SCHEME 1. Problems Associated with Thiol Groups in the
Suzuki-Miyaura Reaction
Practical Thiol Surrogates and Protective Groups
for Arylthiols for Suzuki-Miyaura Conditions
Takahiro Itoh* and Toshiaki Mase
Process Research, Process R&D, Banyu Pharmaceutical Co.
Ltd., 9-1, Kamimutsuna 3-chome, Okazaki, Aichi 444-0858,
Japan
SCHEME 2. Issues with Using Carbonyl Groups for Thiol
Protection
ReceiVed December 21, 2005
in particular, S-acetyl is considered to be a favorable choice
for arylthiols,5 since arylthiol acetates undergo cleavage under
mild basic conditions. Thioethers and thioheterocycles are good
protective groups for thiols in the Suzuki-Miyaura reaction
under aqueous or anhydrous basic conditions. However, the
deprotection of thioethers to thiols is problematic due to the
requirement of the harsh conditions. Acetyl groups are suitable
for the Heck reaction,6 but acyl groups are potentially not
suitable as protective groups for aqueous basic Suzuki-Miyaura
conditions. Terfort et al. reported that a suitable protective group
for anhydrous Suzuki-Miyaura conditions is not an acetyl group
but a 2-methoxyisobutyryl group, which is easily cleaved by
aqueous bases; however, the carbonyl group may cause problems
in the Suzuki-Miyaura reaction. They suggest that a ketone is
formed by insertion of palladium between the sulfur atom and
the carbonyl group, leading to a palladium-acyl complex with
one thiolate ligand (Scheme 2).7
Recently, we have developed a method of efficient arylsulfur
bond formation using aryl bromide/triflate and aryl/alkanethiols
with Pd2(dba)3 and Xantphos.8 2-Ethylhexyl-3-mercaptopro-
pionate 1 and 4-(2′-mercaptoethyl)pyridine hydrochloride 2,
which are odorless and inexpensive reagents, are good thiol
surrogates for coupling under these conditions, and should be
easily cleaved to the corresponding thiols under mild basic
conditions via a â-elimination mechanism (Scheme 3).9
We expected that these thiol surrogates would be suitable
for the Suzuki-Miyaura reaction even under aqueous basic
conditions. This proved to be the case, and we report herein
We have developed practical thiol surrogates and arylthiol
protective groups for the Suzuki-Miyaura reaction. 2-Eth-
ylhexyl-3-mercaptopropionate and 4-(2′-mercaptoethyl)py-
ridine were shown to be not only good thiol surrogates but
also good protective groups for thiol. We have demonstrated
toleration of these protective groups under aqueous Suzuki-
Miyaura conditions.
The biaryl scaffold has received much attention in the
pharmaceutical industry as a privileged structure. This motif
has shown activity across a wide range of therapeutic classes,
and compounds that contain it have been shown to exhibit
antifungal, antiinflammatory, antirheumatic, antitumor, and
antihypertensive properties.1 For the preparation of biaryl
compounds, the Suzuki-Miyaura coupling reaction2 is the most
useful method, as it has been proven to offer distinct practical
advantages over other approaches. Cross-coupling reactions have
been developed for a tremendous variety of substrates containing
various functional groups. However, thiols are one of the few
compound types not suitable for the Suzuki-Miyaura reaction,
as they tend to poison catalysts. For example, the coupling of
4-bromobenzenethiol with arylboronic acid did not proceed in
high yield under typical conditions and resulted in the production
of disulfide side products (Scheme 1).3
(3) Disulfide compounds were identified by LCMS. (a) Khodaei, M. M.;
Salehi, P.; Goodarzi, M.; Yazdanipour, A. Synth. Commun. 2004, 34, 3661-
3666. (b) Hori, M.; Kataoka, T.; Shimizu, H.; Ban, M.; Matsushita, H. J.
Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1987, 1, 187-194.
(4) (a) Greene, T. W.; Wuts, P. G. ProtectiVe Groups in Organic
Synthesis, 3rd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1999. (b) Coulon, E.;
Pinson, J. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 8513-8518.
There are few studies in the literature that address this
problem. The protective groups for thiols are well established;4
(5) (a) Hsung, R. P.; Chidsey, C. E. D.; Sita, L. R. Organometallics
1995, 14, 4808-4815. (b) Yao, Y. X.; Tour, J. M. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 64,
1968-1971. (c) Gryko, D. T.; Clausen, C.; Lindsey, J. S. J. Org. Chem.
1999, 64, 8635-8647.
(1) Horton, D. A.; Bourne, G. T.; Smythe, M. L. Chem. ReV. 2003, 103,
893-930.
(2) (a) Miyaura, N.; Yanagi, T.; Suzuki, A. Synth. Commun. 1981, 11,
513-519. (b) Suzuki, A. Acc. Chem. Res. 1982, 15, 178-184. (c) Miyaura,
N.; Suzuki, A. Chem. ReV. 1995, 95, 2457-2483. (d) Suzuki, A. J.
Organomet. Chem. 1999, 576, 147-168. (e) Kotha, S.; Lahiri, K.; Kashinath,
D. Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 9633-9695. (f) Hassan, J.; Se´vignon, M.; Gozzi,
C.; Schulz, E.; Lemaire, M. Chem. ReV. 2002, 102, 1359-1470. (g) Suzuki,
A. Proc. Jpn. Acad., Ser. B 2004, 80, 359. (h) Bellina, F.; Carpita, A.;
Rossi, R. Synthesis 2004, 2419-2440.
(6) Hsung, R. P.; Babcook, J. R.; Chidsey, C. E. D.; Sita, L. R.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 4525-4528.
(7) Zeysing, B.; Gosch, C.; Terfort, A. Org. Lett. 2000, 2, 1843-1845.
(8) Itoh, T.; Mase, T. Org. Lett. 2004, 6, 4587-4590.
(9) (a) Katritzky, A. R.; Takahashi, I.; Marson, C. M. J. Org. Chem.
1986, 51, 4914-4920. (b) Katritzky, A. R.; Khan, G. R.; Schwarz, O. A.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1984, 25, 1223-1226.
10.1021/jo052624z CCC: $33.50 © 2006 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 02/09/2006
J. Org. Chem. 2006, 71, 2203-2206
2203