from compound 1 (three steps) (Scheme 2). This procedure
was successfully carried out on a 15-g scale.9
The relative configuration of 6 was determined by X-ray
analysis as shown in Figure 1. The absolute configuration
cently, 2-DOS and its analogues have attracted much interest
as the central scaffold of clinically important aminoglycoside
antibiotics, and the first generation of RNA-targeted ligands
has already been designed.12,13 From a synthetic perspective,
enantiopure 2-DOS derivatives pose an interesting synthetic
challenge due to the five contiguous stereogenic centers, thus
numerous attempts including chemical or enzymatic desym-
metrization of meso-2-deoxystreptamine,13a,14 degradation of
neomycin and kanamycin,15 and total synthesis from a chiral
pool16 have been made. Therefore, we applied our asym-
metric desymmetrization by allylic oxidation of 4,5-epoxy-
cyclohex-1-ene (1) giving enantiopure alcohol 7 to a
straightforward synthsis of O-protected 2-DOS precursor and
its regioisomer as the key step.
The synthesis of optically pure 4,5-O-protected 2-deoxy-
streptamine is summarized in Scheme 3. Treatment of 6 with
Scheme 3
Figure 1
probability.
. ORTEP diagram of 6 with ellipsoids set at 50%
of 6 was assigned as (3S,4S,5S) by conversion to a known
compound 14.10,11
Then we applied the present method to the synthsis of
O-protected 2-deoxystreptamine (2-DOS) precursor. Re-
(9) A typical experimental procedure is as follows: A solution of ligand
2 (0.61 g, 2.4 mmol) and Cu(CH3CN)4PF6 (0.76 g, 2.0 mmol) in acetone
(100 mL) was stirred at rt for 1 h. To this dark red solution was added the
epoxide 1 (15.4 g, 160 mmol), followed by dropwise addition of a solution
of PhCO3-t-Bu (15.6 g, 80.0 mmol) in acetone (20 mL) over 1 h. The
reaction was stirred at 25 °C until the cis isomer 4 completely disappeared,
which was judged by HPLC analysis. Then acetone was removed and the
residue was dissolved in EtOAc (200 mL). The solution was washed with
sat. NaHCO3 solution (2 × 30 mL) and dried with Na2SO4. After removal
of the solvent, the residue was passed through a short pad of silica, using
hexane/EtOAc (8:1) as eluent, to give crude 3 as an oil (12.5 g), which
was contaminated with the by-product 5. The crude oil was dissolved in
methanol (100 mL) and a NaOMe solution (prepared from Na (65 mg, 2.82
mmol) and methanol (6 mL)) was added. After 2 h, the reaction was
quenched with acetic acid (0.18 g, 3.0 mmol). After complete removal of
methanol, the residue was dissolved in CH2Cl2 (150 mL) and Et3N (10
mL, 71 mmol) and a solution of 4-nitrobenzoyl chloride (10.8 g, 58 mmol)
in CH2Cl2 (50 mL) was added dropwise over 30 min. The mixture was
stirred at rt overnight and sat. NaHCO3 solution was added to quench the
reaction. The organic layer was separated and the aqueous solution was
extracted with CH2Cl2 (2 × 30 mL). The combined organic layer was
washed with NaHCO3 solution and dried (Na2SO4). After removal of solvent,
the residue was passed through a short pad of silica gel to give a white
solid. The solid was recrystallized from hot hexane/EtOAc solution (120
mL/30 mL) to afford enantiopure 6 as a colorless slice (9.5 g, 23% for
0.05 equiv of NaOMe/methanol solution afforded enantiopure
alcohol 7 quantitatively. It should be mentioned that this is
the first report of an optically active form of 7.17 After MOM
protection, ring-opening of compound 8 with NaN3 afforded
(12) For a review of 2-DOS, see: Busscher, G. F.; Rutjes, F. P. J. T.;
van Delft, F. L. Chem. ReV. 2005, 105, 775–791
.
(13) For some recent representative reports, see: (a) Greenberg, W. A.;
Priestley, E. S.; Sears, P. S.; Alper, P. B.; Roenbohm, C.; Hendrix, M.;
Hung, S. C.; Wong, C. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 6527–6541. (b)
Sucheck, S. J.; Wong, A. L.; Koeller, K. M.; Boehr, D. D.; Draker, K.;
Sears, P.; Wright, G. D.; Wong, C. H. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122,
5230–5231. (c) Luedtke, N. W.; Baker, T. J.; Goodman, M.; Tor, Y. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 12035–12036. (d) Tok, J. B.-H.; Fenker, J. Bioorg.
Med. Chem. Lett. 2001, 11, 2987–2991. (e) Russell, R. J. M.; Murray, J. B.;
Lentzen, G.; Haddad, J.; Mobashery, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 3410–
3411. (f) Hanessian, S.; Tremblay, M.; Swayze, E. E. Tetrahedron 2003,
59, 983–993. (g) Liu, X.; Thomas, J. R.; Hergenrother, P. J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2004, 126, 9196–9197. (h) Yokoyama, K.; Numakura, M.; Kudo, F.;
three steps). Rf ) 0.30 (hexane/EtOAc ) 2/1); mp 125-127 °C; [R]21
D
+209 (c 0.5, CHCl3, 99.1% ee). The ee value was determined by HPLC on
a Chirapak AS column (hexane/2-propanol ) 90/10, 1.0 mL/min, tR of major
isomer (3S,4S,5S): 20.9 min; tR of major isomer (3R,4R,5R): 23.7 min).
(10) To confirm the absolute configuration of 6, we transformed 6 to
(1S,5R,6S)-5-azido-6-benzyloxycyclohex-2-en-1-ol (14) in several steps.
[R]22D of synthetic sample was +110.5 (c 1.0, CHCl3); lit.15 [R]D (derived
from D-glucose in 13 steps) was [R]D +106.2 (c 1.16, CHCl3). The details
of the transformation of 3 to 14 will be published in a separate paper.
Ohmori, D.; Eguchi, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 15147–15155
(14) Orsat, B.; Alper, P. B.; Moree, W.; Mak, C. P.; Wong, C. H. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 712–713
.
.
(15) (a) Canas-Rodriguez, A.; Ruiz-Poveda, S. G. Carbohydr. Res. 1977,
59, 240–243. (b) Tuna, R.; Berolini, R.; Hunziker, J. Org. Lett. 2000, 2,
1693–1696. (c) van den Broek, S. A. M. W.; Gruijters, B. W. T.; Rutjes,
F. P. J. T.; van Delft, F. L.; Blaauw, R. H. J. Org. Chem. 2007, 72, 3577–
3580. (d) Aslam, M. W.; Busscher, G. F.; Weiner, D. P.; de Gelder, R.;
Rutjes, F. P. J. T.; van Delft, F. L. J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 5131–5134.
(11) To´th, Z. G.; Pelyva´s, I. F.; Szegedi, C.; Benke, P.; Magyar, E.;
Miklovicz, T.; Batta, G.; Sztaricskai, F. Carbohydr. Res. 1997, 300, 183–
189
.
3316
Org. Lett., Vol. 11, No. 15, 2009