Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar 23;11(4):597-604.
doi: 10.1021/acsmedchemlett.0c00093. eCollection 2020 Apr 9.

Expanding the Medicinal Chemist Toolbox: Comparing Seven C(sp2)-C(sp3) Cross-Coupling Methods by Library Synthesis

Affiliations

Expanding the Medicinal Chemist Toolbox: Comparing Seven C(sp2)-C(sp3) Cross-Coupling Methods by Library Synthesis

Amanda W Dombrowski et al. ACS Med Chem Lett. .

Abstract

Despite recent advances in the field of C(sp2)-C(sp3) cross-couplings and the accompanying increase in publications, it can be hard to determine which method is appropriate for a given reaction when using the highly functionalized intermediates prevalent in medicinal chemistry. Thus a study was done comparing the ability of seven methods to directly install a diverse set of alkyl groups on "drug-like" aryl structures via parallel library synthesis. Each method showed substrates that it excelled at coupling compared with the other methods. When analyzing the reactions run across all of the methods, a reaction success rate of 50% was achieved. Whereas this is promising, there are still gaps in the scope of direct C(sp2)-C(sp3) coupling methods, like tertiary group installation. The results reported herein should be used to inform future syntheses, assess reaction scope, and encourage medicinal chemists to expand their synthetic toolbox.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Modern strategies to install alkyl groups on heteroaromatic cores.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of methods using simple alkyl groups. For the linear alkyl Negishi coupling (column 2), R = n-propyl. For all other methods (column 2), R = methyl. For the pendant-ester Negishi coupling (column 5), R = ethyl. For all other methods (column 5), R = methyl. Negishi coupling: 5% Pd-PEPPSI-IPentCl, 0.09 M THF. Nickel/photoredox BF3K coupling: 2% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(bpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 2 equiv of 2,6-lutidine, 0.05 M 4:1 dioxane/DMA, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel/photoredox BF3K coupling (tertiary examples): 1% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(bpy)PF6, 10% Ni(TMHD)2, 10% ZnBr2, 1 equiv of K2HPO4, 0.1 M DMA, 450 nm LEDs. Suzuki BF3K coupling: 5% CataCXium A Pd G3, 3 equiv of Cs2CO3 (7 M in H2O), 0.2 M toluene, 100 °C. Suzuki MIDA coupling: 5% SPhos Pd G3, 7.5 equiv of K3PO4 (3 M in H2O), 0.5 M dioxane, 60 °C. Nickel/photoredox decarboxylative coupling: 2% Ir(dF(CH3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.5 equiv of BTMG, 0.1 M DMSO, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel/photoredox decarboxylative coupling (phenylacetic acid derivatives): 2% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.5 equiv of Cs2CO3, 0.1 M DMA, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel/photoredox CEC: 1% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 0.5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.2 equiv of (TMS)3SiH, 2 equiv of 2,6-lutidine, 0.13 M DME, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel-catalyzed reductive CEC: 7% NiCl2-glyme, 7% ligand, 25% NaI, 2 equiv of Zn flake, 10% TFA, 0.015 M DMA, 60 °C, ligand = 4,4′-di-tert-butyl-2,2′-bipyridine, [2,2′-bipyridine]-6-carboximidamide hydrochloride or (2Z,6Z)-N′2,N′6-dicyanopyridine-2,6-bis(carboximidamide).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Installing alkyl groups containing polar functionality. Negishi couplings: 5% Pd-PEPPSI-IPentCl, 0.09 M THF. Negishi couplings (in situ prepared organozincs): 5% SPhos Pd G4, 0.09 M DMA. Nickel/photoredox BF3K couplings: 2% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(bpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 2 equiv of 2,6-lutidine, 0.05 M 4:1 dioxane/DMA, 450 nm LEDs. Suzuki BF3K couplings: 5% CataCXium A Pd G3, 3 equiv of Cs2CO3 (7 M in H2O), 0.2 M toluene, 100 °C. Nickel/photoredox decarboxylative couplings (α-alkyl carboxylic acids): 2% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.5 equiv of BTMG, 0.1 M DMSO, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel/photoredox decarboxylative couplings (α-amino and α-oxy carboxylic acids): 2% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.5 equiv of Cs2CO3, 0.1 M DMA, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel/photoredox CEC: 1% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 0.5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.2 equiv of (TMS)3SiH, 2 equiv of 2,6-lutidine, 0.13 M DME, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel-catalyzed reductive CEC: 7% NiCl2-glyme, 7% ligand, 25% NaI, 2 equiv of Zn flake, 10% TFA, 0.015 M DMA, 60 °C, ligand = 4,4′-di-tert-butyl-2,2′-bipyridine, [2, 2′-bipyridine]-6-carboximidamide hydrochloride or (2Z,6Z)-N′2,N′6-dicyanopyridine-2,6-bis(carboximidamide).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Showcase of methods with high monomer availability. (a) Comparison of two CEC methods and (b) use of unique carboxylic acid building blocks. (4a) Nickel/photoredox CEC: 1% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 0.5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.2 equiv of (TMS)3SiH, 2 equiv of 2,6-lutidine, 0.13 M DME, 450 nm LEDs. Nickel-catalyzed reductive CEC: 7% NiCl2-glyme, 7% ligand, 25% NaI, 2 equiv of Zn flake, 10% TFA, 0.015 M DMA, 60 °C, ligand = 4,4′-di-tert-butyl-2,2′-bipyridine, [2,2′-bipyridine]-6-carboximidamide hydrochloride, or (2Z,6Z)-N′2, N′6-dicyanopyridine-2,6-bis(carboximidamide). (4b) Asterisks (*) denote alkyl group overlap with another method in this study. Nickel/photoredox decarboxylative coupling: 2% Ir(dF(CF3)ppy)2(dtbbpy)PF6, 5% NiCl2(dtbbpy), 1.5 equiv of Cs2CO3, 0.1 M DMA, 450 nm LEDs.

References

    1. Boström J.; Brown D. G.; Young R. J.; Keserü G. M. Expanding the Medicinal Chemistry Synthetic Toolbox. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2018, 17, 709–727. 10.1038/nrd.2018.116. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brown D. G.; Boström J. Analysis of Past and Present Synthetic Methodologies on Medicinal Chemistry: Where Have All the New Reactions Gone?. J. Med. Chem. 2016, 59, 4443–4458. 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.5b01409. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Roughley S. D.; Jordan A. M. The Medicinal Chemist’s Toolbox: An Analysis of Reactions Used in the Pursuit of Drug Candidates. J. Med. Chem. 2011, 54, 3451–3479. 10.1021/jm200187y. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boström J.; Brown D. G. Stuck in a Rut with Old Chemistry. Drug Discovery Today 2016, 21, 701–703. 10.1016/j.drudis.2016.02.017. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Campbell I. B.; Macdonald S. J. F.; Procopiou P. A. Medicinal chemistry in Drug Discovery in Big Pharma: Past. Drug Discovery Today 2018, 23, 219–234. 10.1016/j.drudis.2017.10.007. - DOI - PubMed