4.8 Article

Impact of the Difluoromethylene Group in the Organocatalyzed Acylative Kinetic Resolution of α,α-Difluorohydrins

期刊

ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION
卷 60, 期 47, 页码 24924-24929

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/anie.202107041

关键词

acylation; alcohols; difluoromethylene group; isothiourea; organocatalysis

资金

  1. Aix-Marseille Universite
  2. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)
  3. ANR (Agence Nationale de la Recherche) [ANR-18-CE07-0036]
  4. Universite de Lyon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reported an enantioselective organocatalyzed acylation of alpha,alpha-difluorohydrins using a commercially available chiral isothiourea, greatly improving the enantioselectivity of the kinetic resolution process through electrostatic fluorine-cation interactions. The method allows for the synthesis of various fluorinated alcohols with exquisite enantiocontrol, such as 4,4-difluoro-1,3-diols, as well as demonstrated compatibility between aromatic and fluorinated groups in providing enantioenriched adducts.
Due to the omnipresence of chiral organofluorine compounds in pharmaceutical, agrochemical, and material chemistry, the development of enantioselective methods for their preparation is highly desirable. In the present study, the enantioselective organocatalyzed acylation of alpha,alpha-difluorohydrins using a commercially available chiral isothiourea is reported through a kinetic resolution (KR) process. It reveals that the difluoromethylene moiety (C(sp(3))F-2) can serve as a directing group through electrostatic fluorine-cation interactions, greatly improving the enantioselectivity of the KR. In this context, a broad range of fluorinated alcohols such as valuable 4,4-difluoro-1,3-diols could be synthesized with exquisite enantiocontrol (typically >99:1 er). Turning to 2,2-difluoro-1,3-diols, we also demonstrated that aromatic and fluorinated groups were mutually compatible to provide the expected enantioenriched adducts with >99:1 er.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据