Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Jul 27.
Published in final edited form as: Chemistry. 2012 Jul 5;18(31):9564–9570. doi: 10.1002/chem.201200831

Synthesis and Cross-Coupling of Secondary Ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates: Rapid and Efficient Access to Secondary Arylmethylamines

Nicolas Fleury-Brégeot [a], Jessica Raushel [a], Deidre L Sandrock [a], Spencer D Dreher [b],, Gary A Molander [a],
PMCID: PMC3415697  NIHMSID: NIHMS392166  PMID: 22767518

Abstract

Ammoniomethyl trifluoroborates are very powerful reagents that can be used to access biologically relevant aryl- and heteroaryl-methylamine motifs via Suzuki-Miyaura cross-couplings. Until now, this method was limited to the production of tertiary and primary amines. The synthesis of a large array of secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates has been achieved via a one step nucleophilic substitution reaction on the potassium bromomethyltrifluoroborate. Smooth cross-coupling conditions have been designed, based on the use of an aminobiphenyl palladium precatalyst, to couple these trifluoroborates efficiently with aryl bromides. This strategy offers a new way to access biologically relevant motifs and allows, with the previously developed methods, access to all three classes of aminomethylarenes.

Keywords: Trifluoroborates, Secondary Aminomethylarenes, Suzuki-Miyaura Cross-Coupling, Palladium

Introduction

Nitrogen-containing molecules are among the most important class of organic molecules because of the tremendous array of applications to which they can be applied.[1] Among them, the aminomethylarene moiety is quite well represented. A basic search in the literature generates thousands of hits of bioactive molecules containing this motif. Th e aminomethyl-containing molecules displayed below include molecules exhibiting activity against cancer and malaria, in addition to compounds that are candidates or approved drugs for the treatment of hypertension and obesity (Figure 1).[2]

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Examples of Bioactive Molecules Containing the Aminomethyl Moiety.

Existing methods to introduce such relevant motifs require, in many cases, the employment of harsh reaction conditions that are not always suitable for use in molecules containing sensitive functional groups. Therefore, access to those target molecules often involves longer synthetic routes, including protection/deprotection steps or further functionalization. The main disconnections that can be envisioned for the construction of this structural motif are summarized in Scheme 1. The most commonly used reaction by far is the reductive amination, employing reducing agents such as sodium triacetoxyborohydride or amine-boranes to reduce the in situ generated imine from the reaction between an aldehyde and an amine (routes a and b, Scheme 1).[3] Other routes include nucleophilic substitution on the primary arylmethanamine moiety[4] or longer, similar sequences starting from the corresponding aryl nitrile or imine to introduce the desired methylamine group.[5] The reduction of carboxamides has also been reported.[6] These routes may also be limited by the relative lack of available starting materials (e.g., arylmethanamines or benzylic-type halides).

Scheme 1.

Scheme 1

Possible Disconnections to Access the Aminomethylarene Moiety.

At the outset of our initial studies, there was no literature precedent for a disconnection involving the use of aryl halides and a methylamino carbanion equivalent (Scheme 1, route c). Our group has focused on developing a cross-coupling strategy employing air and moisture stable ammoniomethyltrifluoroborate salts to create a versatile, complementary, and convenient method to access the aryl/heteroarylammoniomethyl moiety (Scheme 2). This new approach represents the most straightforward route to access the secondary aminomethylarene moiety starting from an aryl halide.

Scheme 2.

Scheme 2

Scope of Amino and Ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates.

The protocol envisioned would also represent the first example of direct introduction of the secondary aminomethyl moiety based on a cross-coupling approach, made feasible by the unique features offered by organotrifluoroborates. Organotrifluoroborates are very useful nucleophilic partners in the Suzuki-Miyaura cross-coupling reaction, overcoming some drawbacks of other boron-containing reagents, thus providing unprecedented and suitable synthetic routes to a variety of interesting substructures.[7] Concerning the ammoniomethyl moiety, Molander and coworkers have demonstrated that the corresponding trifluoroborates can be accessed successfully either by direct nucleophilic substitution on the halogenomethyltrifluoroborate (dialkylamines)[8] or using Matteson’s alpha transfer route (e.g., carboxamides, carbamates, sulfonamides).[9] The different coupling partners can be used efficiently in cross-coupling reactions with various electrophilic partners such as aryl/hetaryl halides and more recently mesylates.[10]

Following this strategy, tertiary methylamine groups can be installed starting from the corresponding ammoniomethyl trifluoroborate salts. The introduction of primary methylamine groups has been recently achieved through the use of the Boc-protected aminomethyltrifluoroborate followed by a deprotection step.[11] Diverse functionalized aminomethyl groups such as carboxamides, sulfonamides, and very recently phthalimides can also be prepared and cross-coupled.[12] Surprisingly, access to secondary alkylaminomethyl groups, the last structural unit needed to fill a useful gap in our approach, has been a difficult transformation to achieve.

We report herein the synthesis and cross-coupling of secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates with a large array of aryl bromides as an effective and straightforward route to obtain secondary aminomethylarenes.

Results and Discussion

After reporting that aminomethyl based trifluoroborates exist as the ammoniomethyl internal salt,[8d] an imperative need arose for us to design a reliable method to access the desired secondary aminomethyl-containing trifluoroborates. We based our synthetic route on the direct nucleophilic substitution of potassium halogenomethyltrifluoroborates, in a mixture of THF/t-BuOH, similar to the method already used to obtain other ammoniomethyl salts. Unfortunately, the synthesis starting from the chloromethyltrifluoroborate did not work efficiently even at high temperatures. Better results were obtained using the bromomethyltrifluoroborate and a gradual increase to the final oil bath temperature. Usually, nucleophilic substitutions on the halogenomethyltrifluoroborates are conducted at high temperatures,[8a] but when using primary amines, decomposition products of the trifluoroborate and unidentified polymeric mixtures were often recovered. Lowering the temperature helped reduce the amount of side products generated but also hampered the conversion, making the isolation of the desired secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborate problematic, owing to large amounts of unreacted bromomethyltrifluoroborate. The problem was solved by initiating the reaction in a room temperature oil bath and heating it gradually to the desired temperature over 40 minutes. These conditions allowed access to a large array of diversely substituted secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates. The final temperature as well as the reaction time varied on a case by case basis, depending on the substrate. The various secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates synthesized (1a–s) are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Preparation of Secondary Ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates

graphic file with name nihms392166u1.jpg
Entry Product Method % Yield[a]
1 graphic file with name nihms392166t1.jpg 1a A 29
2 graphic file with name nihms392166t2.jpg 1b A 81
3 graphic file with name nihms392166t3.jpg 1c B 15
4 graphic file with name nihms392166t4.jpg 1d A 85
B 58
5 graphic file with name nihms392166t5.jpg 1e B 81
6 graphic file with name nihms392166t6.jpg 1f A 92
7 graphic file with name nihms392166t7.jpg 1g A 87
8 graphic file with name nihms392166t8.jpg 1h A 90[b]
B 67
9 graphic file with name nihms392166t9.jpg 1i A 74
10 graphic file with name nihms392166t10.jpg 1j A 83
11 graphic file with name nihms392166t11.jpg 1k B 89
12 graphic file with name nihms392166t12.jpg 1l B 67
13 graphic file with name nihms392166t13.jpg 1m A 90
14 graphic file with name nihms392166t14.jpg 1n B 9
15 graphic file with name nihms392166t15.jpg 1o B 30
16 graphic file with name nihms392166t16.jpg 1p B 35
17 graphic file with name nihms392166t17.jpg 1q A 85
18 graphic file with name nihms392166t18.jpg 1r A 54
B 69
19 graphic file with name nihms392166t19.jpg 1s A 44

Method A: 60°C for 4–16 h; Method B: 80 °C for 2–24 h.

[a]

Isolated yield.

[b]

Reaction performed on a 10 mmol scale.

Linear alkyl chains of different lengths were tolerated (entries 1–3) in very disparate yields. Although the 29% yield for the methylammoniomethyltrifluoroborate 1a can be explained by the volatility of the starting methylamine, the low yield obtained with n-butylamine (entry 3) remains unclear. The reaction conditions are very specific to each substrate as illustrated by entries 4, 8, and 18, which exhibit no illuminating trend. Secondary alkylamines proved to react very well with the bromomethyltrifluoroborate, yielding the desired ammonio salts with good to excellent yields (entries 6–8). Cyclohexylammoniomethyltrifluoroborate was obtained in 90% yield on a 10 mmol scale. More hindered alkylamines, such as tert-butylamine, tert-octylamine, and even adamantylamine reacted to afford the desired ammonio salts in very good yields (entries 9–11). Of note, the salt 1k derived from adamantylamine is so insoluble and hydrophobic that it had to be purified with water.[14]

Amines bearing a second heteroatom were more difficult to react in good yields and often required the use of method B to afford the expected trifluoroborate salts (entries 12–16 and 19). The presence of tertiary amine moieties, which could also compete with the desired nucleophilic substitution, can account for the lower yields observed. The success of the reaction might be directly related to the steric bulk on the ancillary group on the amine. For example, in entry 12, the 4-amino-N-benzylpiperidine ammonio salt 1l was obtained in a 67% yield, which increased to 90% when the piperidine moiety was protected by a bulkier Boc group (1m, entry 13). However, basicity might also play a role, as the more basic the second nitrogen atom is, the more likely it will react, leading to undesired side reactions. Unhindered diamines provided very low yields (entries 14, 15). The 35% yield obtained for 1p can be explained by the low nucleophilicity of the corresponding para-methoxyaniline compared to alkylamines. On the other hand, diphenylmethanamine was able to react well, affording 1q in 85% (entry 17). Of note, tryptamine, even with the unprotected indole, led to the formation of the desired ammonio salt 1s in 44% yield (entry 19). In all cases, the secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates were obtained as air and moisture stable solids that were stored on the bench for weeks without any observed decomposition.

As the substitution reactions were performed on bromomethyltrifluoroborate, we were concerned by possible contamination of the final internal salts by KBr.[8d] To prevent this possible issue, work-up conditions were designed using hot filtration in acetonitrile and/or Soxhlet extraction using isopropyl acetate, as it was found that KBr has a very low solubility in those solvents. However, to prevent any problems, it was decided to use a small excess of the ammonio salt when performing the cross-coupling reactions to ensure that enough of the trifluoroborate was still engaged in the reaction even in the case of trace contamination. We were also able to grow crystals of two of the secondary ammoniomethyl trifluoroborates (1h and 1j), and their structures were elucidated by X-Ray crystallography (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

X-ray Structures of Ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates1h and 1j.

Having synthesized a large array of secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates via a very direct and effective nucleophilic substitution pathway, we then explored their behavior in the Suzuki-Miyaura cross-coupling reaction to afford arenemethylamine products. This reaction proved to be much more difficult than expected, and very extensive screening was required to find suitable and reproducible conditions. None of the previously reported cross-coupling conditions with the other ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates provided a trace of the expected product. Indeed, being able to perform a cross-coupling on those internal salts bearing a free amine moiety requires a very effective catalytic system. Specifically, after the transmetalation step, the amine moiety could possibly bind intra- or intermolecularly to the metal, creating aggregates, thus deactivating the catalyst and preventing completion of the catalytic cycle. Moreover, the free amine can also coordinate to the metal as the reagent or as the product and prevent the reaction. This transformation is challenging, and those factors could explain why finding the right catalytic system required such extensive exploratory investigation. The use of the recently reported aminobiphenyl precatalysts developed by Buchwald et al. proved to be crucial.[15] This precatalyst system allows rapid formation of the desired active Pd(0) species in the presence of a weak base. After much screening of ligands, we determined that the classic Buchwald phosphines were not suitable for this reaction. The best ligand was found to be the bulky and electron rich tri-tert-butylphosphine.[16] The synthesis of the precatalyst 2 is shown in Scheme 3.

Scheme 3.

Scheme 3

Synthesis and X-ray Stucture of the Palladium Biphenyl tri-tert-Butylphosphine Precatalyst 2.[17]

The reaction conditions were optimized using the cyclohexylammoniomethyltrifluoroborate 1h and para-halogeno anisole electrophiles in the presence of 5 mol % of catalyst, and the results are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Optimization of the Reaction Conditions.

graphic file with name nihms392166u2.jpg
Entry X Solvent[a] [conc] Yield [%][b]
1 Br CPME 0.05 M 38
2 Br THF 0.05 M 83 (66)[c]
3 Br THF 0.10 M 42
4 Br THF 0.50 M 34
5 Cl THF 0.05 M 50
6 I THF 0.05 M 30
[a]

CPME = cyclopentyl methyl ether.

[b]

Isolated yield.

[c]

Reaction performed at 80 °C.

The best solvent system was found to be a 1:1 mixture of THF/H2O at a concentration of 0.05 M at 60 °C, yielding 3a in 83% isolated yield. When the reaction temperature was increased to 80 °C, irreproducible results were obtained with an average 66% isolated yield (entry 2). The very dilute conditions required can be explained by a possible coordination of the nitrogen of either the boron-containing amino reagent or the amine product to the palladium that can lead to its deactivation when the reaction is run at higher concentration. A solution to overcome this drawback could be envisioned by using continuous flow technology.[18]

para-Bromoanisole provided the best results, while chloro-and iodo-derivatives only afforded the desired product 3a in 50 and 30% yields, respectively (entries 2, 5–6).

Once the conditions were optimized, and to investigate the method further, various electron rich (entries 1–9) and electron poor (entries 10–17) aryl bromides were examined as electrophiles in the reaction (Table 3).

Table 3.

Scope of the Reaction with Aryl Bromides.

graphic file with name nihms392166u3.jpg
Entry Electrophile Product Yield [%][a]
1 graphic file with name nihms392166t20.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t21.jpg 3b 53
2 graphic file with name nihms392166t22.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t23.jpg 3c 77
3 graphic file with name nihms392166t24.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t25.jpg 3d 90
4 graphic file with name nihms392166t26.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t27.jpg 3e 82
5 graphic file with name nihms392166t28.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t29.jpg 3f 42
6 graphic file with name nihms392166t30.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t31.jpg 3g 85
7 graphic file with name nihms392166t32.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t33.jpg 3h 95
8 graphic file with name nihms392166t34.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t35.jpg 3i 90
9 graphic file with name nihms392166t36.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t37.jpg 3j 52
10 graphic file with name nihms392166t38.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t39.jpg 3k 81
11 graphic file with name nihms392166t40.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t41.jpg 3l 24
12 graphic file with name nihms392166t42.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t43.jpg 3m 85
13 graphic file with name nihms392166t44.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t45.jpg 3n 45
14 graphic file with name nihms392166t46.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t47.jpg 3o 80
15 graphic file with name nihms392166t48.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t49.jpg 3p 86
16 graphic file with name nihms392166t50.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t51.jpg 3q 53
17 graphic file with name nihms392166t52.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t53.jpg 3r 48
[a]

Isolated yield after purification, product can contain up to 5% of phosphine oxide.

All the bromides tested afforded the cross-coupled products with yields ranging from 45 to 95%. Interestingly, when the ortho-bromomethylbenzoate (entry 17) was used, the iso-indolinone 3r was isolated in a 48% yield. This product corresponds to the intramolecular cyclization of the amine onto the ester group under basic conditions. Electron rich bromides provided good to excellent yields. The effect of steric hindrance was tested with several mono and di ortho-substituted bromides (entries 1, 3, 5, 11, 17).

Depending on the nature of the ortho substituent, the outcome of the reaction was very different. Although chemically inert groups (entries 1, 3) did not really have an influence on the yields, other functional groups had a negative effect (entry 11) or even participated in the formation of the observed product 3r (entry 17). A very hindered system (entry 5) still proceeded to react, albeit without total conversion, giving a lower yield. Naphthalene bromides (entries 7, 8) cross-coupled very efficiently, affording 3h and 3i in 95 and 90% yield, respectively. The designed method allows the presence of functional groups such as ethers, amines, nitriles, esters, and nitro groups. Fluoro- and trifluoromethyl containing aryl bromides were also well tolerated (entries 12–14). As a general rule, heteroatom-containing aryl bromides gave diminished yields, but still reacted efficiently.

To expand the scope of the reaction, the cyclohexylammoniomethyl trifluoroborate salt 3h was also reacted with heteroaryl bromides under the same conditions with much less success (Table 4).

Table 4.

Scope of the Cross-Coupling Reaction between 1h and Various Heteroaryl Bromides.

graphic file with name nihms392166u4.jpg
Entry Electrophile Product Yield [%][a]
1 graphic file with name nihms392166t54.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t55.jpg 4a 36
34[b]
2 graphic file with name nihms392166t56.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t57.jpg 4b 61[b]
57[b, c]
3 graphic file with name nihms392166t58.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t59.jpg 4c 38
4 graphic file with name nihms392166t60.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t61.jpg 4d 31[b]
5 graphic file with name nihms392166t62.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t63.jpg 4e 32[d]
6 graphic file with name nihms392166t64.jpg graphic file with name nihms392166t65.jpg 4f 34[d]
[a]

Isolated yield, products might be contaminated with up to 10 mol % of phosphine oxide.

[b]

10 mol % of catalyst was used.

[c]

Reaction time of 48 h.

[d]

Reaction ran at 75 °C.

When 8-bromo-isoquinoline was employed in the reaction under the conditions described (entry 1), the desired amine 4a was isolated in 36% yield. Increasing the catalyst loading to 10 mol % did not improve the yield. The 5-bromoquinoline proved to be a better substrate, affording 4b in 61% yield. Extending the reaction time from 24 to 48 hours did not impact the yield of the reaction (entry 2). Indole, pyridine and thiophene derivatives cross-coupled with yields ranging from 31 to 38% (entries 3–6). Harsher reactions conditions (75 °C) did not improve the outcome of the reaction.

The presence of an extra heteroatom that can interact with the catalyst in a bidentate fashion prevents the reaction from working well.[19] To avoid this issue, or at least to lower its impact, we tried performing the cross coupling with the sterically hindered ammoniomethyl salt 1k. We were hoping that the steric bulk of the adamantyl moiety would prevent the nitrogen of the ammonio salt from interacting with the palladium, thus avoiding deactivation. Unfortunately, when using the 5-bromoquinoline, the desired product 5a was only retrieved in 44% yield (Scheme 4), lower than the one obtained when using the cyclohexyltrifluoroborate 1h. The 3-bromopyridine and thiophene did not provide any of the cross-coupled products. The adamantyl group might be too bulky, and in addition to surrounding the nitrogen of the ammoniomethyl, it might also slow down the cross-coupling reaction. Another hypothesis to explain this lack of reactivity could also be the very low solubility of this trifluoroborate salt, with subsequent slow conversion into the active boron species required for the cross-coupling reaction.[20]

Scheme 4.

Scheme 4

Attempts of Cross-Coupling 1k and 5-Bromoquinoline.

To demonstrate the scope of the method on aryl bromides, a variety of ammoniomethyl salts were used in the cross-coupling reaction using para-bromoanisole under the previously defined conditions (Table 5. In some cases, for ease of purification, the products were isolated as their HCl salt.

Table 5.

Variation of the Trifluoroborate Moiety.

graphic file with name nihms392166u5.jpg
Entry R BF3K Product Yield [%][a]
1 t-Bu 1i graphic file with name nihms392166t66.jpg 6a 30[b]
2 i-Pr 1f graphic file with name nihms392166t67.jpg 6b 53[b]
3 graphic file with name nihms392166t68.jpg 1e graphic file with name nihms392166t69.jpg 6c 69
4 Cyclopentyl 1g graphic file with name nihms392166t70.jpg 6d 72[b]
5 Adamantyl 1k graphic file with name nihms392166t71.jpg 6e 83[b]
6 neo-Pentyl 1d graphic file with name nihms392166t72.jpg 6f 54[b]
7 tert-Octyl 1j graphic file with name nihms392166t73.jpg 6g 81[b]
8 graphic file with name nihms392166t74.jpg 1q graphic file with name nihms392166t75.jpg 6h 74 [c]
9 graphic file with name nihms392166t76.jpg 1m graphic file with name nihms392166t77.jpg 6i 81
10 graphic file with name nihms392166t78.jpg 1r graphic file with name nihms392166t79.jpg 6j 59
64[d]
[a]

Isolated yields, might contain up to 5% of phosphine oxide.

[b]

Products isolated as the HCl salt.

[c]

Contaminated with 5% carbazole.

[d]

NaOt-Bu used instead of Cs2CO3.

The ten different ammoniomethyl salts cross-coupled with yields ranging from 30 to 83%. Alkylamine-based trifluoroborates (entries 1–8) proved to be efficient coupling partners in the reaction. The adamantylammoniomethyltrifluoroborate 1k provided the best result with an 83% yield. The presence of an additional nitrogen (e.g., an NBoc group) on the nucleophilic partner 1m did not hamper the outcome of the reaction, as the desired coupled product 6i bearing two amino groups was obtained in 81% yield. Interestingly, the 2-(2-chlorophenyl)ethylaminomethyltrifluoroborate 1r afforded the expected secondary amine 6j in 59% yield, which could be increased to 64% when using NaOt-Bu as the base. Thus, the presence of another halogen did significantly inhibit the reaction.

This product could be used for further functionalization and even other cross-coupling reactions. For instance, we were able to use it to perform an intramolecular amination reaction to yield the corresponding para-methoxybenzylindoline 7a in 73% isolated yield, providing an efficient and short reaction sequence to create this unit (Scheme 5).[21]

Scheme 5.

Scheme 5

Rapid Synthesis of Indoline Derivative7a from Trifluoroborate 1r in Two Metal-Catalyzed Reactions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a straightforward and efficient synthesis of secondary ammoniomethyltrifluoroborate salts has been developed. Their suitability as coupling partners in the Suzuki-Miyaura cross-coupling reaction has been demonstrated with a wide variety of aryl bromides. This new method readily allows access to secondary arylmethanamine moieties via a new disconnection, thus filling a void in the synthesis of aminomethyl substituted arenes based on the use of aminomethyltrifluoroborates to access all the different classes of arylmethylamines. The cross-coupling with heteroaryl electrophiles involving unprotected free amines creates some challenges, but further work is currently underway in our laboratory to overcome these issues.

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a National Priorities Research Program (NRP) grant from the Qatar National Research Fund (Grant No. 08-035-1-008), the National Science Foundation (GOALI), and the NIH (R01 GM-081376). AllyChem is acknowledged for the generous donation of bromomethyl potassium trifluoroborate. Dr. Matthew Tudge (Merck Research Laboratories) is acknowledged for preparing and donating the aminobiphenyl palladium μ-chloro dimer. Dr. Rakesh Kohli (University of Pennsylvania) is acknowledged for obtaining HRMS data. Dr. Patrick Caroll (University of Pennsylvania) is acknowledged for performing the X-ray analysis.

Footnotes

Supporting information for this article is available on the WWW under http://www.chemeurj.org/ or from the author.

References

  • 1.a) Lipinski CA, Lombardo F, Dominy BW, Feeney PJ. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2001;46:3–26. doi: 10.1016/s0169-409x(00)00129-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Smith GF. Prog Med Chem. 2009;48:1–29. doi: 10.1016/s0079-6468(09)04801-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Grabowski K, Baringhaus K-H, Schneider G. Nat Prod Rep. 2008;25:892–904. doi: 10.1039/b715668p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Koehn FE, Carter GT. Nature. 2004;4:206–220. doi: 10.1038/nrd1657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; e) Lednicer D, Mitscher LA. The Organic Chemistry of Drug Synthesis. Wiley; New York: 1997. p. 7. [Google Scholar]; f) Silverman RB. The Organic Chemistry of Drug Design and Drug Action. 2. Elsevier Academic Press; Burlington: 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.a) Drapier M, Nelson ML. Patent WO 2004/038001 ; b) Nakamura Y, Matsuo Y, Hisada S, Ahmed F, Huntley R, Sajjadi-Hashemi Z, Jenkins DM, Kargbo RB, Cui W, Guuan PJF, Walker JR. Patent WO 2011/123419 ; c) Allen D, Ameriks ML, Axe FU, Burdett M, Cai H, Choong I, Edwards JP, Lew W, Meduna SP. Patent US 2009/0118274 ; d) Hu XE. Patent WO 2008/001160 ; e) Luddens H, Lang HJ, Korpi ER. Euro J Pharmacol. 1998;344:269–277. doi: 10.1016/s0014-2999(97)01577-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.a) Abdel-Magid AF, Mehrman SJ. Org Process Res Dev. 2006;10:971–1031. [Google Scholar]; b) Abdel-Magid AF, Carson KG, Harris BD, Maryanoff CA, Shah RD. J Org Chem. 1996;61:3849–3862. doi: 10.1021/jo960057x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Baxter EW, Reitz AB. Org React. 2002;59:1–714. [Google Scholar]; d) Gomez S, Peters JA, Maschemeyer T. Adv Synth Catal. 2002;344:1037–1057. [Google Scholar]; e) Salvatore RN, Yoon CH, Jung KW. Tetrahedron. 2001;57:7785–7811. [Google Scholar]; f) Bomann MD, Guch IC, DiMare M. J Org Chem. 1995;60:5995–5996. [Google Scholar]; g) Liao W, Chen Y, Liu Y, Duan H, Petersen JL, Shi X. Chem Commun. 2009:6436–6438. doi: 10.1039/b915361f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; h) Wang C, Pettman A, Bacsa J, Xiao J. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2010;49:7548–7552. doi: 10.1002/anie.201002944. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.a) Pinner A, Franz A. Chem Ber. 1905;38:1539–1548. [Google Scholar]; b) Salvatore RN, Nagle AS, Schmidt SE, Jung KW. Org Lett. 1999;1:1893–1896. [Google Scholar]; c) Salvatore RN, Nagle AS, Jung KW. J Org Chem. 2002;67:674–683. doi: 10.1021/jo010643c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Chiappe C, Pieraccini D. Green Chem. 2003;5:193–197. [Google Scholar]; e) Guillena G, Ramon DJ, Yus M. Chem Rev. 2010;110:1611–1641. doi: 10.1021/cr9002159. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.For recent examples see: Cui X, Zhang Y, Shi F, Deng Y. Chem Eur J. 2011;17:2587–2591. doi: 10.1002/chem.201003095.Guerin C, Bellosta V, Guillamot G, Cossy J. Org Lett. 2011;13:3534–3537. doi: 10.1021/ol201351a.Farell JM, Heiden ZM, Stephan DW. Organometallics. 2011;30:4497–4500.
  • 6.For a metal free protocol see: Pelletier G, Bechara WS, Charette AB. J Am Chem Soc. 2010;132:12817–12919. doi: 10.1021/ja105194s.for iron-catalyzed examples see: Zhou S, Junge K, Addis D, Das S, Beller M. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2009;48:9507–9510. doi: 10.1002/anie.200904677.Sunuda Y, Kawakami H, Imaoka T, Motoyama Y, Nagashima H. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2009;48:9511–9514. doi: 10.1002/anie.200905025.
  • 7.For reviews on organotrifluoroborate salts see: Molander GA, Figueroa R. Aldrichim Acta. 2005;38:49–56.Molander GA, Ellis N. Acc Chem Res. 2007;40:275–286. doi: 10.1021/ar050199q.Stefani HA, Cella R, Adriano S. Tetrahedron. 2007;63:3623–3658.Darses S, Genêt JP. Chem Rev. 2008;108:288–325. doi: 10.1021/cr0509758.for mechanistic details on the advantages of trifluoroborates over other boron reagents in the Suzuki reaction see: Butters M, Harvey JN, Jover J, Lennox AJJ, Lloyd-Jones GC, Murray PM. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2010;49:5156–5160. doi: 10.1002/anie.201001522.
  • 8.For the first examples of ammoniomethyltrifluoroborate syntheses see: Molander GA, Ham J. Org Lett. 2006;8:2031–2034. doi: 10.1021/ol060375a.for more examples and their use in Suzuki-Miyaura cross-coupling see: Molander GA, Sandrock DL. Org Lett. 2007;9:1597–1600. doi: 10.1021/ol070543e.Molander GA, Gormisky PE, Sandrock DL. J Org Chem. 2008;73:2052–2057. doi: 10.1021/jo800183q.for a recent reinvestigation of the ammoniomethyltrifluoroborates see: Raushel J, Sandrock DL, Josyula KV, Pakyz D, Molander GA. J Org Chem. 2011;76:2762–2769. doi: 10.1021/jo2001066.
  • 9.a) Molander GA, Hiebel MA. Org Lett. 2010;12:4876–4879. doi: 10.1021/ol102039c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Molander GA, Fleury-Brégeot N, Hiebel MA. Org Lett. 2011;13:1694–1697. doi: 10.1021/ol200202g. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.For aryl and heteroaryl halides see ref. [8] b), c), d); for aryl and heteroaryl mesylates, see: Molander GA, Beaumard F. Org Lett. 2011;13:1242–1245. doi: 10.1021/ol200128y.
  • 11.Molander GA, Shin I. Org Lett. 2011;13:3956–39596. doi: 10.1021/ol2014768. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.For carboxamides, see ref [9a]; for sulfonamides see ref [9b] and for phthalimides, see Devulapally R, Fleury-Brégeot N, Molander GA, Seapy DG. Tetrahedron Lett. 2012;53:1051–1055. doi: 10.1016/j.tetlet.2011.12.062.
  • 13.Brotzel F, Chu YC, Mayr H. J Org Chem. 2007;72:3679–3688. doi: 10.1021/jo062586z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.See Supporting Information for more details.
  • 15.Kinzel T, Zhang Y, Buchwald SL. J Am Chem Soc. 2010;132:14073–14075. doi: 10.1021/ja1073799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.a) Fu GC. Acc Chem Res. 2008;41:1555–1564. doi: 10.1021/ar800148f. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Littke AF, Fu GC. Angew Chem Int Ed. 1998;37:3387–3388. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(19981231)37:24<3387::AID-ANIE3387>3.0.CO;2-P. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.For other references dealing with the synthesis of biphenyl precatalysts, see: Albert J, Granell J, Zafrilla J, Font-Bardia M, Solans X. J Organomet Chem. 2005;690:422–429.Albert J, Granell J, Luque A, Minguez J, Moragas R, Font-Bardia M, Solans X. J Organomet Chem. 1996;522:87–96.
  • 18.For a review on cross-coupling reactions in continuous flow see: Noel T, Buchwald SL. Chem Soc Rev. 2011;40:5010–5029. doi: 10.1039/c1cs15075h.for recent articles using the biphenyl precatalyst in continuous flow see: Noel T, Musacchio AJ. Org Lett. 2011;13:5180–5183. doi: 10.1021/ol202052q.Shu W, Buchwald SL. Chem Sci. 2011;2:2321–2325.Noel T, Kuhn S, Musacchio AJ, Jensen KF, Buchwald SL. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2011;50:5943–5946. doi: 10.1002/anie.201101480.Li P, Buchwald SL. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2011;50:6396–6400. doi: 10.1002/anie.201102401.Shu W, Pellegatti L, Oberli MA, Buchwald SL. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2011;50:10665–10669. doi: 10.1002/anie.201105223.
  • 19.a) Hooper MW, Utsunomiya M, Hartwig JF. J Org Chem. 2003;68:2861–2873. doi: 10.1021/jo0266339. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Bedford RB, Cazi CSJ, Coles SJ, Gelbrich T, Hurthouse MB, Scordia VJM. Dalton Trans. 2003;17:3350–3356. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.a) see ref. 7a); Molander GA, Ito T. Org Lett. 2001;3:393–396. doi: 10.1021/ol006896u.Molander GA, Biolatto B. Org Lett. 2002;11:1867–1870. doi: 10.1021/ol025845p.Molander GA, Biolatto B. J Org Chem. 2003;68:4302–4314. doi: 10.1021/jo0342368.Butters M, Harvey JN, Jover J, Lennox AJJ, Lloyd-Jones GC, Murray PM. Angew Chem, Int Ed. 2010;49:5156–5160. doi: 10.1002/anie.201001522.Lennox AJJ, Lloyd-Jones GC. J Am Chem Soc. 2012 doi: 10.1021/ja300236k.
  • 21.(a) Omar-Amrani R, Thomas A, Brenner E, Schneider B, Fort Y. Org Lett. 2003;5:2311–2314. doi: 10.1021/ol034659w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Omar-Amrani R, Schneider R, Fort Y. Synthesis. 2004;15:2527–2534. [Google Scholar]; c) Baxter CA, Cleator E, Alam M, Davies AJ, Goodyear A, O’Hagan M. Org lett. 2010;12:668–671. doi: 10.1021/ol902636v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

RESOURCES