Skip to the content
Browse the library

Buchwald–Hartwig amination: N-(1,3-dimethylpyrazol-4-yl)-4-iodo-5-(trifluoromethyl)pyridin-2-amine → 2-[[2-[(1,3-dimethylpyrazol-4-yl)amino]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-4-pyridyl]amino]-6-methoxy-N-methyl-benzamide

75% yield, run at 100 °C, as recorded by experimental reaction archive. The written procedure is below.

verified record, 75% 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

CNCOCCNCCCNCCNCNCCNCCCFFFCCCCOCI
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
ReactantN-(1,3-dimethylpyrazol-4-yl)-4-iodo-5-(trifluoromethyl)pyridin-2-amineC₁₁H₁₀F₃IN₄—
Reactant2-amino-6-methoxy-N-methylbenzamideC₉H₁₂N₂O₂—
ReagentCesium carbonateCCs₂O₃—
Catalyst1,1'-(9,9-Dimethyl-9H-xanthene-4,5-diyl)bis(1,1-diphenylphosphine)C₃₉H₃₂OP₂—
CatalystPalladium (II) acetateC₄H₈O₄Pd—
Solvent1,4-DioxaneC₄H₈O₂—
Product2-[[2-[(1,3-dimethylpyrazol-4-yl)amino]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-4-pyridyl]amino]-6-methoxy-N-methyl-benzamideC₂₀H₂₁F₃N₆O₂75%

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
100 °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

  • 75% of 2-[[2-[(1,3-dimethylpyrazol-4-yl)amino]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-4-pyridyl]amino]-6-methoxy-N-methyl-benzamide.

Procedure

Copied from the source record, unedited

A suspension of 2-amino-6-methoxy-N-methylbenzamide (9.55 g, 52.99 mmol), N-(1,3-dimethyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)-4-iodo-5-(trifluoromethyl)pyridin-2-amine (13.5 g, 35.33 mmol), diacetoxypalladium (0.397 g, 1.77 mmol), (9,9-dimethyl-9H-xanthene-4,5-diyl)bis(diphenylphosphine) (2.044 g, 3.53 mmol) and cesium carbonate (20.72 g, 63.59 mmol) in dioxane (150 mL) was degassed with argon, which was also let to bubble for 10 minutes then stirred at 100 °C overnight (yellow-ish dense suspension turning grey lighter). The reaction mixture was allowed to cool to rt, the insolubles were removed by filtration, washed with EtOAc and the filtrate was concentrated. (Insolubles~25g, which seemed to contain very little P1 by TLC and LCMS). The crude product (24.5g) was purified by flash chromatography on silica

The source

This record comes from experimental reaction archive (ord-240c47d4226747c780fd84f26f44a48f). Open the source and check it against what is on this page.

  • experimental reaction archive record ord-240c47d4226747c780fd84f26f44a48f 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.