Enantioselective Synthesis of (−)-Gilbertine
Scheme 1. Retrosynthesis
A R T I C L E S
Scheme 2 a
a Reagents and conditions: (a) 1 mol % (R-AlB), KOtBu, dimethylmalonate, THF, 96%, >99% ee; (b) ethylene glycol, pTSOH, reflux, 99%; (c) DABCO,
H2O, toluene, reflux, 66%; (d) LAH, Et2O, reflux, 97%; (e) CH3CN, H2O, 1 N HCl, rt, 91%.
Tetrahydrocarbazole 5 could be synthesized by a convergent
approach by use of the Japp-Klingemann5 Fischer indole6 synthesis,
which would predict the highly substituted cyclohexanone 6 addressing
two of the four stereogenic centers (see Scheme 1). The allyl moiety
in 6 would allow the introduction of the hydroxylamine side chain via
an oxidative cleavage7 reductive amination8 protocol. The carbonyl
functionality would be suitable for the introduction of the methyl group,
and simple acetylation should give the cyclization precursor 5.
The Shibasaki asymmetric Michael addition could introduce the
hydroxyethyl side chain by use of 2-allylcyclohexenone 7, which could
be easily prepared from o-anisic acid under Birch conditions on a large
scale,9 and dimethylmalonate as a commercially available starting
material, allowing the synthesis on a molar scale.10a By use of Corey’s
protocol for the introduction of a formyl moiety, the highly substituted
cyclohexanone derivative 6 should be straightforwardly synthesized.11
The protection group (PG) should be easily cleaved under the acidic
cyclization conditions in the last step of the synthesis, but it should be
stable under the acidic Fischer cyclization conditions.
was isolated (Scheme 2). Evaluation of this reaction led to the
conclusion that 7 is not a Michael acceptor for the Shibasaki
reaction or any other base-catalyzed reaction conditions. Since
the Shibasaki reaction delivers high yields and excellent
enantiomeric excess, it was envisaged to introduce the allyl
moiety at a later step in the synthesis (Scheme 3). For the
optimization of the entire procedures, especially the introduction
of the allyl moiety, the racemate was synthesized in a parallel
manner. The asymmetric Michael addition of dimethyl malonate
with cyclohexenone in the presence of R-AlB was achieved in
96% yield with an excess of >99% ee, achieved by recrystalliza-
tion.10b To avoid a retro-Michael process under decarboxylation
conditions, ketone 9 was protected as a cyclic ketal 10. The
Krapcho decarboxylation12 procedure was replaced by a milder
procedure with DABCO in toluene and water, which afforded
11 in 66% yield. LAH reduction of the methyl ester and deke-
talization with 1 N HClaq in acetonitrile gave rise to hydroxyl-
ethylcyclohexanone 13. These reactions were easily carried out
on a molar scale and it is noteworthy that all intermediates could
be purified by distillation or used without purification.
At the planning stage of the synthesis it was envisaged that
a bulky protecting group (PG, Scheme 1) could effect the
formylation of hydroxyethylcyclohexanone in a regioselective
manner. This formylation11 would allow the introduction of the
allyl side chain by bisanion alkylation,13 which would be
stereoselectively influenced by the protected hydroxyethyl side
chain giving rise to the favored trans diastereomer. Therefore
we investigated the influence of the TPS protecting group, which
could be introduced in a 97% yield (Scheme 3). This TPS ether
Results and Discussion
Synthesis of Gilbertine. The Michael reaction with cyclo-
hexenone derivative 7 was not successful; only starting material
(5) Phillips, R. R. Org. React. 1959, 10, 144.
(6) (a) Robinson, B. The Fischer Indole Synthesis; Wiley: New York, 1982.
(b) Salituro, F. G.; Harrison, B. L.; Baron, B. M.; Philip, L.; Stewart, K.
T.; Kehne, J. H.; White, H. S.; McDonald, I. A. J. Med. Chem. 1992, 35,
1791.
(7) Lee, C. B.; Chou, T.-C.; Zhang, X.-G.; Wang, Z.-G.; Kuduk, S. D.; Mark,
D.; Stachel, S. J.; Danishefsky, S. J. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 65, 6525.
(8) Shishido, K.; Hiroya, K.; Komatsu, H.; Fukumoto, K.; Kametani, T. J.
Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1986, 904.
(9) (a) Taber, D. F. J. Org. Chem. 1976, 41, 2649. (b) Fletcher, R.; Kizil, M.;
Lampard, C.; Murphy, J. A.; Roome, S. J. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1
1998, 2341.
(10) (a) Shimizu, S.; Ohori, K.; Arai, T.; Sasai, H.; Shibasaki, M. J. Org. Chem.
1998, 63, 7547. (b) Shibasaki, M.; Sasai, H.; Arai, T. Angew. Chem. 1997,
109, 1290. (c) Yamada, K.-I.; Arai, T.; Sasai, H.; Shibasaki, M. J. Org.
Chem. 1998, 63, 3666. (d) Sasai, H.; Arai, T.; Satow, Y.; Houk, K. N.;
Shibasaki, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 6194.
(12) (a) Krapcho, A. P.; Mundy, B. P. Tetrahedron 1970, 26, 5437. (b) Krapcho,
A. P.; Lovey, A. J. Tetrahedron Lett. 1973, 12, 957. (c) Krapcho, A. P.
Synthesis 1982, 805.
(13) (a) Huckin, S. N.; Weiler, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1974, 96, 1082. (b)
Boatman, S.; Harris, T. M.; Hauser, C. R. Org. Synth. 1968, 48, 40.
(11) Corey, E. J.; Cane, D. E. J. Org. Chem. 1971, 36, 3070.
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 126, NO. 11, 2004 3535