New insights on reaction pathway selectivity promoted by crown ether phase-transfer catalysis: Model ab initio calculations of nucleophilic fluorination

Crown ethers have the ability of solubilizing inorganic salts in apolar solvents and to promote chemical reactions by phase-transfer catalysis. However, details on how crown ethers catalyze ionic S(N)2 reactions and control selectivity are not well understood. In this work, we have used high level theoretical calculations to shed light on the details of phase-transfer catalysis mechanism of KF reaction with alkyl halides promoted by 18-crown-6. A complete analysis of the of the model reaction between KF(18-crown-6) and ethyl bromide reveals that the calculations can accurately predict the product ratio and the overall kinetics. Our results point out the importance of the K* ion and of the crown ether ring in determining product selectivity. While the K* ion favors the S(N)2 over the E2 anti pathway, the crown ether ring favors the S(N)2 over E2 syn route. The combination effects lead to a predicted 94% for the S(N)2 pathway in excellent agreement with the experimental value of 92%. A detailed analysis of the overall mechanism of the reaction under phase-transfer conditions also reveals that the KBr product generated in the nucleophilic fluorination acts as an inhibitor of the 18-crown-6 catalyst and it is responsible for the observed slow reaction rate. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes and a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack

Background-Patients with acute coronary syndromes and history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) have an increased rate of recurrent cardiac events and intracranial hemorrhages. Methods and Results-We evaluated treatment effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome with and without a history of prior stroke or TIA in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Of the 18 624 randomized patients, 1152 (6.2%) had a history of stroke or TIA. Such patients had higher rates of myocardial infarction (11.5% versus 6.0%), death (10.5% versus 4.9%), stroke (3.4% versus 1.2%), and intracranial bleeding (0.8% versus 0.2%) than patients without prior stroke or TIA. Among patients with a history of stroke or TIA, the reduction of the primary composite outcome and total mortality at 1 year with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel was consistent with the overall trial results: 19.0% versus 20.8% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.13; interaction P=0.84) and 7.9% versus 13.0% (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.91). The overall PLATO-defined bleeding rates were similar: 14.6% versus 14.9% (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.37), and intracranial bleeding occurred infrequently (4 versus 4 cases, respectively). Conclusions-Patients with acute coronary syndrome with a prior history of ischemic stroke or TIA had higher rates of clinical outcomes than patients without prior stroke or TIA. However, the efficacy and bleeding results of ticagrelor in these high-risk patients were consistent with the overall trial population, with a favorable clinical net benefit and associated impact on mortality.

Rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack: a subgroup analysis of ROCKET AF

Background In ROCKET AF, rivaroxaban was non-inferior to adjusted-dose warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to investigate whether the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin is consistent among the subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Methods In ROCKET AF, patients with AF who were at increased risk of stroke were randomly assigned (1:1) in a double-blind manner to rivaroxaban 20 mg daily or adjusted dose warfarin (international normalised ratio 2-0-3.0). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Between Dec 18,2006, and June 17,2009,14 264 patients from 1178 centres in 45 countries were randomly assigned. The primary endpoint was the composite of stroke or non-CNS systemic embolism. In this substudy we assessed the interaction of the treatment effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin among patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done in the on-treatment population. ROCKET AF is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00403767. Findings 7468 (52%) patients had a previous stroke (n=4907) or TIA (n=2561) and 6796 (48%) had no previous stroke or TIA. The number of events per 100 person-years for the primary endpoint in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (2.79% rivaroxaban vs 2.96% warfarin; hazard ratio [HR] 0-94,95% CI 0.77-1.16) and those without (1.44% vs 1.88%; 0.77, 0.58-1-01; interaction p=0.23). The number of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding events per 100 person-years in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (13.31% rivaroxaban vs 13.87% warfarin; HR 0.96,95% CI 0.87-1-07) and those without (16.69% vs 15.19%; 1.10, 0.99-1.21; interaction p=0.08). Interpretation There was no evidence that the relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was different between patients who had a previous stroke or TIA and those who had no previous stroke or TIA. These results support the use of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin for prevention of recurrent as well as initial stroke in patients with AF.