by ion-pair–liquid chromatography-electrospray mass spec-
troscopy (IP-LC-EMS) at least three of the reported universal
solid supports showed that the quality of drug produced is not
the same as the quality of drug produced with the standard
method and were contaminated with unacceptable levels of the
pendent linker molecule. In addition, there was a considerable
(ca. 10%) amount of oligonucleotide still attached to the solid
support, making it an inefficient approach. Addition of salt such
as lithium chloride or heating at high temperatures (75–80 °C)
or use of heavy metals or sulfides or use of strong nucleophiles
such as 40% aqueous methylamine solution is recommended
for release of oligonucleotides from some linker molecules.
These conditions may not be practical or may add additional
cost or may not be acceptable for large-scale synthesis or for
therapeutic applications. The above limitations have thus far
outweighed the added convenience of using one solid support
material for all sequences, and prederivatized supports are still
predominantly preferred. Clearly, while important strides have
been made in this area, additional research efforts are warranted.
For a universal solid support to be widely accepted, it has
to produce good yield of high-quality oligonucleotides and be
applicable for synthesizing different kinds of oligonucleotide
analogs. In addition, the universal linker molecule should be
easily scaleable and inexpensive at large scales. It should work
well across different solid supports, chemistries, and synthesiz-
ers. The molecule should be stable to oligomerization conditions
and cleaved under standard ammonium hydroxide incubation
conditions (55 °C) without use of any additives.
Figure 3. Exo and endo structures of olefin 9.
Figure 4. Exo and endo structures of diol 10.
The universal support described in this work has several
features that should enable greater acceptance by academics
for performing basic research and by industry for development
of various therapeutics: (a) the oligonucleotide is released from
the linker molecule quantitatively under standard deprotection
Figure 5. ORTEP diagrams (different projections) of diol 10.
(12) (a) Kumar, P.; Gupta, K. C. HelV. Chim. Acta 2003, 86, 59. (b) Kumar,
P.; Mahajan, S.; Gupta, K. C. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 6482. (c) Kumar,
P.; Dhawan, R.; Chandra, R.; Gupta, K. C. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002,
30, e130. (d) Ghosh, P. K.; Kumar, P.; Gupta, K. C. Ind. J. Chem.
Soc. 1998, 75, 206. (e) Kumar, P.; Gupta, K. C. Nucleic Acids Res.
1990, 27, e2. (f) Kumar, P.; Gupta, K. C. React. Funct. Polym. 1999,
41, 197. (g) Lyttle, M. H.; Hudson, D.; Cook, R. M. Nucleic Acids
Res. 1996, 24, 2793. (h) Lyttle, M. H.; Dick, D. J.; Hudson, D.; Cook,
R. M. Nucleosides Nucleotides 1999, 18, 1809. (i) Gough, G. R.;
Brunden, M. J.; Gilham, P. T. Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 5321. (j)
deBear, J. S.; Hayes, J. A.; Koleck, M. P.; Gough, G. R. Nucleosides
Nucleotides 1987, 6, 821. (k) Schwartz, M. E.; Breaker, R. R.;
Asteriadis, G. T.; Gough, G. R. Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 27. (l)
Scheuer-Larsen, C.; Rosenbohm, C.; Joergensen, T. J. D.; Wengel, J.
Nucleosides Nucleotides 1997, 16, 67. (m) Nelson, P. S.; Muthini, S.;
Vierra, M.; Acosta, L.; Smith, T. H. Biotechniques 1997, 22, 752. (n)
Azhayev, A. V. Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 787. (o) Scheuer-Larson, C.;
Rosenbohm, C.; Jorgensen, T. J. D.; Wengel, J. Nucleosides Nucle-
otides 1997, 16, 67. (p) Nelson, P. S.; Muthini, S.; Kent, M. A.; Smith,
T. H. Nucleosides Nucleotides 1997, 16, 1951. (q) Azhayev, A. V.;
Antopolsky, M. L. Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 4977. (r) Zheng, X.; Gaffney,
B. L.; Jones, R. A. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997, 25, 3980. (s) Crea, R.;
Horn, T. Nucleic Acids Res. 1980, 8, 2331. (t) Scott, S.; Hardy, P.;
Sheppard, R. C.; McLean, M. J. In InnoVations and PerspectiVes in
Solid-Phase Synthesis; Epton, R., Ed.; Mayflower Worldwide: Bir-
mingham, U. K., 1994; pp 115. (u) Anderson, E.; Brown, T.; Picken,
D. Nucleosides Nucleotides 2003, 22, 1403. (v) Ferreira, F.; Meyer,
A.; Vasseur, J-J.; Morvan, F. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 9198. (w)
Guzaev, A. P.; Manoharan, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 2380.
(x) Krishna Kumar, R.; Guzaev, A. P.; Rental, C.; Ravikumar, V. T.
Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 4528. (y) Wang, Z.; Olsen, P.; Ravikumar, V. T.
Nucleosides Nucleotides and Nucleic Acids 2007, 26, 259. (z)
Anderson, K. M.; Jaquinod, L.; Jensen, M. A.; Ngo, N.; Davis, R. W.
J. Org. Chem. 2007, 72, 9875. (aa) Mackie, H. Glen Res. Rep. 2001,
141.
conditions; (b) the linker molecule is compatible with various
modified chemistries as shown by extensive examples of
syntheses and analyses; (c) it enables the synthesis of high-
quality oligonucleotides (as judged by LC-MS analysis)
without any detectable levels of base modification.
Results and Discussion
Design of UnyLinker Molecule. During our extensive
investigation during this project, we initially designed a
molecule 4 which on loading to a solid support and used led to
the formation of high-quality oligonucleotides with similar or
higher yields compared to those from nucleoside-loaded sup-
ports (Scheme 1). However, after completing all the laboratory-
scale research work, when we started to scale up, we realized
that this molecule failed to scale up efficiently. Isolated yields
of two intermediates, 2 and 3, were low, and it was not
considered economical if we were to scale up to quantities of
several hundreds of kilograms. In addition, there were some
drawbacks in the design of this molecule. During the osmium-
catalyzed dihydroxylation step to form 2, the reaction has to
be monitored by 1H NMR (using relatively expensive deuterated
pyridine) since there is no UV chromophore present in the
molecule. Second, the dicarboxylic acid 3 was highly water
soluble even in presence of a hydrophobic group such as 4,4′-
dimethoxytrityl. Isolation of the product was found to be difficult
Vol. 12, No. 3, 2008 / Organic Process Research & Development
•
401