Synthesis of Substituted 2(1H)-Pyridinones
TABLE 3. Influence of the Alcohol Residue in the
Propiolic Ester on the Product Distributiona
entry
R′ (14)
% 13z
% 15z
% 16z
% 22z′
1
2
3
4
Me
Et
iPr
tBu
<5
<5
60
46
33
13
13
34
24
16
36
17
56
<5
FIGURE 3. Methaqualone 23 and 4,6-dimethyl-1-phenylpy-
rimidin-2(1H)-ones 24.
a All reactions were performed on a 50 mg scale in methanol at
65 °C for 2 h in sealed pressure test tubes.
the enantiomeric excess appeared to be much slower and
could be followed accurately in a time frame of days.24
For 15z the half-life at 100 °C was determined to be 15
days. The energy barrier of rotation was calculated to be
139.0 kJ mol-1, which corresponds to a half-life of 4050
years at room temperature.25 This energy barrier is
methyl sulfoxide, tetrahydrofuran, and acetone (entries
8-12) and in toluene (entry 13). In the latter three
solvents product 22z was obtained in high purity. The
1
vinylic coupling constant of 15.7 Hz in the H NMR of
22z proves the E configuration of the double bond R,â to
the ester as depicted in Scheme 4. When 22z was heated
in methanol at 65 °C we obtained a 4.5:1 mixture of 15z
and 16z very similar to entry 1. This shows that a facile
E/Z isomerization must occur under the cyclization
conditions. In acetic acid most of the starting material
13z was not consumed (entry 7).
The influence of the alkyl group R′ in the propiolic ester
14 was also examined (Table 3). With ethyl instead of
methyl propiolate as reagent a product distribution of
15z:16z of 3.5:1 was found after 2 h at 65 °C in methanol
(entry 2). In the case of isopropyl propiolate, a 1:1 mixture
of 15z and 16z was obtained (entry 3). When tert-butyl
propiolate was used, the cyclization step slowed signifi-
cantly. In this case product 15z was not detected (entry
4).
similar to that reported for 23 (131.6 kJ mol-1 26
and 24
)
(114-126 kJ mol-1 27
(Figure 3).
)
The absolute configuration of (S)-15z ([R]D20.5 ) -30.6°,
c ) 0.665, DCM) was assigned by X-ray analysis (see
Supporting Information).
Mechanism of Rotation. Rotational barriers may be
resolved by computational approaches. Force fields, as
used for 24 (R1 ) OMe, Figure 3),27a calculate only steric
hindrance and neglect any stabilizing electronic effects.
Pure ab initio Hartree-Fock as calculated for derivatives
of 23 (Figure 3, HF/6-31G*)26b accounts for steric hin-
drance but neglects the electron correlation part of
electronic interactions.28 Quantitative values could be
obtained by hybrid density functional or highly correlated
ab initio methods but are not feasible due to computa-
tional limitations. We used semiempirical AM1 theory29
to rank compounds qualitatively by relative barrier
(VAMP6.5,30 details are given in the Supporting Informa-
tion).
From o-pyridine to o-isopropyl the barrier increases
continuously with increasing size of the substituent.
There is mostly no effect with introduction of a p-methoxy
group and some lowering with introduction of a m-
methoxy residue. The ranking is in line with the occur-
rence of separable enantiomers.
Atropisomerism and Absolute Configuration. For
highly congested systems comprised of ortho-substituted
aryl pyridinones, the question arose whether rotation
around the C-N bond forming the biarylic axis was
1
restricted. In the H NMR spectrum of 15y two doublet
signals for the methyl groups of the o-isopropyl substitu-
ent appear at 1.09 and 1.19 ppm. Similarly, in the 13C
NMR spectrum the signals of the two methyl groups on
the isopropyl moiety are distinguishable at 23.1 and 23.4
ppm. This pattern is characteristic for diastereotopic
groups, thus indicating a stereogenic element in the
molecule. In the case of a hindered rotation of the aryl
ring around the inter-ring C-N bond, a stereogenic axis
is defined by this bond, thus explaining the phenomenon
The coarse correlation between barrier heights and
inter-ring dihedrals clearly suggests that electronic ef-
fects have only a negligible role compared with steric
effects. Therefore, the question for the mechanism of
1
through the existence of atropisomers. In the H NMR
(24) Time vs ee: 0 day, 98.2% ee; 2 days, 91.1% ee; 4 days, 79.7%
ee; 7 days, 70.4% ee; 9 days 65.2% ee; 11 days, 59.3% ee; 14 days, 51.3%
ee; 16 days, 47.0% ee; 21 days, 38.3% ee; 23 days, 33.2% ee. Linear
regression of ln(ee(o)/ee) vs t: y ) 5.3423E-7, R2 ) 0.998. k )
2.671E-7 [1/s]. ∆Gq ) 139.0 kJ mol-1. t1/2 (100 °C) ) 15 days, t1/2 (25
°C) ) 4054 years.
of the o-morpholino compound 15bb a similar effect is
observed. The hydrogens of the morpholino group nor-
mally show up as two multiplets at 3.2 and 3.7 ppm, as,
for example, in the meta-regioisomer 15s. In case of the
o-morpholino residue in compound 15bb clearly resolved
signals at 2.73 (2H), 2.87 (2H), and 3.48 (4H) ppm are
observed.
The enantiomers of the ortho-substituted derivatives
were separable by preparative chiral HPLC (15y, 15z).23
In the case of the meta-substituted analogue 15m no
separation was achieved at room temperature. Enan-
tiopure 15z was completely racemized in DMSO solution
at 160 °C within 2 h. In boiling water the decrease of
(25) Ernst, L. ChiuZ 1983, 17, 21-30.
(26) (a) Mannschreck, A.; Koller, H.; Stu¨hler, G.; Davies, M. A.;
Traber, J. Eur. J. Med. Chem. Chim. Ther. 1984, 19, 381-383. (b)
Azanli, E.; Rothchild, R.; Sapse, A.-M. Spectrosc. Lett. 2002, 35, 257-
274.
(27) (a) Kashima, C.; Katoh, A. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1980,
1599-1602. (b) Roussel, C.; Adjimi, M.; Chemlal, A.; Djafri, A. J. Org.
Chem. 1988, 53, 5076-5080. (c) Sakamoto, M.; Utsumi, N.; Ando, M.;
Saeki, M.; Mino, T.; Fujita, T.; Katoh, A.; Nishio, T.; Kashima, C.
Angew. Chem. 2003, 115, 4496-4499; Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2003,
42, 4360-4363.
(28) (a) Go¨ller, A.; Grummt, U.-W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2000, 321, 399-
405. (b) Go¨ller, A.; Grummt, U.-W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2002, 354, 233-
242.
(22) (a) Klapars, A.; Huang, X.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2002, 124, 7421-7428. (b) Li, C. S.; Dixon, D. D. Tetrahedron Lett.
2004, 45, 4257-4260.
(23) Column: KBD 6175, 250 mm × 20 mm. Eluent: isohexane/
ethyl acetate 60:40. Temperature: 23 °C. Flow: 15 mL/min. UV
detection: 254 nm.
(29) Dewar, M. J. S.; Zoebisch, E. G.; Healy, E. F.; Stewart, J. J. P.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985, 107, 3902-3909.
(30) Clark, T.; Alex, A.; Beck, B.; Burckhardt, F.; Chandrasekhar,
J.; Gedeck, P.; Horn, A.; Hutter, M.; Martin, B.; Rahut, G.; Sauer, W.;
Schindler, T.; Steinke, T. VAMP 8.0; Erlangen, 2001.
J. Org. Chem, Vol. 70, No. 23, 2005 9467