Organic Letters
Letter
Scheme 3. Seco-acid Macrolactonization
Figure 3. UV absorption spectra of 15 (10 mM Tris-EDTA) at varying
concentrations; [15] = (0.79, 1.18, 1.95, 2.70, 3.80, 5.56, 8.81, and
11.76) × 10−6 mol L−1 for curves 1−8, respectively.
Furthermore, compound 15 displayed relatively limited ability
to displace bound ethidium bromide from calf thymus DNA as
compared to control compound daunorubicin over the same
concentration range (1 × 10−9 M to 4 × 10−7 M; see
Supporting Information).26 These data suggest that 15 has a
low affinity for duplex DNA, perhaps indicative of the difficulty
in accommodating the bulky chromophore-linked C-glycosyl
moieties in the narrow minor groove, the initial site of small-
molecule binding to DNA.27
In summary, we have developed an 11 step synthesis of the
3,3′-di-O-methyl derivative of the natural product ardimerin
and have shown that this substance readily aggregates in
aqueous solution and has a low apparent affinity for duplex
DNA. Current efforts toward the completion of the synthesis of
ardimerin are centered around deprotection of the C.3 methyl
ether of aldehyde 7.
hydroxy acid was then treated with oxalyl chloride (cat. DMF,
CH2Cl2), and a dilute solution (0.1 M) of the resulting acid
chloride was then added dropwise to a refluxing solution of
DMAP (3 equiv) in benzene. However, this condition gave rise
to the hydroxyacid monomer resulting from DMAP-induced
cleavage of the ester linkage. Standard Yamaguchi lactonization
conditions,18 involving slow addition of the mixed anhydride
(seco acid, 2,4,6-trichlorobenzoyl chloride, Et3N, THF, rt) to a
refluxing solution of DMAP in toluene, gave the same result.
Gratifyingly, attempted macrolactonization under Yonemitsu
conditions (2,4,6-trichlorobenzoyl chloride, Et3N, DMAP, and
the seco acid in benzene, 1 × 10−3 M)19 at room temperature
gave rise to the desired diolide 14 in 50% yield. Hydrogenation
of 14 over Pearlman’s catalyst gave 3,3′-di-O-methyl ardimerin
15 in 90% yield. Interestingly, attempted acylation of 15 (Ac2O,
Pyr, rt, 16 h or Ac2O, i-Pr2NEt, DMAP)20 led to none of the
desired peracetate and the production of numereous side
products. Ultimately, it was found that stirring 15 in neat acetyl
chloride21 overnight led to formation of peracetate 16 in 85%
yield. The β-stereochemistry of the glucosyl moieties was
indicated by the 8.5 Hz coupling constant of the C.1 proton,
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
* Supporting Information
■
S
Detailed experimental procedures including spectroscopic and
analytical data. This material is available free of charge via the
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
■
Notes
1
and the connectivity of the molecule was verified by H−1H
COSY and NOESY experiments (see Supporting Information).
In our attempts to access ardimerin by selective cleavage of
the C.3 and C.3′ methyl ethers, treatment of 14 with BCl3/
CH2Cl2 (rt, overnight), AlCl3/NaI (80 °C, CH3CN, 3 h), or
MgI2 (50−80 °C, toluene)22 initially led to no starting material
conversion, but after a prolonged reaction and an increase in
the number of equivalents of Lewis acid, extensive decom-
position products, arising from diolide cleavage, were formed.
Similarly, use of sodium ethanethiolate in DMF (100 °C, 2 h)23
also led to dissolution of the bislactone moeity. These data
indicate that removal of the requisite methyl ethers is likely to
be successful only on substrates prior to formation of the
diolide core of the natural product.
The binding of 15 to duplex DNA was explored by UV and
fluorescence spectroscopies. A concentration-dependent red
shift in the absorption at λmax = 214 nm in the ultraviolet
spectrum of 15 suggested that self-association/aggregation was
occurring in an aqueous buffer solution (10 mM Tris-EDTA) at
concentrations >1 μM (Figure 3).24 Thermal denaturation
studies showed no significant shift in the TM (68 °C) of salmon
testes DNA in the presence of 15 at low ligand/DNA ratios.25
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the National Institutes of Health (SC3 GM 096899-
01) for their generous support of our research program.
■
REFERENCES
■
(1) (a) Fukuyama, Y.; Kiriyama, Y.; Okino, J.; Kodama, M.; Iwaki, H.;
Hosozawa, S.; Matsui, K. Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1993, 41, 561.
(b) Jansakul, C.; Baumann, H.; Kenne, L.; Samuelsson, G. Planta
Med. 1987, 53, 405.
(2) Ryu, G.; Lee, S. Y.; Kim, B. S.; Ryu, S. Y.; Hwang, H. J.; Choi, B.
W.; Lee, B. H.; Jung, D. S. Nat. Prod. Sci. 2002, 8, 108.
(3) Dat, N. T.; Bae, K. H.; Wamiru, A.; McMahon, J. B.; Le Brice, S.
F. J.; Bona, M.; Bentler, J. A.; Kim, Y. H. J. Nat. Prod. 2007, 70, 839.
(4) (a) Hansen, M. R.; Hurley, L. H. Acc. Chem. Res. 1996, 29, 249.
(b) Hacksell, U.; Daves, G. D. Prog. Med. Chem. 1985, 22, 1.
(5) (a) Owen, E. A.; Burley, G. A.; Carver, J. A.; Wickham, G.;
Keniry, M. A. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2002, 290, 1602.
(b) Pavlopoulos, S.; Bicknell, W.; Wickham, G.; Craik, D. J. J. Mol.
Recognit. 1999, 12, 346. (c) Pavlopoulos, S.; Bicknell, W.; Craik, D. J.;
2214
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ol500725e | Org. Lett. 2014, 16, 2212−2215