Pentamethylphenyl (Ph*) and Related Derivatives as Useful Acyl Protecting Groups for Organic Synthesis: A Preliminary Study

Abstract

A study of acyl protecting groups derived from the Ph* motif is reported. While initial studies indicated that a variety of functional groups were not compatible with the Br₂-mediated cleavage conditions required to release the Ph* group, strategies involving the use of different reagents or a modification of Ph* itself (Ph*OH) were investigated to solve this problem.

Key words

protecting group - oxidative cleavage - acylium ion - HFIP - deprotection

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 13. Juli 2020

Angenommen nach Revision: 31. August 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
22. September 2020

• References and Notes

• 1a Kocieński PJ. Protecting Groups . Thieme; Stuttgart: 2003
• 1b Wuts PG. M, Greene TW. Greene’s Protective Groups in Organic Synthesis . Wiley-Interscience; Hoboken: 2006

For selected examples of protecting groups influencing the stereochemical course of a reaction, see:
• 2a Overman LE, McCready RJ. Tetrahedron Lett. 1982; 23: 2355
• 2b Bols M, Pedersen CM. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2017; 12: 93

For selected examples of neighboring group participation, see:
• 3a Zalewski ZS, Wendler NL. Chem. Int. London 1975; 280

Application in the Koenigs–Knorr reaction:
• 3b Harreus A, Kunz H. Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1986; 717

For selected examples of protecting group migration, see:
• 4a Roslund MU, Aitio O, Wärna J, Maaheimo H, Murzin DY, Leino R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008; 130: 8769
• 4b Hillier MC, Meyers AI. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001; 42: 5145
• 5 For a selected example whereby the acetate group is involved in a Meyer–Schuster rearrangement, see: Engel DA, Dudley GB. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2009; 7: 4149
• 6a Frost JR, Cheong CB, Akhtar WM, Caputo DF. J, Stevenson NG, Donohoe TJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015; 137: 15664
• 6b Akhtar WM, Cheong CB, Frost JR, Christensen KE, Stevenson NG, Donohoe TJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017; 139: 2577
• 6c Akhtar WM, Armstrong RJ, Frost JR, Stevenson NG, Donohoe TJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018; 140: 11916
• 6d Armstrong RJ, Akhtar WA, Young TA, Duarte F, Donohoe TJ. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2019; 58: 12558
• 6e Armstrong RJ, Akhtar WM, Frost JR, Christensen KE, Stevenson NG, Donohoe TJ. Tetrahedron 2019; 75: 130680
• 6f Wübbolt S, Cheong CB, Frost JR, Christensen KE, Donohoe TJ. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2020; 59: 11339
• 7 Baeyer A, Villiger V. Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 1899; 32: 3625
• 8a For 1 (bromide), see: Mudyiwa M, Ndinguri MW, Soper SA, Hammer RP. J. Porphyrins Phthalocyanines 2010; 14: 891

For 2 (methyl ester), see:
• 8b Jiménez-Rodriguez C, Eastham GR, Cole-Hamilton DJ. Inorg. Chem. Commun. 2005; 8: 878

Previous conditions for the cleavage of related (mesityl) functional groups required the use of strong protic acids, see:
• 9a Schubert WM, Latourette HK. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1952; 74: 1829
• 9b Bender ML, Ladenheim H, Chen MC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1961; 83: 123
• 9c Bender ML, Chen MC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963; 85: 37
• 10 El-Khawaga A, Roberts R, Sweeney KM. J. Org. Chem. 1985; 50: 2055

For selected recent reviews on gold catalysis in synthesis, see:
• 11a Pflästerer D, Hashmi AS. K. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2016; 45: 1331
• 11b Zi W, Toste FD. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2016; 45: 4567
• 11c Shahzad SA, Sajid MA, Khan ZA, Canseco-Gonzalez D. Synth. Commun. 2017; 47: 735

For selected reviews on HFIP, see:
• 12a Bégué J, Bonnet-Delpon D, Crousse B. Synlett 2004; 18
• 12b Colomer I, Chamberlain AE. R, Haughey MB, Donohoe TJ. Nat. Rev. Chem. 2017; 1: 88
• 13 A control experiment using TMSCl (2.0 equiv) in CH₂Cl₂ at RT was performed and gave only unreacted starting material.
• 14a Wessely F, Lauterbach-Keil G, Schmid F. Monatsh. Chem. 1950; 81: 811
• 14b Wessely F, Sinwel F. Monatsh. Chem. 1950; 81: 1055
• 14c Metlesics W, Wessely F, Budzikiewicz H. Monatsh. Chem. 1958; 89: 102
• 14d Wessely F, Budzikiewicz H. Monatsh. Chem. 1959; 90: 62
• 14e Adler E, Brasen S, Miyake H. Acta. Chem. Scand. 1971; 25: 2055
• 14f Becker H.-D, Bremholt T, Adler E. Tetrahedron Lett. 1972; 13: 4205
• 15 Yuan C, Eliasen AM, Camelio AM, Siegel D. Nat. Protoc. 2014; 9: 2624
• 16 Ph*OH could also be cleaved using IBr, providing a mixture of phenolic esters as the major product(s). TFA (aq.) was also effective but is quite harsh, whilst methanolic HCl did not cleave Ph*OH at RT (see SI for these examples). These conditions were not investigated further.
• 17 Yoshimura A, Zhdankin VV. Chem. Rev. 2016; 116: 3328
• 18 Typical Procedure for CAN-Mediated Cleavage: Synthesis of 16 To a solution of phenol 14 (28.2 mg, 0.10 mmol) in MeOH (1.0 mL) was titrated a solution of CAN (272 mg, 0.50 mmol) in MeOH (0.5 mL) at RT in the open atmosphere until the color of the CAN solution persisted (orange, typically 4–5 equiv). The reaction mixture was diluted with H₂O (3 mL) and stirred for 5–10 min, then further diluted with CH₂Cl₂ (2 mL), and saturated with NaCl. The layers were separated, the aqueous layer extracted with CH₂Cl₂ (5 × 1.5 mL), the combined organics dried (Na₂SO₄) and concentrated in vacuo. Purification by flash column chromatography (SiO₂, eluent: pentane–Et₂O, 99:1) afforded ester 16 (10.1 mg, 61%) as a volatile colorless oil. IR (film): ν_max = 3087, 3064, 3028, 3002, 2952, 1735, 1604, 1497, 1454, 1436, 1365, 1293, 1255, 1195, 1161, 1079, 1029, 986, 950, 896, 837, 771, 750, 699 cm^–1. ¹H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.38–7.26 (2 H, m, Ph), 7.25–7.17 (3 H, m, Ph), 3.68 (3 H, s, OCH₃), 3.05–2.90 (2 H, m, CH₂Ph), 2.68–2.58 (2 H, m, CH₂COOCH₃). ¹³C NMR (126 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 173.5 (C=O), 140.6 (ArC), 128.6 (2 C, 2 × ArCH), 128.4 (2 C, 2 × ArCH), 126.4 (ArCH), 51.8 (OCH₃), 35.8 (CH₂COOCH₃), 31.1 (CH₂Ph).
• 19 Womack G, Angeles JG, Fanelli VE, Heyer CA. J. Org. Chem. 2007; 72: 7046