substrate, giving the desired adducts 3e,f (entries v and vi).
Cyclopropane 3e (entry v) is an interesting example as it is
trisubstituted, with each substituent being in a different
oxidation state (i.e., alkoxy, aldehyde, and carboxylate),
offering the possibility of further functionalization in a
selective manner. Cyclopropane 3f (entry vi) is similarly
interesting (i.e., alkoxy, aldehyde, and ketone).
those with the benzoyl unit cis to the ketone, due to steric
interactions in the cyclopropanation “enolate” intermediate.
We also investigated the use of 3-substituted 2-propen-
1-ols (entries xiii-xiv). Unfortunately, under the current
conditions, no cyclopropanation was observed with 1h and
1i, despite complete oxidation occurring. We are investigat-
ing the use of more reactive sulfur-ylides to allow the use
of substrates such as 1h,i in TOP cyclopropanations.
Next, we went on to explore the use of polysubstituted
2-propen-1-ols which, on oxidation, give chalcones which
are known to be good substrates for cyclopropanation with
2a.7 The results are summarized in Table 2.8 The results for
these alcohols were more solvent-dependent, and each
example was carried out in CH2Cl2, THF, and 1,2-dichlo-
roethane (DCE), the optimum solvent being indicated in
Table 2. As can be seen, in all cases the yields are good to
excellent (51-100%), with electron-rich, electron-deficient,
and “electron-neutral” examples being investigated. Both
ylides 2a and 2b work well with alcohol 1j (entries i and
ii). The observed erosion of the original double bond
stereochemistry is explained by the equilibration of reaction
intermediates, as discussed earlier.
1-Substituted propen-1-ols (i.e., secondary alcohols) also
gave excellent results (entries vii-xi), with good yields and
complete trans-selectivity about the cyclopropane. Further-
more, with divinylmethanol 1f (entries x and xi), oxidation
and double-cyclopropanation occurs, giving 3j and 3k in 60%
and 69% yield respectively, each as a mixture of isomers
1
(∼1:1 as determined by H NMR spectroscopy).
The trends in stereochemistry seen with 1- and 2-substi-
tuted propen-1-ols are consistent with the reaction mechanism
proposed by Curley and DeLuca involving equilibration of
initial adducts.4c With 1-substituted propen-1-ols (entries vii-
xi), the increased size of the substituent in the intermediate
(ketone vs aldehyde) results in an equilibrium giving solely
the trans-cyclopropane products. A more detailed analysis
of the stereochemistry of these processes will be presented
in a full paper.
Finally, we examined the dihydrochalcone 1o (Scheme 3).
We were delighted to find that this was cleanly converted
into cyclopropane 3t. This result is noteworthy as 1o is
particularly electron rich, and in our experience, this slows
The more complex (-)-trans-pinocarveol 1g also worked
very well in this methodology, giving the spirocyclopropane
3l in 76% yield (entry xii). Of the four possible isomers,
this product was isolated as a ∼5.0:1 mixture of just two
(shown in Table 1). Models suggest these are most likely
Scheme 3. Picropodophyllone Precursor via TOP
Methodology
(2) (a) Ningsanont, N.; Black, D. S. C.; Chanpen, R.; Thebtaranonth, Y.
J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46, 2397. (b) Wipf, P.; Reeves, J. T.; Balachandran,
R.; Day, B. W. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 1901. (c) Rugutt, J. K.; Henry, C.
W.; Franzblau, S. G.; Warner, I. M. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 3402.
(d) Han, S.-Y.; Cho, S.-H.; Kim, S.-Y.; Seo, J.-T.; Moon, S.-J.; Jhon, G.-
L. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 1999, 9, 59. (e) Barrett, A. G. M.; Doubleday,
W. W.; Hamprecht, D.; Kasdorf, K.; Tustin, G. J.; White, A. J. P.; Williams,
D. J. Chem. Commun. 1997, 1693. (f) Bucsh, R. A.; Domagala, J. M.;
Laborde, E.; Sesnie, J. C. J. Med. Chem. 1993, 36, 4139. (g) Martinez, G.
R.; Walker, K. A. M.; Hirschfeld, D. R.; Maloney, P. J.; Yang, D. S.;
Rosenkranz, R. P. J. Med. Chem. 1989, 32, 890.
(3) (a) For a comprehensive summary, see: Larock, R. C. ComprehensiVe
Organic Transformations; VCH: New York, 1989; Chapter 4, p 71. (b)
Helquist, P. In ComprehensiVe Organic Synthesis; Trost, B. M., Fleming,
I., Eds.; Pergamon: Oxford, 1991; Vol. 1, Chapter 4.6, p 951. (c) Johnson,
C. R.; Schroeck, C. W.; Shanklin, J. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 7424.
(d) Payne, G. B. J. Org. Chem. 1967, 32, 3351. (e) Quintana, J.; Torres,
M.; Serratosa, F. Tetrahedron 1973, 29, 2065.
(4) General Procedure. To a solution of monosubstituted 2-propen-1-
ol in CH2Cl2 were added powdered 4 Å molecular sieves (1.0 g/mmol),
(carbethoxymethylene)dimethylsulfurane (1.2 equiv), and activated MnO2
(10.0 equiv). The mixture was heated to reflux and stirred until complete
reaction was observed by TLC. The mixture was then filtered through Celite
and the residue washed with CH2Cl2. Concentration of the combined
organics in vacuo followed by flash column chromatography on silica gave
the desired product. For more specific procedures, see the Supporting
Information.
(5) All known compounds gave satisfactory data (see ref 4); all novel
compounds were fully characterized by spectroscopic methods and HRMS.
(6) (a) Boland, W.; Niedermeyer, U. Synthesis 1987, 28. (b) Wu, P.-L.:
Wang, W.-S. J. Org. Chem. 1994, 59, 622. (c) Curley, R. W., Jr.; DeLuca,
H. F. J. Org. Chem. 1984, 49, 1944. (d) Hammerschmidt, F.; Zbiral, E.
Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1977, 1026. (e) Doyle, M. P.; Dorow, R. L.; Tamblyn,
W. H. J. Org. Chem. 1982, 47, 4059. (f) Duhamel, P.; Poirier, J.-M.;
Hennequin, L. Tetrahedron Lett. 1984, 25, 1471. (g) Aggarwal, V. K.; Smith,
H. W.; Hynd, G.; Jones, R. V. H.; Fieldhouse, R.; Spey, S. E. J. Chem.
Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 2000, 3267. For the methyl ester analogue: Adams,
J.; Hoffman, L., Jr.; Trost, B. M. J. Org. Chem. 1970, 35, 1600. (h) Matano,
Y. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1994, 2703 (i) Rai, K. M. L.;
Anjanamurthy, C.; Radhakrisan, P. M. Synth. Commun. 1990, 9, 1273.
(7) For examples, see; Hantawong, K.; Murphy, W. S. J. Chem. Res.,
Miniprint 1988, 2520 (b) Murphy, W. S.; Wattanasin, S. J. Chem. Soc.,
Perkin Trans. 1 1982, 1029.
(8) General Procedure. To a solution of polysubstituted 2-propen-1-ol
in the solvent of choice were added powdered 4 Å molecular sieves (1.0
g/mmol), (carbethoxymethylene)dimethylsulfurane (1.2-2.0 equiv), and
MnO2 (10.0 equiv). The mixture was heated to reflux and stirred until
complete reaction was observed by TLC. The mixture was then filtered
through Celite and the residue washed with solvent. Concentration in vacuo
followed by flash column chromatography on silica gave the desired product.
For more specific procedures, see the Supporting Information.
(9) Murphy, W. S.; Wattanasin, S. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1982,
271.
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 22, 2004
3999