A. J. Pearson, S. Cui / Tetrahedron Letters 46 (2005) 2639–2642
2641
OMe
OMe
OMe
O
O
OH
OH
O
OH
1.5 equiv TBAF,
THF, -15-0 °C, 5h
HO
HO
O
Et3P, CH3CN/H2O
HO
O
O
O
(4:1), rt, 21h
O
H
N
H
H
FDPP,* i-Pr2NEt
H
14
O
N
RO
N
EtO
N
N
H
NHBoc
NHR
N
H
NHBoc
92%
H
H
88%
H
DMF, 0 °C, 12h
HN
O
O
O
NH2
( two steps )
76%
N3
PO
H
BnO
BnO
OMe
OMe
OMe
OMe
OMe
OMe
MeO
MeO
MeO
15
18 R = Boc, P = Bn
3 R = H, P = Bn
16 R = Et
17 R = H
LiOH, THF/H2O
(1:1), 0 °C, 10 min
HCO2H/CHCl3
rt, 7h (85%)
*(FDPP = pentafluoro-
phenyl diphenylphosphinate)
19 R = H, P = MEM
Scheme 3.
minor epimerization (ca 9%) occurs during the peptide
coupling, but 10 was not subjected to rigorous purifica-
tion to minimize loss of material. Coupling 11 with 4,
using HOAt/EDCI at low temperature afforded the de-
sired ruthenium complex 12 in 85% yield. Several minor
epimeric compounds (12% total) were observed in the
1H NMR spectrum of this material, as expected because
the subunits are not optically pure, but these were not
removed at this stage. Cycloetherification of 12 was car-
ried out by treatment with the weak non-nucleophilic
base, sodium 2,6-di-t-butylphenoxide, to afford 13 in
excellent yield. The reactivity of the chloroarene–ruthe-
nium complexes is sufficiently great that this weak base
can be used, which minimizes the risk of epimerization
of sensitive residues. Removal of the ruthenium from
13 followed the photochemical method used in our ear-
lier work, but with slight modification to control the UV
wavelength (Hanovia reactor using NaNO3 solution as
filter). Also, the [CpRu(CH3CN)3]PF6 that is generated
in this process caused side reactions on the product 14
during its isolation.14 Accordingly, this complex was
destroyed immediately after photolysis, by treating the
reaction mixture with aq ammonia, and intermediate
14 was isolated in 85% yield, after purification by flash
chromatography. It should be noted that minor epimeric
impurities generated during the earlier coupling steps
were removed during this purification.
molecular synthesis. The RuCp moiety is extremely ver-
satile in its ability to withstand numerous chemical
transformations elsewhere in the molecule, and its
attachment to highly functionalized amino acid
derivatives.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Mr. Avdhoot Velankar for preparing
intermediate 9, and to the National Institutes of Health
for financial support (GM 36925).
Supplementary data
Spectroscopic data for all new compounds reported
herein. Supplementary data associated with this article
References and notes
1. Structural studies: Sheldrick, G. M.; Jones, P. G.; Ken-
nard, O.; Williams, D. H.; Smith, G. A. Nature (London)
1978, 271, 223–225; Harris, C. M.; Kopecka, H.; Harris,
T. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983, 105, 6915–6922.
2. Reviews on this topic: Nicolaou, K. C.; Boddy, C. N. C.;
Bra¨se, S.; Winssinger, N. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1999, 38,
2096–2152; Williams, D. H.; Bardsley, B. Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. 1999, 38, 1172–1193; Hiramatsu, K. Drug Resist.
Update 1998, 1, 135–150.
Conversion of 14 to the desired ABCD intermediate fol-
lowed tactics similar to those used by Nicolaou et al. in
their synthesis of the vancomycin aglycone (Scheme 3).3a
It is necessary to deprotect the secondary alcohol of
the arylserine C ring residue to ensure high yield in the
subsequent ester hydrolysis step. Treatment of 14 with
excess TBAF at low temperature effects this transforma-
tion without side reactions—at higher temperatures sig-
nificant dehydration and retroaldol-type reaction of the
arylserine C-ring residue occurs. The A-ring azide was
reduced to amine using triethylphosphine, and the ester
was hydrolyzed using LiOH in THF to afford the amino
acid derivative 17, which was used directly in the cyc-
loamidation step to afford 18. Removal of the Boc pro-
tecting group from 18 afforded 3, which differs from
BogerÕs ABCD intermediate (19) only in the nature of
the primary alcohol protecting group.
3. (a) Nicolaou, K. C.; Natarajan, S.; Li, H.; Jain, N. F.;
Hughes, R.; Salomon, M. E.; Ramanjulu, J. M.; Boddy,
C. N. C.; Takayanagi, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1998, 37,
2708–2714; Nicolaou, K. C.; Jain, N. F.; Natarajan, S.;
Hughes, R.; Salomon, M. E.; Li, H.; Ramanjulu, J. M.;
Takayanagi, M.; Koumbis, A. E.; Bando, T. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 1998, 37, 2714–2716; Nicolaou, K. C.;
Katayanagi, M.; Jain, N. F.; Natarajan, S.; Koumbis, A.
E.; Bando, T.; Ramanjulu, J. M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
1998, 37, 2717–2719; (b) Evans, D. A.; Wood, M. R.;
Trotter, B. W.; Richardson, T. I.; Barrow, J. C.; Katz, J.
L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1998, 37, 2700–2704; Evans, D.
A.; Dinsmore, C. J.; Watson, P. S.; Wood, M. R.;
Richardson, T. I.; Trotter, B. W.; Katz, J. L. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 1998, 37, 2704–2708; (c) Boger, D. L.;
Miyazaki, S.; Kim, S. H.; Wu, J. H.; Castle, S. L.;
Loiseleur, O.; Jin, Q. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 10004–
10011.
In conclusion, this work demonstrates that arene–ruthe-
nium chemistry can be used in the context of complex