2392
M. O. Anderson et al.
LETTER
In this case the crude barium carboxylate salts were uti- applications where such workups are impractical. The
lized directly in the cyclization step, omitting an explicit method appears to be fairly general allowing hydrolysis of
protonation step. The 9-chloroacridine products were pu- both alkyl and aryl esters.
rified automatically by SiO2 chromatography using the
CombiFlash® system (Iscotm). The sequence was evaluat-
ed for a series of substrates (Table 2). Entries 1–7 show
1) Pd(OAc)2
BINAP
2) Ba(OH)2
CH3OH
2 h, 80 °C
Cl
CO2Me
H2N
the generation of purified products in reasonable yields
and excellent purity. In the case of entry 8, the coupling
reaction was successful, but ester hydrolysis did not pro-
ceed to completion, even after several days in refluxing
methanol. This may be due to deactivation caused by the
two electron-donating groups in the molecule. However,
the method is reliable with a single strong electron-donat-
ing group (entries 1–5).
OTf
R'
3) POCl3
N
R
R'
R
1
2
3
Equation 2 Three-step synthesis of 9-chloroacridines avoiding
aqueous workup
Acknowledgment
In summary, a method has been described for performing
ester hydrolysis reactions which avoids aqueous workup.7
The reaction is particularly useful in parallel synthesis
This work has been supported by grants from the NIH (AG21601)
and the Sandler Research Foundation.
Table 2 Examples of Parallel 9-Chloroacridine Synthesis
Entry
1
Salicyl triflate
Aniline
Product
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3)
Isolated yield,
% (purity, %)a
d = 4.01 (s, 3 H), 7.34 (dd, 1 H, J = 2.2, 9.5
Hz), 7.43 (s, 1 H), 7.64 (d, 1 H, J = 9.5 Hz),
8.17–8.20 (m, 2 H), 8.29 (d, 1 H, J = 9.2 Hz)
50 (99)
CO2Me
Cl
OCF3
OCF3
CF3
MeO
MeO
OTf
H2N
H2N
MeO
MeO
N
2
3
4
5
d = 4.04 (s, 3 H), 7.37 (dd, 1 H, J = 2.6, 9.5
Hz), 7.45 (d, 1 H, J = 2.6 Hz), 7.92 (dd, 1 H,
J = 1.8, 9.2 Hz), 8.25 (d, 1 H, J = 9.2 Hz), 8.34
(d, 1 H, J = 9.5 Hz), 8.73 (s, 1 H)
45 (99)
Cl
CF3
CO2Me
OTf
N
d = 4.02 (s, 3 H), 7.33 (dd, 1 H, J = 2.6, 9.5
Hz), 7.42 (d, 1 H, J = 2.6 Hz), 7.71 (dd, 1 H,
J = 2.6, 9.2 Hz), 8.08 (d, 1 H, J = 9.2 Hz), 8.29
(d, 1 H, J = 9.2 Hz), 8.38 (d, 1 H, J = 2.2 Hz)
47 (98)
CO2Me
OTf
Cl
Cl
Cl
Me
F
MeO
MeO
MeO
H2N
H2N
H2N
MeO
MeO
MeO
N
d = 2.62 (s, 3 H), 4.01 (s, 3 H), 7.30 (dd, 1 H, 40 (100)
J = 2.6, 9.5 Hz), 7.43 (d, 1 H, J = 2.6 Hz), 7.63
(dd, 1 H, J = 1.8, 8.8 Hz), 8.05 (d, 1 H, J = 8.8
Hz), 8.14 (s, 1 H), 8.30 (d, 1 H, J = 9.2 Hz)
Me
Cl
CO2Me
OTf
N
d = 4.01 (s, 3 H), 7.32 (dd, 1 H, J = 2.6, 9.5
Hz), 7.41 (d, 1 H, J = 2.2 Hz), 7.58 (t, 1 H,
J = 9.5 Hz), 7.99 (dd, 1 H, J = 2.6, 9.5 Hz),
8.14 (dd, 1 H, J = 5.5, 9.5 Hz), 8.27 (d, 1 H,
J = 9.5 Hz)
44 (100)
Cl
CO2Me
OTf
F
N
6
7
d = 4.04 (s, 3 H), 7.50–7.52 (mult, 2 H), 7.55 48 (99)
(d, 1 H, J = 9.2), 8.08 (d, 1 H, J = 10), 8.19 (s,
1 H), 8.33 (d, 1 H, J = 9.2)
CO2Me
OTf
OMe
Cl
Cl
OMe
Cl
H2N
H2N
Cl
N
d = 2.78 (s, 3 H), 7.22 (t, 1 H, J = 7.8 Hz), 7.32 33 (95)
(d, 1 H, J = 7.8 Hz), 7.68 (dd, 1 H, J = 3.0, 8.8
Hz), 7.86–7.90 (m, 2 H), 8.27 (d, 1 H, J = 2.9
Hz)
CO2Me
OTf
Cl
N
Cl
Me
Me
8
n/a
No reaction
during ester
hydrolysis
OMe
Cl
N
CO2Me
OTf
OMe
H2N
MeO
MeO
a Purity gauged by RP-HPLC analysis (UV detection at 254 nm).
Synlett 2004, No. 13, 2391–2393 © Thieme Stuttgart · New York