Published on Web 01/30/2008
Evolution of the Total Syntheses of Ustiloxin Natural Products
and Their Analogues
Pixu Li,†,§ Cory D. Evans,†,| Yongzhong Wu,† Bin Cao,†, Ernest Hamel,‡ and
Madeleine M. Joullie´*,†
Department of Chemistry, UniVersity of PennsylVania, 231 South 34th Street, Philadelphia,
PennsylVania 19104, Toxicology and Pharmacology Branch, DeVelopmental Therapeutics
Program, DiVision of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute at Frederick,
National Institutes of Health, Frederick, Maryland 21702
Received November 15, 2007; E-mail: mjoullie@sas.upenn.edu
Abstract: Ustiloxins A-F are antimitotic heterodetic cyclopeptides containing a 13-membered cyclic core
structure with a synthetically challenging chiral tertiary alkyl-aryl ether linkage. The first total synthesis of
ustiloxin D was achieved in 31 linear steps using an SNAr reaction. An NOE study of this synthetic product
showed that ustiloxin D existed as a single atropisomer. Subsequently, highly concise and convergent
syntheses of ustiloxins D and F were developed by utilizing a newly discovered ethynyl aziridine ring-
opening reaction in a longest linear sequence of 15 steps. The approach was further optimized to achieve
a better macrolactamization strategy. Ustiloxins D, F, and eight analogues (14-MeO-ustiloxin D, four
analogues with different amino acid residues at the C-6 position, and three (9R,10S)-epi-ustiloxin analogues)
were prepared via the second-generation route. Evaluation of these compounds as inhibitors of tubulin
polymerization demonstrated that variation at the C-6 position is tolerated to a certain extent. In contrast,
the S configuration of the C-9 methylamino group and a free phenolic hydroxyl group are essential for
inhibition of tubulin polymerization.
Introduction
therapy is a very important goal being extensively investigated,
the mechanism of action of the naturally occurring peptides that
Antimitotic Agents. Antimitotic agents have long been of
interest to scientists and physicians, even before their precise
mechanism of action could be articulated. Most of these
compounds interfere with microtubule assembly and functions,
thus resulting in mitotic arrest of eukaryotic cells. There are a
number of natural and synthetic compounds that interfere with
tubulin function to inhibit the formation of microtubules.1 Such
antimitotic agents exhibit a broad range of biological activities
and can be used for medicinal and agrochemical purposes, acting
as anticancer, antifungal, or anthelmintic agents. Moreover,
tubulin-binding compounds are valuable for understanding basic
mechanisms involved in the dynamics of the microtubule
network.2 Mitotic arrest is of importance in cancer chemo-
therapy, since tubulin is an established chemotherapeutic target.
In addition to the widely used vinca alkaloids and taxoids, many
other antimitotic agents are currently in clinical or preclinical
development.3 Newer potential targets that may cause mitotic
arrest are in development as well. Although cancer chemo-
inhibit tubulin polymerization remains a challenging problem.
Attempts to establish a relationship among the tubulin binding
peptides have had only limited success.4-8 As a result, the
mechanism of action of peptidic antimitotic agents is not
completely elucidated and deserves further investigation.
Ustiloxins. The first peptide shown to interact with tubulin
was phomopsin A (Figure 1).9-13 Since then, a number of
peptides and depsipeptides were found to disrupt cellular
microtubules. These compounds universally inhibit the assembly
of the R,â-tubulin dimer into its polymer and, in the cases
investigated, strongly suppress microtubule dynamics at low
(4) Hamel, E. Biopolymers 2002, 66, 142.
(5) Hamel, E.; Covell, D. G. Curr. Med. Chem.: Anti-Cancer Agents 2002, 2,
19.
(6) Mitra, A.; Sept, D. Biochemistry 2004, 43, 13955.
(7) Poncet, J.; Busquet, M.; Roux, F.; Pierre, A.; Atassi, G.; Jouin, P. J. Med.
Chem. 1998, 41, 1524.
(8) Schmitt, J.; Bernd, M.; Kutscher, B.; Kessler, H. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett.
1998, 8, 385.
(9) Culvenor, C. C. J.; Beck, A. B.; Clarke, M.; Cockrum, P. A.; Edgar, J. A.;
Frahn, J. L.; Jago, M. V.; Lanigan, G. W.; Payne, A. L.; Peterson, J. E.;
Petterson, D. S.; Smith, L. W.; White, R. R. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 1977, 30,
269.
(10) Culvenor, C. C. J.; Cockrum, P. A.; Edgar, J. A.; Frahn, J. L.; Gorst-Allman,
C. P.; Jones, A. J.; Marasas, W. F. O.; Murray, K. E.; Smith, L. W.; Steyn,
P. S.; Vleggaar, R.; Wessels, P. L. Chem. Commun. 1983, 1259.
(11) Culvenor, C. C. J.; Edgar, J. A.; Mackay, M. F.; Gorst-Allman, C. P.;
Marasas, W. O. F.; Steyn, P. S.; Vleggar, R.; Wessels, P. L. Tetrahedron
1989, 45, 2351.
† University of Pennsylvania.
‡ National Cancer Institute at Frederick, National Institutes of Health.
§ Present address: Wyeth Research, 401 N. Middletown Road, Pearl
River, NY 10965.
| Present address: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, CVM/ONADE/
DMT HFV-142, 7500 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855.
Present address: Sanofi-Aventis, 1041 Route 202-206, Bridgewater,
NJ 08807.
(12) Mackay, M. F.; Van Donkelaar, A. V.; Culvenor, C. C. J. J. Chem. Soc.,
Chem. Commun. 1986, 1219.
(13) Tonsing, E. M.; Steyn, P. S.; Osborn, M.; Weber, K. Eur. J. Cell. Biol.
1984, 35, 156.
(1) Downing, K. H. Annu. ReV. Cell. DeV. Biol. 2000, 16, 89.
(2) Walczak, C. E. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2000, 12, 52.
(3) Jordan, A.; Hadfield, J. A.; Lawrence, N. J. Med. Res. ReV. 1998, 18, 250.
9
10.1021/ja710363p CCC: $40.75 © 2008 American Chemical Society
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. 2008, 130, 2351-2364
2351