partially racemized amino aldehydes (e.g., Garner’s N-Boc
serine-based aldehyde).
Table 1. Asymmetric Allylboration of Representative Amino
Aldehydes 2 with 1
To address these issues, we recently reported the
synthesis of the chemically and configurationally stable
N-triisopropylsilyl (TIPS) R-amino aldehydes (2) as enan-
tiomerically pure compounds.5 These new N-protected
R-amino aldehydes were strategically designed to exhibit
a complete absence of chelation control unlike many
N-protected R-amino aldehydes. This behavior was ex-
pected to result from the well-known ability of the TIPS
group to retard reactions at adjacent centers.6 Moreover,
in contrast to the doubly substituted N,N-dibenzyl deriva-
tives, which can exert a strong stereochemical bias on the
additions to the aldehydic moiety, use of a single bulky
group (e.g., N-9-phenylfluoren-9-yl) results in essentially
stereorandom additions.3c,7 This is precisely what is needed
for a strictly reagent-controlled process and 2 meets these
requirements. We also envisaged the NfO TIPS migration
of the initially formed adducts 4 through a mild acid-
catalyzed process to the more stable and versatile O-protected
free amines 3. Thus, we viewed the allylboration of 2 with
1 as a potentially ideal combination for the reagent-controlled
allylation of R-amino aldehydes. Representative systems were
chosen to establish the generality of the approach to the
asymmetric synthesis of O-TIPS protected ꢀ-amino alcohols
3 (Scheme 1). These results are presented in Table 1.
dra syn/anti eeb yield (%)c abs. config.d e
,
1
2
3, R
S
S
R
R
S
S
R
R
S
R
S
R
S
R
S
R
S
R
R
S
S
R
R
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
a, i-Bu
<99:1
<1:99
<99:1
<1:99
99:1
1:99
99:1
1:99
<99:1
<1:99
<99:1
<1:99
98:2
2:98
98:2
2:98
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
83
73
83
66
71
62
70
64
70
60
68
60
80
60
76
70
4S,5S
4S,5R
4R,5R
4R,5S
4S,5S
4S,5R
4R,5R
4R,5S
4S,5S
4R,5S
4S,5S
4R,5S
4S,5S
4R,5S
4S,5S
4R,5S
a, i-Bu
a, i-Bu
a, i-Bu
b, Pr
b, Pr
b, Pr
b, Pr
c, Me
c, Me
d, Bn
d, Bn
e, (CH2)2SMe
e, (CH2)2SMe
f, CH2OBn
f, CH2OBn
a Determined by 13C NMR of the crude before TIPS NfO migration.
b Calculated by examination of the Mosher’s amide derivatives of 3. c Yields
of pure and isolated materials. d Absolute configuration of the isomers of
3a were determined by 1-D and 2-D NMR examination of pyrrolidinones
7aSS and 7aRS and confirmed by the synthesis of statine 8aSS and
epi-statine 8aRS. e Absolute configuration of 3b-f were determined by NMR
reagents 1 add to 2 to provide essentially a single isomeric
amino alcohol with the new stereogenic center being
determined solely by the enantiomer of 1 chosen for the
process. Thus, 1S gives 3 with the (4S) configuration in
g99% ee and 1R produces 3 with the (4R) configuration
with the same high level of selectivity. Any enantiomeric
impurities in 2 are faithfully reflected as diastereomeric
products, a phenomenon only observed for methional (2e)
and O-benzylserinal (2f) (e2%).8
Scheme 1
Previously, we had employed both oxidative (H2O2, base)
and nonoxidative (pseudoephedrine) workup procedures for
the allylboration of aldehydes with 1.1 However, since both
pseudoephedrine and 3 are ꢀ-amino alcohol derivatives, we
chose to employ an oxidative workup procedure to avoid
potential separation and isolation problems.
In the case of leucinal 2a, the initially formed N-TIPS
product 4a (R ) i-Bu) proved to be unstable with respect to
chromatography or distillation. Based upon the apparent
sensitivity of these systems to an acid medium, we developed
an efficient protocol to effect the smooth NfO TIPS
migration with dry HOAc (25% mol) in EtOAc (Scheme
2). As expected, the transposition is faster for the threo
Initially, the allylations of alaninal (2cS) and O-benzylseri-
nal (2fS) were examined with allylmagnesiun bromide in
ether producing, after TIPS rearrangement, 3c and 3f in 56:
44 and 52:48 syn/anti ratios, respectively. Essentially no
substrate control is observed with 2 in this process. Thus,
the remarkable selectivity of 1 in the allylboration reaction
can completely dominate the process as is observed from
the results illustrated in Table 1. In each case, the BBD
Scheme 2
(5) Soto-Cairoli, B.; Justo de Pomar, J.; Soderquist, J. A. Org. Lett. 2008,
10, 333.
(6) (a) Soderquist, J. A.; Colberg, J. C.; Del Valle, L. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1989, 111, 4873. (b) Soderquist, J. A.; Miranda, E. I. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1992, 114, 10078. (c) See also citations in ref 5.
(7) Lubell, W. D.; Rapoport, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1987, 109, 236.
(8) No diastereomeric amplification is observed in any step of the process
as revealed from the 1:1 reaction of 1R with (()-2a which gives the borinate
adducts, 4, crude 3, pure 3, and their Mosher amides, all in a 1:1
diastereomeric ratio (see Supporting Information).
402
Org. Lett., Vol. 11, No. 2, 2009