Organic Process Research & Development 2010, 14, 234–237
Efficient Production of Enantiomerically Pure Chiral Amines at Concentrations of 50
g/L Using Transaminases
,†
‡
,†
Matthew D. Truppo,* J. David Rozzell, and Nicholas J. Turner*
School of Chemistry, UniVersity of Manchester, Manchester Interdisciplinary Biocentre, 131 Princess Street,
Manchester M17DN, U.K. and Codexis Inc., 129 North Hill AVenue, Pasadena, California 91106, U.S.A.
Abstract:
Scheme 1. Overview of transaminase-catalysed reaction
methods
Two methods for the efficient (50 g/L) production of optically pure
amines from their corresponding ketones using transaminases have
been developed. The first method utilizes an ion-exchange resin
for in situ product removal allowing the reaction to be carried
out a substrate concentration of 50 g/L. The second approach relies
upon conversion of the initially formed amine, via spontaneous
cyclisation, to a noninhibitory product. Both methods have been
demonstrated at 50 mL scale. (R)- and (S)-methylbenzylamine, and
(R)- and (S)-6-methyl-2-piperidone have been produced in >90%
isolated yield and >99% ee.
Introduction
In view of the importance of enantiomerically pure chiral
amines as building blocks for pharmaceuticals, there is currently
considerable effort underway to develop efficient catalytic
production on scale.8,9 First, the equilibrium constant for the
reaction often favors the ketone starting material requiring the
development of methods to drive the reaction to completion.
Second, transaminases typically suffer significant product
inhibition by both the desired amine product and the keto acid
byproduct. Although methods have been reported which address
1
methods for their preparation. Approaches based on biocatalysis
have largely relied upon kinetic resolution of racemic amides
or amines using lipases, and indeed such methods have been
2
successfully commercialized at scale. Some groups have
recently addressed the issue of in situ racemization of the
unreactive enantiomer by developing catalysts for amine race-
mization permitting dynamic kinetic resolutions to be carried
10
the issue of product inhibition, no general procedures have
been reported for carrying out productive, scaleable reactions.
Generally, for a biocatalyst to be considered for an industrial
application, the process must tolerate substrate concentrations
3-5
out. Alternatively, racemic amines can be deracemized in
high yield and ee by the combined use of an enantioselective
11
6
of at least 50 g/L. Herein, we report a simple procedure for
conducting transaminase-catalysed reactions at substrate con-
centrations of 50 g/L.
amine oxidase and a nonselective reducing agent. However,
the emergence of transaminases, which catalyse the direct
amination of ketones to chiral amines using ammonia, has
7
provided an alternative and highly attractive additional option.
Results
Transaminases typically possess high turnover rate, stability,
and a tightly bound pyridoxal cofactor. However, two factors
have limited the application of transaminases for chiral amine
Scheme 1 shows two alternative approaches for carrying out
12
transaminase catalysed reactions. In Method 1, alanine is
employed as the amine donor, and the pyruvate generated is
*
Author for correspondence. E-mail: nicholas.turner@manchester.ac.uk. Fax:
13
reduced by lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) to L-lactate. Remov-
+
44 161 275 1311. Telephone: +44 161 306 5173.
†
‡
ing the pyruvate serves the dual purpose of driving the reaction
University of Manchester.
Codexis.
(
1) Turner, N. J.; Carr, R. In Biocatalysis in the Pharmaceutical and
Biotechnology Industries; Patel, R. N., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton,
FL, 2007, pp 743-755.
(7) Faber, K.; Kroutil, W. Curr Opin. Chem. Biol. 2005, 9, 181. H o¨ hne,
M.; Robins, K.; Bornscheuer, U. T. AdV 2008, 350, 807. Stewart, J. D.
Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2001, 5, 120. Koszelewski, D.; Lavandera,
I.; Clay, D.; Guebitz, G. M.; Rozzell, D.; Kroutil, W. Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed 2008, 47, 9337. Kaulmann, U.; Smithies, K.; Smith, M. E. B.;
Hailes, H. C.; Ward, J. M. Enz. Microb. Technol. 2007, 41, 628.
(8) Patel, R. N. Enz. Microb. Technol. 2000, 27, 376.
(
2) Ismail, H.; Lau, R. M.; van Rantwijk, F.; Sheldon, R. A. AdV. Synth.
Catal. 2008, 350, 1511. Breuer, M.; Ditrich, K.; Habicher, T.; Hauer,
B.; Kesseler, M.; St u¨ rmer, R.; Zelinski, T. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2
004, 43, 788.
(
(
3) Paetzold, J.; B a¨ ckvall, J. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 17620.
4) Blacker, A. J.; Stirling, M. J.; Page, M. I. Org. Process Res. DeV.
(9) Cameron, M.; Cohen, D.; Cottrell, I. F.; Kennedy, D.; Roberge, C.;
Chartrain, M. J. Mol. Catal. B: Enzym. 2001, 14, 1.
2
007, 11, 642.
(10) H o¨ hne, M.; K u¨ hl, S.; Robins, K.; Bornscheuer, U. T. ChemBioChem
2008, 9, 363.
(
(
5) Kim, M.-J.; Kim, W.-H.; Han, K.; Choi, Y. K.; Park, J. Org. Lett.
2
007, 9, 1157.
(11) Pollard, D. J.; Woodley, J. M. Trends Biotechnol. 2007, 25, 66.
(12) Truppo, M. D.; Rozzell, J. D.; Moore, J. C.; Turner, N. J. Org. Biomol.
Chem. 2009, 395.
6) Dunsmore, C. J.; Carr, R.; Fleming, T.; Turner, N. J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2006, 128, 2224.
2
34
•
Vol. 14, No. 1, 2010 / Organic Process Research & Development
10.1021/op900303q 2010 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 12/28/2009