However, only a small number of analogues have been
successfully prepared to test this hypothesis in vivo.
Progress in this area has been slow because of the many
difficulties associated with synthesizing these compounds.3
Despite efforts spanning over two decades, only one very
recent total synthesis of 1 has been reported,3m along with
two syntheses of 2 (one de novo).3b,d The furanosteroid
skeleton itself has also proven to be a significant synthetic
challenge. Recently, we began a program exploring a
fundamentally new approach to synthesizing members of the
viridin (1) and wortmannin (2) families, involving bond
disconnection at C1-C10 (cf. dashed lines in Figure 1). Our
synthetic analysis for viridin and related furanosteroids is
shown in Scheme 1.
C1-epimerization. However, to the best of our knowledge,
the C1 R-epimer of 3 does not occur naturally. On this basis,
we reasoned that if such an equilibrium exists it must strongly
favor the ring-closed product 3 as well as the “natural” syn
stereochemistry at C1-C10. It followed that 4 constituted an
attractive synthetic precursor to 3.
In our synthetic planning, we assumed that the phenol ring
in 4 has little aromatic character, analogous to the case with
anthracen-10-ol and related species.4 Otherwise, it would be
difficult to rationalize the stability of compounds such as 3.
Also, in the transformation of 4 to 3, we expected that the
desired syn stereochemistry at C1-C10 would predominate
under kinetic control due to a more favorable Burgi-Dunitz
trajectory angle (vide infra).5 The overriding issue pertained
to the synthesis of 4 itself, which we hoped to accomplish
employing the alkyne oxazole Diels-Alder (DA) methodol-
ogy we have used in the syntheses of numerous naturally
occurring furans, butenolides, and lactones.6 Thus, DA/retro-
DA reaction of 7 was expected to lead directly to furan 5,
which upon tautomerization would afford the desired phenol
4 (Scheme 1). To test this approach, we have been investi-
gating the synthesis and reactivity of simpler alkyne oxazoles
of type 8, focusing on their conversion to viridin model
systems 9 incorporating the characteristic skeletal features
of 1 (Scheme 2).
Scheme 1. Viridin Synthetic Analysis
Scheme 2. Proposed Viridin Model Studies
We pursued a number of routes for the synthesis of alkyne
oxazoles 8. Ultimately, however, we made use of the inno-
vative methodology of Pettus et al., who developed a general
procedure for converting salicylaldehyde derivatives to a
wide variety of o-substituted phenols.7a This is illustrated in
Scheme 3 for the parent compound 10, which in step 1 is
converted to the Boc derivative 11. Next, in a very efficient
sequence, treatment of 11 with 1.05 equiv of MeLi generated
the reactive o-quinone methide 12, by a pathway involving
nucleophilic addition to the aldehyde, followed by intramo-
lecular transfer of the Boc group and 1,4-elimination (not
shown). Quenching with the Grignard reagent derived from
trimethylsilylacetylene (TMSA) followed by triflation then
gave a 74% overall yield of the desired triflate derivative
14 on 95 mmol scales (>20 g). With ample quantities of 14
A distinguishing feature of the viridin skeleton 3 is that
the C1-C10 bond can be formally derived by intramolecular
aldol condensation of phenol aldehydes 4 (Scheme 1; not
the biogenetic pathway). Viewed in this context, it is
interesting that 3 and related materials do not at least partly
revert to 4 via retro-aldol reaction, providing a pathway for
(3) Representative studies. Wortmannin family: (a) Broka, C. A.;
Ruhland, B. J. Org. Chem. 1992, 57, 4888. (b) Sato, S.; Nakada, M.;
Shibasaki, M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 6141. (c) Honzawa, S.; Mizutani,
T.; Shibasaki, M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1999, 40, 311. (d) Mizutani, T.;
Honzawa, S.; Tosaki, S.-y.; Shibasaki, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2002,
41, 4680. (e) Wipf, P.; Halter, R. J. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2005, 3, 2053 and
cited references. Viridin family: (f) Moffatt, J. S. J. Chem. Soc. (C) 1966,
734. (g) Yasuchika, Y.; Kenji, H.; Kanematsu, K. Chem. Commun. 1987,
515. (h) Carlina, R.; Higgs, K.; Older, C.; Randhawa, S.; Rodrigo, R. J.
Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 2330. (i) Souza, F. E. S.; Rodrigo, R. Chem. Commun.
1999, 1947. (j) Boynton, J.; Hanson, J. R.; Kiran, I. J. Chem. Res. (S) 1999,
638. (k) Wright, D.; Whitehead, C.; Orugunty, R. Abstracts of Papers, 221st
ACS National Meeting, 2001; American Chemical Society: Washington,
DC. (l) Wright, D. L.; Robotham, C. V.; Aboud, K. Tetrahedron Lett. 2002,
43, 943. (m) Anderson, E. A.; Alexanian, E. J.; Sorensen, E. J. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 1998.
(4) Freiermuth, B.; Hellrung, B.; Peterli, S.; Schultz, M.-F.; Wintgens,
D.; Wirz, J. HelV. Chim. Acta 2001, 84, 3796.
(5) Burgi, H. B.; Dunitz, J. D. Acc. Chem. Res. 1983, 16, 153.
(6) For leading references, see: Jacobi, P. A.; Lee, K. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2000, 122, 4295.
(7) (a) Van De Water, R. W.; Magdziak, D. J.; Chau, J. N.; Pettus, T. R.
R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122(27), 6502. (b) We are grateful to Mr. Roger
O’Connor of these laboratories for optimizing this step.
4126
Org. Lett., Vol. 8, No. 18, 2006