C17 Substitution. Spirocyclization of previously described
keto sulfone 104 using our preferred conditions for keto
sulfone substrates (CSA, MeCN)5 led to a mixture of
stereoisomers (Scheme 2). Treatment of the spirocycle 11
resents, to the best of our knowledge, a unique strategy for
the effective construction of highly labile enol ethers (e.g.,
14).
C16 Substitution. The synthesis of the required benzyloxy
aldehyde 21 began with the known Evans alkylation product
158 (Scheme 3). Conversion to its benzyl ester 16 followed
Scheme 2. Bis-spirocyclization of C17 Allyl Substratea
Scheme 3. Synthesis of the C16 Benzyloxy-Substituted
Aldehydea
a Key: (i) BnOLi, PMBOH, THF, 99%; (ii) AD mix R, NaHCO3,
t-BuOH, H2O; (iii) TIPSOTf, 2,6-lutidine, CH2Cl2, -78 °C, 66%
overall yield from 16 (3:1 d.s.); (iv) LiBH4, MeOH, THF, 0 °C,
99%; (v) PivCl, Et3N, DMAP, CH2Cl2, 66%; (vi) NaH, BnBr, DMF,
-50 °C to -10 °C; (vii) TBAF, THF, 79% (over two steps); (viii)
TESCl, DMAP, Et3N, CH2Cl2, 95%; (ix) LiBH4, saturated aqueous
NH4Cl, THF, 0 °C to rt, 99%; (x) TPAP, NMO, CH2Cl2, molecular
sieves, 87%.
a Key: (i) CSA, MeCN, 90%; (ii) n-BuLi, THF, -78 °C, 70%;
(iii) TPAP, NMO, CH2Cl2, mol. sieves, 96%; (iv) (+)-Ipc2Ballyl,
Et2O, pentane, 70%, >20:1 d.s.; (v) 5% Na/Hg, Na2HPO4, MeOH,
THF, -10 °C; (vi) CSA, t-BuOH, PhMe, 76% (over two steps).
by Sharpless asymmetric dihydroxylation,9 in situ lacton-
ization, and TIPS protection yielded the lactone 17, in overall
66% yield from 16, as a separable 3:1 ratio at C16 favoring
the desired stereochemistry.10 While the diastereomeric
selectivity in the dihydroxylation is less than optimum (3:1
d.s.), direct dihydroxylation of the chiral oxazolidinone-
containing alkene 15 provided inferior results (1.5:1 d.s.).
This observation is consistent with our previous findings with
other oxazolidinone-containing alkenes.11 Subsequent reduc-
tion using LiBH4 provided the diol 18. Next, sequential
protection at C13 and C16 produced the fragment 19, along
with a small amount of impurities derived from migration
of the pivaloate and silyl protecting groups. Removal of the
TIPS ether under standard conditions allowed for easy
purification. The C17 hydroxyl was reprotected as its TES
ether 20. Cleavage of the C13 pivaloate protecting group did
with n-BuLi induced â-elimination to yield the elaborate enol
ether 12 in 70% yield, along with 10% of the presumed C10
epimer. The strategy allowed for the protection of the C13
carbonyl function while selectively revealing the C17 hy-
droxyl group. Oxidation at C17 followed by Brown allylation6
yielded the homoallylic alcohol 13 in greater than 20:1 d.s.
Removal of the sulfone functionality revealed the highly
labile enol ether 14, which rapidly underwent spirocyclization
under the standard conditions (0.04 M CSA, t-BuOH/PhMe,
14-18 h) to give the bis-spiroketal 6 as a single diastereomer.
Unfortunately, NOESY and COSY NMR experiments (CDCl3)
confirmed the cisoidal 10R,13S relationship of the bis-
spiroketal. While it is important to point out that the enol
ether spirocyclization precursor 14 is structurally different
than ketone 4, previous work in our laboratory has shown
that the C10 ketal is readily ionized under acidic conditions,5
thereby ensuring formation of comparable spirocyclization
intermediates from both precursors. It is interesting to note,
however, that the sulfone moiety once again provided added
stability,7 as 13 was indefinitely stable in the freezer. Also,
our ketalization/â-elimination/desulfonylation strategy rep-
(7) We have consistently observed an increased stabilization in substrates
containing the sulfone function versus their corresponding desulfonylated
counterparts, which are prone to elimination at C10,11 to the corresponding
enol ether.
(8) Evans, D. A.; Ennis, M. D.; Mathre, D. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1982,
104, 1737.
(9) Kolb, H. C.; VanNieuwenhze, M. S.; Sharpless, K. B. Chem. ReV.
1994, 94, 2483.
(10) A small, inseparable bi-product was present in 17. Fleming and co-
workers recently reported the presence of an n-propyl silyl impurity in
selected TIPS protection protocols. As silylation as alternate silyl protecting
groups (such as TBS or TES) did not lead to a similar impurity, it would
appear that the n-propyl silyl species is a reasonable explanation. Barden,
D. J.; Fleming, I. Chem Commun. 2001, 2366.
(5) Carter, R. G.; Graves, D. E. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 6035.
(6) Racherla, U. S.; Brown, H. C. J. Org. Chem. 1991, 56, 401.
(11) Carter, R. G.; Weldon, D. J. Org. Lett. 2000, 2, 3913.
2182
Org. Lett., Vol. 4, No. 13, 2002