Next Article in Journal
TiO2-Based Hybrid Nanocomposites Modified by Phosphonate Molecules as Selective PAH Adsorbents
Previous Article in Journal
A Review on Electroporation-Based Intracellular Delivery
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Efficient Synthesis of Acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole Derivatives via Domino Reaction

1
Institute of Medicinal Biotechnology, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100050, China
2
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Both authors contributed equally to this work.
Submission received: 22 October 2018 / Revised: 19 November 2018 / Accepted: 20 November 2018 / Published: 21 November 2018

Abstract

:
A concise and efficient synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives via the domino reactions of enaminones with acenaphthoquinone catalyzed by l-proline has been developed. This protocol has the advantages of good yields, operational convenience and high regioselectivity.

1. Introduction

The indole skeleton is often considered to be one of the most important and fascinating classes of nitrogen-containing heterocycles, and it is often found in both natural products and biologically active compounds [1]. Many indole derivatives have a wide range of biological activities, including anticancer, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-HIV effects [2,3,4,5,6,7]. In addition, various polycyclic indoles are privileged scaffolds in medicinal chemistry and drug discovery [8,9,10,11]. As a result of these interesting biological activities, many powerful approaches have been developed for the construction of polycyclic indole moieties [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. However, many of these methods have drawbacks, such as limited availability of starting materials, the use of expensive metal catalysts and the need for harsh reaction conditions. Therefore, developing new and efficient methods for the synthesis of polycyclic indoles and their functionalized derivatives using readily available starting materials is of great importance. Enaminones are commercially available starting materials and have proven to be a useful synthons in the construction of a variety of diverse heterocycles. This synthons has been used in the construction of indole moiety via the condensation with α,β-dicarbonyl compounds under catalyst-free [19,20] or acidic catalyst [21] conditions.
Domino (cascade) reactions are promising and powerful tools in organic and medical chemistry because of their high atom economy, highly complex and diverse products, efficiency in forming multiple bonds, and environmental friendliness [22]. Consequently, domino reactions have often been used for the construction of complex heterocycles [23,24,25,26,27,28]. As part of our program to develop new methods for the construction of important heterocycles by domino reactions [29,30,31,32], we report herein an efficient synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives via a domino reaction using l-proline as the catalyst.

2. Results and Discussion

We initially evaluated the domino reaction of enaminone 1a and acenaphthoquinone (2). The reaction mixture of 1a and 2 (1:1 in mole) was subjected to a variety of different conditions and the results are summarized in Table 1. Target product 3a was obtained in 19% yield when the reaction was carried out under catalyst-free conditions in ethanol at reflux for 2 h followed by dehydroxylation catalyzed by acid (Table 1, entry 1). To our delight, when l-proline (10 mol %) was added, the yield increased to 41% (Table 1, entry 2). Next several other solvents were evaluated for their ability to improve the yield further. The results indicated that toluene was superior to ethanol, chloroform, THF, 1,4-dioxane, DMF, and water in providing much better results (Table 1, entries 2-8). A number of different catalysts were also evaluated for their catalytic efficiency in this reaction. In all cases, the reaction was carried out with 10 mol % of the catalyst in toluene at 80 °C for 2 h. The results revealed that l-proline provided much better results than p-TSA, S-phenylalanine, phenylalanine, pyrrolidine, piperidine, benzylamine and dibenzylamine (Table 1, entries 9–15). These results indicated that the presence of both secondary nitrogen and a carboxylic acid group plays a crucial role in the desird catalytic activity.
After l-proline had been identified as the best organocatalyst for this reaction, we decided to test the amount of this catalyst required for the full transformation to the desired compounds. The results revealed that when the amount of l-proline increased from 5 mol % to 10 mol %, the yield also increased from 45 to 65% (Table 1, entries 16 and 8). The use of 10 mol % of l-proline in toluene was effective in pushing this reaction forward, and using larger amounts of the catalyst did not improve the yields (Table 1, entries 17–18). The optimization process revealed that the reaction could not proceed in toluene at 40 °C (Table 1, entry 19). To identify the optimum reaction temperature, the reaction was conducted in toluene in the presence of 10 mol % l-proline at 60 °C, 80 °C, and reflux, and these reactions provided product 3a in yields of 25, 65 and 80% (Table 1, entries 20, 8 and 21), respectively. On the basis of these results, the optimum reaction condition was identified as refluxing with 10 mol % l-proline in toluene for 2 h. Compared with other catalysts (for example, p-TSA and TEA), this catalyst has the advantages of higher catalytic efficiency, less toxicity, low cost and ready availability
After the reaction conditions were optimized, the substrate scope of this transformation was also investigated. As shown in Table 2, acenaphthequinone and methyl, bromo, chloro, t-Bu and fluoro substituents on the enaminone ring were well tolerated under the reaction conditions, yielding products in satisfactory yields (up to 85%). However, when the enaminones with a bulkier group at the 2- or 2- and 6- positions were used, none of the desired products was obtained (Table 2, entries 15-16).
The structures of compounds 3 were characterized by IR, 1H-NMR, and 13C-NMR spectra as well as HRMS. The structure of 3g was further confirmed using single-crystal X-ray diffraction analysis, (Figure 1).
Although details of the mechanism of the domino reaction remain unclear, the formation of compound 3 could be explained by the reaction sequence shown in Scheme 1. The initial reversible reaction of acenaphthoquinone (2) with l-proline would give iminium ion A. Then, an aza-ene addition of enaminone 1 to iminium ion A leads to intermediate B, which would undergo a rapid tautomerization to give intermediate C. Intermediate E would be formed by the intramolecular cyclization of intermediate C and the elimination of l-proline. Then, intermediate F would be generated by the nucleophilic addition of water to intermediate E. In the last step, product 3 would be formed by dehydroxylation of the intermediate catalyzed by H2SO4 in acetic acid solution.
To support the proposed reaction mechanism, several control experiments were performed (Scheme 2). For example, intermediate Fa was obtained in 84% yield from the reaction of 1a with 2 in refluxing toluene for 2 h catalyzed by 10 mol % l-proline. Desired product 3a was obtained in 90% yield when intermediate Fa was reacted at 80 °C for 2 h in acetic acid catalyzed by H2SO4.

3. Experimental

3.1. General Information

All chemicals were obtained commercially and used without further purification. Melting points were measured using an XT-5 micro melting point apparatus from Beijing Tech Instrument Co., Ltd., (Beijing, China) and are uncorrected. NMR spectra were recorded in DMSO-d6 or CDCl3 solution on Inova-300 or 400 MHz spectrometers (Varian, Palo Alto, CA, USA). Chemical shifts values are given in ppm and referred as the internal standard to TMS (tetramethylsilane). The coupling constants (J) are reported in hertz (Hz). High-resolution mass spectra (HRMS) were obtained using a MicrOTOF-Q II instrument from Bruker (Billerica, MA, USA). X-ray crystal diffraction analysis was performed with a Mercury CCD X-ray diffractometer (Rigaku, Akishima, Tokyo, Japan).

3.2. General Procedure for the Synthesis of Acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole Derivatives 3

A mixture of enaminone 1 (1.0 mmol), acenaphthoquinone (2, 1.0 mmol), l-proline (0.1 mmol) and toluene (5 mL) was refluxed for 1–3 h. After the completion of the reaction (confirmed by TLC), the reaction mixture was concentrated in vacuo. Then, acetic acid (15 mL) and conc. H2SO4 (0.5 mL) were added. The reaction mixture was stirred at 80 °C for 1–2 h. After completion of the reaction (confirmed by TLC), the reaction mixture was then cooled to room temperature and concentrated in vacuo. The crude mixture was purified by column chromatography on silica gel using ethyl acetate/petroleum ether 1:3 as the eluents to give the corresponding product 3.
9,9-Dimethyl-7-(p-tolyl)-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3a). White solid, Rf = 0.56, m.p. 214–216 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3063, 2951, 1724, 1630, 1504, 1483, 1323, 1259, 1156, 1140, 860, 771, 722, 679. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.11 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.56 (t, J = 8.8 Hz, 2H, ArH), 7.47 (t, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.35–7.33 (m, 4H, ArH), 7.21 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.04 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.56 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.42 (s, 3H, CH3), 2.40 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.05 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 192.8, 145.5, 138.1, 137.7, 133.7, 131.0, 130.8, 129.3, 128.2, 128.0, 127.1, 125.6, 125.3, 125.0, 124.7, 124.6, 122.8, 117.9, 115.2, 51.1, 36.1, 34.8, 27.6, 20.3. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C27H23NONa [M + Na]+ 400.1677. Found: 400.1705.
7-(3-Chloro-4-fluorophenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3b). White solid, Rf = 0.61, m.p. 248–250 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3027, 2939, 1721, 1494, 1343, 1174, 895, 818. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.18 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.69–7.65 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.56 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.44–7.31 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.10 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.57 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.43 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.12 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.7, 156.3, 146.2, 138.8, 131.7, 131.6, 129.3, 128.5, 128.2, 128.2, 126.7, 126.5, 126.3, 125.9, 125.8, 124.2, 118.7, 117.9, 117.6, 116.6, 51.9, 37.0, 35.9, 28.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H19ClFNONa [M + Na]+ 438.1037. Found: 438.1020.
7-(4-Methoxyphenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3c). White solid, Rf = 0.57, m.p. 240–242 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3037, 2944, 1723, 1511, 1443, 1078, 816. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.10–8.08 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.58–7.54 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.48–7.46 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.37–7.35 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.23–7.17 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.01–7.00 (m, 3H, ArH), 3.84–3.83 (m, 3H, CH3O), 2.52 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.46 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.04 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.8, 159.6, 146.8, 139.3, 132.1, 131.8, 130.0, 129.2, 129.0, 128.1, 127.1, 126.7, 126.3, 125.9, 125.5, 123.7, 118.8, 116.1, 114.9, 55.6, 52.0, 36.9, 35.7, 28.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C27H23NO2Na [M + Na]+ 416.1626. Found: 416.1629.
7-(4-Bromophenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3d). White solid, Rf = 0.60, m.p. 230–232 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3049, 2952, 1652, 1609, 1494, 1079, 819, 769. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.17 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.73–7.71 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.67–7.62 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.54 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.41–7.39 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.29 (t, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.10 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.55 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.41 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.10 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.7, 146.2, 138.6, 136.3, 133.0, 131.8, 131.7, 129.3, 128.7, 128.2, 127.4, 126.7, 126.5, 126.2, 126.1, 124.0, 122.4, 118.9, 116.5, 51.9, 37.0, 35.8, 28.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H20BrNONa [M + Na]+ 464.0626. Found: 464.0633.
9,9-Dimethyl-7-(4-nitrophenyl)-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3e). Yellow solid, Rf = 0.63, m.p. 240–242 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3036, 2953, 2350, 1728, 1592, 1505, 1329, 1068, 842. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.60 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H, ArH), 8.52 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 8.31–8.26 (m, 3H, ArH), 8.09 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.84–7.80 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.67 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.72 (s, 1H, CH2), 2.51 (s, 1H, CH2), 2.17 (s, 1H, CH2), 1.64 (s, 1H, CH2), 1.25 (s, 3H, CH3), 1.16 (s, 3H, CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 187.1, 159.5, 146.1, 145.0, 141.8, 134.3, 132.4, 131.6, 127.5, 127.4, 126.4, 125.8, 125.6, 125.5, 125.3, 124.4, 123.4, 121.0, 117.9, 117.7, 50.9, 35.0, 28.7, 27.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H20N2O3Na [M + Na]+ 431.1372. Found: 431.1355.
7-(3,5-Dimethylphenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3f). White solid, Rf = 0.57, m.p. 220–221 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3076, 2956, 1728, 1638, 1510, 1474, 1383, 1181, 1080, 870, 836, 801, 767. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.18 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.66–7.62 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.55 (t, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.30 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.18–7.15 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.11 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.65 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.48 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.46 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3), 1.15 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.9, 146.5, 139.7, 139.1, 137.2, 132.1, 130.3, 129.2, 129.1, 128.1, 126.7, 126.3, 126.0, 123.8, 123.4, 118.9, 116.2, 52.1, 37.2, 35.9, 28.6, 21.4. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C28H25NONa [M + Na]+ 414.1834. Found: 414.1847.
9,9-Dimethyl-7-phenyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3g). White solid, Rf = 0.55, m.p. 200–202 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3042, 2958, 1649, 1520, 1500, 1394, 1081, 821, 774, 706. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.13 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.60–7.50 (m, 8H, ArH), 7.23 (dd, J = 14.0, 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.05 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.59 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.42 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.09 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.8, 146.5, 138.9, 137.3, 132.0, 131.8, 129.8, 129.2, 128.9, 128.7, 128.1, 126.7, 126.3, 126.1, 125.8, 123.8, 118.9, 116.3, 52.0, 37.0, 35.8, 28.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H21NONa [M + Na]+ 386.1521. Found: 386.1503.
7-(2-Chlorophenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3h). White solid, Rf = 0.59, m.p. 210–212 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3041, 2957, 1651, 1518, 1491, 1458, 1069, 821, 771. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.15 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.67–7.59 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.53–7.49 (m, 4H, ArH), 7.23 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 6.76 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.52–2.46 (m, 4H, 2 × CH2), 1.14–1.11 (m, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.8, 147.5, 139.5, 135.1, 132.3, 132.1, 131.7, 131.0, 130.8, 129.3, 129.2, 128.7, 128.2, 128.1, 126.7, 126.4, 126.0, 125.5, 124.0, 118.4, 116.2, 52.2, 36.4, 35.9, 29.0, 28.2. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H20ClNONa [M + Na]+ 420.1131. Found: 420.1169.
7-(4-(tert-Butyl)phenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3i). White solid, Rf = 0.56, m.p. 250–252 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3021, 2940, 1700, 1452, 1339, 1057, 893, 767. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.18 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.64–7.54 (m, 5H, ArH), 7.47–7.45 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.31–7.29 (t, J = 4.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.13 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.67 (s, 2H CH2), 2.48 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.44 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.14 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 193.8, 151.8, 146.6, 139.0, 134.7, 132.0, 131.9, 129.2, 129.1, 128.1, 126.6, 126.3, 126.0, 125.2, 123.8, 119.0, 116.3, 52.1, 37.2, 35.8, 34.9, 31.4, 28.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C30H28NO [M − H]+ 418.2171. Found: 418.2147.
7-Phenyl-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3j). White solid, Rf = 0.57, m.p. 208–210 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3038, 2956, 1720, 1698, 1498, 1341, 1136, 837, 734. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.10 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.56–7.43 (m, 8H, ArH), 7.18 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.01 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.67 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.51 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.07 (s, 2H, CH2). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 194.4, 147.6, 138.7, 137.4, 132.0, 131.9, 129.8, 129.2, 128.9, 128.6, 128.1, 126.6, 126.4, 126.1, 126.0, 125.7, 123.9, 119.0, 117.4, 38.1, 24.0, 23.3. HRMS(ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C24H16NO [M − H]+ 334.1232. Found 334.1234.
7-(2-Chlorophenyl)-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3k). White solid, Rf = 0.39, m.p. 193–194 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3051, 2943, 1723, 1656, 1522, 1072, 820, 773, 745. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.10 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.55–7.51 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.47–7.38 (m, 4H, ArH), 7.16 (t, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H, ArH), 6.71 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.61–2.50 (m, 4H, 2 × CH2), 2.09–2.05 (m, 2H, CH2). 13C- NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 194.4, 148.6, 139.3, 135.0, 132.1, 131.7, 131.0, 130.8, 129.2, 129.1, 128.7, 128.2, 128.1, 126.7, 126.4, 126.0, 125.7, 123.9, 118.5, 117.4, 38.1, 23.8, 22.6. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C24H16ClNONa [M + Na]+ 392.0818. Found: 392.0830.
7-(2,4-Dimethylphenyl)-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3l). White solid, Rf = 0.35, m.p. 264–267 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3037, 2943, 1724, 1690, 1461, 1337, 1156, 788. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.21–8.19 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.66–7.56 (m, 5H, ArH), 7.51–7.44 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.31 (t, 1H, J = 4.8 Hz, ArH), 7.15 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.84–2.79 (m, 2H, CH2), 2.64–2.58 (m, 2H, CH2), 2.22–2.15 (m, 2H, CH2), 1.42 (s, 9H, 3 × CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 194.5, 151.8, 147.8, 138.7, 134.6, 132.1, 131.9, 129.2, 129.0, 128.1, 126.6, 126.3, 126.0, 125.1, 123.8, 119.1, 117.3, 38.1, 34.9, 31.4, 24.0, 23.4. HRMS calcd for C28H25NONa [M + Na]+ 414.1834, found 414.1834.
7-(4-(tert-Butyl)phenyl)-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3m). White solid, Rf = 0.36, m.p. 190–192 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3049, 2953, 1655, 1521, 1082, 819, 773. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.17 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.64–7.59 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.53 (t, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.25–7.22 (m, 3H, ArH), 7.17 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 1H, ArH), 6.76 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H, ArH), 2.67 (t, J = 10.4 Hz, 1H, CH2), 2.62–2.59 (m, 2H, CH2), 2.53 (t, J = 5.6 Hz, 1H, CH2), 2.44 (s, 3H, CH3), 2.18–2.15 (m, 2H, CH2), 2.07 (s, 3H, CH3). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 194.3, 148.1, 139.5, 135.2, 133.7, 132.3, 132.1, 131.8, 129.2, 129.0, 128.2, 127.9, 127.2, 126.7, 126.2, 125.8, 123.7, 118.3, 117.0, 38.2, 24.0, 22.6, 21.3, 17.4. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H21NONa [M + Na]+ 386.1521. Found: 386.1566.
7-(3,5-Dimethylphenyl)-9,10-dihydro-7H-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(8H)-one (3n). White solid, Rf = 0.34, m.p. 222–224. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3043, 2940, 1721, 1660, 1521, 1071, 1034, 852, 815, 767. 1H-NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 8.19–8.17 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.66–7.62 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.56–7.51 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.31–7.28 (m, 1H, ArH), 7.17–7.11 (m, 4H, ArH), 2.81 (t, J = 5.2 Hz, 2H, CH2), 2.63–2.59 (m, 2H, CH2), 2.44 (s, 6H, 2 × CH3), 2.19 (t, J = 5.6 Hz, 2H, CH2). 13C-NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3) δ 194.5, 147.7, 139.6, 138.8, 137.2, 132.1, 131.9, 130.2, 129.2, 129.1, 128.1, 126.7, 126.3, 126.0, 123.8, 123.3, 118.9, 117.3, 38.1, 24.0, 23.4, 21.4. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C26H20NO [M − H]+ 363.1545. Found: 363.1557.

3.3. General Procedure for the Synthesis of Tetrahydroacenaphtho[1,2-b]indole Derivatives Fa

A mixture of enaminone (1a) (1.0 mmol), acenaphthoquinone (2) (1.0 mmol), l-proline (0.1 mmol) and toluene (5 mL) was refluxed for 3 h. After the completion of the reaction (confirmed by TLC), the reaction mixture was concentrated in vacuo. The crude mixture was purified by column chromatography on silica gel using ethyl acetate/petroleum ether 1:1 as the eluents to give corresponding product Fa.
6b,11b-Dihydroxy-9,9-dimethyl-7-(p-tolyl)-8,9,10,11b-tetrahydro-6bH-acenaphtho[1,2-b]indol-11(7H)-one (Fa). White solid, Rf = 0.23, m.p. 240–242 °C. IR (KBr, cm−1) ν: 3598, 2961, 2870, 1790, 1606, 1511, 1436, 1406, 1283, 1038, 783. 1H NMR (300 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 7.94–6.93 (m, 10H, ArH), 6.46 (s, 1H, OH), 5.80 (s, 1H, OH), 2.38–1.79 (m, 7H, CH3 + 2 × CH2), 1.01 (s, 3H, CH3), 0.83 (s, 3H, CH3). 13C NMR (100 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 194.5, 168.6, 149.7, 145.7, 142.4, 140.9, 139.8, 136.0, 135.0, 134.9, 134.2, 133.8, 132.7, 130.1, 128.6, 126. 6, 124.8, 115.9, 107.8, 91.9, 56.3, 42.3, 38.7, 34.7, 32.3, 26.2. HRMS (ESI) m/z: Calcd. for C27H25NO3Na [M + Na]+ 434.1732. Found: 434.1734.

4. Conclusions

In summary, we have developed an efficient protocol for the construction of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives via the domino reaction of enaminones with acenaphthoquinone catalyzed by l-proline. This protocol has the advantages of mild reaction conditions, high yields and operational convenience.

Supplementary Materials

Copies of the 1H-NMR and 13C-NMR spectra of the compounds are available in the online Supplementary Materials.

Author Contributions

J.W. and Y.W. conceived and designed the experiments. G.-N.Z., X.Y. and M.Z. performed the experiments. W.N. performed the experiments supporting the proposed reaction mechanism. G.-N.Z. wrote the manuscript with the help of J.W. and Y.W. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

Financial support for this research provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81473098, 81473099, and 81703366) and the CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (2016-I2M-3-014, 2016-I2M-1-011, and 2017-I2M-3-019) is gratefully acknowledged.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Somei, M.; Yamada, F. Simple indole alkaloids and those with a nonrearranged monoterpenoid unit. Nat. Prod. Rep. 2004, 21, 278–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Bandidni, M.; Eichholzer, A. Catalytic functionalization of indoles in a new dimension. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 9608–9644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Kochanowska-Karamya, A.J.; Hamann, M.J. Marine indole alkaloids: Potential new drug leads for the control of depression and anxiety. Chem. Rev. 2010, 110, 4480–4497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chen, I.; Safe, S.; Bjeldanes, L. Indole-3-carbinol and diindolymethane as aryl hydrocarbon (Ah) receptor agonists and antagonists in T47D human breast cancer. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1996, 51, 1069–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Suzen, S.; Buyukbingol, E. Anti-cancer activity studies of indolalthiohydantoin (PTT) on certain cancer cell lines. Farmaco 2000, 55, 246–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Giagoudakis, G.; Markantonis, S.L. Relationships between the concentrations of prostaglandins and the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs indomethacin, diclofenac, and ibuprofen. Pharmacotherapy 2005, 25, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Suzen, S.; Buyukbingol, E. Evaluation of anti-HIV activity of 5-(2-phenyl-3’-indolal)-2-thiohydantoin. Farmaco 1998, 53, 525–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Walter, G.; Liebl, R.; voa Angerer, E. 2-Phenylindole sulfamates: Inhibitors of steroid sulfatase with antiproliferative activity in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2004, 88, 409–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ge, X.; Yannai, S.; Rennert, G.; Gruener, N.; Fares, F.A. 3,3’-Diindolymethane induces apoptosisin human cancer cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1996, 228, 153–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Horton, D.A.; Bourne, G.T.; Smythe, M.L. The combinational synthesis of bicyclic privileged structures or privileged substructures. Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 893–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Shiri, M. Indoles in multicomponent process (MCPs). Chem. Rev. 2012, 112, 3508–3549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Lescot, E.; Muzard, G.; Markovits, J.; Belleney, J.; Roques, B.P.; Lepecq, J.B. Synthesis of 11H-pyridocarbazoles and derivatives. Comparison of their DNA binding and antitumor activity with those of 6H- and 7H-pyridocarbazoles. J. Med. Chem. 1986, 29, 1731–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Thevissen, K.; Marchand, A.; Chaltin, P.; Meert, E.M.K.; Cammue, B.P.A. Antifungal carbazoles. Curr. Med. Chem. 2009, 16, 2205–2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Scopton, A.; Kelly, T.R. Synthesis of HKI 0231B. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 10004–10012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Kraus, A.; Wu, T. A concise synthesis of 5-demethyl-HKI 0231A and 5-demethyl-HKI 0231B. Tetrahedron Lett. 2006, 47, 7801–7804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chen, X.B.; Luo, T.B.; Gou, G.Z.; Wang, J.; Liu, W.; Lin, J. Selective synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives via tandem regioselective aza-ene addition/N-cycliaztion/ SN1 type reaction. Asian J. Org. Chem. 2015, 4, 921–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shan, D.; Gao, Y.; Jia, Y. Intramolecular larock indole synthesis: Preparation of 3,4-fused tricyclic indoles and total synthesis of fargesine. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2013, 52, 4902–4905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Yan, H.; Wang, H.; Li, X.; Xin, X.; Wang, C.; Wan, B. Rhodium-catalyzed C-H annulation of nitrones with alkynes: A regiospecific route to unsymmetrical 2,3-disryl-substituted indoles. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2015, 54, 10613–10617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Narayanaiyer, V.; Ninadnamdeo, R.; Dilip, H.G. Reaction of dimedone enamines with α-ketoacids. J. Chem. Res. (S) 1985, 244–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Shibata, N.; Fujimoto, H.; Mizuta, S.; Ogawa, S.; Ishiuchi, Y.; Nakamura, S.; Toru, T. Efficient synthesis of bicyclic α-hydroxy-α-trifluoromethyl-γ-lactams. Synlett 2006, 3484–3488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pei, Q.L.; Cui, B.D.; Han, W.Y.; Wu, Z.J.; Zhang, X.M. A facile synthesis of 3-hydroxy-3-(trifluoromethyl)- 1H-pyrrol-2(3H)—Ones with BrØnsted acid-catalyzed condensation-cyclization reactions of β-enamino esters and ethyl trifluoropyruvate. Tetrahedron 2014, 70, 4595–4601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Tietze, L.F. Domino reactions in organic synthesis. Chem. Rev. 1996, 96, 115–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Zubarev, A.A.; Larionova, N.A.; Rodinovskaya, L.A.; Mortikov, V.Y.; Shestopalov, A.M. Synthesis of 2,5-asymmetrically substituted 3,4-diaminothieno[2,3-b]thiophenes by domino reaction. ACS Comb. Sci. 2013, 15, 546–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Feng, X.; Wang, J.J.; Zhang, J.J.; Cao, C.P.; Huang, Z.B.; Shi, D.Q. Regioselective synthesis of functionalized [1,8]naphthyridine derivatives via three-component domino reaction under catalyst-free conditions. Green Chem. 2015, 17, 973–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Fu, L.; Feng, X.; Zhang, J.J.; Hu, J.D.; Xun, Z.; Wang, J.J.; Huang, Z.B.; Shi, D.Q. Highly efficient construction of a bridged pentacyclic skeleton via a six-component domino reaction under microwave irradiation. Green Chem. 2015, 17, 1535–1545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Xun, Z.; Feng, X.; Wang, J.J.; Shi, D.Q.; Huang, Z.B. Multicomponent strategy for the preparation of pyrrolo[1,2-a]pyrimidine derivatives under catalyst-free and microwave irradiation conditions. Chin. J. Chem. 2016, 34, 696–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lin, W.; Hu, X.X.; Wang, Y.Z.; Song, S.; Zhang, M.Y.; Shi, D.Q. Microwave-assisted synthesis of 3-substituted indole derivatives via three-component domino reaction. Chin. J. Org. Chem. 2018, 38, 855–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hu, J.D.; Cao, C.P.; Lin, W.; Hu, M.H.; Huang, Z.B.; Shi, D.Q. Selective synthesis of polyfunctionalized pyrido[2,3-b]indoles by multicomponent domino reactions. J. Org. Chem. 2014, 79, 7935–7944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Cao, C.P.; Xu, C.L.; Lin, W.; Li, X.M.; Hu, M.H.; Wang, J.X.; Huang, Z.B.; Shi, D.Q.; Wang, Y.C. Microwave-assisted improved synthesis of pyrrolo[2,3,4-kl]acridine and dihydropyrrolo[2,3,4-kl]acridine derivatives catalyzed by silica sulfuric acid. Molecules 2013, 18, 1613–1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Yang, J.M.; Li, Q.; Zhang, J.J.; Lin, W.; Wang, J.X.; Wang, Y.C.; Huang, Z.B.; Shi, D.Q. Ultrasound-promoted one-pot, four-component synthesis of pyridine-2(1H)-one derivatives. Molecules 2013, 18, 14519–14528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Wang, J.X.; Zhang, J.J.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, G.N.; Wang, Y.C.; Shi, D.Q. An efficient and multi-component synthesis of functionalized pyrazole derivatives. Heterocycles 2017, 94, 531–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, J.X.; Gao, Y.; Zhang, J.J.; Zhang, G.N.; Ren, J.F.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, Y.C.; Shi, D.Q. An efficient and multi-component synthesis of 5-imino-3,5-dihydro-2H-chromeno[3,4-c] pyridine-2-one derivatives. Heterocycles 2017, 94, 1143–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sample Availability: Samples of compounds 3a3n are available from the authors.
Figure 1. Crystal structure of compound 3g.
Figure 1. Crystal structure of compound 3g.
Molecules 23 03045 g001
Scheme 1. Proposed mechanism of the synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives 3.
Scheme 1. Proposed mechanism of the synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives 3.
Molecules 23 03045 sch001
Scheme 2. Preliminary mechanism study.
Scheme 2. Preliminary mechanism study.
Molecules 23 03045 sch002
Table 1. Optimization of the reaction conditions.
Table 1. Optimization of the reaction conditions.
Molecules 23 03045 i001
EntrySolventCatalyst (mol %)Temperature (°C)Yield (%)
1EthanolNoReflux19
2EthanolL-Proline (10)Reflux41
3ChloroformL-Proline (10)Reflux28
4THFL-Proline (10)Reflux40
51,4-DioxaneL-Proline (10)Reflux23
6DMFL-Proline (10)8042
7WaterL-Proline (10)8020
8TolueneL-Proline (10)8065
9Toluenep-TSA (10)8046
10TolueneS-Phenylalanine (10)8018
11ToluenePhenylamine (10)8030
12ToluenePyrrolidine(10)8056
13ToluenePiperidine(10)8060
14TolueneBenzylamine(10)8040
15TolueneDibenzylamine(10)8063
16TolueneL-Proline (5)8045
17TolueneL-Proline (15)8059
18TolueneL-Proline (20)8045
19TolueneL-Proline (10)40Trace
20TolueneL-Proline (10)6025
21TolueneL-Proline (10)Reflux80
Reactions were performed using 1a (1 mmol), 2 (1 mmol) in solvent (5 mL).
Table 2. Synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives 3.
Table 2. Synthesis of acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole derivatives 3.
Molecules 23 03045 i002
EntryR1R2ProductYield (%)
1CH34-CH33a80
2CH33-Cl-4-F3b82
3CH34-CH3O3c85
4CH34-Br3d76
5CH34-NO23e70
6CH33,5-(CH3)23f78
7CH3H3g80
8CH32-Cl3h82
9CH34-t-Bu3i80
10HH3j84
11H2-Cl3k79
12H2,4-(CH3)23l80
13H4-t-Bu3m81
14H3,5-(CH3)23n83
15CH32-t-Bu3otrace
16CH32,6-(t-Bu)23ptrace

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, G.-N.; Yuan, X.; Niu, W.; Zhu, M.; Wang, J.; Wang, Y. An Efficient Synthesis of Acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole Derivatives via Domino Reaction. Molecules 2018, 23, 3045. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/molecules23113045

AMA Style

Zhang G-N, Yuan X, Niu W, Zhu M, Wang J, Wang Y. An Efficient Synthesis of Acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole Derivatives via Domino Reaction. Molecules. 2018; 23(11):3045. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/molecules23113045

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Guo-Ning, Xia Yuan, Weiping Niu, Mei Zhu, Juxian Wang, and Yucheng Wang. 2018. "An Efficient Synthesis of Acenaphtho[1,2-b]indole Derivatives via Domino Reaction" Molecules 23, no. 11: 3045. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/molecules23113045

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop