PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16466254

Chemoselectivities in acetalization, thioacetalization, oxathioacetalization and azathioacetalization.

Abstract

In the present article (experimental as well theoretical) the relative yields of cyclic (O,O), (S,S), (S,O), and (S,N) acetals, formed from p-(NO2)C6H4CHO and p-(OH)C6H4CHO, are compared. Atomic charges, global electrophilicity descriptor (w) [as proposed by Parr et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 1922] and hard-soft acid-base concept of Pearson (J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963, 85, 3533) are used to explain the experimental observations. Although the w values can explain the yields, charge and local softness values of the interacting sites explain the plausible reaction mechanism. The bisnucleophiles chosen for acetalization are CH2(OH)-CH2(OH) (glycol), CH2(SH)-CH2(SH) (dithiol), CH2(OH)-CH2(SH) (oxathiol) and CH2(SH)-CH2(NH2) (azathiol). For p-(NO2)C6H4CHO, the experimental yield of cyclic acetals were found to follow the trend as (S,N) > (S,O) > (O,O) > (S,S), which is also supported by theoretical explanation based on the w values and applying the concept of hard-hard (i.e., charge-controlled) and soft-soft (i.e., orbital-controlled) interaction between the interacting sites of the substrates (i.e., aldehydes) and the reactants (bisnucleophiles). Similarly, for p-(OH)C6H4CHO the relative yields of cyclic acetals follow the trend (S,N) approximately (S,S) > (S,O) > (O,O). It is argued that the attack on C(CHO) (i.e., C-atom of the CHO group) in p-(NO2)C6H4CHO by O(OH) (i.e., O-atom of OH group) or N(NH2) (i.e., N-atom of NH2 group) is mainly charge-controlled but the attack on C(CHO) in p-(OH)C6H4CHO) by S(SH) (i.e., S-atom of SH group) is orbital-controlled.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ram Kinkar Roy, Priyanka Bagaria, Sarala Naik, Veerababurao Kavala, Bhisma K Patel. 2006-02-16. Chemoselectivities in acetalization, thioacetalization, oxathioacetalization and azathioacetalization.. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp054626t

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗