been dominated by the use of C-terminal protecting
supports. This means that head-to-tail cyclizations must
becarried out after removal ofsuchsupports, complicating
reaction workup and product isolation. In this context,
sophisticated backbone amide linker strategies have been
well-establishedbased on a solid-phase technique torealize
on-resin peptide head-to-tail cyclization.6 Such linker
strategies should find further application in combination
with a tag-assisted liquid-phase technique that generally
can yield purer peptides on a larger scale. We have been
developing soluble tag-assisted liquid-phase methods
using hydrophobic benzyl alcohols as support groups for
versatile production of bioactive peptides.7 However, since
our supports are also C-terminal protecting, head-to-tail
cyclization is still a matter of demand. Described herein
is the application of soluble tag-assisted methods toward
head-to-tail cyclization using antimalarial cyclic heptapep-
tide, mahafacyclin B (1),8 as a model.
Scheme 1. Retrosynthetic Strategy for Mahafacyclin B (1)
The present work began with the preparation of hydro-
phobically tagged Gly-OMe (3) (Scheme 1). H-Gly-OMe
(4) was introduced into hydrophobic benzaldehyde (5)
through reductive amination to afford desired tagged
Gly-OMe (3) (Scheme 2). Several amino acid methyl
esters, including H-Phe-OMe and H-Thr(tBu)-OMe, can
be introduced into hydrophobic benzaldehyde (5) under
the same reaction conditions (Table S1, Supporting
Information), providing an amide nitrogen as a tagging
site. To avoid commonly occurring epimerization, the
glycine residue was selected as a C-terminus. Fmoc-Phe-
OH (6) was then coupled to give the tagged dipeptide (7).
In this case, the use of HATU in combination with HOAt
was found to be effective for the coupling, while HBTU
was used in combination with HOBt for peptide synthesis
unless otherwise mentioned.
Basic deprotection of the hydrophobically tagged dipep-
tide (7), however, did not give the desired product (8),
instead leading to the formation of diketopiperazine (9)
(Scheme S1, Supporting Information). It is well-known
that basic deprotection induces diketopiperazine forma-
tion when the C-terminal residue is a proline. The
N-alkylation of peptides also has a significant impact on
their conformations (Table S2, Supporting Information).
When a Boc-protected variant was used instead, both
the Boc-group and the tag were removed through acidic
deprotection (Scheme S2, Supporting Information). This
Scheme 2. Preparation of the Hydrophobically Tagged
Gly-OMe (3) and the Hydrophobically Tagged Dipeptide (7)
could be avoided through the coupling of Fmoc-Phe-
Phe-OH to the hydrophobically tagged Gly-OMe (3)
(Scheme 3). This step was evaluated by HPLC, and only a
trace amount of epimerized variant was observed (Figure S1,
Supporting Information). Basic deprotection of the hydro-
phobically tagged tripeptide (10) gave the desired product
(11) predominantly, accompanied by the formation of only
a trace amount of cyclized compound (12) (Scheme 4). This
could be simply rationalized based on the resulting ring sizes;
thus, the formation of six-membered rings was much more
favorable than that of nine-membered rings.
Scheme 3. Preparation of the Hydrophobically Tagged
Tripeptide (10)
(6) (a) Boas, U.; Brask, J.; Jensen, K. J. Chem. Rev. 2009, 109, 2092–
2118. (b) Alsina, J.; Jensen, K. J.; Albericio, F.; Barany, G. Chem.;Eur.
J. 1999, 5, 2787–2795. (c) Jensen, K. J.; Alsina, J.; Songster, M. F.;
Vagner, J.; Albericio, F.; Barany, G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 5441–
5452. (d) Boojamra, C. G.; Burow, K. M.; Thompson, L. A.; Ellman,
J. A. J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 1240–1256. (e) Boojamra, C. G.; Burow,
K. M.; Ellman, J. A. J. Org. Chem. 1995, 60, 5742–5743.
(7) (a) Kitada, S.; Fujita, S.; Okada, Y.; Kim, S.; Chiba, K. Tetra-
hedron 2013, 69, 2555–2559. (b) Okada, Y.; Suzuki, H.; Nakae, T.;
Fujita, S.; Abe, H.; Nagano, K.; Yamada, T.; Ebata, N.; Kim, S.; Chiba,
K. J. Org. Chem. 2013, 78, 320–327. (c) Kitada, S.; Fujita, S.; Okada, Y.;
Kim, S.; Chiba, K. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 21, 4476–4479.
(d) Tana, G.; Kitada, S.; Fujita, S.; Okada, Y.; Kim, S.; Chiba, K. Chem.
Commun. 2010, 46, 8219–8221.
(8) (a) Sayyadi, N.; Skropeta, D.; Jolliffe, K. A. Org. Lett. 2005, 7,
5497–5499. (b) Baraguey, C.; Blond, A.; Cavelier, F.; Pousset, J.-L.;
Bodo, B.; Auvin-Guette, C. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 2001, 2098–
2103.
Withthe hydrophobicallytaggedtripeptide(11) inhand,
thedesiredsequence(13) wasthenelaboratedusing general
Fmoc-chemistry followed by basic deprotection, which
removed both the Fmoc-group and the C-terminal methyl
ester to give the desired product (2) in one step (Scheme 5).
All reactions took place efficiently in less polar solvents
followed by dilution with poor solvents to give the product
1156
Org. Lett., Vol. 15, No. 6, 2013