1
reduced pressure to afford a crude residue, which was analysed by H
NMR spectroscopy for conversion and SFC for enantiomeric excess.
δH(400 MHz; d4-MeOD; ref. MeOH) 7.40–7.14 (8H, m, Ar), 3.96 (1H,
t, J 8, CHCH2), 2.34–2.28 (2H, m, CHCH2), 2.09 (2H, t, J 7,
CHCH CH2) and 1.33 (9H, s, 3 × CH3); Free acid [α]2D2 = ϩ12.4 [c = 2.2
in benz2ene (product from run 15, 90% ee)]; δH(400 MHz; CDCl3; ref.
Me4Si) 7.36–7.18 (7H, m, Ar), 7.07 (1H, d, J 9, Ar), 3.91 (1H, br t, J 8,
CHCH2) and 2.40–2.27 (4H, m, CH2CH2). Determination of enantio-
meric excess was performed using a Gilson SFC system [Diacel Chiral-
cel OD column, 250 × 4.6 mm, 10 µm particle size, using 95% CO2, 5%
methanol (with 1% v/v TFA modifier), 30 ml minϪ1 flow rate, 3000 psi
pressure, 35 ЊC column temperature, 220 nm UV detection]. Retention
times: first enantiomer (S) 12.0 minutes, second enantiomer (R) 14.1
minutes.
‡ Crystal data for (E)-allylic acid 1, C16H12Cl2O2, M = 307.16: colour-
less, monoclinic, P21/C, a = 7.474(4) Å, b = 12.744(4) Å, c = 15.237(3) Å,
β = 91.49(3)Њ, V = 1450.7(10) Å3, Z = 4, dcalc = 1.406 g cmϪ3, F(000) =
632, µ(Mo-Kα) = 0.455 mmϪ1, θ = 6.9–8.2Њ (Mo-Kα), 2777 measured
reflections on a Rigaku AFC-5R diffractometer, 2567 independent
reflections [R(int) = 0.0346], structure determination using direct
methods (SHELXS86), R(F) = 0.0575, Rw = 0.1135 for 1321 reflections
with I > 2σ(I ), GOF = 1.022. CCDC reference numbers 196474. See
in .cif or other electronic format.
Fig. 2 ORTEP diagram of the molecular structure of allylic acid 1.
Thermal ellipsoids shown at the 50% probability level.
The rhodium-PhanePhos catalysed hydrogenation of a 1 : 1
isomeric mixture of tert-butyl ammonium salt 2 using our best
conditions (cf. run 15) gave racemic product. The successful
synthesis of an intermediate for candoxatril,11 where the stereo-
centre is created at the more distant end of the olefin from the
coordinating carboxylate functionality, is presumably due to
the substrate being available as a single geometric isomer.
In summary we have demonstrated the principle of a route to
an enantioenriched 4,4-diarylbutanoate using asymmetric
hydrogenation, in which unpredictably, a catalyst based on the
PhanePhos ligand gave the best results. These findings illustrate
the importance of screening a wide range of ligands against
any new substrate.12 The route may have practical utility for
sertraline and stereochemically related compounds, particularly
when an efficient crystallisation based separation procedure for
the olefin isomers can be demonstrated. It may ultimately be
possible to recycle the unwanted olefin isomer, or hydrogenate it
with the opposite enantiomer of catalyst to converge all the
material into one enantiomer of product.
1 S. K. Armstrong, J. M. Brown and M. J. Burk, Tetrahedron Lett.,
1993, 34, 879–882.
2 M. J. Burk, F. Bienewald, M. Harris and A. Zanotti-Gerosa,
Angew. Chem., Int., Ed., 1998, 37, 1931–1933.
3 M. J. Burk, M. F. Gross and J. P. Martinez, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1995,
117, 9375–9376.
4 A. Kleemann and J. Engel, Pharmaceutical Substances, Thieme,
Stuttgart, 1999, 3rd edn.
5 (a) W. M. Welch, A. R. Kraska, R. Sarges and K. B. Coe, J. Med.
Chem., 1984, 27, 1508–1515; (b) J. A. Lowe III, D. L. Hageman,
S. E. Drozda, S. McLean, D. K. Bryce, R. T. Crawford, S. Zorn,
J. Morrone and J. Bordner, J. Med. Chem., 1994, 37, 3789–3811.
6 E. J. Corey and T. G. Gant, Tetrahedron Lett., 1994, 35, 5373–
5376.
7 (a) K. Maeda and J. M. Brown, Chem. Commun., 2002, 310–311;
(b) S. Chandreskar and M. Venkat Reddy, Tetrahedron, 2000, 56,
1111–1114; (c) C.-Y. Chen and R. A. Reamer, Org. Lett., 1999, 1,
293–294; (d ) H. M. L. Davies, D. Stafford and T. Hansen, Org. Lett.,
1999, 1, 233–236 (Corrigendum: H. M. L. Davies, D. Stafford and
T. Hansen, Org. Lett., 2000, 2, 417); (e) C. Barbieri, E. Caruso,
P. D’Arrigo, G. P. Fanton and S. Servi, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry,
1999, 10, 3931–3937; ( f ) M. Williams and G. Quallich, Chem. Ind.
(London), 1990, 10, 315–319.
8 Alternative syntheses: (a) K. Vukics, T. Fodor, J. Fischer,
I. Fellegvári and S. Lévai, Org. Process Res. Dev., 2002, 6, 82–85;
(b) J. Yun and S. L. Buchwald, J. Org. Chem., 2000, 65, 767–774;
(c) M. Lautens and T. Rovis, Tetrahedron, 1999, 55, 8967–8976;
(d ) M. Lautens and T. Rovis, J. Org. Chem., 1997, 62, 5246–5247;
(e) G. J. Quallich and T. M. Woodall, Tetrahedron, 1992, 48, 10239–
10248; ( f ) G. J. Quallich, M. T. Williams and R. C. Friedmann,
J. Org. Chem., 1990, 55, 4971–4973.
9 (a) M. J. Burk and M. F. Gross, Tetrahedron Lett., 1994, 35, 9363–
9366; (b) U. Berens, M. J. Burk, A. Gerlach and W. Hems,
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2000, 39, 1981–1984; (c) M. J. Burk, Acc.
Chem. Res., 2000, 33, 363; (d ) M. J. Burk, T. G. P. Gregory,
P. Harper, J. R. Lee and C. Kalberg, Tetrahedron Lett., 1994, 35,
4963–4966.
Acknowledgements
We thank Dr Madeleine Helliwell, Department of Chemistry,
University of Manchester for determination of the X-ray crys-
tal structure. We are grateful to Natasha Cheeseman and
Catherine Rippé for development of analytical methods.
Notes and References
† General hydrogenation procedure for the preparation of 4-(3,4-
dichlorophenyl)-4-phenylbutanoic acid tert-butyl ammonium salt
3. Geometrically enriched (E)-4-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-phenylbut-3-
enoic acid tert-butyl ammonium salt 2 and the hydrogenation pre-
catalyst (1 mol%, see Table 1) were placed in a glass liner within a 50 ml
stainless steel autoclave and the vessel was assembled. The vessel was
pressurised to 120 psi with nitrogen and then the gas was released, this
process was repeated a further three times. After the final vent,
deoxygenated methanol (5 ml) was introduced into the bomb. The ves-
sel was then charged and vented three times with hydrogen to 120 psi.
The vessel was equilibrated to the appropriate temperature and charged
with the appropriate pressure of hydrogen. After stirring overnight, the
vessel was allowed to cool, the hydrogen pressure was released and the
vessel was disassembled. The reaction mixture was concentrated under
10 P. J. Pye, K. Rossen, R. A. Reamer, N. N. Tsou, R. P. Volante and
P. J. Reider, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1997, 119, 6207–6208.
11 M. J. Burk, F. Bienewald, S. Challenger, A. Derrick and J. A.
Ramsden, J. Org. Chem., 1999, 64, 3290–3298.
12 T.-Y. Yue and W. A. Nugent, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2002, 124, 13692–
13693.
O r g . B i o m o l . C h e m . , 2 0 0 3 , 1, 1 0 9 4 – 1 0 9 6
1096