A BF3·OEt2 catalyzed intramolecular Povarov reaction was used to synthesize 15 chromenopyridine fused thiazolino-2-pyridone peptidomimetics. The reaction works with several O-alkylated salicylaldehydes and amino functionalized thiazolino-2-pyridones, to generate polyheterocycles with diverse substitution. The synthesized compounds were screened for their ability to bind α-synuclein and amyloid β fibrils in vitro. Analogues substituted with a nitro group bind to mature amyloid fibrils, and the activity moreover depends on the positioning of this functional group.
A BF3·OEt2 catalyzed intramolecular Povarov reaction was used to synthesize 15 chromenopyridine fused thiazolino-2-pyridone peptidomimetics. The reaction works with several O-alkylated salicylaldehydes and amino functionalized thiazolino-2-pyridones, to generate polyheterocycles with diverse substitution. The synthesized compounds were screened for their ability to bind α-synuclein and amyloid β fibrils in vitro. Analogues substituted with a nitro group bind to mature amyloid fibrils, and the activity moreover depends on the positioning of this functional group.
The thiazolino
fused 2-pyridone
represents a privileged scaffold which can be modified to display
various biological activities.[1] It was
initially designed as a peptidomimetic to combat the virulence of
uropathogenic E. coli by inhibiting the formation
of pili.[1a] With alternative substitution
patterns, compounds based on this scaffold have also demonstrated
activity against Chlamydia trachomatis,[1b]Listeria monocytogenes,[1c] and Mycobacterium tuberculosis.[1d] Rigidifying the scaffold by equipping
it with sterically demanding aryl groups provides compounds with the
ability to modulate formation of bacterial and human amyloid fibrils.[2] Extension of the bicyclic thiazolino fused 2-pyridone
with nitrogen containing aromatic heterocycles offers another way
of rigidifying the peptidomimetic scaffold,[3] as exemplified by compounds 1–4 (Figure A). These
analogues are able to modulate α-synuclein amyloid fibril formation,
which is associated with Parkinson’s disease, a human neurodegenerative
disorder,[2a,3a,3b] or bind to
mature α-synuclein fibrils.[3c]
Figure 1
(A) Bicyclic
2-pyridones capable of modulating (compounds 1–3) and binding (compound 4) to α-synuclein
and amyloid β fibrils. (B) Chromenopyridine
containing bioactive polyheterocycles 5–8 and retrosynthetic strategy devised for construction of
chromenopyridine fused 2-pyridone polyheterocycle 11.
(A) Bicyclic
2-pyridones capable of modulating (compounds 1–3) and binding (compound 4) to α-synuclein
and amyloid β fibrils. (B) Chromenopyridine
containing bioactive polyheterocycles 5–8 and retrosynthetic strategy devised for construction of
chromenopyridine fused 2-pyridone polyheterocycle 11.Chromenopyridine is a versatile structural motif
present in a variety
of polyheterocycles with applications in biology as estrogenic, antibacterial,
and anticancer agents and biosensors (compounds 5–8, respectively, Figure B).[4] Recently, the merging
of two different active fragments to develop scaffolds with improved
biological properties has received considerable attention.[5] As mentioned above, annulation of bicyclic thiazolino
fused 2-pyridone with different heterocycles has resulted in scaffolds
capable of modulating amyloid fibrils.[3] We envisaged that fusing thiazolino 2-pyridone and chromenopyridine,
by combining units 9 and 10, could afford
scaffolds with the ability to target amyloid structures (Figure B) and, in addition,
constitute a new central fragment with great potential for drug discovery
in general.Since its discovery, the Povarov reaction[6] has been used widely for the synthesis of nitrogen
containing, six-membered
heterocycles with biological relevance.[7] Recently, we utilized the Lewis acid catalyzed Povarov reaction
to construct a tricyclic pyridine fused 2-pyridone peptidomimetic
scaffold,[3c] whose analogues have been shown
to bind α-synuclein and Aβ fibrils by ThT displacement[8]in vitro (e.g., compound 4, Figure A). We envisioned that performing the Povarov reaction
in an intramolecular fashion[9] could result
in the desired chromenopyridine annulated 2-pyridones 11 in a single operation (Figure B). The new scaffold 11 being equipped
with the tetrahedral carbon, and the oxygen, could decrease planarity
of the structures and enable increased hydrogen bonding, respectively.[10] In addition, these features could potentially
confer selectivity between different amyloid structures, a very desired
property in diagnostic and therapeutic applications of amyloid binding
small molecules.[11]We perceived that
chromenopyridine ring fused 2-pyridone scaffold 11 would
be accessible from amino 2-pyridone 9 and O-alkylated salicylaldehyde 10. Hence, we began our work
by investigating the feasibility of the
reaction between 9a and O-cinnamyl salicylaldehyde 10a in an intramolecular Povarov setup using BF3·OEt2 as catalyst, followed by oxidation with DDQ
(Scheme ).[3c] As hypothesized, the intramolecular reaction
worked smoothly, and the desired product 11a was isolated
in excellent yield. To explore the substrate scope of the reaction,
substituted O-cinnamyl salicylaldehydes 10b–i (Schemes S1 and S2) were allowed to react with 6-amino-2-pyridones 9a,b to construct 11b–k in good
to excellent yields (Scheme ).
Scheme 1
Synthesis of 2-Pyridone Based Polyheterocycles 11a–k
Aware of the importance of the 4-nitrophenyl substituent for amyloid
binding activity of the tricyclic scaffold 4,[3c] we prepared 11b–f and 11k with nitro groups in various positions. Notably,
salicylaldehydes with electron withdrawing R3 substituents
underwent faster Povarov reaction due to lowering of LUMO in the electrophilic
imine intermediate, providing 11b–d, 11g, and 11k.[12] Electron donating R4 substituents rendered the alkene
more nucleophilic and likewise decreased the reaction times, while
electron withdrawing R4 substituents increased them. Heating
was required to achieve synthetically useful reaction times for synthesis
of 11e and 11h, where, in the former case,
the moderate yield reflects a less clean conversion. In the preparation
of 11f, the effect of the electron withdrawing R3 substituent compensated for poor nucleophilicity of the alkene
moiety, and heating was not required to complete the reaction in 1
day. To test the scalability, 11b was also prepared from
1.6 mmol of 9a. The yield (88%) is comparable to that
at 0.4 mmol scale (86%).Next, we turned our attention toward
the synthesis of C-13 unsubstituted
target molecules 13 (Scheme ). SAR from our previous study suggested
that the best amyloid binding properties are achieved when the corresponding
position is unsubstituted.[3c] It was approached
by Povarov reaction between 9a and O-allyl salicylaldehyde 12. To our dismay, we were only
able to isolate small amounts (7%) of the desired product 13a, from the complex reaction mixture after 4 days at 70 °C. Microwave
irradiation, 120 °C for 3 h, shared the same lack of success,
and 13a was isolated in only 11% yield. Though fruitful
results are reported,[9e] attempts with terminal
allyl moieties often suffer from low yields.[7a,9a,12a,12b]
Scheme 2
Unsuccessful
Attempt to Synthesize C-13 Unsubstituted Compound 13a
Familiar with the mechanistic
features of the Lewis acid catalyzed
Povarov reaction,[7a,7d,7e,12c,13] we realized
that use of the terminal allyl group as alkene components would require
the reaction to go via high energy carbocations or operate via an
alternative mechanism.[9a,9b,9d,14] With our previous strives in mind where
we had made use of ethyl vinyl ether as alkene component, for synthesis
of unsubstituted tricyclic analogues 4,[3c] we naturally thought of employing a vinyl ester moiety
as electron donating auxiliary. With 3-bromopropenyl benzoate,[15] we were able to alkylate salicylic aldehydes
to synthesize the required intermediates14a–d (Schemes and S3). With the alkene component now
armed with an ester group, capable of mesomeric contributions, we
attempted Povarov reactions between 14a–d and 9a,b. Still, heating the reaction
mixtures to 70 °C was required to achieve reasonable reaction
times.
Scheme 3
Synthesis of C-13 Unsubstituted Compounds 13a–e
The benzoate functionality was
eliminated during oxidation to provide the desired products.
Synthesis of C-13 Unsubstituted Compounds 13a–e
The benzoate functionality was
eliminated during oxidation to provide the desired products.The desired compounds 13a–e were
isolated in low to moderate yields after 24 h of heating, followed
by oxidation with DDQ at room temperature. The unusually low yield
of 13e results from the formation of side products, which
complicated the purification. The low to moderate yields motivated
us to try a slightly different approach, using CuBr2 catalysis
and O-propargyl salicylaldehyde (Scheme S4).[7b,7c,7f,9a] Unfortunately, the method suffered from
undesired side reactions and 13a was only isolated in
31% yield.Having both sets of compounds in hand, we hydrolyzed
the methyl
ester to deprotect the carboxylic acid and reveal the peptidomimetic
(Scheme ). The limited
solubility of 16a–e in organic solvents
complicated handling, and these compounds were thus obtained in lower
yields.
Scheme 4
Deprotection of Methyl Esters through Saponification of 11a–k and 13a–e
The carboxylic acids 15a–k and 16a–e were initially screened in an α-synuclein
fibrilization assay with Thioflavin T (ThT) to probe for fibril binding
and modulation of amyloid fibril formation (Figure A and Figure S1).[8,16] Compounds 15b,c, 15e,f, 15k, 16a,b, and 16e bind to the α-synuclein
fibrils and had a significant effect on the fluorescence intensity,
by competing with ThT for binding. In addition, compound 15e has a mild inhibitory effect upon the fibril formation, as the lag
phase was slightly extended. In order to verify that amyloid fibrils
were indeed present, samples were taken upon the end point of the
assay and visualized with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) (Figure S2). No visible difference was observed
between the control experiment (black trace) and the mixture with 16a (green trace) (Figures B and S2).
Figure 2
(A) Representative selection
of ThT fluorescence traces. Each experiment
was performed in triplicate (Figure S1)
and normalized to the average. Compounds 15b and 16a appear to bind fibrils strongly, whereas 15a does not seem to bind to any significant extent. 15e and 16b are borderline. (B) TEM picture of fibrils
formed in the presence of compound 16a (green trace).
(A) Representative selection
of ThT fluorescence traces. Each experiment
was performed in triplicate (Figure S1)
and normalized to the average. Compounds 15b and 16a appear to bind fibrils strongly, whereas 15a does not seem to bind to any significant extent. 15e and 16b are borderline. (B) TEM picture of fibrils
formed in the presence of compound 16a (green trace).In a similar assay, compounds (15a–c, 15e,f, 15k, 16a–c, 16e) were
added after 70 h,
when the fluorescence traces had reached the plateau phase (Figures A and S3). The compounds were observed to bind to the
mature α-synuclein fibrils and displace bound ThT, indicated
by reduction of the ThT fluorescence, to varying degrees (Figures B and S4).
Figure 3
(A) ThT trace for compound 16a added
after 70 h (green),
α-Syn control (black), and ThT background fluorescence (gray).
(B) Retained ThT fluorescence 5 h after addition of compounds 15a–c, 15e,f, 15k, 16a–c, and 16e to mature α-synuclein fibrils, compared to the fluorescence
intensity 1 h before addition. For comparison, 15a and 16c were also included.
(A) ThT trace for compound 16a added
after 70 h (green),
α-Syn control (black), and ThT background fluorescence (gray).
(B) Retained ThT fluorescence 5 h after addition of compounds 15a–c, 15e,f, 15k, 16a–c, and 16e to mature α-synuclein fibrils, compared to the fluorescence
intensity 1 h before addition. For comparison, 15a and 16c were also included.Interestingly, all compounds equipped with a nitro group except 15d showed binding activity. The strongest binding was observed
for compounds with the nitro group situated in position C-9 (15b, 15c, 16a, and 16b). Moving the nitro group to position C-8 (16e) or to
the 4′ position of the C-13 aryl group (15e,f) is accompanied by a decrease in fibril binding ability.
Notably, the presence of the C-13 phenyl group abolishes all binding
activity rendered by the nitro group in position C-8 (15d vs 16e) but not C-9 (15b vs 16a, Figure S3). The cyclopropyl group appears
to be the favored C-14 substituent, over methoxy and proton (15b vs 15c and 15k, and 16a vs 16b). This observation is in agreement with the
SAR on scaffold 4, where cyclopropyl as R1 substituent was found somewhat superior to phenyl, hydrogen, and
methoxy substituents.[3c] Taken together,
these observations fit with the hypothesis that binding sites on amyloid
fibrils are made up of shallow hydrophobic clefts flanked by polar
groups, situated between the rows of side chains and running parallel
to the fiber axis.[11a,11c,11e]Compounds were also evaluated against Aβ40 in a similar
manner
(Figure and Figures S5–S7). Compounds 15b,c, 15f, and 16a, which bind
strongly to α-synuclein fibrils, were found to bind mature Aβ
fibrils as well, indicated by reduced ThT fluorescence, compared to
the control experiments.
Figure 4
Retained ThT fluorescence after addition of
selected compounds
to mature Aβ40 fibrils in vitro. (A) ThT fluorescence
trace for addition of compound 15b (magenta), α-Syn
control (black), and ThT background fluorescence (gray). (B) Bar chart
representation of the retained fluorescence (60 h), compared to the
intensity before compound addition (40 h).
Retained ThT fluorescence after addition of
selected compounds
to mature Aβ40 fibrils in vitro. (A) ThT fluorescence
trace for addition of compound 15b (magenta), α-Syn
control (black), and ThT background fluorescence (gray). (B) Bar chart
representation of the retained fluorescence (60 h), compared to the
intensity before compound addition (40 h).
O
In summary,
we have developed methods to fuse two privileged scaffolds,
namely, chromenopyridines and thiazolino 2-pyridones. These new peptidomimetic
polyheterocycles constitute a new scaffold with potential for diverse
substitution patterns. The intramolecular Povarov reaction between -alkylated salicylaldehydes and amino functionalized thiazolino-2-pyridones
afforded chromenopyridine fused 2-pyridone polyheterocycles in moderate
to excellent yields. Rewardingly, biological evaluation of chromenopyridine
fused thiazolino 2-pyridones revealed compounds capable of binding
to α-synuclein and Aβ40 amyloid fibrils in vitro. An interesting SAR was observed with respect to groups at position
C-9. The polyheterocycles equipped with a nitro group at position
C-9 showed the strongest binding to α-synuclein and Aβ40
amyloid fibrils. However, changing the position of the nitro group
resulted in decreased binding ability versus both amyloid fibrils.
As binding to mature amyloid fibrils is a property of pharmacological
relevance,[11] we intend to investigate these
promising compounds further in future biological studies.
Experimental Section
General
Unless otherwise stated,
purchased reactants
and reagents were used as received from commercial suppliers. Molecular
sieves and LiCl were dried at 300 °C under high vacuum for 4
h prior to use. Acetonitrile was dried over activated 3 Å molecular
sieves (5% w/v) for 48 h, then transferred via syringe to new 3 Å
molecular sieves (5% w/v) for storage until use. DMF, THF, and diethyl
ether were dried using an SG Water solvent drying tower according
to the manufacturer’s instructions and stored over activated
3 Å (DMF) or 4 Å (THF and diethyl ether) MS for 48 h or
more before use. Amberlyst was rinsed prior to use with THF/MeOH 1:1
in a cylindrical sintered funnel until the filtrate was transparent,
then dried briefly by passing air through. Microwave reactions were
performed in sealed vessels using a Biotage Initiator microwave synthesizer,
temperatures were monitored by an internal IR probe, and stirring
was mediated magnetically. TLC was performed on purchased aluminum
backed silica gel plates (median pore size 60 Å, fluorescent
indicator 254 nm) and detected with UV light at 254 and 366 nm. Flash
column chromatography was performed using silica gel (0.063–0.200
mesh). Automated flash column chromatography was performed using a
Biotage Isolera One system and purchased prepacked silica gel cartridges
(Biotage SNAP Cartridge, KP-Sil). Preparative HPLC was performed on
a Gilson instrument with a Phenomenex column (250 × 21.2 mm;
Gemini 5 μm NX-C18, 110 Å). MeCN/water, with 0.75% HCOOH
in the mobile phase. 30–100% MeCN in water over 30 min with
a flow rate of 20 mL/min. The elution was monitored with UV-abs. at
254 nm. Freeze-drying was accomplished by freezing the diluted MeCN/water
solutions in liquid nitrogen and then employing a Scanvac CoolSafe
freeze-dryer connected to an Edwards 28 rotary vane oil pump. Optical
rotation was measured with a Rudolph Autopol IV polarimeter 343 at
22 °C and 589 nm. [α] is reported in deg·mL·g–1·dm–1; concentrations (c) are given in g/100 mL. IR spectra were recorded on a
Bruker Alpha-t spectrometer. The samples were prepared as KBr pellets
or between NaCl plates; absorbances are given in reciprocal cm. 1H, 13C, and 19F NMR spectra were recorded
on a Bruker Avance III 400 MHz spectrometer with a BBO-F/H Smartprobe
or a Bruker Avance III HD 600 MHz spectrometer with a CP BBO-H/F,
5 mm cryoprobe, at 298 K, unless another temperature is given. All
spectrometers were operated by Topspin 3.5. Resonances are given in
ppm relative to TMS, and calibrated to solvent residual signals [CDCl3: δH = 7.26 ppm; δC = 77.16
ppm. (CD3)2SO: δH = 2.50 ppm;
δC = 39.51 ppm. (CD3)CO δH = 2.05 ppm; δC = 29.84 ppm]. The following abbreviations
are used to indicate splitting patterns: s = singlet; d = doublet;
dd = double doublet; t = triplet; m = multiplet; bs = broad singlet.
LC-MS was conducted on a Micromass ZQ mass spectrometer with ES+ and ES– ionization. HRMS was performed
on a mass spectrometer with ESI-TOF (ES+/ES–). Human wild-type α-synuclein was expressed and purified as
described previously,[3c] expressed and purified
Aβ40 was supplied by Alexotech AB.
General Procedure for Synthesis
of O-Alkylated
Salicylaldehydes 10a–i
Salicylaldehydes
were O-alkylated according to established procedures
with modifications.[17] Under an atmosphere
of nitrogen, cinnamyl bromide II (2.34 mmol, 1.30 equiv)
was dissolved in DMF (1.0 mL) and transferred with a syringe to a
mixture of salicylaldehyde I (1.80 mmol, 1.00 equiv)
and K2CO3 (496 mg, 2.00 equiv) under nitrogen.
The reaction mixture was stirred at r.t. until completion was indicated
by TLC analysis. The mixture was then transferred to a beaker of ice-cold
water (60 mL) while stirring; the resulting precipitate was filtered
off and washed with water (5 mL). The precipitate was then dissolved
in EtOAc (50 mL) and washed with brine (5 × 25 mL), dried with
sodium sulfate, filtered, and evaporated. Unless otherwise stated,
the compounds were used in the following synthetic step without further
purification.
2-(Cinnamyloxy)benzaldehyde (10a)
The
compound was prepared by following the general procedure. The mixture
was stirred for 6.5 h. The crude product was purified with automated
flash column chromatography (25 g cartridge, 10–20% EtOAc inheptane). White, low melting solid (373 mg, 87.2%). IR (KBR): ν
3028, 2862, 1684, 1598, 1580, 1481, 1455, 1375, 1286, 1236 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ
10.58 (s, 1H), 7.86 (dd, J = 7.9, 1.8 Hz, 1H), 7.55
(td, J = 8.0, 1.8 Hz, 1H), 7.43 (d, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H), 7.35 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2H), 7.31–7.27
(m, 1H), 7.05 (dt, J = 7.5, 3.2 Hz, 2H), 6.77 (d, J = 16.0 Hz, 1H), 6.43 (dt, J = 16.0, 5.7
Hz, 1H), 4.84 (dd, J = 5.7, 1.4 Hz, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 189.9,
161.1, 136.2, 136.0, 133.7, 128.8, 128.7, 128.3, 126.8, 125.3, 123.6,
121.1, 113.1, 69.3. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M – H]− Calcd for C16H13O2– 237.0921; Found 237.0917.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure but with 1.8 equiv of crude alkyl bromide. The
reaction mixture was stirred overnight. Only about 50% conversion
of salicylaldehyde was indicated by TLC, but the alkyl bromide was
consumed. The crude product was purified with automated flash column
chromatography (25 g cartridge, 5–20% diethyl ether in heptane).
Off white solid (124 mg, 24.5%). IR (KBr): ν 2980, 2934, 2879,
1681, 1599, 1512, 1485, 1455, 1388, 1287, 1239, 1179, 1047, 978, cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ
10.59 (s, 1H), 7.88 (dd, J = 8.0, 1.8 Hz, 1H), 7.60–7.52
(m, 1H), 7.37 (d, J = 8.7 Hz, 2H), 7.07 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 2H), 6.89 (d, J = 8.7 Hz, 2H),
6.73 (d, J = 16.0 Hz, 1H), 6.31 (dt, J = 15.9, 5.9 Hz, 1H), 4.83 (dd, J = 6.0, 1.5 Hz,
2H), 4.07 (q, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H), 1.44 (t, J = 7.0 Hz, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 190.0, 161.3, 159.2, 136.0, 133.6, 128.8, 128.6,
128.0, 125.3, 121.1, 121.0, 114.8, 113.1, 69.6, 63.7, 15.0. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + Na]+ Calcd for C18H18NaO3+ 305.1154; Found
305.1160.
General Procedure for Synthesis of C-13 Aryl
Substituted Povarov
Reaction Products 11a–j
The 6-amino thizolo-2-pyridone 9 (0.40 mmol, 1.00 equiv)
and 2-(cinnamyloxy)-benzaldehyde 10 (0.48 mmol, 1.20
equiv) were weighed up in a Biotage Microwave reaction tube and dissolved
in DCM (4 mL). 4 Å MS (8–10 pellets) was added, followed
by BF3·OEt2 (10.8 μL; 0.100 equiv),
whereupon the tube was sealed and left stirring at r.t. The reaction
was monitored with TLC until complete consumption of 1, and the corresponding imine intermediate, was indicated. The tube
was then opened and DDQ (182 mg; 2.00 equiv) was added. The reaction
mixture was stirred until complete oxidation was visible by TLC, then
transferred to a separation funnel and diluted with DCM (25 mL). The
mixture was washed with saturated aqueous bicarbonate solution (2
× 10 mL), followed by brine (10 mL). The aq. phases were re-extracted
once each with DCM (3 mL). The organic phase was dried over sodium
sulfate, filtered, and evaporated to dryness. The crude residue was
redissolved in DCM and purified with automated flash column chromatography.
The fractions containing pure desired product were combined, evaporated,
and co-evaporated with distilled chloroform twice. The residue was
put under high vacuum for several hours before storage at −20
°C. The yield was calculated from the 1H NMR spectrum
recorded in d6-DMSO.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure. Upon addition of boron trifluoride, the stirred
solution turned dark purple and a precipitate emerged within a few
minutes. The resulting suspension thickened so that the stirring was
compromised. The tube was shaken manually with regular intervals for
20 min until the suspension was lighter and the magnetic stirring
could be continued. The precipitate eventually dissolved completely,
and the reaction was then followed with TLC until complete consumption
of 9a was indicated, after 2 h reaction time. DDQ (197
mg, 2.17 equiv) was added and stirred for 50 min. The residue was
purified with automated flash column chromatography (25 g SNAP Cartridge,
20–65% EtOAc in heptane). Yellow solid (181 mg, 85.8%) The
compound contained chloroform; yield calculated from 1H
NMR sample in (CD3)2SO. 11b (746
mg, 88.4%) was also prepared at 1.6 mmol scale, according to the general
procedure. The reaction was complete after 3 h. [α]D −228° (c 0.289, CHCl3);
IR (KBr): ν 3452, 1752, 1668, 1573, 1526, 1433, 1342, 1227 cm–1; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ
8.65 (d, J = 8.6 Hz, 1H), 7.95 (dd, J = 8.6, 2.2 Hz, 1H), 7.76 (d, J = 2.2 Hz, 1H), 7.49–7.42
(m, 3H), 7.36–7.30 (m, 1H), 7.24–7.29 (m, 1H), 5.74
(dd, J = 8.3, 2.7 Hz, 1H), 5.22–5.07 (m, 2H),
3.83 (s, 3H), 3.71 (dd, J = 11.7, 8.3 Hz, 1H), 3.52
(dd, J = 11.6, 2.6 Hz, 1H), 1.03–0.90 (m,
1H), 0.36–0.23 (m, 2H), 0.23–0.14 (m, 1H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 168.6,
159.4, 156.3, 149.7, 145.3, 144.5, 142.7, 141.2, 137.0, 134.6, 129.9,
129.8, 129.6, 128.74, 128.65, 128.2, 127.1, 117.5, 112.5, 109.4, 67.1,
63.6, 53.5, 31.6, 15.7, 11.68, 11.60. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C28H22N3O6S+ 528.1224; Found
528.1229.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure. A precipitate emerged after 10 min stirring
upon addition of boron trifluoride. The magnetic stirring was compromised
as the mixture got viscous, and the tube was shaken manually for 10
min, until the viscosity had decreased to a point where magnetic stirring
was possible. The reaction was finished after 5.8 h. DDQ was added,
and the mixture was stirred for 10 min. The crude product was dissolved
in a larger volume of DCM and loaded onto a column (30 × 80 mm
silica gel, equilibrated with DCM) and purified with flash column
chromatography (0–70% EtOAc in heptane). Yellow solid (179
mg, 92%). The compound contained chloroform; yield was calculated
from 1H NMR spectrum recorded in (CD3)2SO. [α]D −256° (c 0.55,
CHCl3). IR (KBr): ν 3443, 1754, 1680, 1595, 1535,
1514, 1451, 1432, 1342, 1322, 1222, 1179, 1041 cm–1. 1H NMR [400 MHz, (CD3)2SO]: δ
8.48 (d, J = 8.6 Hz, 1H), 8.06 (dd, J = 8.6, 2.3 Hz, 1H), 7.79 (d, J = 2.2 Hz, 1H), 7.66–7.53
(m, 3H), 7.37 (ddt, J = 13.3, 7.8, 1.7 Hz, 2H), 6.02
(s, 1H), 5.75 (dd, J = 8.7, 2.0 Hz, 1H), 5.20 (d, J = 3.4 Hz, 2H), 3.94 (dd, J = 11.9, 8.7
Hz, 1H), 3.75 (s, 3H), 3.66 (dd, J = 11.9, 2.0 Hz,
1H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3):
δ 168.4, 159.8, 156.4, 149.8, 145.2, 142.6, 142.3, 139.6, 133.9,
133.5, 129.5, 129.5, 129.4, 129.0, 128.8, 128.5, 128.5, 127.1, 117.5,
112.7, 96.1, 66.9, 63.0, 53.6, 32.4. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C25H18N3O6S+ 488.0911; Found
488.0901.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure. A red precipitate emerged upon addition of
boron trifluoride. The mixture got thick, so the tube was sonicated
in an ultrasonic water bath at room temperature for 5 min, then shaken
manually with regular intervals during several hours, until the viscosity
had decreased to a point where magnetic stirring was no longer compromised.
The reaction was finished after 24.5 h. DDQ was added, and the mixture
was stirred for 10 min. The crude product was purified with flash
column chromatography (80 × 30 mm SiO2, 0–17%
EtOAc in DCM. Orange solid (167 mg, 78.5%). The compound contained
chloroform; yield was calculated from 1H NMR spectrum recorded
in (CD3)2SO. [α]D −239°
(c 0.28, CHCl3). IR (KBr): ν 3447,
1756, 1670, 1595, 1532, 1433, 1348, 1227, 1042 cm–1. 1H NMR [400 MHz, (CD3)2SO]: δ
8.51–8.40 (m, 3H), 8.07 (dd, J = 8.7, 2.3
Hz, 1H), 7.80 (d, J = 2.3 Hz, 1H), 7.75–7.66
(m, 2H), 6.06 (s, 1H), 5.79–5.72 (m, 1H), 5.22 (d, J = 1.6 Hz, 2H), 3.94 (dd, J = 11.9, 8.8
Hz, 1H), 3.76 (s, 3H), 3.66 (dd, J = 11.8, 2.0 Hz,
1H). 13C{1H} NMR [151 MHz, (CD3)2SO]: δ 168.6, 158.3, 155.9, 149.1, 147.9, 144.7, 143.5,
139.9, 139.6, 138.6, 133.1, 130.8, 130.6, 128.3, 128.1, 125.9, 124.3
(2C), 117.5, 112.3, 94.2, 79.2, 66.3, 62.5, 53.1, 31.5. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C25H17N4O8S+ 533.0762;
Found 533.0748.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure. The reaction was finished after 2 h. DDQ was
added, and the mixture was stirred for 10 min. The crude product was
purified with automated flash column chromatography (25 g cartridge,
0–100% EtOAc in heptane). Yellow solid (155 mg, 73%). [α]D25 −241 (c 0.4, CHCl3). IR (KBr): ν 3468, 3000, 1742, 1667, 1592, 1552, 1531,
1494, 1456, 1410, 1375, 1226, 922, 799, 740, 705 cm–1. 1H NMR (600 MHz, CDCl3): δ 8.68 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 1H), 7.94 (d, J = 7.3 Hz, 1H),
7.75 (d, J = 2.0 Hz, 1H), 7.52–7.43 (m, 3H),
7.28 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 2H), 5.78 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 1H), 5.03 (q, J = 15.0 Hz, 2H), 3.83
(s, 3H), 3.81–3.76 (m, 1H), 3.61 (d, J = 11.1
Hz, 1H), 2.98 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, CDCl3): δ 168.2, 158.4, 156.4, 149.8, 145.0, 140.9, 140.4, 135.8,
135.7, 132.5, 130.0, 129.9, 128.5, 128.2, 128.2, 128.2, 128.1, 127.1,
117.4, 112.6, 66.8, 63.4, 60.1, 53.6, 32.0. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C26H20N3O7S+ 518.1016;
Found 518.1016.
2-(Allyloxy)-4-nitrobenzaldehyde (12)
Under an atmosphere of nitrogen, 2-hydroxy-4-nitrobenzaldehyde Ib (300 mg, 1.00 equiv) and K2CO3 (498
mg, 2.01 equiv) were suspended in DMF (1.5 mL). While stirring at
r.t., allyl bromide (198 μL, 1.30 equiv) was added. The reaction
mixture was stirred for 3:40 h at r.t. until completion was indicated
by TLC analysis. The mixture was transferred to a beaker of ice-cold
water (60 mL) while stirring; the resulting precipitate was filtered
off and washed with water (5 mL). The precipitate was then dissolved
in EtOAc (50 mL) and washed with brine (5 × 25 mL), dried with
sodium sulfate, filtered, and evaporated. Yellow solid (326 mg, 87.7%).
IR (KBr): ν 3102, 3086, 2886, 1689, 1614, 1590, 1532, 1482,
1433, 1420, 1395, 1369, 1350, 1308, 1270, 1246, 1184, 1111, 1087,
995, 937, 88, 815, 747 cm–1. 1H NMR (600
MHz, CDCl3): δ 10.57 (s, 1H), 7.99 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 1H), 7.88 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 1H), 7.85 (s,
1H), 6.09 (ddt, J = 16.6, 10.6, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 5.51
(d, J = 17.3 Hz, 1H), 5.42 (d, J = 10.5 Hz, 1H), 4.78 (d, J = 4.7 Hz, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR (151 MHz, CDCl3): δ
188.4, 160.9, 152.2, 131.3, 129.7, 129.0, 119.6, 115.8, 108.5, 70.2.
HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M –
H]− Calcd for C10H8NO4– 206.0459; Found 206.0465.
General
Procedure for Synthesis of Povarov Reaction Products 13a–e
The 6-amino thizolo-2-pyridone 9 (0.40 mmol, 1.00 equiv) and O-(propenyl
benzoate)-salicylaldehyde 14 (0.48 mmol, 2.00 equiv)
were weighed up in a Biotage Microwave reaction tube and dissolved
in DCM (4 mL). 4 Å MS (8–10 pellets) was added, followed
by BF3·OEt2 (10.8 μL; 0.10 equiv),
whereupon the tube was sealed and left stirring in an oil bath at
70 °C. The reaction was monitored with TLC until complete consumption
of 9 was indicated. The tube was then cooled down to
r.t., opened, and DDQ (182 mg; 2.00 equiv) was added. The reaction
mixture was stirred for 5 min; complete oxidation was indicated by
TLC. Then it was transferred to a separation funnel and diluted with
DCM (25 mL). The mixture was washed with saturated aqueous bicarbonate
solution (2 × 10 mL), followed by brine (10 mL). The aq. phases
were re-extracted once each with DCM (3 mL). The organic phase was
dried over sodium sulfate, filtered, and evaporated to dryness. The
crude residue was redissolved in DCM and purified with automated flash
column chromatography. The fractions containing pure desired product
were combined, evaporated, and co-evaporated with distilled chloroform
twice. The residue was put under high vacuum for several hours before
storage at −20 °C. The yield was calculated from 1H NMR spectrum recorded in d6-DMSO.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure starting from 9a (106 mg, 0.40
mmol). The reaction mixture was stirred for 24 h, and the product
was purified with automated flash column chromatography (50 g cartridge,
10–50% EtOAc inn-heptane) in 14% yield (25
mg, 0.05 mmol) as a yellow powder. [α]D −83°
[c 0.12, (CH3)2SO]. IR (KBr):
ν 3417, 3082, 30009, 2954, 2852, 2247, 1753, 1665, 1617, 1606,
1592, 1578, 1520, 1488, 1467 cm–1. 1H
NMR [600 MHz, (CD3)2SO] δ 8.98 (d, J = 2.9 Hz, 1H), 8.34 (s, 1H), 8.27 (dd, J = 9.0, 2.9 Hz, 1H), 7.27 (d, J = 9.0 Hz, 1H), 5.78–5.67
(m, 3H), 3.91 (dd, J = 11.8, 8.9 Hz, 1H), 3.75 (s,
3H), 3.64 (dd, J = 11.8, 2.2 Hz, 1H), 1.85–1.78
(m, 1H), 1.15–1.05 (m, 2H), 0.73–0.60 (m, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR [151 MHz, (CD3)2SO] δ 169.2, 161.6, 158.6, 143.8, 143.8, 142.7, 139.4, 135.8,
130.1, 128.4, 127.3, 122.8, 120.4, 119.0, 107.2, 68.6, 63.0, 53.4,
31.2, 10.2, 7.9, 7.7. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + Na]+ Calcd for C22H17N3NaO6S+ 474.0736; Found 474.0714.
General Procedure for Synthesis of O-Alkylated
Salicylaldehydes 14a–d
Under
an atmosphere of nitrogen, 3-bromopropenyl benzoate (868 mg, 3.60
mmol, 1.80 equiv) was dissolved in DMF (2.0 mL) and transferred with
a syringe to a mixture of salicylaldehyde I (2.00 mmol,
1.00 equiv) and K2CO3 (553 mg, 2.00 equiv) under
nitrogen. The reaction mixture was stirred at r.t. until completion
was indicated by TLC analysis. The mixture was diluted with CH2Cl2 (50 mL) and washed with brine (5 × 50
mL), filtered through sodium sulfate, and evaporated. The crude product
was purified with automated flash column chromatography.
The compound was prepared by
following the general procedure starting from 5-fluoro-2-hydroxybenzaldehyde
(251 mg, 1.79 mmol). The reaction mixture was stirred for 2.5 h, and
the product was purified with automated flash column chromatography
(50 g cartridge, 2–50% EtOAc in n-heptane)
as a white powder in 84% yield (388 mg, 1.51 mmol). (E)-3-Bromoprop-1-en-1-yl benzoate was prepared according to literature
reports and crystallized from heptane.[15a] IR (KBr): ν 3548, 3415, 3091, 3059, 2946, 2892, 2870, 2766,
1727, 1685, 1614, 1599, 1584, 1495, 1452 cm–1. 1H NMR (600 MHz, CDCl3) δ 10.48 (s, 1H), 8.18–8.09
(m, 2H), 7.76 (dd, J = 12.5, 1.3 Hz, 1H), 7.70–7.62
(m, 1H), 7.56 (dd, J = 8.2, 3.3 Hz, 1H), 7.52 (t, J = 7.8 Hz, 2H), 7.31–7.27 (m, 3H), 7.04 (dd, J = 9.1, 3.9 Hz, 1H), 5.92 (dt, J = 12.5,
7.0 Hz, 1H), 4.74 (dd, J = 7.0, 1.2 Hz, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR (151 MHz, CDCl3) δ
188.58, 188.57, 163.3, 157.9, 156.98, 156.97, 156.3, 140.2, 133.9,
130.10, 128.6, 128.4, 122.5, 122.3, 114.68, 114.63, 114.3, 114.1,
108.9. 19F{1H} NMR (376 MHz, CDCl3) δ −121.79. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M – H]− Calcd for C17H12FO4– 299.0725; Found 299.0725.
3-(2-Formylphenoxy)prop-1-en-1-yl Benzoate (14d)
The compound was prepared by following the general procedure
starting from 2-hydroxybenzaldehyde (244 mg, 2.00 mmol). The reaction
mixture was stirred for 1.5 h, and the product was purified with automated
flash column chromatography (50 g cartridge, 2–25% EtOAc in n-heptane) in 79% yield as a white powder (450 mg, 1.59
mmol). 3-Bromoprop-1-en-1-yl benzoate was prepared by following literature
reports.[15a] Instead of recrystallization,
it was purified on automated flash column chromatography (50 g cartridge,
0–10% EtOAc in n-heptane) and isolated as
a mixture of E and Z isomers. Thus,
the alkylated salicylaldehyde was also isolated as a mixture of E and Z isomers. IR (KBr): ν 3415,
3093, 3067, 2941, 2859, 2761, 1734, 1691, 1599, 1582, 1482, 1453,
1400 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 10.55 (s, 1H), 10.25 (s, 1H), 8.30–8.23 (m,
1H), 8.19–8.09 (m, 2H), 8.00–7.98 (m, 1H), 7.90–7.87
(m, 1H), 7.80–7.42 (m, 9H), 7.37–7.35 (m, 1H), 7.12–7.02
(m, 2H), 5.98–5.91 (m, 1H), 5.42–5.37 (m, 1H), 5.03–5.01
(m, 1H), 4.77–4.75 (m, 1H). 13C{1H} NMR
(100 MHz, CDCl3) δ 189.7, 189.6, 188.4, 164.9, 163.3,
162.8, 160.7, 152.3, 140.0, 137.1, 135.8, 135.8, 135.3, 134.0, 134.0,
133.9, 130.3, 130.2, 130.1, 130.0, 128.7, 128.7, 128.6, 128.6, 128.6,
128.5, 128.4, 128.3, 126.5, 125.2, 125.2, 123.5, 121.1, 121.0, 112.8,
112.7, 109.2, 108.7, 65.4, 62.2. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M – H]− Calcd for
C17H13O4– 281.0819;
Found 281.0819.
General Procedure for Hydrolysis of Methyl
Esters. Synthesis
of 15a–j and 16a–e
The methyl ester was dissolved inTHF (4 mL), and
LiOH (0.10 M, 1.40 equiv) was added to the stirred solution. The hydrolysis
was monitored with TLC. Upon completion, HCl (1.00 M, 1.50 equiv)
was added. The resulting mixture was stirred for 5 min, then concentrated
partially, until most of the THF was removed. The residue was partitioned
between water and CHCl3/MeOH 9:1 (10 mL). The phases were
separated, and the aqueous phase was extracted once more (5 mL). The
combined organic extracts were dried with sodium sulfate, filtered,
and evaporated. The residue was redissolved in DMSO (1–3 mL)
and purified with preparative HPLC. The fractions containing the pure
desired product were combined, diluted with water, and freeze-dried.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure, but upon complete saponification, the mixture
was neutralized with Amberlyst 15 until around pH = 6 by pH paper,
then filtered through a pad of THF-wet Celite. The amberlyst and Celite
were rinsed with MeOH until the filtrate was transparent. The filtrate
was evaporated and extracted according to the general procedure. The
residue was triturated with Et2O (0.5 mL) and filtered.
The solid was washed with more Et2O (0.5 mL) and dried
under vacuum overnight. 25 mg of 11h was hydrolyzed to
provide 15h (15.45 mg, 63.4%) as a yellow solid. [α]D −51.71° [c 0.29, (CD3)2SO]. IR (KBr): ν 3442, 3082, 3003, 1734, 1629,
1577, 1518, 1490, 1446, 1382, 1330, 1169, 1127 cm–1. 1H NMR [600 MHz, (CD3)2SO, 343
K]: δ 8.25 (dd, J = 7.7, 1.8 Hz, 1H), 7.85–7.65
(m, 4H), 7.37 (td, J = 7.8, 1.7 Hz, 1H), 7.17 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 1H), 6.96 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H),
5.38 (d, J = 8.2 Hz, 1H), 5.14–4.92 (m, 2H),
3.68 (dt, J = 10.0, 7.3 Hz, 1H), 3.55 (d, J = 10.9 Hz, 1H), 0.80–0.70 (m, 1H), 0.34 to −0.07
(m, 4H). 13C{1H} NMR [151 MHz, (CD3)2SO, 343 K]: δ 168.4, 157.7, 155.4, 146.6, 144.0,
140.3, 137.9, 133.6, 132.6 (d, J = 13.3 Hz), 131.0,
128.6 (d, J = 9.9 Hz), 127.8, 126.1, 124.7, 124.6,
124.3, 122.9, 122.5, 122.0, 116.3, 105.3, 65.6, 65.1, 31.8 (d, J = 8.3 Hz), 14.8 (d, J = 9.5 Hz), 11.2–0.9
(m). The multiplets in the19F NMR [565 MHz, (CD3)2SO, 343 K]: δ −61.20. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C28H20F3N2O4S+ 537.1091; Found 537.1094.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure, but upon complete saponification, the mixture
was neutralized with Amberlyst 15 until around pH = 6 by pH paper,
then filtered through a pad of THF-wet Celite. The amberlyst and Celite
were rinsed with MeOH until the filtrate was transparent. The filtrate
was evaporated and extracted according to the general procedure. The
residue was triturated in Et2O (0.5 mL) and filtered. The
solid was washed with more Et2O (0.5 mL) and dried under
vacuum overnight. 25 mg of 11i was converted to 15i (17.5 mg, 72%) isolated as a yellow solid. [α]D −91.56° [c 0.21, (CD3)2SO]. IR (KBr): ν 3442, 3390, 2941, 2836, 1757,
1646, 1608, 1577, 1519, 1463, 1439, 1439, 1218, 1038 cm–1. 1H NMR [600 MHz, (CD3)2SO, 343
K]: δ 8.24 (dd, J = 7.8, 1.7 Hz, 1H), 7.44–7.33
(m, 2H), 7.16 (td, J = 7.5, 1.1 Hz, 1H), 7.03 (dd, J = 8.2, 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.00–6.87 (m, 3H), 5.51–5.45
(m, 1H), 5.17–4.96 (m, 2H), 3.82 (d, J = 8.6
Hz, 3H), 3.78–3.71 (m, 1H), 3.53 (dd, J =
11.3, 2.0 Hz, 1H), 0.99–0.92 (m, 1H), 0.34–0.21 (m,
3H), 0.20–0.09 (m, 1H). 13C{1H} NMR [151
MHz, (CD3)2SO, 343 K]: δ 168.7, 158.4
(d, J = 9.2 Hz), 157.8, 155.5, 145.2, 144.3, 141.0,
140.1, 138.0, 132.8, 131.1, 128.6 (d, J = 10.8 Hz),
128.0, 124.6, 122.5, 121.9, 116.3, 115.4 (d, J =
12.2 Hz), 113.5, 106.4, 65.8, 64.1, 55.1, 31.2, 14.6, 11.14–10.10
(m). The multiplets in the HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C28H22N2O5S+ 499.1322; Found
499.1326.
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure starting from 13e (20.76 mg, 0.046
mmol). The reaction was stirred for 1.5 h, and the product was isolated
as yellow powder in 20% yield (4.200 mg, 0.009 mmol). [α]D −198° [c 0.10, (CD3)2SO]. IR (KBr): ν 3550, 3475, 3414, 3236, 3079,
2844, 2497, 1754, 1634, 1617, 1587 cm–1. 1H NMR [600 MHz, (CD3)2SO] δ 8.95 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 1H), 8.24 (dd, J = 9.0, 2.9
Hz, 1H), 7.25 (d, J = 9.0 Hz, 1H), 5.69–5.59
(m, 4H), 3.87–3.84 (m, 1H), 3.61 (dd, J =
11.6, 1.7 Hz, 1H), 1.79–1.75 (m, 1H), 1.11–1.03 (m,
2H), 0.68–0.56 (m, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR [151
MHz, (CD3)2SO] δ 169.5, 161.1, 158.2,
143.7, 143.0, 142.2, 139.0, 135.2, 129.3, 127.7, 126.7, 122.3, 119.8,
118.5, 106.3, 68.1, 62.9, 31.2, 9.7, 7.4, 7.2. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M + H]+ Calcd for C21H16N3O6S+ 438.0755;
Found 438.0766.
2-(Hydroxymethyl)-5-nitrophenol
The compound was prepared
from 2-hydroxy-4-nitro-benzoic acid by following a published procedure[18] but with only 3 equiv of BH3·SMe2. 10.00 g was converted to 8.39 g (91%) after purification.
NMR data were in agreement with published data.
2-Hydroxy-4-nitrobenzaldehyde
(Ib)
2-(Hydroxymethyl)-5-nitrophenol
(8.20 g, 1.00 equiv) was dissolved inTHF (100 mL). (Diacetoxyiodo)benzene
(17.27 g, 1.11 equiv) and TEMPO (158 mg, 0.02 equiv) were weighed
up and added. The resulting suspension was stirred at r.t. After 30
min, a clear solution remained, but TLC indicated some remaining acid.
No further progress was indicated after 65 min, whereupon (diacetoxyiodo)benzene
(3.14 g, 0.20 equiv) was added. After 50 min of stirring, the reaction
was found complete by TLC. Saturated aqueous sodium thiosulfate solution
(100 mL) was added, and the mixture was stirred for 5 min, then transferred
to a separation funnel and extracted with EtOAc (150 + 50 + 50 mL).
The organic phases were combined, washed with brine (200 mL), and
evaporated. The residue was redissolved in chloroform (300 mL) and
extracted with aqueous potassium hydroxide solution (5% w/v, 3 ×
200 mL). The combined extracts were cooled in an ice-water bath and
neutralized with HCl (12 M, 44 mL). The precipitate was filtered off
and dissolved in EtOAc, dried with sodium sulfate, filtered, and evaporated.
The residue was redissolved in DCM/MeOH (99:1) and purified with flash
column chromatography (70 × 120 mm silica gel, DCM/MeOH 99:1).
5.23 g (64.5%) isolated as a light-yellow powder. NMR data recorded
in (CD3)2CO are in close agreement with published
data,[18] and the phenolic proton is visible
as well. 1H NMR (600 MHz, (CD3)2CO):
δ 11.06 (s, 1H), 10.27 (s, 1H), 8.10 (d, J =
8.4 Hz, 1H), 7.93–7.81 (m, 1H), 7.76 (s, 1H). IR (KBr): ν
3452, 3224, 3110, 3046, 2885, 1676, 1537, 1476, 1353, 1299, 1219,
1172, 1116, 958, 882, 827, 793, 740 cm–1. 1H NMR (600 MHz, CDCl3): δ 11.16 (s, 1H), 10.08 (s,
1H), 7.79–7.89 (m, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (151
MHz, CDCl3): δ 196.1, 162.0, 152.6, 134.9, 123.8,
114.5, 113.6. HRMS (ESI-TOF) m/z: [M – H]− Calcd for C7H4NO4– 166.0146; Found 166.0145.
General Procedure for Synthesis of Cinnamyl Esters IVa–c
The cinnamyl esters were synthesized
according to a literature procedure with slight modifications.[19] LiCl (509 mg; 12 mmol, 1.2 equiv) was weighed
up in an oven-dried 100 mL round-bottom flask and put under vacuum.
The flask was heated with a hot air gun for several minutes and allowed
to cool down to room temperature, then back-filled with nitrogen.
The flask was put under vacuum and back-filled with nitrogen twice
more. Dried MeCN (30 mL) was added with a syringe, and the resulting
suspension was cooled to 0 °C in an ice-water bath. Triethylphosphonoacetate
(2.4 mL, 12 mmol, 1.2 equiv) was added with a syringe while stirring.
After 20 min was added benzaldehyde III (10 mmol, 1.0
equiv), followed by DBU (1.8 mL, 12 mmol, 1.2 equiv) dropwise. The
resulting reaction mixture was allowed to warm up to room temperature
and stirred until completion was indicated by TLC analysis. Upon complete
consumption of the aldehyde, the mixture was concentrated under reduced
pressure and partitioned between diethyl ether (30 mL) and NH4Cl solution (sat. aq.) (40 mL). The aq. phase was extracted
with diethyl ether (2 × 30), and the combined organic phase was
dried over sodium sulfate, filtered, and concentrated by rotary evaporation.
The residue was redissolved in DCM and purified with automated flash
column chromatography.
Ethyl (E)-3-(3-Methoxyphenyl)acrylate
(IVa)
The compound was prepared by following
the general
procedure. The reaction was finished after 3.5 h. The crude product
was purified with automated flash column chromatography (50 g cartridge,
5–15% EtOAc inheptane). Transparent oil (1.94 g, 94%). IR
(KBr): ν 2981, 2940, 2906, 2837, 1712, 1638, 1581, 1490, 1466,
1434, 1367, 1311, 1293, 1261, 1179, 1041, 982 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.65 (d, J = 16.0 Hz, 1H), 7.30 (t, J = 7.9 Hz,
1H), 7.12 (dt, J = 7.7, 1.2 Hz, 1H), 7.04 (s, 1H),
6.93 (ddd, J = 8.3, 2.5, 0.9 Hz, 1H), 6.42 (d, J = 16.0 Hz, 1H), 4.27 (q, J = 7.1 Hz,
2H), 3.83 (s, 3H), 1.34 (t, J = 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ
167.1, 160.0, 144.6, 136.0, 130.0, 120.9, 118.7, 116.3, 113.0, 60.7,
55.4, 14.5. The NMR data are in agreement with published data for
this compound.[20a]
The compound was prepared by following
the general procedure. The reaction was finished after 1.3 h. The
crude product was purified with automated flash column chromatography
(50 g cartridge, 5% EtOAc inheptane). Colorless oil that crystallizes
at room temperature (1.20 g, 89%). IR (KBr): ν 3048, 2986, 2912,
1715, 1675, 1642, 1478, 1441, 1367, 1335, 1308, 1281, 1202, 1157,
1125, 1098, 1079, 1035, 996 cm–1. 1H
NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.77 (s, 1H), 7.74–7.66
(m, 2H), 7.63 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 0H), 7.52 (t, J = 7.8 Hz, 1H), 6.50 (d, J = 16.0 Hz,
1H), 4.28 (q, J = 7.1 Hz, 2H), 1.35 (t, J = 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 166.6, 142.9, 135.4, 131.6 (q, J = 32.5 Hz), 131.2 (d, J = 1.4 Hz), 129.6, 126.7
(q, J = 3.7 Hz), 124.7 (q, J = 3.8
Hz), 123.9 (q, J = 272.5 Hz), 120.4, 60.9, 14.4. 19F NMR (376 MHz, CDCl3) δ −62.9. The
NMR data are in agreement with published data for this compound.[20b]
Ethyl (E)-3-(4-Ethoxyphenyl)acrylate
(IVc)
The compound was prepared by following
the general
procedure but at 15 mmol scale. The reaction was finished after 2.2
h. The crude product was purified with automated flash column chromatography
(50 g cartridge, 5% EtOAc inheptane). White solid (3.03 g, 91%).
IR (KBr): ν 3395, 2988, 2932, 1710, 1631, 1604, 1573, 1482,
1425, 1394, 1364, 1289, 1253, 1168, 1043 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.64 (d, J = 15.9 Hz, 1H), 7.46 (d, J = 8.7 Hz,
2H), 6.89 (d, J = 8.8 Hz 2H), 6.30 (d, J = 15.9 Hz, 1H), 4.25 (q, J = 7.1 Hz, 2H), 4.06
(q, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H), 1.43 (t, J =
7.0 Hz, 3H), 1.33 (t, J = 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 167.5,
160.9, 144.5, 129.8, 127.2, 115.8, 114.9, 63.8, 60.5, 14.9, 14.52.
General Procedure for Synthesis of Cinnamyl Alcohols Va–d
The cinnamyl alcohols were synthesized
according to a literature procedure.[19c] The cinnamyl ester IV (10 mmol, 1.0 equiv) was weighed
up in an oven-dried 100 mL round-bottom flask, put under nitrogen,
and dissolved in dried THF (30 mL). The reaction mixture was cooled
to −78 °C in a dry ice/acetone bath, and DiBAl-H (1 M
in toluene, 24 mL, 24 mmol. 2.4 equiv) was added slowly with a syringe.
The mixture was stirred at −78 °C while the reaction was
monitored with TLC. Upon complete consumption of the cinnamyl ester,
saturated Rochelle salt solution (20 mL) was added to the mixture
at −78 °C. The mixture was allowed to warm up to room
temperature, transferred to a separation funnel, and extracted with
EtOAc (5 × 40 mL). The organic phases were combined, dried over
sodium sulfate, filtered through a pad of EtOAc-wet Celite, and concentrated
by rotary evaporation.
(E)-3-(3-Methoxyphenyl)prop-2-en-1-ol
(Va)
The compound was prepared at 9.30 mmol
scale
by following the general procedure. The reaction was finished after
1 h. Transparent liquid (1.54 g, quant.). IR (KBr): ν 3361,
2939, 2836, 1599, 1580, 1490, 1465, 1454, 1433, 1289, 1257, 1156,
1046, 1011, 970 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz,
CDCl3): δ 7.27–7.20 (m, 1H), 7.02–6.96
(m, 1H), 6.93 (t, J = 2.1 Hz, 1H), 6.81 (ddd, J = 8.2, 2.6, 0.9 Hz, 1H), 6.59 (d, J =
15.9 Hz, 1H), 6.36 (dt, J = 15.9, 5.7 Hz, 1H), 4.33
(dd, J = 5.7, 1.5 Hz, 2H), 3.82 (s, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 159.9,
138.3, 131.1, 129.7, 129.0, 119.3, 113.5, 111.9, 63.8, 55.4. The NMR
data are in agreement with published data for this compound.[20c]
The compound was prepared at 8.89 mmol
scale by following the general procedure. The reaction was complete
after 1 h. Transparent liquid (1.76 g, quant.). IR (KBr): ν
3345, 2869, 1487, 1441, 1334, 1270, 1199, 1165, 1125, 1099, 1072,
1011, 967 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.63 (s, 1H), 7.55 (d, J = 7.4
Hz, 1H), 7.52–7.39 (m, 2H), 6.71–6.61 (m, 1H), 6.44
(dt, J = 15.9, 5.4 Hz, 1H), 4.36 (dd, J = 5.4, 1.6 Hz, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz,
CDCl3): δ 137.6, 131.2, (q, J =
32.3 Hz), 130.7, 129.7 (d, J = 1.4 Hz), 129.5, 129.2,
124.3 (q, J = 3.8 Hz), 124.2 (q, J = 136.2 Hz), 123.2
(q, J = 3.8 Hz), 63.5. 19F NMR (376 MHz,
CDCl3): δ −62.81. The NMR data are in agreement
with published data for this compound.[20d]
(E)-3-(4-Ethoxyphenyl)prop-2-en-1-ol (Vc)
The compound was prepared at 8.57 mmol scale
by following the general procedure. The reaction was complete after
2 h. White solid (1.52 g, quant.). IR (KBr): ν 3363, 3274, 2979,
2931, 1605, 1512, 1476, 1447, 1397, 1305, 1269, 1246, 1175, 1114,
1087, 1048, 1007, 970 cm–1. 1H NMR (400
MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.38–7.29 (m, 2H), 6.92–6.80
(m, 2H), 6.62–6.48 (m, 1H), 6.23 (dt, J =
15.9, 6.0 Hz, 1H), 4.35–4.27 (m, 2H), 4.04 (q, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H), 1.41 (t, J = 7.0 Hz, 3H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 158.9,
131.2, 129.4, 127.8, 126.2, 114.7, 64.1, 63.6, 15.0. The NMR data
are in agreement with published data for this compound.[20e]
(E)-3-(4-Nitrophenyl)prop-2-en-1-ol
(Vd)
The compound was prepared at 10.4 mmol
scale
by following the general procedure. The reaction was finished after
1 h. Light yellow solid (1.89 g, quant.). IR (KBr): ν 3508,
3108, 3080, 1652, 1596, 1504, 1455, 1411, 1338, 1101, 972, 958 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ
8.23–8.10 (m, 2H), 7.59–7.44 (m, 2H), 6.72 (dt, J = 16.0, 1.8 Hz, 1H), 6.54 (dt, J = 16.0,
5.1 Hz, 1H), 4.40 (dd, J = 5.1, 1.7 Hz, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ
147.1, 143.4, 133.7, 128.4, 127.1, 124.2, 63.3. The NMR data are in
agreement with published data for this compound.[20f]
General Procedure for Synthesis of Cinnamyl
Bromides IIa–d
The cinnamyl
bromides were synthesized
according to a literature procedure with slight modifications.[19c] The cinnamyl alcohol V (2.0 mmol,
1.0 equiv) was weighed up in an oven-dried Biotage microwave reaction
tube and put under nitrogen. Dried diethyl ether (4 mL) was added,
and the resulting suspension was cooled to 0 °C in an ice/water
bath. PBr3 (0.20 mL, 2.0 mmol, 1.0 equiv) was added dropwise
with a syringe. The resulting mixture was stirred at 0 °C until
complete consumption of the starting material was indicated by TLC.
The reaction was quenched at 0 °C by slow and careful addition
of a concentrated phosphate buffer at pH 7.4 (4 mL). The reaction
mixture was transferred to a separation funnel, and the phases were
separated. The aq. phase was extracted with diethyl ether (2 ×
5 mL). The combined organic phases were dried over sodium sulfate,
filtered, and concentrated by rotary evaporation. The crude cinnamyl
bromide was used for the next step without further purification or
storage.
The compound was prepared at 4.45 mmol
scale by following the general procedure but with 0.915 equiv of PBr3 used. The reaction was complete after 5 min. Transparent
liquid (0.938 g, 92.8% crude yield). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.25 (t, J = 7.9 Hz, 1H), 6.98 (dt, J = 7.6, 1.2 Hz, 1H), 6.92 (t, J = 2.1 Hz, 1H), 6.86–6.80
(m, 1H), 6.62 (d, J = 15.5 Hz, 1H), 6.39 (dt, J = 15.5, 7.7 Hz, 1H), 4.16 (dd, J = 7.8,
1.0 Hz, 2H), 3.82 (s, 3H). The NMR data are in agreement with published
data for this compound.[20g]
The compound was prepared at 3.98 mmol
scale by following the general procedure. The reaction was complete
after 25 min. Off white solid (0.977 g, 92.6% crude yield). 1H NMR (600 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.63 (s, 1H), 7.54 (ddd, J = 19.3, 7.7, 1.7 Hz, 2H), 7.45 (t, J =
7.7 Hz, 1H), 6.67 (d, J = 15.6 Hz, 1H), 6.47 (dt, J = 15.5, 7.7 Hz, 1H), 4.15 (dd, J = 7.7,
1.1 Hz, 2H). The NMR data are in agreement with published data for
this compound.[20h]
The compound was prepared at 5.03 mmol
scale by following the general procedure. The reaction was finished
after 5 min. White solid (1.10 g, 91% crude yield). 1H
NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 7.31 (d, J = 8.6 Hz, 2H), 6.85 (d, J = 8.8 Hz, 2H), 6.59 (d, J = 15.6 Hz, 1H), 6.26 (dt, J = 15.6, 7.9
Hz, 1H), 4.17 (dd, J = 7.9, 1.0 Hz, 2H), 4.04 (q, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H), 1.41 (t, J = 7.0 Hz, 3H).
This compound is unstable and has to be used in the next step immediately.
The compound was prepared at 6.0 mmol
scale by following the general procedure but with DCM as solvent and
1.22 equiv of PBr3 used. The reaction was complete after
40 min. Light yellow solid (1.39 g, 96% crude yield). IR (KBr): ν
1595, 1515, 1341, 1197, 1107, 971 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 8.20 (d, J = 8.8 Hz, 2H), 7.53 (d, J = 8.8 Hz, 2H), 6.71 (d, J = 15.7 Hz, 1H), 6.61–6.51 (m, 1H), 4.16 (dd, J = 7.5, 0.9 Hz, 2H). 13C{1H} NMR
(100 MHz, CDCl3) δ 147.5, 142.3, 132.2, 130.0, 127.4,
124.2, 32.0. The NMR data are in agreement with published data for
this compoud.[20i]
2-(Prop-2-yn-1-yloxy)benzaldehyde
(VI)
Under an atmosphere of nitrogen, salicylaldehyde Ia (1.07
mL, 1.00 equiv) and K2CO3 (2.76 g, 2.00 equiv)
were suspended in DMF (5.0 mL). While stirring at r.t., propargyl
bromide (80% w/w in toluene, 1.45 mL, 1.30 equiv) was added. The reaction
mixture was stirred for 2.5 h at r.t. until completion was indicated
by TLC analysis, then diluted with DCM (100 mL) and washed with water
(50 mL), followed by brine (3 × 50 mL). The organic phase was
dried, filtered, and concentrated. The crude product was purified
with automated flash column chromatography (50 g cartridge, 0–4%
EtOAc in heptane). Off white solid (1.50 g, 94%). NMR spectra were
in agreement with published data.[21]
Authors: Krista L Neal; Naomi B Shakerdge; Steven S Hou; William E Klunk; Chester A Mathis; Evgueni E Nesterov; Timothy M Swager; Pamela J McLean; Brian J Bacskai Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Erik Chorell; Emma Andersson; Margery L Evans; Neha Jain; Anna Götheson; Jörgen Åden; Matthew R Chapman; Fredrik Almqvist; Pernilla Wittung-Stafshede Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lin Jiang; Cong Liu; David Leibly; Meytal Landau; Minglei Zhao; Michael P Hughes; David S Eisenberg Journal: Elife Date: 2013-07-16 Impact factor: 8.140