However, a hydrogenation reaction featuring CÀH bond
formation could not be utilized for constructing spiro
compounds with quaternary carbon centers. As part of
our ongoing research on dearomatization reactions,4
we recently envisaged that partial hydrogenation of quino-
line followed by cyclization with a tethered nucleophile
would provide a straightforward synthesis of spiro-
tetrahydroquinoline derivatives (Scheme 1). It is note-
worthy that spiro-tetrahydroquinoline represents an im-
portant structural motif in pharmaceuticals and therefore
its synthesis has attracted intense attention.5,6 Here, we
report an efficient synthesis of spiro-tetrahydroquinolines
via cascade hydrogenative dearomatization of quinoline
and aza-FriedelÀCrafts alkylation reaction (indole as the
nucleophile).8
Table 1. Screening of Brønsted Acid Catalysts
2a
time
(h)
yield
(%)b
entrya
cat.
(equiv)
1
2
3
3a
3a
1
1
1
8
70
75
72
16
16
Scheme 1. Proposed Synthesis of Spiro-tetrahydroquinolines
from Quinolines
L-camphorsulfonic
acid
4
5
6
7
TFA
1
1
1
1
16
16
24
24
68
TsOH•H2O
3,5-(NO2)2C6H3COOH
63
53
3-NO2C6H4COOH
<10
a Reactions were performed with 1a (0.1 mmol), Hantzsch ester 2a,
and 20 mol % catalyst in 1 mL of toluene. b Isolated yield.
We began our study by choosing compound 1a as a
model substrate, which was subjected to Hantzsch ester 2a
in the presence of a catalytic amount of acids.9 To ourgreat
delight, most of the tested acids could catalyze the trans-
formation smoothly. As shown in Table 1, with 1 equiv of
Hantzsch ester 2a and 20 mol % of racemic phosphoric
acid 3a, the desired product 4a was obtained in 70% yield
in 8 h (entry 1). Prolonging the reaction time could slightly
increase the yield of 4a (entry 2, Table 1). Several acidic
catalysts such as L-camphorsulfonic acid, trifluoroacetic
acid (TFA), toluenesulfonyl acid (TsOH), and 3,5-(NO2)2-
C6H3COOH all could be employed to give the product
(53À72% yields, entries 3À6, Table 1). 3-NO2C6H4COOH
proved to be inefficient to catalyze this reaction likely due
to its relatively weak acidity (entry 7, Table 1).
(4) (a) Wu, Q.-F.; He, H.; Liu, W.-B.; You, S.-L. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2010, 132, 11418. (b) Wu, Q.-F.; Liu, W.-B.; Zhuo, C.-X.; Rong, Z.-Q.;
Ye, K.-Y.; You, S.-L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 4455. (c) Zhuo,
C.-X.; Liu, W.-B.; Wu, Q.-F.; You, S.-L. Chem. Sci. 2012, 3, 205. (d) Wu,
Q.-F.; Zheng, C.; You, S.-L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 1680.
(e) Cai, Q.; Zheng, C.; Zhang, J.-W.; You, S.-L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2011, 50, 8665. (f) Cai, Q.; You, S.-L. Org. Lett. 2012, 14, 3040.
(5) (a) Hamann, L. G.; Higuchi, R. I.; Zhi, L.; Edwards, J. P.; Wang,
X.-N.; Marschke, K. B.; Kong, J. W.; Farmer, L. J.; Jones, T. K. J. Med.
Chem. 1998, 41, 623. (b) Ramesh, E.; Manian, R. D. R. S.; Raghunathan,
R.; Sainath, S.; Raghunathan, M. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2009, 17, 660.
(c) Casara, P.; Dorey, G.; Lestage, P.; Lockhart, B. Dihydro- and
tetrahydro-quinoline compounds. United States Patent No. US6350759B1.
(6) (a) Denmark, S. E.; Venkatraman, S. J. Org. Chem. 2006, 71,
1668. (b) Fotie, J.; Wangun, H. V. K.; Fronczek, F. R.; Massawe, N.;
Bhattarai, B. T.; Rhodus, J. L.; Singleton, T. A.; Bohle, D. S. J. Org.
Chem. 2012, 77, 2784. (c) Tverdokhlebov, A. V.; Gorulya, A. P.;
Tolmachev, A. A.; Kostyuk, A. N.; Chernega, A. N.; Rusanov, E. B.
Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 9146. (d) Zubkov, F. I.; Nikitina, E. V.; Kouznetsov,
V. V.; Duarte, L. D. A. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 5064.
(7) For reviews on transfer hydrogenation reactions with Hantzsch
esters, see: (a) You, S.-L. Chem.;Asian J. 2007, 2, 820. (b) Ouellet, S. G.;
Walji, A. M.; MacMillan, D. W. C. Acc. Chem. Res. 2007, 40, 1327.
(c) Connon, S. J. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2007, 5, 3407. (d) Wang, C.; Wu,
X.; Xiao, J. Chem.;Asian J. 2008, 3, 1750. (e) Rueping, M.; Sugiono, E.;
Schoepke, F. R. Synlett 2010, 852. (f) Rueping, M.; Dufour, J.;
Schoepke, F. R. Green Chem. 2011, 13, 1084. (g) Zheng, C.; You, S.-L.
Chem. Soc. Rev. 2012, 41, 2498. For selected examples, see: (h) Rueping,
M.; Antonchick, A. P.; Theissmann, T. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45,
3683. (i) Rueping, M.; Theissmann, T.; Raja, S.; Bats, J. W. Adv. Synth.
Catal. 2008, 350, 1001. (j) Rueping, M.; Theissmann, T. Chem. Sci. 2010,
1, 473. (k) Rueping, M.; Stoeckel, M.; Sugiono, E.; Theissmann, T.
Tetrahedron 2010, 66, 6565. (l) Rueping, M.; Hubener, L. Synlett 2011,
1243. (m) Rueping, M.; Theissmann, T.; Stoeckel, M.; Antonchick, A. P.
Org. Biomol. Chem. 2011, 9, 6844. (n) Guo, Q.-S.; Du, D.-M.; Xu, J.
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 759.
With 20 mol % of 3a as the catalyst, various solvents
were then screened to further optimize the reaction condi-
tions. The results are summarized in Table 2. Among these
tested solvents, CH2Cl2 and CHCl3 were the optimal ones
(93% yield, entries 3 and 7, Table 2). The reactions in
toluene, ClCH2CH2Cl, CH3CN, and EtOAc afforded
(8) For reviews on FriedelÀCrafts reaction, see: (a) Wang, Y.; Ding,
K.-L. Chin. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 21, 763. (b) Bandini, M.; Melloni, A.;
Umani-Ronchi, A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 550. (c) Bandini, M.;
Melloni, A.; Tommasi, S.; Umani-Ronchi, A. Synlett 2005, 1199. (d)
Sheng, Y.-F.; Zhang, A. J.; Zheng, X.-J.; You, S.-L. Chin. J. Org. Chem.
2008, 28, 605. (e) Poulsen, T.; Jørgensen, K. A. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108,
2903. (f) You, S.-L.; Cai, Q.; Zeng, M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2009, 38, 2190.
(g) Bandini, M.; Eichholzer, A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 9608.
(h) Zeng, M.; You, S.-L. Synlett 2010, 1289. (i) Terrasson, V.; de
Figueiredo, R. M.; Campagne, J. M. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2010, 2635.
(9) (a) Amat, M.; Hadida, S.; Llor, N.; Sathyanarayana, S.; Bosch, J.
ꢀ
J. Org. Chem. 1996, 61, 3878. (b) Borregan, M.; Bradshaw, B.; Valls, N.;
Bonjoch, J. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2008, 19, 2130.
Org. Lett., Vol. 15, No. 7, 2013
1489