particular, when the more reactive
HF–pyridine reagent was used. Treatment with TREAT, however,
provided a safe alternative. Hydrogenolysis of 28 followed
by alkaline transesterification/ester hydrolysis of the dibenzoate 29 yielded the known 4-O-phosphoryl heptoside 30.[43,44] The di- and trisaccharide derivatives
were treated similarly to the deprotection of the monosaccharide 6. The desilylation of 23 and 24 was accomplished under mild TREAT conditions affording 34 and 37 without significant phosphate–debenzylation.
By contrast, the 7-O-heptosides 20a and 27, respectively, required the more reactive HF–pyridine
reagent under carefully monitored reaction conditions to afford 31 and 40 in good isolated yields and without
hydrolysis of the benzyl phosphate group. Hydrogenolysis and alkaline
ester cleavage was uneventful in all cases, complicated only by the
fact that benzoylated heptosides 32, 38,
and 41 were insoluble in MeOH at basic pH and needed
addition of water to achieve quantitative cleavage. The formed methylbenzoate
and benzoic acid were subsequently extracted with Et2O
or CHCl3, respectively. The NMR data of 30 and 39 were in good agreement with published values.[29,44] The structures of 33, 39, and 42 were fully assigned on the basis of one- and two-dimensional NMR
measurements, and this data will be used in ongoing STD-NMR experiments
with heptose-binding lectins.
Scheme 6
Global Deprotection of Oligosaccharides
Conclusions and Outlook
A straightforward synthetic route toward LPS-oligosaccharide fragments
containing a central 4-O-phosphorylated heptosyl
residue has been established. This strategy capitalizes on the introduction
of the required phosphorylation pattern already at the early stage
of monosaccharide building blocks followed by a regioselective partial
cleavage of a side-chain TIPDS protecting group as a robust and high-yielding
method to generate fully protected 7-O-heptosyl acceptor
derivatives. In addition, the presence of the resulting 6-O-fluorosilyl protecting group after regioselective TIPDS
cleavage may also be exploited for subsequent selective substitution
at position 6 of heptoses. The selective ring-opening of a side-chain
locked TIPDS group should also work for the synthesis of other higher-carbonsugars such as Kdo and provide rapid access to 8-O-substituted Kdo
derivatives.In conclusion, starting from a methyl heptoside,
less than 10 steps
were needed to complete the synthesis of a series of α-(1→3)-
and α-(1→7)-connected LPSheptose fragments (Figure 3).
Figure 3
Summary of di- and trisaccharide ligands derived from
the TIPDS-protected
4-O-phosphotriester precursor.
Summary of di- and trisaccharide ligands derived from
the TIPDS-protected
4-O-phosphotriester precursor.
Experimental Section
General Methods
All starting materials and reagents
were purchased from commercial sources and used without further purification.
DCM was distilled from CaH2 and stored over molecular sieves
4 Å. Residual moisture was confirmed by Karl Fischer tritration
to be at least below 5 ppm. Reactions were monitored by TLC on silica
gel 60 F254 plates; spots were detected by UV light examination or
visualized by spraying with anisaldehyde–sulfuric acid and
heating. Normal-phase column chromatography was performed on silica
gel 60 (230–400 mesh) or on prepacked SPE columns (2 g/6 mL).
Preparative normal-phase HPLC was performed on column A (250 ×
20 mm, S-5 μm, 6 nm) or column B (250 × 10 mm, S-5 μm,
6 nm). NMR spectra were recorded at 297 K in the solvent indicated,
with 300 and 600 MHz instruments, respectively, employing standard
software provided by the manufacturer. 1H NMR spectra were
referenced to tetramethylsilane (TMS, δ = 0) or by calibration
with the residual solvent peaks for solutions in organic solvents
and to DSS for solutions in D2O. 13C NMR spectra
were referenced to TMS (δ = 0), residual solvent peaks (CDCl3, δ = 77.0, CD3OD, δ = 49.0) in organic
solvents and to 1,4-dioxane (δ = 67.4) for solutions in D2O. 31P NMR spectra in D2O were referenced
to external H3PO4 (δ = 0). Assignments
were based on COSY, HSQC, and HMBC experiments. HPLC–MS monitoring
was done by injection of 0.01–0.1% solutions (5–20 μL)
on a system with two gradient pumps, degasser, and a LCMS-2200 EV
detector with mobile phase A = H2O (0.1% HCOOH) and mobile
phase B = CH3CN (0.1% HCOOH) on a column (3.5 μm,
100 Å, 4.6 × 150 mm). Method A: flow rate: 0.75 mL/min (0–22
min); gradient: 0–2 min: 85% B, 2–17 min: 85–40%
B, 17–22 min: 40% B. Method B: flow rate: 0.75 mL/min (0–22
min); gradient: 0–2 min: 95% B, 2–17 min: 95–40%
B, 17–22 min: 40% B. Accurate mass analysis (2 ppm mass accuracy)
was carried out from 10–100 mg/L solutions via LC–TOFMS
measurements using an autosampler, an HPLC system with binary pumps,
degasser, and column thermostat and ESI-TOF mass spectrometer.
General
Procedure 1 for Cleavage of the 6-O-FTIPDS Group with
TREAT
The fully protected heptoside was coevaporated with
toluene, dissolved in dry DCM (1–6 mL), and transferred into
a Teflon flask. TREAT (0.3 mL, ∼150 equiv of F–) was added dropwise to the vigorously stirred solution, which was
kept at rt for 15–21 h. The solution was poured into a stirred
mixture of cold 50% aqNaHCO3 and EtOAc. Phases were separated,
and the aqueous layer was extracted twice with EtOAc. The combined
organic layers were washed with satd aq NaHCO3 and brine,
dried (Na2SO4), concentrated, and coevaporated
with toluene. The crude material was then purified by silica gel chromagraphy.
General Procedure 2 for Hydrogenolysis of Benzyl Derivatives
A solution of the heptoside in dry MeOH (5–8 mL) was purged
with argon, and 10% Pd/C was added. The atmosphere was exchanged for
H2, and the suspension was stirred at rt for the time indicated.
The atmosphere was exchanged to argon, and the suspension was filtered
through Celite and washed repeatedly with MeOH. The filtrate was concentrated
to yield the acidic form or was treated with Et3N and concentrated
to afford the target compound as Et3N species.
Compound 6 (290 mg, 0.310 mmol)
was dissolved in dry DCM (15 mL), transferred into a Teflon flask,
and cooled in an ice bath. HF–pyridine reagent (88 μL,
∼10 equiv of F–) was added in four portions
every 2 min to prevent local overheating. The solution was stirred
for 35 min at 0 °C. The reaction was quenched by dropping the
solution into stirred ice-cold satd aq NaHCO3 (60 mL).
The aqueous layer was extracted with DCM (3 × 30 mL), and the
combined organic layers were washed with satd aq NaHCO3, and brine, dried (Na2SO4), and concentrated.
The crude material (19.8 mg) was purified by column chromatography
(SiO2: 17 g, toluene/EtOAc 2:3) to furnish 10 (245 mg, 83%).
Peracetate 12(31) (1.00 g,
2.16 mmol) was dissolved in
dry DCM (10 mL), and the solution was stripped with argon for several
minutes. Thiophenol (0.44 mL, 4.3 mmol) and then BF3·OEt2 (1.33 mL, 10.8 mmol) were added dropwise, each within ∼15
min, and the solution was stirred at rt for 23 h. The reaction mixture
was poured into 1:1 DCM/satd aq NaHCO3 (100 mL). The phases
were separated, and the aqueous layer was extracted with DCM (3×).
The combined organic layer was washed twice with satd aq NaHCO3, 0.5% aq I2-solution, 5% aqNa2S2O3, and brine. The organic phase was dried (Na2SO4) and concentrated. The crude material was purified
by vacuum flash chromatography (SiO2: 22 g, hexane/EtOAc
2:1) to give 14 as an anomeric mixture (980 mg, 88.4%,
α/β ∼ 93:7) that was used for the further steps.
To obtain pure α-anomer, the material was crystallized from
hot dry EtOH (10 mL) to give 14 as colorless crystals
(657 mg, 59%), mp 109–111 °C (EtOH). The anomers can alternatively
be separated by chromatography using Et2O/hexane 3:2 as
eluent. Analytical data for α-anomer 14: R 0.21 (hexane/Et2O 2:3); [α]D20 +93.9 (c 1.9, CHCl3); 1H NMR (600 MHz, CDCl3) δ 7.43–7.40 (m, 2H, PhH), 7.34–7.26
(m, 3H, PhH), 5.62 (d, J = 1.6 Hz,
1H, H-1), 5.52 (dd, J = 1.5, 3.4 Hz, 1H, H-2), 5.37
(app t, J = 10.1, 1H, H-4), 5.31 (dd, J = 3.4, 10.1 Hz, 1H, H-3), 5.29 (ddd, J = 2.0, 5.6,
7.5 Hz, 1H, H-6), 4.55 (dd, J = 2.1, 10.0 Hz, 1H,
H-5), 4.03 (dd, J = 5.8, 11.4 Hz, 1H, H-7a), 3.99
(dd, J = 7.5, 11.4 Hz, 1H, H-7b), 2.18, 2.12, 2.04,
2.01, and 1.90 (5s, 5 × 3H, CHC=O); 13C NMR (151 MHz, CDCl3)
δ 170.3, 170.2, 169.9, 169.8, 169.55 (5 × C=O), 132.5, 130.9, 129.4, 127.9 (PhC), 85.6 (C-1),
70.9 (C-2), 69.7 (C-5), 69.6 (C-3), 67.0 (C-6), 64.8 (C-4), 61.8 (C-7),
20.9, 20.64, 20.59, 20.58, 20.5 (5 × CH3C=O); HRMS (+ESI-TOF) m/z [M + NH4]+ calcd for C23H32NO11S 530.1691, found 530.1680.
Thioglycoside 15 (310 mg, 1.025 mmol) was coevaporated
with toluene and dissolved
in dry DMF (20 mL). The solution was cooled to 0 °C, and NaH
(60%, 226 mg, 5.65 mmol, 5.5 equiv) was added in portions. The resulting
slurry was stirred for ∼0.5 h, and benzyl bromide (0.74 mL,
6.15 mmol, 6.0 equiv) was added dropwise. The reaction mixture was
warmed to rt and was stirred for 18 h. Since mainly two polar spots
were visible on TLC (toluene/EtOAc 20:1, EtOAc/MeOH = 4:1), additional
NaH (75 mg, 1.87 mmol, ∼1.8 equiv) was added at 0 °C.
The ice bath was removed, and stirring was continued for 20 min. BnBr
(0.06 mL, 0.25 mmol, 0.24 equiv) was added, and the mixture was stirred
for an additional 45 min without significant additional formation
of product. MeOH (0.84 mL, ∼20 equiv) was added leading to
formation of H2 (caution!). After 30 min, the reaction
mixture was separated between Et2O (50 mL) and satd aqNaHCO3 (100 mL). The aqueous layer was extracted with Et2O (50 mL), and the combined organic layers were washed with
satd aq NaHCO3 (50 mL), water (50 mL), and brine (50 mL).
The organic layer was dried (Na2SO4), filtered,
and concentrated, and the residue was coevaporated with toluene. The
crude material was submitted to vacuum flash chromatography (SiO2: 30 g toluene → toluene/EtOAc 120:1→80:1) to
give 16 (625.5 mg, 81%) as a colorless oil: [α]D20 +73.6 (c 0.8, CHCl3); 1H NMR (600 MHz, CDCl3) δ 7.39–7.36
(m, 4H, PhH), 7.34–7.19 (m, 26H, PhH), 5.75 (d, J = 1.7 Hz, 1H, H-1), 4.88
and 4.34 (2 d, J = 11.0 Hz, 2H, CHPh), 4.84 and 4.52 (2 d, J = 11.8 Hz, 2H, CHPh),
4.76 and 4.63 (2 d, J = 12.2 Hz, 2H, CHPh), 4.57 (bs, 2H, CHPh), 4.38 and 4.35 (2 d, J = 11.9 Hz, 2H, CHPh),
4.25 (app t, J = 9.5 Hz, 1H, H-4), 4.15–4.11
(m, 2H, H-5, H-6), 3.98 (dd, J = 2.0, 2.9 Hz, 1H,
H-2), 3.88 (dd, J = 3.0, 9.1 Hz, 1H, H-3), 3.69 (dd, J = 6.7, 10.0 Hz, 1H, H-7a), 3.46 (dd, J = 5.1, 10.0 Hz, 1H, H-7b); 13C NMR (151 MHz, CDCl3) δ 138.7, 138.7, 138.2, 138.1, 137.95 (PhC), 134.4 (SPhC-1), 130.7, 128.9, 128.4, 128.33, 128.29, 128.2, 127.9,
127.73, 127.71, 127.68, 127.6, 127.50, 127.47, 127.35, and 127.0 (PhC), 85.2 (C-1), 80.6 (C-3), 76.0 (C-2), 75.3 (C-6), 74.7
(CH2Ph), 74.35 (C-4), 73.3 (CH2Ph), 73.1 (C-5), 72.8 (CH2Ph), 72.1 (CH2Ph), 72.0 (CH2Ph), 71.0 (C-7); HRMS (+ESI-TOF) m/z [M + NH4]+ calcd
for C48H52NO6S 770.3510, found 770.3544.
A
solution of dibenzylphosphate 28 (117 mg, 0.169 mol)
in MeOH (8 mL) was treated with 10% Pd/C (23 mg) for 2 h according
to general procedure 2. The filtrate was concentrated to give 29 (87 mg, quant) as a glasslike solid: [α]D20 −55.1 (c 0.25, MeOD); 1H NMR (600 MHz, MeOD) δ 8.07–8.04 (m, 2H, BzH2/6),
7.98–7.95 (m, 2H, BzH2/6), 7.65–7.60 (m, 1H, BzH4),
7.54–7.50 (m, 1H, BzH4), 7.50–7.45 (m, 2H, BzH3/5),
7.37–7.32 (m, 2H, BzH3/5), 5.62–5.60 (m, 2H, H-2, H-3),
5.06 (app q, J = 10.3 Hz, 1H, H-4), 4.91 (bs, 1H,
H-1), 4.17 (app t, J = 7.0 Hz, 1H, H-6), 4.02 (bd, J = 9.8 Hz, 1H, H-5), 3.79 (dd, J = 10.5,
6.8 Hz, 1H, H-7a), 3.76 (dd, J = 10.5, 7.1 Hz, 1H,
H-7b), 3.50 (s, 3H, OCH3); 13C NMR (151 MHz,
MeOD) δ 167.2, 166.9 (2 × C=O), 134.7, 134.16, 131.1,
131.0, 130.7, 129.6, 129.2 (PhC), 100.1 (C-1), 72.7
(d, JC,P = 2.2 Hz, C-3), 71.6 (d, JC,P = 5.5 Hz, C-5), 71.5 (C-2), 71.1 (d, JC,P = 4.9 Hz, C-4), 69.8 (C-6), 63.3 (C-7),
55.8 (OCH3); HRMS (−ESI-TOF) m/z calcd for C22H25O12P [M – H]− 511.1011,
found 511.1013; HRMS (+ESI-TOF) m/z [M + H]+ calcd for C22H26O12P 513.1156, found 513.1159.
Methyl l-glycero-α-d-manno-Heptopyranoside
4-O-Phosphate
Monosodium Salt (30)
A solution of 29 (74 mg, 0.144 mmol) in MeOH (5 mL) was treated with 0.1 M methanolicNaOMe solution (13 mL). The solution (pH of ∼11) was stirred
for 10 h at rt and made neutral by addition of cation-exchange resin
(H+-form). The resin was filtered off, and the filtrate
was concentrated. The residue was dissolved in water, extracted with
Et2O and the aqueous phase was passed through a PD-10 column
(water). Product containing fractions were pooled and lyophilized
to give 47 mg (94%) of compound 30: [α]D21 +73.6 (c 0.35, H2O) [lit.[43] [α]D20 +60.1 (c 0.22, H2O); lit.[44] [α]D20 +30 (c 1.0,
H2O)]; NMR data agree with ref (44). A different chemical shift of C-4 has been
reported in ref (43) (72.39 ppm): 13C NMR (151 MHz, D2O) δ
101.5 (C-1), 71.9 (C-3), 71.4 (d, JC,P = 6.9 Hz, C-5), 70.35 (C-2), 69.9 (d, JC,P = 4.4 Hz, C-4), 69.25 (C-6), 63.3 (C-7), 55.6 (OCH3); 31P NMR (243 MHz, D2O) δ 4.87; HRMS (−ESI-TOF) m/z calcd
for C8H17O10P [M – H]− 303.0487, found 303.0483; HRMS (+ESI-TOF) m/z [M + H]+ calcd for C8H18O10P 305.0632, found 305.0634.
Methyl (l-glycero-α-d-manno-Heptopyranosyl)-(1→7)-l-glycero-α-d-manno-heptopyranoside
4-O-Phosphate Monosodium Salt (33)
Dibenzoate 32 (16.8 mg, 20.9 μmol) was dissolved
in dry MeOH (1.0 mL) and 1 M methanolicNaOMe (0.15 mL, 146 μmol)
was added, leading to the formation of a turbid emulsion. The reaction
mixture was stirred for 19 h at rt and subjected to HPLC–MS
analysis (method B) which indicated ∼30% of unchanged 32. Additional reagent (0.15 mL, 146 μmol) and MeOH
(0.5 mL) were added, and stirring was continued for 8 h. The pH of
reaction mixture was adjusted to ∼5 by addition of cation-exchange
resin (Dowex, H+-form). The resin was filtered off and
washed with MeOH, and the filtrate was made nearly neutral by adding
0.1 M NaOMe to give a pH of∼7–8. The solution was concentrated,
and the residue (∼13.4 mg) was dissolved in D2O
(1 mL) and washed twice with chloroform (1 mL). The combined organic
layers were re-extracted with D2O (0.8 mL), and the combined
aqueous phases were concentrated to remove residual CHCl3. A solution of 1 M methanolicNaOMe (40 μL) was added, and
the mixture was stirred overnight at rt and processed as described
above. The combined aqueous layers were neutralized by adding 0.1
M NaOMe (pH ∼7–8), purged with a stream of argon, and
lyophilized. Since NMR analysis indicated ∼5% of residual sodium
benzoate in the material, the extraction process was repeated to give
pure compound 33 (10.2 mg, 94.4%): [α]D20 +71.2 (c 1.5, H2O); 1H NMR (600 MHz, D2O, pH ∼6–7) δ
4.91 (d, J = 1.7 Hz, 1H, H-1′), 4.75 (d, J = 1.6 Hz, 1H, H-1), 4.29–4.26 (app q, J = 9.7 Hz, 1H, H-4), 4.27–4.25 (m, 1H, H-6), 4.03 (ddd, J = 1.7, 5.5, 7.4 Hz, 1H, H-6′), 3.98 (dd, J = 1.6, 3.0 Hz, 1H, H-2′), 3.93 (dd, J = 1.7, 3.6 Hz, 1H, H-2), 3.89 (dd, J = 3.5, 9.4
Hz, 1H, H-3), 3.86–3.81 (m, 2H, H-3′, H-4′),
3.77 (dd, J = 4.2, 10.9 Hz, 1H, H-7a), 3.73 (dd, J = 7.6, 11.2 Hz, 1H, H-7a′), 3.71–3.67 (m,
2H, H-7b, H-7b′), 3.63–3.59 (m, 2H, H-5, H-5′),
3.38 (s, 3H, OCH3); 13C NMR (151 MHz, D2O) δ 101.6 (C-1), 101.4 (C-1′), 72.2 (C-5′),
71.7 (d, JC,P = 7.0 Hz, C-5), 71.64 (C-3),
71.57 (C-3′), 70.8 (C-2′), 70.4 (C-2), 70.3 (d, JC,P = 4.8 Hz, C-4), 69.6 (C-6′), 69.3
(C-7), 67.7 (C-6), 66.9 (C-4′), 63.8 (C-7′), 55.6 (OCH3); 31P NMR (243 MHz, D2O) δ 3.81; HRMS (−ESI-TOF) m/z [M-H]− calcd for C15H27O16P 495.1120, found 495.1122.
Methyl (l-glycero-α-d-manno-Heptopyranosyl)-(1→3)-l-glycero-α-d-manno-heptopyranoside
4-O-Phosphate Monosodium Salt (39)
A solution of 1 M methanolicNaOMe (0.29 mL, 0.290 mmol) was added
to a solution of 38 (17.6 mg, 29.3 μmol) in dry
MeOH (1.8 mL) to give a pH ≥ 12. The turbid emulsion was stirred
for 41 h at rt. Additional reagent (0.29 mL) and MeOH (1.8 mL) were
added, and stirring was continued for 24 h. Another portion (4 mL
MeOH and 0.6 mL 1 M NaOMe) was then added, and stirring was continued
for 3 more days. The solution was acidified by adding cation-exchange
resin (H+-form), the resin was filtered off, washed with
MeOH, and the filtrate was concentrated. The residue was partitioned
between water and chloroform to remove methyl benzoate. The aqueous
layer was neutralized by addition of 1 M NaOMe solution and submitted
to lyophilization to yield a white powder (14.7 mg, 97%). Since the
product contained ∼1% of residual 38, hydrolysis
of an aqueous solution was continued using 1 M NaOMe in MeOH (57 μL)
overnight at rt. Workup as described afforded compound 39 (12.0 mg, 79%) as a colorless powder: [α]D20 +86.3 (c 0.8, D2O) [lit.[29] [α]D20 +85 (c 0.8, H2O)]; NMR data agree with published values;[29]31P NMR (243 MHz, D2O)
δ 2.71; HRMS (−ESI-TOF) m/z [M – H]− calcd for C15H28O16P 495.1120, found 495.1122.
Authors: F E Di Padova; H Brade; G R Barclay; I R Poxton; E Liehl; E Schuetze; H P Kocher; G Ramsay; M H Schreier; D B McClelland Journal: Infect Immun Date: 1993-09 Impact factor: 3.441
Authors: Hua Wang; James Head; Paul Kosma; Helmut Brade; Sven Müller-Loennies; Sharmin Sheikh; Barbara McDonald; Kelly Smith; Tanya Cafarella; Barbara Seaton; Erika Crouch Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2007-12-20 Impact factor: 3.162