a heterocyclic array are much less common. Seminal studies
by Bechwith9 and Stork’s groups10 have shown that, under
tin hydride mediated reaction conditions, vinyl radical
cyclization gives a mixture of both 5-exo and 6-endo
products. The kinetic work by Beckwith revealed that
formation of the six-membered ring is not solely due to a
6-endo-trig cyclization but is the result of a rapid rearrange-
ment of the methylene cyclopentyl radical, via a reversible
3-exo-trig cyclization.11 It was envisioned that by keeping
the hydride concentration low, rearrangement of the kineti-
cally formed radical 9 derived from bromide 7 to the
thermodynamically more stable radical 10 would occur,
leading to product 12. Comparison of the strain energies of
9 and 10, as well as radical stability, supports this idea.
Indeed, when 7 (0.01 M) was treated with tributyltin hydride
and a catalytic amount of AlBN, six-membered ring product
12 was the major product formed in 89% yield. In contrast,
when bromide 7 was treated with Bu3SnH at a concentration
of 0.1 M, a significant quantity (20%) of the 5-exo cyclization
product 13 (3:1 mixture of diastereomers) was obtained along
with the 6-endo cyclization product 12 in a ratio of 1:3,
together with the simple reduction product 6 (19%). These
results clearly indicate that the vinyl radical rearrangement
pathway is responsible, to a considerable extent, for the
regiochemical outcome of the reaction.
The cyclization method was next extended to the N-benzyl-
substituted hexahydroindolinones 14 and 15. Exposure of
bromo-enamide 14 to Bu3SnH under standard radical forming
conditions furnished pyrrolo[3.2.1-de]phenanthridinone 16
in 68% yield together with 27% of the reduced hexahydroin-
dolinone 17. In this case, selective 6-endo cyclization took
place on the aromatic ring. Interestingly, the closely related
o-bromobenzyl-substituted hexahydroindolinone 15 failed to
cyclize but instead gave largely the reduction product 17 in
75% yield. The different behavior observed with these two
systems is presumably reflective of the slower rate of addition
to the enamido π-bond.12 The successful cyclization of 14
encouraged us to also apply the reaction to the simpler
8-bromo-hexahydro-1H-quinolinone system 18. Gratifyingly,
subjecting a sample of 18 to the standard radical conditions
furnished the cyclized pyrido[3.2.1-jk]carbazolonone 19 in
81% yield, thereby demonstrating the facility of the 5-exo-
trig cyclization pathway.13 At this juncture, we decided to
extend our studies toward the homologous N-butenyl hexahy-
droindolinone 20. A review of the literature revealed,
somewhat surprisingly, that simple 1,6-heptadienyl radicals
Scheme 2
Scheme 2 depicts the basic features of our strategy directed
toward aspidospermidine construction. The first step, selec-
tive bromination of the enamido π-bond, should be extremely
rapid and efficient since analogous examples are known.5
We hoped that generation of a cyclohexenyl radical (i.e., 8)
from 7 would initiate a 6-endo-trig cyclization ultimately
leading to 12 after abstraction of hydrogen from tributyltin
hydride. A model study designed to test the feasibility of
this concept began by the condensation of allylamine with
1-methyl-(2-oxocyclohexyl) acetic acid to give the desired
bicyclic lactam 6 in 96% yield.6 Hexahydroindolinone 6 was
subsequently treated with bromine in CH2Cl2 followed by
reaction with NEt3 to deliver the cyclization precursor 7 in
95% yield. Exposure of 7 to several radical cyclization
conditions led to various mixtures of the 6-endo- and 5-exo-
trig cyclization products 12 and 13, with the best yield and
product ratio obtained using n-Bu3SnH/AIBN in refluxing
benzene under slow addition conditions.
Since their introduction in 1982,7 vinyl radical cyclizations
have been widely used in organic synthesis,8 although
preparative sequences incorporating vinyl radicals as part of
(3) (a) Woodward, R. B.; Cava, M.; Ollis, W. D.; Hunger, A.; Daeniker,
H. U.; Schenker, K. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1954, 76, 4749. (b) Wenkert, E. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 1962, 84, 98. (c) Magnus, P.; Gallagher, T.; Brown, P.;
Pappalardo, P. Acc. Chem. Res. 1984, 17, 35. (d) Stork, G.; Dolfini, J. E.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963, 85, 2872. (e) Marino, J. P.; Rubio, M. B.; Cao,
G.; Dios, de, A. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 13398. (f) Kuehne, M.
E.; Bornmann, W. G.; Earley, W. G.; Marko, I. J. Org. Chem. 1986, 51,
2913. (g) Sumi, S.; Matsumoto, K.; Tokuyama, H.; Fukuyama, T. Org.
Lett. 2003, 5, 1891.
(4) Lynch, S. M.; Bur, S. K.; Padwa, A. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 4643.
(5) (a) Wei, L. L.; Mulder, J. A.; Xiong, H.; Zificsak, C. A.; Douglas,
C. J.; Hsung, R. P. Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 459. (b) Goffin, E.; Legrand, Y.;
Viehe, H. G. J. Chem. Res., Synop. 1977, 105.
(7) Stork, G.; Baine, N. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1982, 104, 2321.
(8) (a) Giese, B.; Kopping, B.; Go¨bel, T.; Dickhaut, J.; Thoma, G.;
Kulicke, K. J.; Trach, F. Org. React. 1996, 48, 301. (b) Motherwell, W.
B.; Crich, D. Free Radical Reactions in Organic Synthesis; Academic
Press: London, 1992. (c) Curran, D. P. Synthesis 1988, 4117. (d) Curran,
D. P. Synthesis 1988, 489. (e) Jasperse, C. P.; Curran, D. P.; Fevig, T. L.
Chem. ReV. 1991, 91, 1, 1237.
(9) Beckwith, A. L. J.; O’Shea, D. M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 4525.
(10) Stork, G.; Mook, R., Jr. Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 4529.
(11) More recently, Crich’s group reported preferential formation of the
5-exo product when the reaction was conducted in a rapid radical quenching
environment (i.e., PhSeSePh/Bu3SnH), reconfirming that the five-membered
ring closure is the kinetically favored process; see Crich, D.; Hwang, J.-T.;
Liu, H. Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 3105.
(6) (a) Ragan, J. A.; Claffey, M. C. Heterocycles 1995, 41, 57. (b) Ennis,
M. D.; Hoffman, R. L.; Ghazal, N. B.; Old, D. W.; Mooney, P. A. J. Org.
Chem. 1996, 61, 5813.
(12) Vazquez, A. N.; Garcia, A.; Dominguez, D. J. Org. Chem. 2002,
67, 3213.
918
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 6, 2004