With a powerful approach to construct the nine-
membered lactone ring in hand, efforts were then directed
toward the synthesis of natural glaucogenins. Through
inspection of the structures of the glaucogenin family
(Figure 1), one could easily observe that they differ only
in the oxidation patterns at C1, C2 and C7. As such, we
postulated that a unified synthetic strategy6 with enone 14
as the key intermediate would enable access to the entire
glaucogenin family (Scheme 1B): reduction or deoxygena-
tion of enone 14 would provide glaucogenin D or C, while
further introduction of hydroxyl groups at C1 or C2via the
C3-carbonyl group should afford glaucogenin A, B, or E.
Herein, we report the first synthesis of glaucogenin D (4),
which represents an entry toward the unified synthesis of
the glaucogenin family.
Scheme 1. (A) Construction of the Disecopregnane Skeleton
from Hirundigenin-Type Intermediates via Regioselective
Radical Fragmentation Reactions. (B) Unified Synthetic
Strategy toward the Glaucogenin Family
As shown in Scheme 2, our synthesis of glaucogenin D
(4) commenced with a diastereoselective cis-dihydroxyla-
tion of 12 with KMnO47 to furnish diol 15 in 70% yield.
Oxidation of the C7-hydroxyl group led to ketone 16,
which was primed for the dehydrogenation event to install
the critical C5ÀC6 olefin. Initial attempts to effect this
dehydrogenation directly with DDQ8 or IBX9 met with
failure. Alternatively, ketone 16 reacted with LDAÀ
TMSCl to afford the corresponding silyl enol ether 17,
which underwent bromination to produce bromide 18 in
excellent yield. Unfortunately, dehydrobromination of 18
proved to be a dead end under a variety of conditions. We
surmised that this failure might result from the cis-config-
uration of the C6ÀBr and C5ÀH, which does not satisfy
the antiperiplanar conformation requirement of an E2
elimination. Therefore, we explored an alternative selen-
oxide syn-elimination pathway10 by converting 17 to phe-
nylseleno ketone 20 with PhSeCl (99% yield from 16).
Surprisingly and unexpectedly, when PhSeBr was used as
the selenium reagent, bromide 18 was obtained as the sole
product instead of phenylseleno ketone 20. Contrary to
literature precedent, this provides a rare example of a
reaction between a silyl enol ether and PhSeBr to generate
a bromide product.
synthesis of 5,6-dihydroglaucogenin C.4 Key features of
the previous synthesis were a Schenck ene reaction and
subsequent iron(II)-promoted regioselective fragmenta-
tion of an R-alkoxy hydroperoxide (Scheme 1A, see 6 f
8, 8 f 10, and 12). To synthesize more glaucogenin mem-
bers as well as their analogues by utilizing our methodol-
ogy, we continued to explore the reactivity of 7, an anal-
ogue of 6bearing an additional C15-acetal group. Pleasingly,
Schenck ene reaction5 of 7 also afforded the alkoxy hydro-
peroxide 9 as a single diastereomer in quantitative yield.
Hydroperoxide 9 was found to display a similar re-
activity under the optimal conditions4 we had developed
for the fragmentation reaction of 8. Upon exposure to
iron(II), 9 decomposed efficiently to give a C13-alkyl radical
that can be trapped by either TEMPO or I2 to produce,
respectively, C13-TEMPO-substituted product 13 in 71%
yield or C13ÀC18 olefin product 11 in 83% yield after
iodide elimination. This successful synthesis of disecopreg-
nane intermediate 13 would provide access to more glauco-
genin analogues with a variety of possible substituents at
C15, which could be easily realized via acetal chemistry.
Deprotection of 20 and subsequent oxidation with
ozone11 gave the corresponding selenoxide, which under-
went syn-elimination to afford enone 22 in 52% yield from
20. Fortunately, we were able to obtain a single crystal
structure of the deprotected phenylseleno ketone 21,12
which confirmed the stereochemical assignments at C6
(6) (a) Lavilla, R.; Gullon, F.; Bosch, J. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 373.
(b) Tisdale, E. J.; Slobodov, I.; Theodorakis, E. A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2004, 101, 12030. (c) Dransfield, P. J.; Dilley, A. S.; Wang, S.;
Romo, D. Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 5223. (d) Broehmer, M. C.; Bourcet, E.;
Nieger, M.; Braese, S. Chem.;Eur. J. 2011, 17, 13706.
(7) Hegedus, L. S.; Geisler, L.; Riches, A. G.; Salman, S. S.;
Umbricht, G. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 7649.
(8) Walker, D.; Hiebert, J. D. Chem. Rev. 1967, 67, 153.
(9) Satam, V.; Harad, A.; Rajule, R.; Pati, H. Tetrahedron 2010, 66,
7659.
(10) Nishibayashi, Y.; Uemura, S. Top. Curr. Chem. 2000, 208, 201.
(11) Bonjoch, J.; Sole, D.; Garcia-Rubio, S.; Bosch, J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1997, 119, 7230.
(12) CCDC-920710 contains the supplementary crystallographic
data for this paper. These data can be obtained free of charge from
data_request/cif.
(4) Gui, J.; Wang, D.; Tian, W. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 7093.
(5) (a) Prein, M.; Adam, W. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1996, 35, 477. (b)
Clennan, E. L. Tetrahedron 2000, 56, 9151.
B
Org. Lett., Vol. XX, No. XX, XXXX