a variety of parameters. However, we were delighted to
find that the yield could be improved to 18% when the
combination of Pd(OAc)2, tricyclohexylphosphine (PCy3),
and Na2CO3 was employed in THF under an O2 atmo-
sphere (Table 1, entry 1).
Table 1. Optimization of Reaction Conditionsa
Encouraged bythispromisingresult, wefurtheradjusted
reaction parameters including palladium catalysts, bases,
and solvents. Among the palladium sources used (e.g.,
PdCl2, PdCl2(PPh3)2, PdCl2(dppf), PdCl2(PhCN)2, PdCl2-
(cod), PdCl2(acac)2, Pd(PPh3)4, and Pd2(dba)3), Pd2(dba)3
exhibited the highest catalytic reactivity in 47% yield
(Table 1, entries 2À9). The choice of base was also vital
to the success of the catalytic reaction. Screening revealed
that the use of 1-methylpiperidine as base achieved the best
result. Other bases, including Na2CO3, NaOAc, Cs2CO3,
CsF, KF, tBuONa, Et2NH, Et3N, DABCO, 1-methylpyr-
rolidine, and 1-methylmorpholine, were less efficient
(Table 1, entries 9À20). Since phosphorus ligands always
play important roles in metal-catalyzed chemistry,7 we
then turned our attention to the screening of ligands
(Table 1, entries 21À28). We were pleased to discover
that only when the ligand changed to the bis[(2-
diphenylphosphino)phenyl] ether (DPEphos) did the yield
dramatically increase to 92% yield (Table 1, entries
21À28). Finally, we studied the solvent effect and found
that THF was superior to CH3NO2, 1,4-dioxane, xylene,
DMF, CH3CN, toluene, and sulfolane (Table 1, entries
28À35). In addition, the reaction failed to give the desired
product when the procedure was carried out under a N2
atmosphere. Therefore, the optimized conditions were de-
fined as follows: under an O2 atmosphere, Pd2(dba)3 (5 mol
%) as the catalyst, DPEphos (10 mol %) as the ligand, and
1-methylpiperidine (3 equiv) as the base in THF at 60 °C.
Having the optimized reaction conditions in hand, we
next investigated the scope and generality of the coupling
reaction using various arylboronic acids and isatoic anhy-
drides (Table 2). Initially, a variety of arylboronic acids
2bÀ2u were examined by the reaction with isatoic anhy-
dride 1a (Table 2, entries 1À21). The results demonstrated
that the optimal conditions were general for arylboronic
acids and were compatible with many functional groups,
including methyl, methoxy, fluoro, chloro, bromo, forma-
cyl, acetyl, nitro, cyano, trifluoromethyl, naphthyl, and
thienyl substituents on the phenyl moiety. For example,
arylboronic acids 2bÀ2h, with a methyl or methoxy group,
smoothly underwent the reaction in excellent yields,
although the o-methoxy substituents on the phenyl ring
decreased the substrate activity (Table 2, entries 1À8).
The electronic properties of the groups on the phenyl
ring of arylboronic acids had some effect on the reaction.
Generally, the arylboronic acids possessing electron-do-
nating groups produce the corresponding aryl o-amino-
benzoates 3ab, 3ad, 3ae, and 3ag with higher yields
a Unless otherwise noted, the reaction conditions were as follows: 1a
(0.4 mmol), 2a (1.2 mmol), indicated Pd source (5 mol %), ligand (10 mol
%), base (1.2 mmol), dry solvent (2.5 mL), 60 °C, 24 h, O2. b Isolated
yield. c 2-Amino-N,N-diethylbenzamide was obtained in 72% yield.
(Table 2, entries 2, 4, 5, and 7). Electron-withdrawing
arylboronic acids, which are less nucleophilic, and hence
transmetalate more slowly than their electron-neutral ana-
logues, are prone to homocoupling and protodeborona-
tion side reactions.8 However, in our catalytic system,
p-(trifluoromethyl)phenylboronic acid 2i, m-nitrophenyl-
boronic acid 2j, and p-cyanophenylboronic acid 2k reacted
with 1a to afford the respective compounds 3ai, 3aj, and
3ak in moderate to good yields (Table 2, entries 9À11).
Notably, the fluoro, chloro, and bromo moieties
(commonly used for cross-coupling reactions) in arylboro-
nic acids 2lÀ2o were all tolerated and afforded a novel
route to compounds 3al, 3am, 3an, and 3ao in good yields,
(7) (a) Tolman, C. A. Chem. Rev. 1977, 77, 313. (a) Braga, A. A. C.;
Morgon, N. H.; Ujaque, G.; Liedos, A.; Maseras, F. J. Organomet.
Chem. 2006, 691, 4459. (b) Braga, A. A. C.; Morgon, N. H.; Ujaque, G.;
Maseras, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 9298. (c) Littke, A. F.; Fu,
G. C. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 4176. (d) Eichenseher, S.;
Delacroix, O.; Kromm, K.; Hampel, F.; Gladysz, J. A. Organometallics
2005, 24, 245.
(8) Barder, T. E.; Walker, S. D.; Martinelli, J. R.; Buchwald, S. L. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 4685.
Org. Lett., Vol. 13, No. 22, 2011
6115