position on the glycerol scaffold, and degree of branching.4
The evolution of this process can be visualized in Figure 1,
hydrate precursors, such as 1,2:3,5-di-O-isopropylidene-R-
D-threo-apiofuranose5 and D-arabinose.6 Furthermore, because
compounds having a type III scaffold have not yet been
synthesized in pure enantiomeric form, we chose to dem-
onstrate the utility of our approach by synthesizing type III
molecules, such as compounds (E)-10 and (Z)-10, as (R)-
enantiomers. As anticipated, the binding affinities of both
geometric isomers confirmed the preference of PK-C for the
(R)-enantiomers.
The synthesis began with protection of commercially
available 2-methylenepropane-1,3-diol as its monotrityl ether
1 (Scheme 1). Use of Sharpless mnemonic rules led to the
Scheme 1a
Figure 1. Structures and PK-CR binding affinity of racemic and
(R)-enantiomeric DAG-lactones with templates of increasing com-
plexity (I, II, and III).
a Reagents and conditions: (a) Et3N, TrCl, CH2Cl2 (52%); (b)
(+)-DET (2% mol), Ti(Oi-Pr)4 (10% mol), t-BuOOH, CH2Cl2, -20
°C (80%); (c) NaH, BnBr, DMF (86%); (d) LiCtCH‚EDA, DMSO
(79%); (e) Lindlar cat. (50% w), H2, quinoline (50% w), hexane
(97%); (f) BH3‚SMe2, THF, -78 °C; then PCC, CH2Cl2 (48% for
2 steps).
where it can also be seen that for scaffolds I and II the active
enantiomer has the (R)-stereochemistry. In the few cases
where both (R)- and (S)-enantiomers were synthesized,
binding affinity differences greater than two orders of magni-
tude were observed with activity residing exclusively with
the (R)-enantiomer.5 An important improvement in potency
occurred when transferring the bulk of the alkyl group from
the acyl position in I to the R-alkylidene position in II, which
reduced the acyl group to the simplest acetyl moiety and
resulted in a 5- to 8-fold increase in binding affinity.6
Because our most recent potent compounds belong to
scaffold type III, where the alkyl chains are distributed
between both acyl and R-alkylidene positions, we wanted
to confirm that, in agreement with scaffolds I and II, the
required stereochemistry for III was also (R). This confirma-
tion was considered important because normally for the sake
of convenience the search for novel compounds is initially
conducted with racemic DAG-lactones, with the synthesis
of the pure enantiomer postponed until after the initial screen.
In the present manuscript, we wish to present a general
approach to a simple, chiral DAG-lactone [(R)-6] that serves
as chiral precursor for all three scaffolds (I-III). This new
process appears to be vastly superior in efficiency and
simplicity when compared to previous methods of syntheses
of (R)-DAG-lactones (scaffolds I and II) from chiral carbo-
selection of L-(+)-diethyl tartrate as the optically active
reagent for the chiral epoxidation of alkene 1 to produce the
desired DAG-lactone (R)-6. Epoxidation of 1 with t-BuOOH
in the presence of catalytic amounts of titanium tetraisopro-
poxide and L-(+)-diethyl tartrate gave an 80% yield of the
desired, chiral epoxide (R)-2 with >96% ee as confirmed
by its Mosher ester. Protection of the remaining free alcohol
as a benzyl ether provided compound (R)-3 and set the stage
for the ensuing nucleophilic opening of the epoxide moiety
with lithium acetylide (ethylenediamine complex) to give the
key intermediate (R)-4. In the presence of Lindlar catalyst
(Pd-CaCO3-PbO), the alkyne group in (R)-4 was successfully
reduced to the alkene to give the tertiary homoallylic alcohol
(R)-5. As was the case for the synthesis of racemic lactones,
formation of lactone (R)-6 was achieved in “one pot” after
hydroboration of the olefin and immediate oxidation with
pyridinium chlorochromate.7
From lactone (R)-6, the synthesis of chiral (R)-DAG-
lactones (E)-10 and (Z)-10 was completed using a well-
established methodology developed in our laboratory2 in-
volving aldol condensation with 5-methyl-3-(2-methylpropyl)-
hexan-1-one followed by olefination (Scheme 2). Separation
of geometric isomers (E)-7 and (Z)-7 was achieved at this
stage by column chromatography, and completion of the
synthesis was performed individually for each isomer.
Removal of the trityl ether gave the free alcohols (E)-8 and
(2) Nacro, K.; Bienfait, B.; Lee, J.; Han, K. C.; Kang, J. H.; Benzaria,
S.; Lewin, N. E.; Bhattacharyya, D. K.; Blumberg, P. M.; Marquez, V. E.
J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 921-944.
(3) Marquez, V. E.; Blumberg, P. M. Acc. Chem. Res. 2003, 36, 434-
443.
(4) Marquez, V. E.; Nacro, K.; Benzaria, S.; Lee, J.; Sharma, R.; Teng,
K.; Milne, G. W.; Bienfait, B.; Wang, S.; Lewin, N. E.; Blumberg, P. M.
Pharmacol. Ther. 1999, 82, 251-261.
(5) Lee, J.; Sharma, R.; Wang, S.; Milne, G. W.; Lewin, N. E.; Szallasi,
Z.; Blumberg, P. M.; George, C.; Marquez, V. E. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39,
36-45.
(6) Lee, J.; Wang, S.; Milne, G. W.; Sharma, R.; Lewin, N. E.; Blumberg,
P. M.; Marquez, V. E. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39, 29-35.
(7) Sharma, R.; Lee, J.; Wang, S.; Milne, G. W.; Lewin, N. E.; Blumberg,
P. M.; Marquez, V. E. J. Med. Chem. 1996, 39, 19-28.
2414
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 14, 2004