The natural product ouabagenin is a complex cardiotonic steroid with a highly oxygenated skeleton. This full account describes the development of a concise synthesis of ouabagenin, including the evolution of synthetic strategy to access hydroxylation at the C19 position of a steroid skeleton. In addition, approaches to install the requisite butenolide moiety at the C17 position are discussed. Lastly, methodology developed in this synthesis has been applied in the generation of novel analogues of corticosteroid drugs bearing a hydroxyl group at the C19 position.
The natural product ouabagenin is a complex cardiotonic steroid with a highly oxygenated skeleton. This full account describes the development of a concise synthesis of ouabagenin, including the evolution of synthetic strategy to access hydroxylation at the C19 position of a steroid skeleton. In addition, approaches to install the requisite butenolide moiety at the C17 position are discussed. Lastly, methodology developed in this synthesis has been applied in the generation of novel analogues of corticosteroid drugs bearing a hydroxylgroup at the C19 position.
The term “cardiac
glycosides”—often used interchangeably
with “cardiotonic steroids”—refers to a class
of steroidal natural products exhibiting positive inotropic activity.[1] These molecules possess the capacity to increase
the cardiac output through their inhibitory interaction with the extracellular
surface of the membrane-bound sodium pump (Na+/K+–ATPase) through stabilization in the E2-P transition state,
resulting in the increase of intracellular sodium concentration and
the buildup of intracellular calcium concentration in the sarcoplasmic
reticulum. This process ultimately results in a more powerful contraction
of the mycocyte.Cardiac glycosides possess several characteristic
features[2] (Figure 1A): (i) glycosylation,
if any, is found at the C3 position of the steroidal framework; (ii)
in contrast to the common steroidal skeleton, both their A/B and C/D
rings are of cis configuration; (iii) a β-configured
tertiary alcohol is present at C14 (and often at C5); and finally,
(iv) an unsaturated lactone ring is found at the C17 position. The
C17lactone domain further defines the subclass of cardiac glycosides:
those with an unsaturated butyrolactone moiety, typically afforded
by plant sources, are called cardenolides and those with an unsaturated
2-pyrone moiety, typically afforded by animal sources, are called
bufadienolides.[3]
Figure 1
(A) Structures of cardiotonic
steroid ouabagenin (1) and its parent glycoside ouabain
(2). (B) Interaction
of ouabain (2) with borosilicate glassware.
(A) Structures of cardiotonic
steroidouabagenin (1) and its parent glycoside ouabain
(2). (B) Interaction
of ouabain (2) with borosilicate glassware.In 1888, a highly oxidized member of the cardenolide
family, ouabain
(2), was isolated by Arnaud[4] from the roots and barks of the African ouabaio tree. Its aglycone,
ouabagenin (1), was later isolated in 1942 by Mannich
and Siewert,[5] who also proposed the correct
structure for the aglycone and the parent glycoside. These molecules
have attracted considerable attention due to the discovery of naturally
occurring ouabain (or a ouabain-like compound) in mammals. In fact,
buildup of endogenous ouabain has recently been proposed as one genetic
molecular mechanism for hypertension in animal models.[6] From a chemical synthesis point of view, the predominant
β-orientation of the hydroxylgroups of ouabagenin and ouabain
presents an additional layer of complexity as ouabain (2) has been reported to undergo facile complexation with borosilicate
glassware (Figure 1B).[7]Our laboratory became enamored with cardiotonic steroids for
both
chemical and biological reasons. Chemically, there was no scalable
solution (semisynthetic or fully synthetic) to the synthesis of highly
oxygenated steroid systems such as ouabain (2), thus
presenting an opportunity for innovation. From a biological vantage
point, we were interested in the medicinal chemistry of highly oxygenated
steroids that would result from such an effort. This full account
traces the evolution of our synthetic strategy that ultimately led
to a scalable solution to the puzzle posed by the ouabain problem
and enabled initial medicinal chemistry explorations of uniquely oxidized
steroid derivatives.
Results and Discussion
Historical Context and
Key Precedents
Ouabain and related
natural products are classic targets for synthesis. Semisynthesis
campaigns for the preparation of the cardenolides and the related
bufadienolides date back to the early 1970s with the landmark synthesis
of batrachotoxinin[8] by Werhli and co-workers.
Since then, numerous synthetic efforts have resulted in the semisynthesis
of strophanthidol and its parent glycoside (strophanthidin) by Yoshii,[9] the semisynthesis of digitoxigenin by Wiesner[10] and Kabat,[11] and
bufalin by Wiesner[12] and Yoshii.[13] In addition, the first total synthesis of digitoxigenin[14] was reported by Stork and co-workers in 1996,
and the total synthesis of rhodexin A[15] was achieved by Jung and co-workers in 2011. More recently, an elegant
total synthesis of 19-hydroxysarmentogenin starting from carvone was
disclosed by Inoue and co-workers.[16]Synthetic studies toward the most oxidized members of the cardenolide
family, ouabagenin (1) and ouabain (2),
have also been conducted, culminating in a landmark total synthesis
of these compounds in 2008 by Deslongchamps and co-workers featuring
a polyanionic cascade as the key skeletal construction step (Scheme 1).[17] In addition, other
elegant approaches have been developed, including a novel Heck annulation
by Overman and co-workers,[18] and a Diels–Alder
approach by Jung and co-workers.[19]
Scheme 1
Previous Endeavors toward the Synthesis of Ouabagenin (1)
Given the success of pharmaceutical
research on semisynthetic steroids,
we anticipated that a semisynthetic approach would be the most viable
means to achieve a scalable synthesis of ouabagenin (1). With pragmatic considerations in mind, our retrosynthetic analysis
used a “look-ahead” approach[20] commencing with readily available cortisone acetate (9; Figure 2). This starting material was chosen
because of (i) its bulk availability at a reasonable cost ($1.2/g);
(ii) the existence of “pre-built” oxidations at C3 and
C11, which would facilitate access to the requisite hydroxylgroups
at these two carbons; and (iii) the facile cleavage of the C17–C20
bond to give a ketone moiety at C17,[21] which
would provide us with a functional handle for the butenolide appendage.
Figure 2
Preliminary
strategic considerations for elaboration of the A ring.
Preliminary
strategic considerations for elaboration of the A ring.
The C19 Oxidation Problem
An overwhelming
amount of
literature evidence has suggested that the A ring of a steroid skeleton
exhibits higher reactivity than the rest of the tetracyclic framework.[22] Thus, we posited that the A ring be fully elaborated
before the rest of the molecule in the approach toward ouabagenin
(1). Several scenarios exist for the elaboration of the
A ring using the putative steroid intermediate 10 derived
from cortisone acetate (9) following C17–C20 cleavage
(Figure 2). Given the multitude of hydroxylgroups to be introduced, a “pre-built” oxidation state
within the A ring would be desirable. In pathway a, it is envisioned that either the C1 or C5 hydroxylgroup could
be introduced via selective hydration of the dienone moiety. However,
introduction of the hydroxylgroup at C19 would still be problematic
due to the geometrically unfavorable 1,4-relationship to the requisite
hydroxylgroup at either C1 or C5.[23] The
same problem would also be encountered with the use of the hydroxylgroup at C3 to direct oxidation onto the C19 position, as they exist
in a 1,6-relationship (pathway c). Literature evidence
suggested that C19 functionalization by way of alkoxy radical generation
at C3 proceeded only in poor yield.[24] Thus,
it is apparent that the oxidation at the C19 carbon is unlikely to
be accessed via the use of other functionalities on the A ring as
directing groups, and would have to be attained via other means (pathway b), preferably early in the synthesis.Installation of functionality at C19 is a classic unsolved
problem
in steroid chemistry dating back to the days of Woodward.[25] A representative panel of strategies that have
been developed to solve this problem is shown in Scheme 2. While the bromohydrin functionalization route (Scheme 2A) is a well-established method to access the C19
oxidation in steroid semisynthesis literature, this strategy was not
pursued due to the lengthiness of operations required. Our studies
thus commenced with the reinvestigation of an intriguing report of
metalloporphyrin-catalyzed hydroxylation of the steroidal
C19 position[26] as this would represent
the most direct access to the desired C19-hydroxyl compound (Scheme 2B). The described reaction utilized iron-porphyrin 18 in the presence of N-methylimidazole and
cumyl hydroperoxide to furnishhydroxylated product 19 in moderate yield among other oxidation products. In our hands,
this result could not be reproduced, as 17 proved to
be unreactive toward oxidation under the reported conditions. Disappointingly,
the use of a more reactive perfluorinated iron-porphyrin catalyst[27] resulted only in epoxidation of the C4–C5
olefin of 17.
Scheme 2
A Reinvestigation
of Previous Approaches Regarding the C19 Functionalization
of a Steroid Scaffold
Attention was then turned to a report
from Rindone and co-workers
(Scheme 2C) of a direct dichloromethylation
of estrone under aerobic reaction conditions with cobalt(II) salen
as catalyst.[28] This report was viewed as
an alternative solution for the installation of the requisite oxidation
state at the C19 position. In our hands, formation of two products
was observed with NMR spectra identical to the ones reported by the
authors. X-ray analysis, however, established that the reported dichloromethyl
adduct 22 was instead an oxidized dimer of estrone (23). In the original publication, the structure of product 22 was established based on the presence of a singlet at 5.39
ppm by 1H NMR spectroscopy. However, the actual structure
of the product 23 suggests that this singlet belongs
to the o-quinone proton. In addition, a multitude
of conditions were attempted to effect a para-functionalization
of estrone but most conditions only resulted in the formation of ortho-functionalized products. The preference for ortho-functionalization could be rationalized by the high
thermodynamic penalty associated with breaking the aromaticity of
the A ring in the para-functionalization pathway.These failures led us to retool our synthesis plan and consider
the possibility of introducing the hydroxylgroup at C19 with the
use of an appropriate functionality embedded at the C11carbon. Literature
evidence suggested that hypoiodite photochemistry would lead to nonselective
functionalizations of both C19 and C18carbons.[29] On the other hand, a Norrish type II photochemistry could
pave the way for selective functionalization of the C19 methyl group
(Scheme 2D). Jeger and co-workers were able
to introduce a hydroxyl moiety at C19 by first effecting a Norrish
type II photochemistry to generate cyclobutanol 25 in
modest yield, followed by an oxidative fragmentation with Pb(OAc)4.[30] Encouraged by this finding,
we arrived at the final retrosynthesis for ouabagenin as depicted
in Figure 3. The general premise of this strategy
was to relay the C17 and C19 ketone oxidation states to neighboring
and distalcarbon atoms. This so-called “redox-relay”
approach would potentially simplify the installation of four hydroxylgroups (C1, C5, C14 and C19) and minimize functionalgroup incompatibilities
along the way. Butenolide installation at a late stage would result
in target 27 and allow divergent exploration of D-ring
substituents. Redox-relay from the C17ketone would lead to 28. Subsequent hydroxyl-directed bis-oxygenation (C1 and C5)
simplifies the target to C19-oxygenated steroid 29, which
is essentially one oxidation away from readily available cortisone
acetate (9).
Figure 3
Final retrosynthetic analysis of ouabagenin.
Final retrosynthetic analysis of ouabagenin.
Norrish Type II Photochemistry
and Cyclobutanol Fragmentation
Oxidative cleavage of the
C17–C20 bond of cortisone acetate
(9) generated adrenosterone (30) in a straightforward
manner (Scheme 3). Preliminary photochemical
investigations suggested that the presence of ketone moieties at C3
and C17 led to the formation of a complex mixture of products, presumably
via competitive photoexcitation. Thus, we elected to convert these
two ketone moieties to the corresponding ketals. Although 31 could be converted to the desired cyclobutanol 32,
the reaction gave only a modest yield of desired product (43%) and
suffered from formation of undesired side products, most notably compound 33, which arises from Norrish type I cleavage of the C9–C11
bond.
Scheme 3
Norrish Type II Photochemistry on Steroid 31
Reagents and conditions: (a)
NaBH4 (0.6 equiv), 0 °C, 135 min; then NaIO4 (5 equiv), 23 °C, 12 h, 86%; (b) p-TsOH (0.1
equiv), ethylene glycol (30 equiv), PhCH3, 135 °C,
6 h, 81%; (c) hν, Vycor filter, 48–120
h; (d) Pb(OAc)4, C6H6, 80 °C,
1 h.
Norrish Type II Photochemistry on Steroid 31
Reagents and conditions: (a)
NaBH4 (0.6 equiv), 0 °C, 135 min; then NaIO4 (5 equiv), 23 °C, 12 h, 86%; (b) p-TsOH (0.1
equiv), ethylene glycol (30 equiv), PhCH3, 135 °C,
6 h, 81%; (c) hν, Vycor filter, 48–120
h; (d) Pb(OAc)4, C6H6, 80 °C,
1 h.In 2004, a total synthesis of herbertenolide[31] was accomplished by Garcia-Garibay and co-workers
and featured
for the first time the application of a solid-state Norrish type I
photoreaction in total synthesis. Remarkably, the authors reported
a highly chemoselective formation of cyclopentane 35, which stood in stark contrast to the nonselective outcome obtained
with conventional solution photochemistry (Scheme 4A). In addition, Scheffer and co-workers also reported a highly
differential outcome of a Norrish type II photoreaction[32] when conducted in solution and in solid-state:
significant improvement in the formation of cyclobutanols 37 and 38 was observed when solid-state photochemistry
was employed in place of conventional solution photochemistry (Scheme 4B). Encouraged by these precedents, we elected to
conduct our photochemistry in the solid state. Gratifyingly, the use
of solid-state photochemistry led to an appreciable increase in the
yield of cyclobutanol formation (43% to 68%) while minimizing the
formation of undesired α-cleavage product 33 (see
Scheme 3).
Scheme 4
Examples of Solid-State Photochemistry
Precedents
Unfortunately, the
oxidative fragmentation protocol described by
Jeger proved unsuccessful on 32 as a complex mixture
of products was observed, none of which corresponded to the desired
C19-functionalized product 29. Presumably, the C5–C6
olefin of 32 is incompatible with the strong oxidant/harsh
conditions employed, leading to the formation of various undesired
products.Following precedents by Snider, Phillips, and several
other research
groups,[33] a range of inorganic oxidants
was also screened to effect the oxidative fragmentation of the C11–C19
bond, but none led to formation of the desired product (Scheme 5A). It was then reasoned that a hypervalent iodine
species could undergo a ligand exchange reaction with cyclobutanol 32 and the resulting adduct could then fragment oxidatively
to give either a hydroxyl or an acetategroup at C19. Unfortunately,
no reaction was observed with both IBX and DMP even at elevated temperatures,
and undesired fragmentation of the C9–C11 bond to hemiketal 40 and 41 was observed with PhI(OAc)2 and hypoiodite photolysis conditions (I2/PhI(OAc)2), respectively.[34]
Scheme 5
Endeavors
toward Oxidative Fragmentation of Cyclobutanol 32
Reagents and conditions: (a)
PhI(OAc)2 (1.5 equiv), Ac2O, 80 °C, 3 h,
68%; (b) hν, I2 (1.5 equiv), PhI(OAc)2 (2 equiv), CH2Cl2, 23 °C, 20 min,
61%; (c) Pd(OAc)2 (0.2 equiv), PhI(OAc)2 (1.5
equiv), Ac2O, 80 °C, 3 h.
Endeavors
toward Oxidative Fragmentation of Cyclobutanol 32
Reagents and conditions: (a)
PhI(OAc)2 (1.5 equiv), Ac2O, 80 °C, 3 h,
68%; (b) hν, I2 (1.5 equiv), PhI(OAc)2 (2 equiv), CH2Cl2, 23 °C, 20 min,
61%; (c) Pd(OAc)2 (0.2 equiv), PhI(OAc)2 (1.5
equiv), Ac2O, 80 °C, 3 h.Building on precedents set by Uemura and co-workers,[35] we next envisaged a palladium-mediated fragmentation
reaction (Scheme 5B). It was shown that cyclobutanols
can be engaged in a β-carbon elimination from the initialpalladium(II)
alcoholate adduct. Thus, it was hoped that the resulting metalloketone
intermediate could be intercepted by an oxidant to generate a PdIV species, which would in turn undergo reductive elimination
to furnishacetate 45.To this end, 32 was heated with Pd(OAc)2 and PhI(OAc)2, with
Ac2O as solvent at 80
°C. The desired C19 functionalized compound 45 was
indeed formed, albeit in minor amounts, validating our hypothesis
(Scheme 5C). The major product from this reaction
turned out to be hemiketal 40, indicating significant
background reaction of the cyclobutanol with the oxidant itself. Unfortunately,
despite extensive experimentations, we were not able to improve the
yield of formation of acetate 45.Eventually, the
desired C19 functionalization was effected by using
either Barluenga’s reagent[36] or N-iodosuccinimide[37] under photolytic
conditions, with the latter being preferred simply due to the lower
cost of the reagent. A proposed mechanism for this transformation
is put forth in Figure 4. In addition, since
both conditions (see Scheme 5) and / (see Figure 4) should generate
an identical hypoiodite intermediate, it is entirely possible that
additives from the latter conditions exert subtle geometrical changes
in the reaction transition state such that the O–I bond is
anti-periplanar to the C11–C19 bond, leading to a chemoselective
fragmentation to iodide 47.
Figure 4
NIS-assisted oxidative
fragmentation and proposed mechanism. A
and B show two conformations of the O–I bond, leading to the
cleavage of different C–C bonds.
NIS-assisted oxidative
fragmentation and proposed mechanism. A
and B show two conformations of the O–I bond, leading to the
cleavage of different C–C bonds.With iodide 47 now in hand, selective deketalization
at C3 was achieved by using TiCl4, and the iodide at C19
was hydrolyzed with AgOAc to furnishenone alcohol 49 (Scheme 6). In contrast to a similar epoxidation
with a simpler C19 methyl substrate,[38] epoxidation
of the C4–C5 olefin proceeded in a completely diastereoselective
fashion. Dehydrogenation of the C1–C2 bond was then achieved
with SeO2 to give 50, as the use of other
reagents such as IBX[39] or HIO3 led to formation of over-oxidized products. Lastly, another diastereoselective
epoxidation furnished diepoxide 51, a landmark intermediate en route to full elaboration of the A ring of ouabagenin
(1).
Scheme 6
Elaboration of Cyclobutanol 32 to Diepoxide 51
Reagents
and conditions: (a) hν, N-iodosuccinimide
(3 equiv),
Li2CO3 (3.5 equiv), MeOH, PhCH3,
23 °C, 20 min, 85%; (b) TiCl4 (1 M in CH2Cl2, 1 equiv), CH2Cl2, −10
°C, 15 min; AgOAc (1.5 equiv), THF, H2O, 50 °C,
2 h, 71%; (c) H2O2 (35 wt% in H2O,
6 equiv), 3 M NaOH (1 equiv), MeOH, 0 °C, 75 min; (d) SeO2 (1.1 equiv), PhCl, 90 °C, 10 h; (e) H2O2 (35 wt% in H2O, 6 equiv), 3 M NaOH (1 equiv),
MeOH, 0 °C, 75 min, 50% (over three steps); (f) conc. HCl (1
equiv), CH2Cl2, 23 °C, 1 h, 87%.
Elaboration of Cyclobutanol 32 to Diepoxide 51
Reagents
and conditions: (a) hν, N-iodosuccinimide
(3 equiv),
Li2CO3 (3.5 equiv), MeOH, PhCH3,
23 °C, 20 min, 85%; (b) TiCl4 (1 M in CH2Cl2, 1 equiv), CH2Cl2, −10
°C, 15 min; AgOAc (1.5 equiv), THF, H2O, 50 °C,
2 h, 71%; (c) H2O2 (35 wt% in H2O,
6 equiv), 3 M NaOH (1 equiv), MeOH, 0 °C, 75 min; (d) SeO2 (1.1 equiv), PhCl, 90 °C, 10 h; (e) H2O2 (35 wt% in H2O, 6 equiv), 3 M NaOH (1 equiv),
MeOH, 0 °C, 75 min, 50% (over three steps); (f) conc. HCl (1
equiv), CH2Cl2, 23 °C, 1 h, 87%.
Diepoxide Fragmentation and Synthesis of
Protected “Ouabageninone”
As was observed by
Jung and co-workers in their model study,[19] reductive opening of diepoxide 51 proved to be daunting.
A wide range of conditions[40] (Table 1) were tried, but most conditions
resulted only in the formation of regioisomeric mixtures of A-ring
enones. Hydrogenation conditions (entry 10), despite multiple precedents
by Porco,[41] led to reduction of the C3
ketone while leaving the two epoxides intact.
Table 1
Screening of Conditions for Diepoxide
Fragmentation
entry
reagent
solvent
product(s)
1
PhSeNa
52 + 53
2
NaTeH
52 + 53
3
NaI/NaOAc/HOAc
no reaction
4
Zn/MeOH
52 + 53
5
SmI2
52 + 53
6
Li/naphthalene
52 + 53
7
Mg/MeOH
no reaction
8
N2H4
no reaction
9
Cr(OAc)2
decomposition
10
Pt/C, H2
ethyl acetate
55 + 56
11
Al–Hg
THF:EtOH:sat.
NaHCO3 (2:1:0.15)
54 (15%) + 57
12
Al–Hg
THF:EtOH (2:1)
no reaction
13
Al–Hg
EtOH:sat. NaHCO3 (1:0.15)
54 (<5%) + 57
14
Al–Hg
sat. NaHCO3
54 (51%) + 57
15
Al–Hg (portion-wise
addition)
sat. NaHCO3
54 (64%; 56%a)
16
Al–Hg
sat. K2CO3
no reaction
17
Al–Hg
sat.
LiCl
no reaction
18
Al–Hg
sat. NaCl
54 (<10%) + 57
19
Al–Hg
sat. NH4Cl
54 (19%) + 57
20
Al–Hg
pH 7.4 buffer
54 (41%) + 57
Gram-scale
reaction.
Gram-scale
reaction.Gratifyingly,
triol 54 was accessible via treatment
of 51 with in situ-generated aluminum
amalgam. Poor conversion to 54 was observed when this
reaction was run in the more conventional biphasic solvent mixture,
leading to an extensive solvent screening for the reaction (entries
11–20), which eventually revealed saturated NaHCO3 as the optimal medium (entries 14 and 15). It is worth noting that
with these “on-water” conditions,[42] we observed formation of over-reduced product 57, suggesting that this aqueous medium provided a higher reduction
potential for the reagent than conventional organic solvents.Cognizant of the ligating ability of the A ring of ouabain (2),[7] we elected to introduce an
appropriate protecting group on the A ring. While attempts to tie
the three hydroxylgroups in 54 as an orthoformate were
unsuccessful, clean acetonide formation could be effected in acidic
acetone to form 58. Reduction of the C3 ketone of 58 with LiBEt3H (Scheme 7) proceeded in a completely diastereoselective fashion and
also protected the remaining two free hydroxyl moieties as the boronate
ester to give 59.[43] The ketone
moiety of the C ring was next reduced under thermodynamic conditions
(Li/NH3) to furnish an α-configured alcohol at C11.
Following deketalization, the C17ketone moiety of 60 was subjected to Saegusa oxidation to provide the corresponding
conjugated enone. Isomerization of the olefin at C15–C16 out
of conjugation could be effected with a SiO2/iPr2EtN mixture to give 61,[44] although this necessitated the use of octafluorotoluene
as solvent in order to minimize undesired epimerization of the C14
stereocenter (the C14 β-hydrogen epimer of the conjugated enone
cannot be isomerized to give 61). To introduce the last
hydroxylgroup at C14, the C14–C15 olefin was subjected to
Mukaiyama hydration.[45] Once again, solvent
optimization leading to the use of dioxane was necessary in order
to achieve a satisfactory diastereomeric ratio of hydration products.
With the completion of this step, we arrived at the protected form
of the ketonic core of our target molecule (62, termed
“ouabageninone”), and to date, more than 500 mg of this
compound has been prepared. In addition, as a testament to the versatility
of this route for further diversification, we demonstrated that 61 could undergo radical fluorination[46] to produce 63 (Scheme 8). In
light of recent advances in radical functionalization of alkenes,[47] compound 61 could be viewed as
a viable platform for further generation of new steroidal skeletons,
and ultimately, novel analogues of the cardenolides and bufadienolides.
Scheme 7
Elaboration of Triol 54 To Protected
Ouabageninone (62)
Reagents
and conditions: (a)
PPTS (0.2 equiv), CaSO4 (2.5 equiv), Me2CO,
23 °C, 20 h; (b) LiBEt3H (1 M in THF, 1.1 equiv),
−78 °C, 30 min, 92%; (c) Li (60 equiv), NH3, THF, −78 °C, 30 min; (d) PPTS (1.5 equiv), Me2CO, 70 °C, 16 h, 69% over 2 steps; (e) TMSOTf (3 equiv), Et3N (4 equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 to 23 °C,
30 min; Pd(OAc)2 (1.2 equiv), MeCN, 23 °C, 3 h, then
FeCl3 (1 equiv), 0 °C, 10 min; (f) SiO2, iPr2EtN (55 equiv), C6F5CF3, 23 °C, 45 min, 55% over 2 steps; (g)
Co(acac)2 (0.2 equiv), PhSiH3 (3 equiv), O2 (1 atm), dioxane, 23 °C, 3 h, 86%.
Scheme 8
Radical Fluorination of Intermediate 61
Reagents and conditions: Fe2(oxalate)3 (4
equiv), NaBH4 (6.4 equiv),
Selectfluor (4 equiv), 3:4:2 MeCN:THF:H2O, 0 °C, 20
min, 51%.
Elaboration of Triol 54 To Protected
Ouabageninone (62)
Reagents
and conditions: (a)
PPTS (0.2 equiv), CaSO4 (2.5 equiv), Me2CO,
23 °C, 20 h; (b) LiBEt3H (1 M in THF, 1.1 equiv),
−78 °C, 30 min, 92%; (c) Li (60 equiv), NH3, THF, −78 °C, 30 min; (d) PPTS (1.5 equiv), Me2CO, 70 °C, 16 h, 69% over 2 steps; (e) TMSOTf (3 equiv), Et3N (4 equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 to 23 °C,
30 min; Pd(OAc)2 (1.2 equiv), MeCN, 23 °C, 3 h, then
FeCl3 (1 equiv), 0 °C, 10 min; (f) SiO2, iPr2EtN (55 equiv), C6F5CF3, 23 °C, 45 min, 55% over 2 steps; (g)
Co(acac)2 (0.2 equiv), PhSiH3 (3 equiv), O2 (1 atm), dioxane, 23 °C, 3 h, 86%.
Radical Fluorination of Intermediate 61
Reagents and conditions: Fe2(oxalate)3 (4
equiv), NaBH4 (6.4 equiv),
Selectfluor (4 equiv), 3:4:2 MeCN:THF:H2O, 0 °C, 20
min, 51%.
Model Study for Butenolide Installation
With a scalable
route to ouabageninone secured, attention was then turned to introduction
of the butenolide moiety with the correct stereochemical orientation.
To this end, a model study employing estrone as starting material
was conducted (Scheme 9). Using a similar route
to Scheme 7, the tertiary hydroxylgroup at
C14 was introduced to afford 64 (see the Supporting Information for its preparation).
It was initially envisioned that the butenolide moiety would be appended
via a palladium-catalyzed cross-coupling, followed by a chemo- and
diastereoselective reduction of the C16–C17olefin. Thus,
ketone 64 was first converted to the corresponding vinyl
iodide using Barton’s protocol.[48] A wide range of conditions were tried for the butenolide attachment,
but initial results were discouraging as the desired product 68 could only be obtained in very poor yield (Table 2). Eventually, it was found that the use of Fürstner’s
modified Stille coupling protocol[49] led
to the formation of dienoate 68 in a synthetically useful
yield.
Scheme 9
Attempted Installation of a Butenolide Moiety
on an Estrone Model
System
Reagents and conditions: (a)
N2H4 (10 equiv), Et3N (10 equiv),
EtOH, 50 °C, 5 h; I2 (3 equiv), Et3N (4
equiv), THF, 23 °C, 10 min; (b) Ra-Ni (10 wt equiv), THF, 23
°C, 14 h, 90%.
Table 2
Optimization
of the Pd Coupling Reaction
of 65 with 66 (X = SnBu3) or 67 (X = H)a
entry
reaction conditions
X
result
1
Pd(PPh3)4, LiCl, CuCl
SnBu3
decomposition
2
Pd2dba3, P(furyl)3, 50 °C
SnBu3
decomposition
3
Pd(OAc)2, KOAc, 80 °C
H
dimerization
4
PdCl2(MeCN)2, DMF, heat
SnBu3
decomposition
5
PdCl2(PPh3)2, toluene, heat
SnBu3
decomposition
6
CuTC, NMP
SnBu3
ca. 5% desired product
7
Pd(PPh3)4, CuTC,[Ph2PO2][NBu4]
SnBu3
55% desired product
Compound 65 was used
without further purification from the previous step.
Attempted Installation of a Butenolide Moiety
on an Estrone Model
System
Reagents and conditions: (a)
N2H4 (10 equiv), Et3N (10 equiv),
EtOH, 50 °C, 5 h; I2 (3 equiv), Et3N (4
equiv), THF, 23 °C, 10 min; (b) Ra-Ni (10 wt equiv), THF, 23
°C, 14 h, 90%.Compound 65 was used
without further purification from the previous step.With sufficient quantities of 68 in hand, chemoselective
reduction of the C16–C17olefin was attempted. No reaction
was observed when palladium on carbon was used as the hydrogenation
catalyst, and when the more active platinum catalyst was employed,
nonselective hydrogenation of both olefins occurred. A chemoselective
hydrogenation was eventually effected by using Ra-Ni,[50] but this led to the wrong stereochemical outcome of the
reduction, giving 69. This result stood in stark contrast
to hydrogenation conducted on steroids possessing a more conventional trans C/D ring configuration, where reduction from the α
face is typically observed. Clearly, the cis configuration
of 68 rendered its convex face more accessible for hydrogenation.
Alternatively, a directing effect of the C14 hydroxylgroup could
also be invoked to explain the stereochemical outcome. A radical-based
coupling[51] approach employing iodide 71 and lactones 66, 72, and 73 was also attempted but only deiodination of 71 was observed (Scheme 10).
Scheme 10
Attempted Radical
Coupling on Iodide 71
Reagents
and conditions: (a)
O2 (1 atm), N2H4, EtCO2H, EtOH, 100 °C, 2.5 h.
Attempted Radical
Coupling on Iodide 71
Reagents
and conditions: (a)
O2 (1 atm), N2H4, EtCO2H, EtOH, 100 °C, 2.5 h.Another approach
was then developed based on the idea of using
a butenolide anion equivalent to effect a nucleophilic addition onto
the C17carbon from the more accessible β-face. A hydrazone-boronic
acid coupling protocol[52] disclosed by Barluenga
and co-workers in 2009 was viewed as a highly attractive option owing
to the minimal number of concession steps to be performed either before
or after the coupling, and thus, the potential brevity of the overall
sequence. A C2-substituted furanboronic acid was identified as a suitable
butenolide equivalent (Scheme 11), and this
compound was accessed by subjecting furan 74 to Ir-catalyzed
C–H silylation employing a procedure developed by Falck and
co-workers.[53] Treatment with NaIO4 unmasked the free boronic acid to give 76. Gratifyingly,
coupling of this boronic acid and tosylhydrazone 77 proceeded to give 78 with the correct stereochemical
configuration, albeit in modest yield. Conversion of the substituted
furan moiety to butenolide 70 could be readily achieved
by treatment with basic AcOOH solution.[54]
Scheme 11
Successful Installation of the Butenolide
Moiety via a Hydrazone–Boronic
Acid Coupling Strategy
Reagents and conditions:
(a)
[Ir(OMe)(cod)]2 (0.05 equiv), dtbpy (0.1 equiv), 2-norbornene
(1.5 equiv), PhMe2SiH (1.5 equiv), 80 °C, 8 h, 43%;
(b) NaIO4 (3 equiv), HCl (1 M, 0.7 equiv), 4:1 THF:H2O, 23 °C, 2 h, 91%; (c) TsNHNH2 (1.5 equiv),
dioxane, 110 °C, 5 h, 64%; (d) K2CO3 (2.2
equiv), dioxane, 110 °C, 5 h, ca. 20%; (e) AcOOH (32 wt % in
H2O), NaOAc (5 equiv), CH2Cl2, 23
°C, 24 h, ca. 70%.
Successful Installation of the Butenolide
Moiety via a Hydrazone–Boronic
Acid Coupling Strategy
Reagents and conditions:
(a)
[Ir(OMe)(cod)]2 (0.05 equiv), dtbpy (0.1 equiv), 2-norbornene
(1.5 equiv), PhMe2SiH (1.5 equiv), 80 °C, 8 h, 43%;
(b) NaIO4 (3 equiv), HCl (1 M, 0.7 equiv), 4:1 THF:H2O, 23 °C, 2 h, 91%; (c) TsNHNH2 (1.5 equiv),
dioxane, 110 °C, 5 h, 64%; (d) K2CO3 (2.2
equiv), dioxane, 110 °C, 5 h, ca. 20%; (e) AcOOH (32 wt % in
H2O), NaOAc (5 equiv), CH2Cl2, 23
°C, 24 h, ca. 70%.
Completion of Ouabagenin
Synthesis
Having identified
a viable method for installation of the butenolide moiety, we turned
our efforts back to the synthesis of ouabagenin (1).
In the conversion of ouabageninone to the corresponding tosylhydrazone,
we encountered the first hurdle: concomitant removal of all the protecting
groups was observed upon conversion to the corresponding hydrazone.
This problem was rectified by the use of TrisNHNH2, which
allowed formation of hydrazone 79 at ambient temperature
(Scheme 12). Submitting this hydrazone to the
coupling conditions with boronic acid 76, however, led
to formation of a complex mixture of products, none of which could
be identified as the desired coupled product 81a.
Scheme 12
Attempted Hydrazone–Boronic Acid Coupling on
Protected Ouabageninone 62
Reagents
and conditions: (a)
TrisNHNH2 (1.5 equiv), CH2Cl2, 23
°C, 10 h, 80%; (b) 76 (2 equiv), K2CO3 (2.2 equiv), dioxane, 110 °C, 5 h; (c) TMSOTf (3 equiv),
Et3N (4 equiv), 23 °C, 1 h; (d) Ac2O (3
equiv), pyridine (7 equiv), DMAP (1 equiv), DMF, 40 °C, 20 h,
66%; (e) MOMCl (2.4 equiv), iPr2EtN (3.5
equiv), DMAP (1 equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 to 23 °C,
24 h, 62%.
Attempted Hydrazone–Boronic Acid Coupling on
Protected Ouabageninone 62
Reagents
and conditions: (a)
TrisNHNH2 (1.5 equiv), CH2Cl2, 23
°C, 10 h, 80%; (b) 76 (2 equiv), K2CO3 (2.2 equiv), dioxane, 110 °C, 5 h; (c) TMSOTf (3 equiv),
Et3N (4 equiv), 23 °C, 1 h; (d) Ac2O (3
equiv), pyridine (7 equiv), DMAP (1 equiv), DMF, 40 °C, 20 h,
66%; (e) MOMCl (2.4 equiv), iPr2EtN (3.5
equiv), DMAP (1 equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 to 23 °C,
24 h, 62%.Positing that the free hydroxylgroup at C11 is incompatible with
the transient diazo species, we decided to convert it to the corresponding
TMSether (80), acetate (82) and MOM ether
(83). Unfortunately, subjection of these compounds to
the Barluenga coupling conditions again led to formation of a complex
mixture of products. Several additives, notably fluoride salts[55] as well as different protecting groups at the
C11hydroxyl moiety were also tried, but none of these strategies
led to any improvement to the outcome of the reaction.These
failures led us to reinvestigate the original Stille coupling/chemoselective
reduction route (Scheme 13). Thus, ketone 62 was converted to the corresponding vinyl iodide and then
subjected to the modified Stille cross-coupling conditions to deliver
dienoate 85. As was observed in the estrone model system,
hydrogenation of 85 resulted in reduction from the undesired
convex face of the molecule. Use of other conditions led to a nonselective
reduction outcome, none of which could be identified as the desired
product. We eventually discovered that the use of in situ-generated Co2B[56] led to chemoselective
formation of tetrasubstituted olefin 86. Extensive screening
of organic bases and superbases (Table S1, Supporting
Information) again led to the formation of an epimeric mixture
of enoates, where our desired product was only present in minor amounts.
Gratifyingly, we discovered that heating 86 in the presence
of Barton’s base (BTMG)[57] leads
to the formation of a 3:1 mixture of enoates in favor of the desired
product. To complete the synthesis of ouabagenin (1),
this product was treated with concentrated HCl to effect global removal
of the protecting groups. Overall, the synthesis of ouabagenin (1) was achieved in 20 steps and in 0.6% yield from adrenosterone
(30) or in 21 steps and in 0.5% yield from cortisone
acetate (9).
Scheme 13
Completion of the Synthesis of Ouabagenin
(1)
Reagents and conditions: (a)
N2H4 (10 equiv), Et3N (10 equiv),
4:1 CH2Cl2:EtOH, 50 °C, 5 h; I2 (3 equiv), Et3N (4 equiv), THF, 10 min; (b) 66 (4 equiv), [Ph2PO2][NBu4] (4 equiv),
Pd(PPh3)4 (0.15 equiv), CuTC (3 equiv), DMF,
23 °C, 2 h, 42% over two steps; (c) CoCl2·6H2O (2.5 equiv), NaBH4 (5 equiv), EtOH, 0 to 23 °C,
20 min; (d) BTMG (1.5 equiv), C6H6, 100 °C,
10 min, 70% over two steps; (e) conc. HCl (2 equiv), MeOH, 23 °C,
30 min, 90%.
Completion of the Synthesis of Ouabagenin
(1)
Reagents and conditions: (a)
N2H4 (10 equiv), Et3N (10 equiv),
4:1 CH2Cl2:EtOH, 50 °C, 5 h; I2 (3 equiv), Et3N (4 equiv), THF, 10 min; (b) 66 (4 equiv), [Ph2PO2][NBu4] (4 equiv),
Pd(PPh3)4 (0.15 equiv), CuTC (3 equiv), DMF,
23 °C, 2 h, 42% over two steps; (c) CoCl2·6H2O (2.5 equiv), NaBH4 (5 equiv), EtOH, 0 to 23 °C,
20 min; (d) BTMG (1.5 equiv), C6H6, 100 °C,
10 min, 70% over two steps; (e) conc. HCl (2 equiv), MeOH, 23 °C,
30 min, 90%.
Synthesis of Novel C19-Hydroxylated
Analogues of Corticosteroid
Drugs
As an extension of this work, we applied some of the
methodologies developed in this campaign to the preparation of C19-hydroxylated
analogues of corticosteroid drugs. Topical glucocorticoids represent
the treatment of choice for inflammatory dermal diseases[58] and when used properly, only limited systemic
adverse events are observed, which make them a safe and effective
therapy. However, long-term use of topical treatment on large body
surface areas can be associated with systemic side effects partly
due to mineralocorticoid antagonism of the glucocorticoids,
which causes fluid-electrolyte imbalance and hypertension.[59] All therapeutically used glucocorticoids
possess this undesired mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonism
in addition to their glucocorticoid receptor (GR) agonism, and
some SAR information on these two receptors has been reported for
a range of steroids.[60] However, only very
limited SAR knowledge is available for glucocorticoids modified
at the C19 position, presumably due to the difficulty in procuring
meaningful quantities of these C19-modified compounds.To investigate
the pharmacological impact of installing a C19-hydroxy function in
the glucocorticoid scaffold, analogue 90 became
our initial target compound (Figure 5A). Its
synthesis commenced with global protection of the ketone moieties
of cortisone acetate (9) to afford 87. Following
the procedure delineated in the synthesis of ouabagenin (1), iodide 88 was prepared. Deketalization and iodide
hydrolysis afforded enone 89 in a straightforward manner.
A chemoselective reduction of the C11ketone followed by deprotection
of the side chain under forcing conditions furnished the desired analogue 90 (for details, see the Supporting Information). To probe the overall effect of the hydroxyl moieties at the C19
and C11 positions, analogues bearing the epimeric hydroxylgroup (91) and no hydroxylgroup (92) at C11 were also
synthesized from intermediate 89 (for details, see the Supporting Information).
Figure 5
(A) Syntheses of glucocorticoid
analogues 90, 91, 92, 97, and 98. Reagents
and conditions: (a) HCHO
(37%), HCl (conc.), CHCl3, 23 °C, 61%; (b) ethylene
glycol, TsOH (cat.), benzene, reflux, 60%; (c) hν,
Vycor filter, 60 h, 57%; (d) hν, N-iodosuccinimide (3.0 equiv), Li2CO3 (3.5 equiv),
MeOH:PhCH3 = 1:20, 23 °C, 20 min; (e) 2:10:1 TFA:CH2Cl2:H2O, 0 °C, 2 h, 67% over 2
steps; (f) AgF (3.8 equiv), 10:1 MeCN:H2O, 23 °C,
98%; (g) NaBH4 (0.9 equiv), 1:1 CH2Cl2:MeOH, 0 °C, 2 h, 72%; (h) HCl (6 N), TFA, 23 °C, 30 min,
53%; (i) MsCl (1.3 equiv), Et3N (2.0 equiv), DMAP (0.1
equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 to 23 °C, 40 min; LiCl
(1.3 equiv), DMF, 60 °C, 3 h, 81%; (j) TMSCl (4.0 equiv), NaI
(40.0 equiv), Ac2O, 0 °C, 1 h; Selectfluor (1.3 equiv),
MeCN, 0 °C, 1 h, 49%; for 97, (k) (EtCO)2O (1.5 equiv), TMSOTf (0.45 equiv), CH2Cl2,
0 °C, 1 h; (l) HCl (6 N), 75 °C, 5 h, 44% over 2 steps,
and for 98, (k) (EtCO)2O (1.5 equiv), TMSOTf
(0.45 equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 °C, 1 h, 91%; (l)
HCl (6 N), μW, 120 °C, 15 min, 31%. (B) GR binding and
anti-inflammatory efficacy of steroid analogues and reference compounds. GR, glucocorticoid receptor. IL-12B, interleukin-12B; MR, mineralocorticoid
receptor. The number in parentheses is
the corresponding efficacy value. The
abbreviation “nd” indicates that examination is not
done.
As can be seen
in Figure 5B, the GR binding
data for 92 showed a total lack of activity (IC50 > 10 000 nM), suggesting that introduction of a hydroxylgroup at C19 alone cannot compensate for loss of the criticalC11hydroxyl. However, the data for 90 confirm that introduction
of the C19 hydroxyl while keeping the C11hydroxyl—in the same
orientation as in hydrocortisone—only results in a 10-fold
loss of affinity compared to the latter. This proves that the C19
hydroxyl is generally tolerated in steroidalGR agonists. The fact
that 91, the C11 epimer of 90, is completely
inactive in the GR binding assay further underscores the critical
role of the presence and orientation of the C11hydroxyl moiety. We
were then very pleased to see that the GR binding of 90 also translated into anti-inflammatory efficacy in a cellular assay
(LPS-induced IL-12B released from primary human peripheral blood mononuclear
cells), albeit with low potency.(A) Syntheses of glucocorticoid
analogues 90, 91, 92, 97, and 98. Reagents
and conditions: (a) HCHO
(37%), HCl (conc.), CHCl3, 23 °C, 61%; (b) ethylene
glycol, TsOH (cat.), benzene, reflux, 60%; (c) hν,
Vycor filter, 60 h, 57%; (d) hν, N-iodosuccinimide (3.0 equiv), Li2CO3 (3.5 equiv),
MeOH:PhCH3 = 1:20, 23 °C, 20 min; (e) 2:10:1 TFA:CH2Cl2:H2O, 0 °C, 2 h, 67% over 2
steps; (f) AgF (3.8 equiv), 10:1 MeCN:H2O, 23 °C,
98%; (g) NaBH4 (0.9 equiv), 1:1 CH2Cl2:MeOH, 0 °C, 2 h, 72%; (h) HCl (6 N), TFA, 23 °C, 30 min,
53%; (i) MsCl (1.3 equiv), Et3N (2.0 equiv), DMAP (0.1
equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 to 23 °C, 40 min; LiCl
(1.3 equiv), DMF, 60 °C, 3 h, 81%; (j) TMSCl (4.0 equiv), NaI
(40.0 equiv), Ac2O, 0 °C, 1 h; Selectfluor (1.3 equiv),
MeCN, 0 °C, 1 h, 49%; for 97, (k) (EtCO)2O (1.5 equiv), TMSOTf (0.45 equiv), CH2Cl2,
0 °C, 1 h; (l) HCl (6 N), 75 °C, 5 h, 44% over 2 steps,
and for 98, (k) (EtCO)2O (1.5 equiv), TMSOTf
(0.45 equiv), CH2Cl2, 0 °C, 1 h, 91%; (l)
HCl (6 N), μW, 120 °C, 15 min, 31%. (B) GR binding and
anti-inflammatory efficacy of steroid analogues and reference compounds. GR, glucocorticoid receptor. IL-12B, interleukin-12B; MR, mineralocorticoid
receptor. The number in parentheses is
the corresponding efficacy value. The
abbreviation “nd” indicates that examination is not
done.In light of these data and the
∼1000-fold difference in
cellular potency (IL-12B) between clobetasole propionate and hydrocortisone,
we next elected to explore the effect of incorporating two D-ring
clobetasol side chains (chloroketone and propionate ester moieties)
on 90. The synthesis started from intermediate 89 (Figure 5A). A chemoselective
reduction of the C11ketone in the presence of the A-ring enone moiety
initially proved to be challenging. A preliminary solution was found
by first globally reducing the two ketones, followed by allylic oxidation
of the C3 hydroxylgroup to regenerate the enone moiety. Eventually,
it was found that a modified NaBH4 reduction protocol could
effect a chemoselective C11ketone reduction while leaving the
A-ring enone intact to arrive at 93. It was serendipitously
found that a methylene transfer to the C11 and C19 diol from the side
chain of 93 could be effected under acidic conditions
to afford 94, which interestingly achieved the desired
protection by concomitant deprotection. With diol 94 in
hand, a chlorine atom was introduced at the C21 position.[61] Installation of a propionate ester[62] at C17 and deprotection with HCl then completed
the synthesis of analogue 97. We were encouraged to see
the increase in GR binding affinity (∼15-fold) and cellular
potency (∼30-fold) of 97 compared to 90 (Figure 5B). Furthermore, 97 showed an interesting selectivity profile against the mineralocorticoid
receptor where it exhibited neither antagonistic nor agonistic effect
when tested up to 1 μM (data not shown), suggesting that the
C19 position potentially could be a trigger region for obtaining selectivity
for the glucocorticoid receptor over the mineralocorticoid
receptor. Finally, further refinement of 97 by introduction
of a fluorine atom[63] at C6 (to give analogue 98) provided a two-fold improvement in both the GR affinity
and cellular potency, which is in agreement with published SAR for
compounds bearing no hydroxylgroup at C19.[64]
Conclusion
Stereochemically defined functional adornment
of a steroid system
was accomplished by following a “redox-relay” approach.
This simplifying strategy allowed for the sequential installation
of four hydroxyl units that underscore the complexity of ouabagenin
(1). First, solid-state photochemistry and cyclobutanol
fragmentation achieved hydroxylation at the C19 position of
a steroid skeleton, which is a key motif in both ouabagenin (1) and C19-hydroxylated steroid analogues of cortisone
acetate (9). Then, many redox-relay events were conducted,
involving directed epoxidation, diepoxide fragmentation, and a Saegusa
oxidation/Mukaiyama hydration sequence. Unexpected difficulty was
encountered when installing the requisite butenolide moiety in 1, which was overcome by careful examination of an estrone
model system. Finally, adapting the C19-hydroxylation method
to related steroid systems has resulted in a series of hydroxylated
analogues for structure–activity relationship studies. Evaluation
of these steroid analogues for glucocorticoid receptor (GR)
agonism has shown that the C19-hydroxylated steroid skeleton
is a promising scaffold for identifying new anti-inflammatory drug
candidates with improved properties, which will motivate our continued
efforts in this field.
Authors: A Kawamura; L M Abrell; F Maggiali; N Berova; K Nakanishi; J Labutti; S Magil; G T Haupert; J M Hamlyn Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Claudia Grossmann; Tim Scholz; Marina Rochel; Christiane Bumke-Vogt; Wolfgang Oelkers; Andreas F H Pfeiffer; Sven Diederich; Volker Bahr Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Kotaro Iwasaki; Kanny K Wan; Alberto Oppedisano; Steven W M Crossley; Ryan A Shenvi Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2014-01-15 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Hem Raj Khatri; Bijay Bhattarai; Will Kaplan; Zhongzheng Li; Marcus John Curtis Long; Yimon Aye; Pavel Nagorny Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Yulia V Surovtseva; Vikram Jairam; Ahmed F Salem; Ranjini K Sundaram; Ranjit S Bindra; Seth B Herzon Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 15.419