Efforts in our laboratory have been directed toward
synthesizing the individual GLYs.8 To date, there have been
four GLYs isolated from natural sources but none have
undergone total synthesis. GLY I is the most prevalent family
member and its synthesis is described herein.
The isoflav-3-ene is a key intermediate in our overall
synthesis, and devising a robust method for establishment
of its double bond was important. We imagined that if a
Wittig olefination reaction was set up to occur in an
intramolecular fashion, the desired isoflav-3-ene could be
obtained as a consequence of the ring-closure.9 Our synthetic
route to this key intermediate is depicted in Scheme 1.
nation with 0.5 equiv of iodine and 0.6 equiv of Selectfluor
gave the desired halide 5 in 70% yield.11 Unlike 1, initial
attempts to regioselectively protect 3 resulted in significant
amounts of dibenzylated material (30%). The latter can be
circumvented by specifically deploying sodium bicarbonate
in acetonitrile, whereupon we observed less than 5% diben-
zylation.12 Reduction to the salicylalcohol derivative 6 by
using sodium borohydride in MeOH followed by conven-
tional workups also proved to be problematic, perhaps owing
to ready formation of the quinone-methide under either basic
or even acidic conditions. Review of the literature indicates
that alternate methods are typically used for making salicyl-
alcohol from salicylaldehyde.13 In the end, we were able to
conduct a standard sodium borohydride reduction in MeOH
by adopting a workup where after evaporation of solvent,
0.1 N sulfuric acid was carefully added so as to achieve an
acidic pH of not less than 6.0. Addition of water then
conveniently precipitated high-purity product in nearly 80%
yield. Coupling of 5 and 6 was accomplished by using
potassium carbonate in acetone14 to obtain product 7 in high
yield (72%).
Scheme 1
When formation of phosphonium salt 8 was attempted by
treatment of 7 with triphenylphosphine hydrobromide
(TPP·HBr) in refluxing acetonitrile, a mixture of products
was produced wherein inadvertent loss of the MOM group
was also observed. Alternatively, when this reaction was
done in freshly distilled acetonitrile at room temperature, a
quantitative yield of 8 was obtained.15 Intramolecular
condensation of 8 was then accomplished by using sodium
tert-butoxide as base in refluxing methanol, after which
product precipitated from the reaction medium.16 Crystal-
lization of this material from methanol afforded pure 9 in
78% yield for the two-step process. To avoid the possibility
for acid-catalyzed 1,2-elimination of the 6a-hydroxy group
during removal of MOM as the last step of the overall
synthesis, at this point we replaced MOM with a TBDMS
group. Since we repeatedly found 9 to be sensitive to the
various acidic conditions typically deployed to remove
MOM, we exploited our earlier observation wherein the
MOM group was inadvertently lost during treatment of 7
with TPP·HBr. Thus, refluxing 9 in acetonitrile:water (20:1)
in the presence of TPP·HBr produced the sensitive phenolic
intermediate, which after a quick column chromatographic
purification was used immediately in the next step. Treatment
with TBDMS-chloride and triethylamine in DCM gave the
stable TBDMS-protected isoflav-3-ene 10 as a white solid
that was crystallized from DCM and methanol to afford a
Because the o-hydroxy group in 1 forms a tight hydrogen
bond with the adjacent carbonyl, regioselective protection
of the p-hydroxy group as the MOM ether occurs cleanly.
This is followed by benzyl-protection of the o-hydroxy group,
using more rigorous conditions. R-Bromination of the
orthogonally protected ketone by using conventional methods
resulted in a complex mixture of products, namely due to
loss of MOM and ring bromination.10 Alternatively, iodi-
(7) (a) Collins-Burow, B. M.; Burow, M. E.; Duong, B. N.; McLachlan,
J. A. Nutr. Cancer 2000, 38, 229–244. (b) LaVecchia, C.; Gallus, S.;
Fernandez, E. J. Br. Menopause Soc. 2005, 11, 166–172. (c) Newcomb,
P. A.; Zheng, Y.; Chia, V. M.; Morimoto, L. M.; Doria-Rose, V. P.;
Templeton, A.; Thibodeau, S. N.; Potter, J. D. Cancer Res. 2007, 67, 7534–
7539.
(8) (a) Khupse, R. S.; Erhardt, P. W. 30th Natl. Med. Chem. Symp. Seattle,
WA 2006, Abstract 87. (b) Khupse, R. S.; Erhardt P. W. Abstracts of Papers,
234th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Boston, MA,
2007; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2007; Abstract MEDI-
182.
(11) Jereb, M.; Stavber, S.; Zupan, M. Synthesis 2003, 853–858.
(12) (a) Dewick, P. M. Synth. Commun. 1981, 11, 853–857. (b) Kevin;
T. Mendelson, W. W.; Zhang, W. Y.; Lantos, I.; Matsuoka, R. T.; LynnM.;
Liu, L.; Procter, G. World patent WO9619438 1996, 40 pp.
(13) (a) Nagata, W.; Okada, K.; Aoki, T. Synthesis 1979, 365–368. (b)
Belyanin, M. L.; Filimonov, V. D.; Krasnov, E. A. Russ. J. Appl. Chem.
2001, 74, 103–105. (c) Brink, M. Acta UniV. Lund., Sect. 2 1965, 16, 1–
11, CAN64:51716.
(9) (a) Conti, C.; Desideri, N.; Orsi, N.; Sestili, I.; Stein, M. L. Eur.
J. Med. Chem. 1990, 25, 725–730. (b) McAllister, G. D.; Hartley, R. C.;
Dawson, M. J.; Knaggs, A. R. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1998, 20,
3453–3458. (c) Begasse, B.; Corre, M. Tetrahedron 1980, 36, 3409–3412.
(10) (a) Fougerousse, A.; Gonzalez, E.; Brouillard, R. J. Org. Chem.
2000, 65, 583–586. (b) King, L. C.; Ostrum, G. K. J. Org. Chem. 1964,
29, 3459–3461. (c) Cacchi, S.; Caglioti, L.; Cernia, E. Synthesis 1979, 64–
66. (d) Horiuchi, C. A.; Kiji, S. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1997, 70, 421–426.
(14) Kraus, G. A.; Kim, I. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 1191–1192.
(15) Yuan, Y.; Men, H.; Lee, C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 14720–
14721.
(16) Burali, C.; Desideri, N.; Stein, M. L.; Conti, C.; Orsi, N. Eur.
J. Med. Chem. 1987, 22, 119–123.
5008
Org. Lett., Vol. 10, No. 21, 2008