Organic Letters
Letter
bond. This leads to an appreciable overflow of some electron
density to the imino group and even to preferable protonation
of the latter over peri-NMe2 groups. There are no doubts that
such electron transfer in conjunction with the negative charge
on terminal nitrogen atoms in imides 4 and 5 should greatly
enhance nucleophilicity of the side chains.9 Interestingly, that
one of the reviewers has suggested treating transiton 5 → 6 as
the 6π-electrocyclization event, which may also help explain its
facility.
We believe the rate-limiting step in conversion 2 → 3 is the
formation of 5 from 4, while the stages of nucleophilic addition
5 → 6 and aromatization 6 → 3 proceed relatively fast. In
particular, this is confirmed by a strong slowing reaction at the
interaction of imine 2a with less electrophilic 4-methoxybenzo-
nitrile to produce 3b (Figure 3, lower curve). A significant
demonstration of unusual ease of nucleophilic displacement of
the formally unactivated aromatic NMe2 group on the last stage
of the process, (2) the first example of nucleophilic substitution
of the two NMe2 groups in the same substrate, and (3) a new
approach to the synthesis of difficultly accessible benzo[h]-
quinazoline derivatives. Several arguments were put forward
that the success of the disclosed transformations originates
from the proton sponge nature of the used substrates.
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
* Supporting Information
■
S
The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the
Technical details and experimental procedures; spectral
data for all new compounds (PDF)
Crystallographic data for 3a and 3k (CIF)
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
■
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
■
This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic
Research (project No 14-03-00010). We thank Drs. Anna V.
Gulevskaya and Valery A. Ozeryanskii (Department of Organic
Chemistry, Southern Federal University) for helpful discus-
sions, the Scientific and Educational Laboratory of Resonance
Spectroscopy (Department of Natural and High Molecular
Compounds Chemistry, Southern Federal University) for
NMR measurements, and Dr. Kyrill Y. Suponitsky (A. N.
Nesmeyanov Institute of Organoelement Compounds, Mos-
cow) for X-ray measurements.
Figure 3. NMR monitoring of conversion 2 → 3 for some selected 2-
ketimines.
slowdown in the process also occurs after about 50−60%
conversion of 2. We attribute this to the gradual accumulation
in the reaction mixture of the dimethylamide anion, which
reacts with nitrile to convert it into an amidine byproduct
(experimental evidence: SI, Figure S33).
Of three aforementioned factors favoring easy nucleophilic
substitution of the 1-NMe2 group in imides 4 at their
interaction with nitriles, at least two, the second and the
third, stem from the proton sponge nature of the substrates. In
accord with this point, we found that this reaction cannot be
applied to benzene series. Thus, on treatment of 2-
(dimethylamino)benzophenonimine10 with n-BuLi and then
PhCN, only the starting material was recovered from the
reaction mixture. Finally, it should be noted that Li et al. have
recently elaborated copper-catalyzed synthesis of quinazolines
via [2 + 2 + 2] annulations of diaryliodonium salts and two
nitriles.11 Their approach is based exclusively on electrophilic
reactions and does not address the displacement of the NMe2
group.
In summary, it was found that interaction of 2-lithio-1,8-
bis(dimethylamino)naphthalene with an excess of aryl or
hetaryl cyanide proceeds as a [2 + 2 + 2] nucleophilic cascade
annulation of two nitrile molecules to a naphthalene system and
results in the formation of 10-(dimethylamino)benzo[h]-
quinazoline derivatives. However, the best way for carrying
out the reaction is to start from preliminarily prepared 2-
ketimino-1,8-bis(dimethylamino)naphthalenes. It allows not
only the use of two different nitriles but also enhances the
yield of the reaction product up to 36−87%. The most
innovative findings of the work are considered to be (1) a
REFERENCES
■
(1) Hojo, M.; Masuda, R.; Okada, E.; Miya, H. Synthesis 1989, 1989,
870−873. (b) Sekiguchi, S.; Suzuki, T.; Hirosawa, Y.; Ishikura, H. J.
Org. Chem. 1990, 55, 1829−1834. (c) Okada, E.; Otsuki, Y.;
Shinohara, M.; Medebielle, M.; Shimizu, Y.; Takeuchi, H. Tetrahedron
Lett. 2003, 44, 741−744. (d) Sekiguchi, S.; Suzuki, T.; Hosokawa, M. J.
Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1989, 1783−1788. (e) Sekiguchi, S.;
Hosokawa, M.; Suzuki, T.; Sato, M. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1993,
1111−1118.
(2) Zhang, H.; Hagihara, S.; Itami, K. Chem. - Eur. J. 2015, 21,
16796−16800.
(3) Povalyakhina, M. A.; Antonov, A. S.; Dyablo, O. V.; Ozeryanskii,
V. A.; Pozharskii, A. F. J. Org. Chem. 2011, 76, 7157−7166.
(4) Antonov, A. S.; Mikshiev, V. Y.; Pozharskii, A. F.; Ozeryanskii, V.
A. Synthesis 2014, 46, 3273−3282.
(5) Pozharskii, A. F.; Ozeryanskii, V. A.; Antonov, A. S.; Mikshiev, V.
Y.; Chernyshev, A. V.; Metelitsa, A. V.; Fedik, N. S.; Borodkin, G. S.;
Dyablo, O. V. J. Org. Chem. 2016, submitted for publication.
(6) For recent reviews, see: (a) Khan, I.; Ibrar, A.; Ahmed, W.; Saeed,
A. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2015, 90, 124−169. (b) Shakhidoyatov, Kh. M.;
Elmuradov, B. Zh. Chem. Nat. Compd. 2014, 50, 781−800. (c) Bilbro,
J.; Mart, M.; Kyprianou, N. Anticancer Res. 2013, 4695−4700.
(d) Wang, D.; Gao, F. Chem. Cent. J. 2013, 7, 95. (e) Zhang, Y.;
Wang, P.; Hu, D.; Jin, L.; Yang, S. Youji Huaxue 2012, 32, 444−461.
(7) (a) Pozharskii, A. F.; Ryabtsova, O. V.; Ozeryanskii, V. A.;
Degtyarev, A. V.; Kazheva, O. N.; Alexandrov, G. G.; Dyachenko, O. A.
J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 10109−10122. (b) Pozharskii, A. F.;
C
Org. Lett. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX