Chemistry
Majority of disclosed routes for the synthesis of 1 involves the use of 2 as the key starting material. There were no reports on the use of 5 for the preparation of 1. Synthesis of 2 in the laboratory always resulted in the isolation of a mixture of 2 and 5. Starting material 2, procured from DL Intrachem was also found to contain almost 10-12% of 5. The preparation of pure 2 from the mixture will be a tedious process and results in loss, making it expensive. The prohibiting cost of 2 and its scarce availability had led us to explore the use of 5 instead of 2 for the decarboxylative coupling with 6 to isolate 1 (Scheme 1) in high yield and purity. In order to improve the raw material efficiency, minimize the expenditure and effluent load, efforts were put on towards the recovery of silver nitrate from the inorganics and dichloromethane and acetonitrile from the filtrates.
The simple reaction mechanism for the decarboxylative coupling reaction of 6 with 5 through free radical pathway was shown in Scheme 2. Free radical will be formed by the interaction of ammonium persulfate, silver nitrate and 6 in aqueous acetonitrile medium. The free radical thus generated, gets coupled with 5 and chlorine radical will be expelled from the compound 5 leading to the formation of 1 along with the generation of silver chloride.
Optimization of silver nitrate molar quantity for the reaction
Various experiments were conducted using silver nitrate and 5 in the molar ratio of 0.8:1 to 2:1 (Table 1) for the synthesis of 1. Encouraging result with respect to yield (39.6%) was obtained when 5, 6 and silver nitrate were used in equimolar ratios (Table 1, Exp. No: 2), whereas in the prior arts the molar ratio used are in the range of 0.3 to 0.7 molar equivalents of silver nitrate with respect to 5 which gave very low (less than 20%) yields. Upon using silver nitrate in higher molar ratios, there was no significant increase in the yield of 1 (Table 1, Exp. No: 3-5). All the experiments were done by the use of 5 (2.00 g, 8.81 mmol), 6 (2.10 g, 8.81 mmol), 20 mL of acetonitrile and 26 mL of DM water with different input quantity of silver nitrate.
Table 1. Experimental results obtained by the use of silver nitrate in different molar ratios.
Exp. No.
|
Input quantity of silver nitrate
|
Molar ratio
|
Yield
|
1.
|
1.19 g, 7.05 mmol
|
0.8:1
|
24.1%
|
2.
|
1.49 g, 8.81 mmol
|
1.0:1
|
39.6%
|
3.
|
1.94 g, 11.45 mmol
|
1.3:1
|
39.7%
|
4.
|
2.53 g, 14.93 mmol
|
1.7:1
|
39.5%
|
5.
|
2.99 g, 17.62 mmol
|
2.0:1
|
39.6%
|
Selection of reagents for the decarboxylative coupling reaction
Various combination of reagents for decarboxylative coupling reaction were tried with an intention to replace the prior art disclosed combination of silver nitrate/ammonium persulfate for the synthesis of 1. Distinct experiments (Table 2) were carried out by the use of 5 (2.00 g, 8.81 mmol), 6 (2.10 g, 8.81 mmol), 20 mL of acetonitrile and 26 mL of DM water with different reagent combinations for decarboxylative coupling, like sodium molybdate (1.81 g, 8.81 mmol)/hydrogen peroxide (0.7 mL, 26.4 mmol), sodium molybdate (1.81 g, 8.81 mmol)/ammonium persulfate (6.03 g, 26.4 mmol), red mercuric oxide (1.75 g, 8.81 mmol)/ammonium persulfate (6.03 g, 26.4 mmol), silver nitrate (1.49 g, 8.81 mmol)/oxone (10.83 g ,17.62 mmol) and silver nitrate (1.49 g, 8.81 mmol)/ammonium persulfate (6.03 g, 26.4 mmol). Experimental results clearly indicate that none of the reagent combinations gave satisfactory results as compared to silver nitrate and ammonium persulfate (Table 2, Exp. No: 5). In few experiments (Table 2, Exp. No: 1-3), disappearance of 6 was observed by TLC but there was no formation of 1 due to free radical degradation. In an instance, (Table 2, Exp. No: 4) 1 was isolated but with too many impurities. This indicates that the free radical formed undergoes some other reaction leading to the formation of by-products.
Table 2. Experimental results obtained by the use of various decarboxylative coupling reagents for the synthesis of 1
Exp. No.
|
Reagents for coupling
|
Outcome
|
Inference by TLC
|
1.
|
Sodium molybdate/hydrogen peroxide31
|
discarded
|
no product formation
|
2.
|
Sodium molybdate/ammonium persulfate
|
discarded
|
no product formation
|
3.
|
Red mercuric oxide/ammonium persulfate32
|
discarded
|
5% product formation
|
4.
|
Silver nitrate/oxone33
|
purity: 53.5%
yield: 84.8%
|
product with more impurities
|
5.
|
Silver nitrate/ammonium persulfate
|
purity: 98.8%
yield: 39.5%
|
product with least impurities
|
Experiments for the selection of better solvent for the reaction
Prior art discloses the use of acetonitrile for the synthesis of 1 by decarboxylative coupling reaction. Various solvents like sulfolane, N,N-dimethylacetamide, acetone, N,N-dimethylformamide, N-methylpyrrolidine, tetrahydrofuran, isopropyl alcohol, acetonitrile and water were used in different experiments to select the best solvent for the reaction. Distinct experiments were done using 5 (2.00 g, 8.81 mmol), 6 (2.10 g, 8.81 mmol), silver nitrate (1.49 g, 8.81 mmol), ammoium persulfate (6.03 g, 26.4 mmol), 26 mL of DM water and 20 mL of solvent (Table 3). From the results, it was evident that none of the solvents were found to be the useful alternatives to acetonitrile (Table 3, Exp. No: 8). In an experiment with the use of sulfolane (Table 3, Exp. No: 1), more impurities were formed along with 1, with a yield of 12.7%. In majority of remaining experiments (Table 3, Exp. No: 2-7) product formation was negligible. Reaction was tried in water alone by avoiding the solvent (Table 3, Exp. No: 9), but the product formed was pasty in nature and hence got adhered to the sides of the flask.
Table 3. Results of experiments done using various solvents for synthesis of 1
Exp. No.
|
Solvent used for the experiment
|
Outcome
|
Inference by TLC
|
1.
|
Sulfolane
|
yield: 12.7%
|
80-85% product purity
|
2.
|
N,N-dimethylacetamide
|
discarded
|
2-5% product formation
|
3.
|
Acetone
|
discarded
|
1-2% product formation
|
4.
|
N N-dimethylformamide
|
yield: 10.4%
|
70-75% product purity
|
5.
|
N-methylpyrrolidine
|
discarded
|
1-2% product formation
|
6.
|
Tetrahydrofuran
|
discarded
|
3-5% product formation
|
7.
|
Isopropyl alcohol
|
discarded
|
2-3% product formation
|
8.
|
Acetonitrile
|
yield: 38.9%
|
95-98% product purity
|
9.
|
DM water
|
sticky mass
|
80-85% product purity
|
Variation in the sequence of addition of reagents and solvents for the reaction
As per the prior art disclosures, the reaction has to be carried out by the slow addition of an aqueous solution of ammonium persulphate to the mixture of 5, 6 and silver nitrate in acetonitrile at 75-800C under stirring. To enhance the yield, we varied the reagent addition sequence and the resultant outcomes were tabulated (Table 4) and examined to finalize the sequence of addition of reagents and solvents. All the experiments were carried out using 5 (5.00 g, 0.022 mol), 6 (5.25 g, 0.022 mol), silver nitrate (3.73 g, 0.022 mol), ammonium persulfate (15.10 g, 0.066 mol), 50 mL of acetonitrile and 65 mL of DM water. Reaction progress was monitored by TLC and if the conversion progress was satisfactory, reaction mixture was worked up to isolate 1. Experimental outcome indicates that the sequence of addition of reagents and solvents will decide the yield and quality of 1. Best results are obtained when all the reagents are added together and then gradually raised the reaction mixture temperature to 75-800C (Table 4, Exp. No: 4). When all the reagents are added together, as soon as the radicals of 6 are generated they immediately will react with 5 to give 1. In the remaining experiments (Table 4, Exp. No: 1, 2, 3 and 5), free radicals generated would get degraded (no product formation) or it undergoes side reactions contributing to the formation of by-products (lower yield).
Table 4. Results of experiments done to optimize the reagent and solvent addition sequence
Exp. No.
|
Sequence of addition of reagents and solvents
|
Outcome
|
Inference by TLC
|
1.
|
6, silver nitrate, ammonium persulfate, DM water and acetonitrile were taken in the reactor. Reaction mixture was heated to 75-800C. 5 was added at 75-800C under stirring.
|
discarded
|
no product formation
|
2.
|
5, 6 and acetonitrile were taken in the reactor. Heated the reaction mixture to 75-800C. Aqueous solution of silver nitrate and ammonium persulfate was added drop wise at 75-800C.
|
discarded
|
only 10-15% of product formation
|
3.
|
5, 6, silver nitrate and acetonitrile were taken in the reactor. Reaction mixture was heated to 75-800C. Aqueous solution of ammonium persulfate was added to the reaction at 75-800C.
|
purity: 97.44%
yield: 28.30%
|
product formed with more impurities
|
4.
|
5, 6, silver nitrate, ammonium persulfate and acetonitrile were taken in the reactor. Reaction mixture was stirred at 25-300C for 15 minutes, added DM water and heated gradually to 75-800C.
|
purity: 97.58%
yield: 39.80%
|
product formed with less impurities
|
5.
|
5, 6, silver nitrate, ammonium persulfate and acetonitrile were taken in the reactor. Reaction mixture was stirred at 25-300C for 15 minutes, added DM water and continued stirring at 25-300C.
|
discarded
|
only 5-10% of product formation
|
Recovery and reuse of silver nitrate, from and for the reaction
Expensive silver nitrate will be used in considerable amounts for the decarboxylative coupling reaction. It contributes to about 30% of cost for the synthesis of 1. Hence recovery/reuse concept was ventured in order to increase the reagent efficiency and to reduce the process expenditure. During the reaction, silver nitrate would get converted to silver chloride and the same was converted back to silver nitrate by a series of reactions. Initially silver chloride was reduced to silver by zinc dust and ammonia solution. Free silver metal isolated was washed with dilute sulfuric acid solution to remove the unreacted silver chloride and then dried. It was later treated with nitric acid to regenerate silver nitrate with 95% yield and 98.5% purity (by assay). Regenerated silver nitrate was effectively reused for the reaction without impacting the quality and quantity of the product. The mechanism by which AgCl gets generated was shown in Scheme 2. The overall recovery pathway was schematically shown in Scheme 3.