Skip to the content
Browse the library

Buchwald–Hartwig amination: 4-chloro-N-[(1S)-1-(5-fluoropyrimidin-2-yl)ethyl]-6-morpholin-4-yl-1,3,5-triazin-2-amine → N-[(1S)-1-(5-Fluoropyrimidin-2-yl)ethyl]-N'-(5-methyl-1,3-thiazol-2-yl)-6-morpholin-4-yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine

21% yield, run at 95 °C, as recorded by experimental reaction archive. The written procedure is below.

verified record, 21% yield recorded, Not balanced as written, From experimental reaction archive

Reagents, catalysts and solvents are in the table below.

The atoms, from reactants to products

CCCNCNCNCNCCCNCCFCNNCNCCOCCNSCl
Reactants · 1/6
breakingformingbond order changesmapped atom that changes

Drawn from the record's atom map: which bonds break and which form between the reactants and products the source listed. It shows a change in connectivity, not a simulated trajectory and not a mechanism.

What was in the flask

RoleSpeciesFormulaYield
Reactant4-chloro-N-[(1S)-1-(5-fluoropyrimidin-2-yl)ethyl]-6-morpholin-4-yl-1,3,5-triazin-2-amineC₁₃H₁₅ClFN₇O—
Reactant2-Amino-5-methylthiazoleC₄H₆N₂S—
ReagentCesium carbonateCCs₂O₃—
CatalystBinap, (A+-)-C₄₄H₃₂P₂—
CatalystBis(dibenzylideneacetone)palladiumC₅₁H₄₂O₃Pd₂—
Solvent1,4-DioxaneC₄H₈O₂—
ProductN-[(1S)-1-(5-Fluoropyrimidin-2-yl)ethyl]-N'-(5-methyl-1,3-thiazol-2-yl)-6-morpholin-4-yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamineC₁₇H₂₀FN₉OS20.67%

The equation does not balance as written. That is usual for an experimental record: the source listed what it put in and what it measured, not a stoichiometric equation.

Conditions

Temperature
95 °C

Only the dimensions the source stated are listed. Anything absent here was not recorded, and it is not inferred from what the class usually needs.

Yield

  • 21% of N-[(1S)-1-(5-Fluoropyrimidin-2-yl)ethyl]-N'-(5-methyl-1,3-thiazol-2-yl)-6-morpholin-4-yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine.

Procedure

Copied from the source record, unedited

(S)-4-chloro-N-(1-(5-fluoropyrimidin-2-yl)ethyl)-6-morpholino-1,3,5-triazin-2-amine (100 mg, 0.29 mmol), 5-methylthiazol-2-amine (50.4 mg, 0.44 mmol), BINAP (18.33 mg, 0.03 mmol), Pd2(dba)3 (13.48 mg, 0.01 mmol) and Cs2CO3 (240 mg, 0.74 mmol) were combined in a microwave reaction tube and vacuum purged. The tube was then charged with nitrogen and dioxane (0.589 mL) was added. The tube was then evacuated again and placed under a nitrogen balloon for 8 hours. LC/MS confirmed formation of the product (m+1 = 418) at t= 2.07 min. The reaction mixture was concentrated in vacuo leaing a brown solid (472 mg). This material was the redissolved in EtOAc, filtered through Celite, washed with water and dried with Na2SO4. Concentration in vacuo gave a rust solid (272 mg). This material was purified by

The source

This record comes from experimental reaction archive (ord-9f0febad39ec4abd95b00a68a93da5f3). Open the source and check it against what is on this page.

  • experimental reaction archive record ord-9f0febad39ec4abd95b00a68a93da5f3 from dataset "750 AstraZeneca ELN dataset" (url: https://chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxiv/article-details/60c9e3f37792a23bfdb2d471). No atom mapping is provided by the source.

    experimental record · quality medium · source

experimental reaction record.

How to read this record

This is one experiment, not a rule. It says that on one occasion these species were combined under these conditions and this came out. It does not say the reaction will give the same result on your substrate, and nothing on the page has been generalised into a claim that it would.

The pathway is a separate question, kept on separate pages. A mechanism here is the canonical arrow pushing for a class, run on real structures and labelled rule-derived. It is not evidence, and this record is not a mechanism.