Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Monocyclic β-lactams are an underexplored subclass of β-lactam antibiotics active against Gram-negative pathogens, but access to them requires long sequences reported across the patent and primary literature. We compare two alternative routes to 3-amino-4-(hydroxymethyl)-2-azetidinone, a synthon carrying handles at N1, C3 and C4, starting from ethyl glyoxylate and from (R)-glyceraldehyde acetonide. Both are assembled from published transformations; reported here are isolated yields for every step, including the conditions that failed, and execution of the β-lactam-forming sequence on a 50 g scale. Removal of the 2,4-dimethoxybenzyl group was strongly concentration-dependent, giving 94% on the glyoxylate-derived ester against 70% on the acetonide-derived alcohol, whereas the acetonide route replaces a low-yielding NaBH4 ester reduction (43 to 57%) with a near-quantitative oxidative cleavage/reduction sequence. Diverting one late-stage intermediate through copper-catalyzed azide–alkyne cycloaddition or direct thioether alkylation gave three sulfonated monobactams bearing a ceftaroline-derived C4 sidechain, in 0.10 to 0.29% overall yield over 15 steps. None reduced S. pneumoniae PBP1b activity below 50% at 100 μM, against an IC50 of 4.93 μM for aztreonam, and none inhibited wild-type E. coli or S. aureus at 128 μg/mL; weak inhibition was seen only in efflux-deficient and outer-membrane-permeabilized E. coli. C4 substitution through either linkage supports activity when the appended group also provides an uptake vector, which the ceftaroline-derived side chain does not, and it conferred no measurable target affinity either.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kavaš et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: