Download PDF
Synlett 2011(2): 161-164  
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1259300
LETTER
© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart ˙ New York

Towards a Library of Chromene Cannabinoids: A Combinatorial Approach on Solid Supports

Dagmar C. Kapellera, Stefan Bräse*a,b
a Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Campus North, ComPlat, Hermann-von-Helmholtz Platz 1, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany
b Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Campus South, Institute of Organic Chemistry, Fritz-Haber-Weg 6, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
Fax: +49(721)6088581; e-Mail: stefan.braese@kit.edu;
Further Information

Publication History

Received 4 October 2010
Publication Date:
05 January 2011 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Abstract

A novel solid-phase synthesis towards classical cannabinoids is presented. Starting from immobilized salicylaldehydes the desired THC-analogous tricycles are obtained in four atom-economic steps including cleavage. The reagents of the employed reactions (domino oxa-Michael-aldol, Wittig, and Diels-Alder) can be varied easily, providing the basis for a combinatorial approach. Overall yields range from 20-60%.

Key words

cannabinoids - combinatorial chemistry - domino reactions - heterocycles - solid phase synthesis

    References

  • 1 Gaoni Y. Mechoulam R. J. Am. Chem. Soc.  1964,  86:  1646 
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2a Sarfaraz S. Adhami VM. Syed DN. Afaq F. Mukhtar H. Cancer Res.  2008,  68:  339 
    Google Scholar
  • 2b Ware MA. Daeninck P. Maida V. Ther. Clin. Risk Manag.  2008,  4:  99 
    Google Scholar
  • 2c Pertwee RG. Mol. Neurobiol.  2007,  36:  45 
    Google Scholar
  • 2d Mackie K. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.  2006,  46:  101 
    Google Scholar
  • 2e Romero J. Lastres-Becker L. de Miguel R. Berrendero F. Ramos JA. Fernandez-Ruiz J. Pharmacol. Ther.  2002,  95:  137 
    Google Scholar
  • Reviews:
  • 3a Poso A. Huffman JW. Br. J. Pharmacol.  2008,  153:  335 
    Google Scholar
  • 3b Howlett AC. Barth F. Bonner TI. Cabral G. Casellas P. Devane WA. Felder CC. Herkenham M. Mackie K. Martin BR. Mechoulam R. Pertwee RG. Pharmacol. Rev.  2002,  54:  161 
    Google Scholar
  • 4a Burdick D. DeOrazio R. Guzzo P. Habershaw A. Helle M. Paul B. Wolf M. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett.  2010,  20:  1424 
    Google Scholar
  • 4b Trost BM. Dogra K. Org. Lett.  2007,  9:  861 
    Google Scholar
  • 4c Sun H. Mahadevan A. Razdan RK. Tetrahedron Lett.  2004,  45:  615 
    Google Scholar
  • 4d Chu C. Ramamurthy A. Makriyannis A. Tius MA. J. Org. Chem.  2003,  68:  55 
    Google Scholar
  • 4e Liddle J. Huffman JW. Tetrahedron  2001,  57:  7607 
    Google Scholar
  • 4f Tietze LF. Kettschau G. Gewert JA. Schuffenhauer A. Curr. Org. Chem.  1998,  2:  19 
    Google Scholar
  • 4g Singer M. Ryan WJ. Saha B. Martin BR. Razdan RK. J. Med. Chem.  1998,  41:  4400 
    Google Scholar
  • 4h Evans DA. Shaugnessy EA. Barnes DM. Tetrahedron Lett.  1997,  38:  3193 
    Google Scholar
  • 5a Lesch B. Toräng J. Nieger M. Bräse S. Synthesis  2005,  1888 
    Google Scholar
  • 5b Lesch B. Toräng J. Vanderheiden S. Bräse S. Adv. Synth. Catal.  2005,  347:  555 
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Thompson LA. Ellman JA. Tetrahedron Lett.  1994,  35:  9333 
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Merrifield RB. J. Am. Chem. Soc.  1963,  85:  2149 
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11a Oh S. Jang HJ. Ko SK. Ko Y. Park SB. J. Comb. Chem.  2010,  12:  548 
    Google Scholar
  • 11b Review: Ziegert RE. Toräng J. Knepper K. Bräse S. J. Comb. Chem.  2005,  7:  147 
    Google Scholar
  • 11c Nicolaou KC. Pfefferkorn JA. Cao G.-Q. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.  2000,  39:  734 
    Google Scholar
  • 11d Nicolaou KC. Cao G.-Q. Pfefferkorn JA. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.  2000,  39:  739 
    Google Scholar
  • 11e Nicolaou KC. Pfefferkorn JA. Roecker AJ. Cao G.-Q. Barluenga S. Mitchell HJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc.  2000,  122:  9939 
    Google Scholar
  • 11f Hong B.-C. Chen Z.-Y. Chen W.-H. Org. Lett.  2000,  2:  2647 
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Shi Y.-L. Shi M. Org. Biomol. Chem.  2007,  5:  1499 
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13a Das BC. Mohapatra S. Campbell PD. Nayak S. Mahalingam SM. Evans T. Tetrahedron Lett.  2010,  51:  2567 
    Google Scholar
  • 13b Ibrahem I. Sundén H. Rios R. Zhao G.-L. Córdova A. Chimia  2009,  61:  219 
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Satoh Y. Stanton JL. Hutchison AJ. Libby AH. Kowalski TJ. Lee WH. White DH. Kimble EF.
    J. Med. Chem.  1993,  36:  3580 
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Minami T. Matsumoto Y. Nakamura S. Koyanagi S. Yamaguchi M. J. Org. Chem.  1992,  57:  167 
    Google Scholar
8

General Procedure for Immobilization
DHP-resin 9 (6 g, 0.99 mmol/g) was dried overnight at 100 ˚C, then suspended in a mixture of DCE-toluene (42/18 mL) under nitrogen. Then, 4- or 6-HSA (4.15 g, 30.0 mmol) and PPTS (2.26 g, 9.00 mmol) were added and the mixture agitated at 55 ˚C overnight. Afterwards, the resin was filtered, washed (CH2Cl2, 2 ¥ H2O and DMF, 2 ¥ H2O and THF, 3 ¥ MeOH and CH2Cl2, 4 ¥ CH2Cl2; with 20 mL/g resin each), and dried under vacuum.

9

General Procedure for Cleavage
Resin (200 mg) were suspended in a 1:1 mixture of EtOH-DCE (4 mL). Then PPTS (100 mg, 0.40 mmol) was added, and the mixture was agitated at 70 ˚C overnight. The resin was separated by filtration, washed with EtOAc (25 mL), and the filtrate concentrated. The crude product was diluted with EtOAc (15 mL) and H2O (10 mL). The organic layer was separated and the aqueous one extracted twice with EtOAc (15 mL). The combined organic phases were dried (MgSO4) and concentrated under reduced pressure. After Diels-Alder reactions the crude product was additionally purified by flash chromatography to separate endo- and exo-diastereomers.

10

For procedures see Supporting Information.

15

General Procedure for DOMA Condensation
Resin (1.00 g) was suspended in 1,4-dioxane (10 mL) in a 20 mL vial. Nitrogen was bubbled through for a few minutes, before addition of K2CO3 (552 mg, 4.0 mmol) and the Michael acceptor (6.0 mmol). The vial was closed and agitated at 80 ˚C for 4 d. After the second day another portion of the Michael acceptor (1.0 mmol) was added. At the end of the reaction, the resin was filtered, washed (as described above), and dried under vacuum. The procedure was repeated a second time if remaining starting material was detected after cleavage.

16

General Procedure for Wittig Reaction
Methyl triphenylphosphonium bromide (1.79 g, 5.0 mmol) was suspended in anhydrous THF (14 mL) under nitrogen and cooled to -25 ˚C. n-BuLi (3.1 mL, 5.0 mmol, 1.6 M solution in hexanes) was added (yellow color) and the mixture stirred for 2 h (-25 ˚C up to r.t.). Afterwards, it was cooled to -35 ˚C and added to the resin (1.65 g), which was previously suspended in anhydrous THF (12 mL), also cooled to -35 ˚C. The reaction was allowed to warm up to r.t. and agitated overnight. It was quenched with H2O (2 mL), washed (as described above), and dried under vacuum.

17

General Procedure for Diels-Alder Reaction
The resin (500 mg) was dried overnight at 90 ˚C. It was suspended in toluene (5 mL) in a vial and nitrogen was bubbled through for 10 min. The dienophile (5.0 mmol) was added, the vial closed, and the reaction agitated at 80 ˚C for 2 d. The resin was filtered, washed (as described above), and dried under vacuum before being cleaved.
Analytical Data for Compound 18bb
IR (ATR, platinum): 3329, 2978, 2937, 2248, 1622, 1589, 1506, 1456, 1310, 1296, 1160, 1139, 1121 cm-¹. ¹H NMR (250 MHz, acetone-d 6): δ = 1.39 (s, 3 H, CH3), 1.43 (s, 3 H, CH3), 1.84-2.01 (m, 1 H, CH2), 2.08-2.27 (m, 3 H, CH2), 3.00 (ddd, J = 11.5, 9.1, 3.1 Hz, 1 H, NCCH), 3.73 (br dd, J = 9.1, 2.2 Hz, 1 H, CH), 5.80-5.88 (m, 1 H, =CH), 6.28 (d, J = 2.5 Hz, 1 H, ArmH), 6.47 (dd, J = 8.5, 2.5 Hz, 1 H, ArmH), 7.51 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 1 H, ArmH), 8.32 (s, 1 H, OH) ppm. ¹³C NMR (125 MHz, acetone-d 6): δ = 25.0, 27.6, 28.28, 28.34, 32.4, 37.3, 79.2, 106.2, 110.3, 117.7, 121.7, 125.1, 128.2, 139.6, 156.6, 159.4 ppm. MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 255 (43) [M+], 187 (100), 174 (27), 173 (29). HRMS (EI): [M+] calcd for C16H17NO2: 255.1259; found: 255.1258. Structure verified by 2D NMR.