4.7 Article

Cu-Catalyzed Oxidative [3+2] Annulation of 2-(Pyridine-2-yl)acetates with Maleimides: Synthesis of 1H-Pyrrolo[3,4-b]indolizine-1,3-diones

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 87, 期 22, 页码 15301-15311

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.joc.2c01879

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Yunnan Province
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  3. Scientific and Technological Innovation Team of Green Synthesis and Activity Research of Natural-like Heterocyclic Compound Libraries in Universities of Yunnan Province
  4. [2019FY003003]
  5. [21662042]
  6. [C17624011121]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel protocol for the synthesis of highly functionalized indolizine derivatives, known as 1H-pyrrolo[3,4-b]-indolizine-1,3-diones (PIZDOs), has been developed through regioselective oxidative [3 + 2] annulation. The cascade oxidative reaction was achieved by heating a mixture of 2-(pyridine-2-yl)acetates and maleimides in the presence of Ag2CO3 and Cu(OAc)center dot H2O catalyst in chlorobenzene. The method allows for the one-pot oxidative annulation reaction to synthesize functionalized PIZDOs instead of multiple steps reactions, making it suitable for both combinatorial and parallel syntheses of PIZDOs.
A novel protocol for the construction of highly functionalized indolizine derivatives, that is, 1H-pyrrolo[3,4-b]-indolizine-1,3-diones (PIZDOs, 3) from 2-(pyridine-2-yl)acetates and maleimides via a regioselective oxidative [3 + 2] annulation was developed. The cascade oxidative reaction was enabled by heating a mixture of the two substrates in the presence of Ag2CO3 as an oxidant and Cu(OAc)center dot H2O as a catalyst in chlorobenzene. Consequently, a series of PIZDOs 3 were synthesized with high regioselectivity in moderate yields. This protocol can be used in the synthesis of functionalized PIZDOs via the one-pot oxidative annulation reaction rather than through multistep reactions, which is suitable for both combinatorial and parallel syntheses of PIZDOs.

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

4.7
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