has served as an inspiration for the design of antibacterial
agents and antimicrobial peptides and as a model system for
conformational mimicry.9 GS is therefore a particularly
significant target for the evaluation of alkene peptide isosteres
as surrogates for the type II′ â-turn inducing sequence.
The D-Phe-Pro reverse turn is a critical feature of the rigid
amphipathic antiparallel â-pleated sheet conformation of
GS.10,11 In earlier work,7 we were able to replace the Leu-
D-Phe peptide bond in GS with a ψ[(E)-C(CF3)dCH] isostere
with minimal perturbation of the secondary structure and
biological activity, whereas the corresponding ψ[(E)-C(CH3)d
CH] isostere failed to maintain the â-pleated sheet conforma-
tion according to CD and NMR analyses. A different
situation presents itself when the D-Phe-Pro peptide bond is
replaced. Because the D-Phe carbonyl group is not involved
in intramolecular H-bonding or dipolar interactions, a ψ-
[(E)-C(CH3)dCH] surrogate should be as effective as a
trifluoromethylated congener in conformationally preorga-
nizing the chain. The restricted backbone rotation imposed
by the A1,3-strain across the trisubstituted alkene and, to a
lesser extent, by the A1,2-strain experienced by substituents
attached to the alkene should be sufficient for both methyl
and trifluoromethyl groups to impose the reverse turn.
Furthermore, neither alkene isostere provides an NH hydro-
gen bond donor group that can lead to the stabilization of
γ-turns or other competitive backbone folding patterns that
would interfere with the desired â-turn motif. These proper-
ties lead, theoretically, to a close match of isostere and D-Phe-
Pro features (Figure 1).5b We now report an experimental
confirmation of this hypothesis.
Scheme 1. Synthesis of
Boc-D-Phe-ψ[(E)-C(CH3)dCH]-Pro-Val-OMe
reaction (Scheme 1).13 Using our hydrozirconation/ZrwZn
transmetalation methodology,14,15 the alkenylzinc species
derived from the chiral internal alkyne 213b was added to 3,
affording the allylic amide 4 in 64% yield as a ∼1:1 mixture
of diastereomers. Deprotection of the TBDPS group with
TBAF provided the primary alcohol 5. The two diastereomers
could not be separated after conversion of 5 to the corre-
sponding acetates;3f,7 however, a two-step oxidation with
Dess-Martin periodinane,16,17 followed by coupling with
valine methyl ester, provided pseudotripeptides 6 and 7 which
were separated by preparative C18 RP HPLC.18
Saponification of pseudotripeptide 7 followed by fragment
coupling with dipeptide H-Orn(Cbz)-Leu-OMe in the pres-
ence of EDC as a coupling reagent afforded the pseudopen-
tapeptide 8 in 96% yield over two steps. We initially
envisioned a one-pot dimerization-cyclization of 8; however,
this approach resulted exclusively in the formation of
cyclized pseudopentapeptide. In contrast, the stepwise cou-
pling proceeded smoothly to give the pseudodecapeptide 9
in excellent yield. Saponification of 9 and stepwise removal
of the Boc protecting group followed by macrolactamization
afforded the desired bis-Cbz-protected GS analogue 10 in
50% yield after preparative C18 RP HPLC purification
(Scheme 2).
The chemical shifts of all amide protons in 10 were
assigned using a combination of COSY, NOESY, HMQC,
(10) (a) Yamada, K.; Unno, M.; Kobayashi, K.; Oku, H.; Yamamura,
H.; Araki, S.; Matsumoto, H.; Katakai, R.; Kawai, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2002, 124, 12684. (b) Doi, M.; Fujita, S.; Katsuya, Y.; Sasaki, M.;
Taniguchi, T.; Hasegawa, H. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2001, 395, 85.
(11) (a) Kondejewski, L. H.; Farmer, S. W.; Wishart, D. S.; Hancock,
R. E. W.; Hodges, R. S. Int. J. Pept. Protein Res. 1996, 47, 460. (b)
Kondejewski, L. H.; Farmer, S. W.; Wishart, D.; Kay, C. M.; Hancock, R.
E. W.; Hodges, R. S. J. Biol. Chem. 1996, 271, 25261.
(12) Coˆte´, A.; Boezio, A. A.; Charette, A. B. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
2004, 101, 5405.
Figure 1. GS and its analogue with ψ[(E)-C(CH3)dCH] peptide
bond surrogates.
Because of the lability of phenylacetaldimines, the sulfinyl
adduct 312 was employed in the organometallic allylation
(13) (a) Wipf, P.; Xiao, J.; Geib, S. J. AdV. Synth. Catal. 2005, 347,
(6) Wadhwani, P.; Afonin, S.; Ieronimo, M.; Buerck, J.; Ulrich, A. S. J.
Org. Chem. 2006, 71, 55.
(7) Xiao, J.; Weisblum, B.; Wipf, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 5742.
(8) Gauze, G. F.; Brazhnikova, M. G. Am. ReV. SoViet Med. 1944, 2,
134.
(9) See: Grotenbreg, G. M.; Buizert, A. E. M.; Llamas-Saiz, A. L.;
Spalburg, E.; Van Hooft, P. A. V.; De Neeling, A. J.; Noort, D.; Van Raaij,
M. J.; Van Der Marel, G. A.; Overkleeft, H. S.; Overhand, M. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2006, 128, 7559, and references therein.
1605. (b) Wipf, P.; Xiao, J. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 103.
(14) (a) Wipf, P.; Jahn, H. Tetrahedron 1996, 52, 12853. (b) Wipf, P.;
Kendall, C. Top. Organomet. Chem. 2004, 8, 1.
(15) (a) Wipf, P.; Kendall, C.; Stephenson, C. R. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2001, 123, 5122. (b) Wipf, P.; Kendall, C.; Stephenson, C. R. J. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 761.
(16) Dess, D. B.; Martin, J. C. J. Org. Chem. 1983, 48, 4155.
(17) Wipf, P.; Kim, Y.; Goldstein, D. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117,
11106.
4732
Org. Lett., Vol. 8, No. 21, 2006