Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
The chemical story of 3,5-Di-O-Benzoyl-2-Deoxy-2,2-Difluoro-D-Erythropentane-1,4-Lactone starts in the world of nucleoside analogues, dating from an era when researchers first realized the power of fluorine substitution in sugar moieties. Fluorinated compounds, especially in the area of antiviral drug design, have become synonymous with inventive strategies in the pharmaceutical sciences. Over the last fifty years, pharmaceutical researchers have consistently tapped into such molecules to shape more potent and selective therapies. Early synthetic routes toward this compound came out of the push to understand how sugar modification can sharpen both the stability and biological activity of nucleoside drugs. Today, the development echoes decades of trial, error, and iterative progress within labs focused on treatments for viral infections, cancer, and rare genetic disorders.
3,5-Di-O-Benzoyl-2-Deoxy-2,2-Difluoro-D-Erythropentane-1,4-Lactone belongs to a distinct segment of protected fluorinated sugars, often used as building blocks in the synthesis of advanced nucleoside analogues. What’s striking about this compound is how the dual benzoyl groups provide functional protection for the hydroxyl sites and how the difluoro modification locks in a specific stereochemical profile. Chemists regard such a design as the toolkit for the synthesis of several pharmaceuticals where molecular tweaking can make the difference between a life-saving compound and a dead-end intermediate. Across pharma grade categories—BP, EP, and USP—the product represents validated consistency, driven by demands from global pharmacopeias.
A white to off-white crystalline powder, this compound holds both solidity and purity in high regard, due to strict purification processes throughout manufacturing. Structural analysis reveals a rigid lactone ring, which creates a certain robustness against unwanted hydrolysis during downstream reactions. In practical lab terms, I have always appreciated its good solubility in organic solvents like dichloromethane, chloroform, or even acetonitrile. The fluorine atoms on the erythropentane backbone show up distinctly on NMR spectra, simplifying QC checks and reinforcing confidence in both structure and batch purity. Melting points usually hover around 110–120°C, while the stability under dry conditions gives it a respected shelf life in storage rooms worldwide.
Suppliers package this pharma-grade compound with tight control over labelling. Every label must clearly mention batch number, manufacturing and expiry dates, and an assay percentage—most reputable batches deliver over 99% purity with minimal residual solvents. Moisture content runs below 0.5%, and total impurities rarely break the 1% mark. Labelling practices also flag critical storage conditions: dry, cool, and protected from direct sunlight. As someone who’s spent years behind the bench, I can say the most unforgiving research deadlines often hinge on those fine print details—consistent labeling minimizes painful setbacks.
Most current synthetic routes start with selective benzoylation of precursor diols, usually protected via acyl anhydrides or benzoyl chlorides, before the critical introduction of fluorine. The fluorination steps typically use reagents like DAST or Deoxo-Fluor under carefully controlled temperatures; improper control here risks side products or even explosive runaways in worst-case scenarios. After incorporation of the difluoro motifs, closing the lactone ring is both art and science, often catalyzed by acid under anhydrous conditions, monitored by TLC and eventually HPLC for final purity. The workups demand precision, thorough washing, and careful drying to ensure stability at the final stage.
Once commercial labs get their hands on this difluoro lactone, the canvas expands. Deprotection of the benzoyl groups creates the free sugar analogues for direct conversion into nucleoside intermediates. Chemists modify these cores to fashion drug candidates targeting viral polymerases or kinases. The difluoro configuration alters electron density and steric profile, steering both reactivity and binding patterns once incorporated into larger molecules. Over the years, I’ve watched labs routinely tune such molecules through selective hydrolysis, further acylation, or glycosylation reactions—every step presents its own unique troubleshooting moments that help teams sharpen both process know-how and creativity.
In catalogues, researchers might find this compound listed under a series of alternative names—3,5-Di-O-Benzoyl-2-deoxy-2,2-difluoro-D-erythro-pentono-1,4-lactone, Difluoro Benzoyl Lactone, or simply as a difluorinated lactone intermediate. Such naming shorthand lets different specialities talk about the same molecule without confusion, easing communication between synthetic chemists, pharmacologists and regulatory teams involved in late-stage drug development.
Lab protocols around this compound focus on both chemical and operator safety. Personal experience warns that benzoylation reagents and fluorinating agents carry their own special risks—skin irritation, respiratory hazards, and acute toxicity from accidental inhalation or spills. Facilities dealing with pharma grade intermediates run HEPA-filtered fume hoods and maintain strict documentation. Storage setups feature desiccators or sealed containers, critical for keeping the product away from accidental water ingress. Transport and handling checklists align with ICH Q7A and cGMP standards, closing off risks of cross-contamination or mix-ups, which would ripple through any subsequent clinical batch development.
Most applications live in the synthesis of anti-infective drugs—especially antivirals geared toward hepatitis, HIV, and herpetic viruses. The difluorinated sugar backbone helps create nucleoside analogues with stronger binding to viral targets and better resistance to metabolic breakdown in the liver. In industrial settings, these intermediates make the difference for bulk API production and custom medicinal chemistry programs. Outside anti-infectives, cancer research increasingly turns to such fluorinated analogues for targeted therapy programs, guided by promising early-phase data.
Ongoing R&D reflects broad interest across academic and commercial sectors. Medicinal chemists leverage this lactone as a jumping-off point for tweaking sugar puckering, electronegativity, and even overall three-dimensional fit inside protein targets. I’ve worked beside teams screening for polymerase inhibitors and kinase modulators, with each modification to the sugar moiety offering new leads or eliminating lukewarm candidates. Analytical chemists use this compound to benchmark new NMR methods for fluorine coupling, while process chemists continually search for “greener” or safer fluorination strategies. That spirit of collaboration and competition keeps the science moving.
Before scaling up any batch for clinical investigation, research teams run detailed toxicity screens covering acute, repeated-dose, genotoxic and reproductive safety. In my experience reviewing safety files, the parent compound through to its downstream analogues often sails through these screens due to both limited systemic absorption and rapid clearance. The difluorinated and benzoylated versions frequently show low reactivity under simulated digestive conditions—though vigilance never slacks off. Toxicologists dig for the rare cases of fluorinated metabolite persistence, especially in the setting of immune-compromised patients, demanding robust animal and in-vitro studies.
Looking ahead, the future shines bright for protected, fluorinated sugar lactones like this one. The hunger for new nucleoside and nucleotide therapeutics only grows as old diseases resurface and new ones emerge—a sobering reality for the world after pandemics. Synthetic advances in late-stage fluorination, or in milder and more selective benzoylation, promise both greener chemistry and better access for emerging markets. Regulatory bodies push manufacturers for documentation, traceability, and crystal-clear supply chains—a challenge but also a catalyst for quality advances. As the bridge between raw chemical innovation and therapeutic breakthrough, this compound’s legacy continues through every new researcher who picks up a vial and pushes the science a little further.
Most folks don’t spend their days thinking about complex organic molecules, yet the choices scientists make matter when it comes to fighting tough viruses. Some names in the lab are forgettable; others stick around for good reason. Take 3,5-Di-O-Benzoyl-2-Deoxy-2,2-Difluoro-D-Erythropentane-1,4-Lactone. Tucked inside that heavy name is a bridge between pure science and real medicine.
My years covering medical science taught me how these odd-sounding substances don’t appear out of thin air. They’re the backbone for major advances—especially in the field of antiviral drugs. This compound shows up in the early stages of crafting nucleoside analogues, which are the chemical tools used to build drugs that block the reproduction of viruses inside the body.A huge reason this molecule got attention has to do with the difluoro substitution. Just swapping out two atoms can change how a molecule interacts with enzymes inside the cell: that’s the trick behind several effective antiviral and anticancer medicines. Researchers at big pharma and universities both use this chemical framework to help build drugs that trip up dangerous viruses like HIV and hepatitis C—some even eye it for research fighting cancer cells.
There’s science behind why these types of compounds became essential. Fluorinated nucleosides often survive longer in the bloodstream and resist being broken down by natural enzymes. That means bigger punch for each dose, and more selective attack against viruses, while reducing the chances the treatment will harm healthy cells. Back in school, I sat through lectures that showed how these small improvements drive down the cost of care and keep side effects at bay. A good example is gemcitabine—a cancer chemotherapy agent with roots in similar chemical tweaks.Pharmaceutical companies need reliable starting materials to deliver these kinds of drugs. 3,5-Di-O-Benzoyl-2-Deoxy-2,2-Difluoro-D-Erythropentane-1,4-Lactone fits this need. Its structure has chemical “handles” that let chemists bolt on different groups, making it highly flexible for drug design. Reliable sources have verified that it serves as a key intermediate in a wide range of experimental treatments, some already moving through clinical testing.
Availability of specialty building blocks like this one shows how the research supply chain affects end products on pharmacy shelves. Costs can soar if starting materials run short or purities fall; I’ve heard from chemists who lost weeks of work to a single unreliable shipment. The entire sector benefits from open data, robust quality checks, and investment in safe production. Reliable partnerships between life science suppliers and drug makers give scientists the strongest footing.Drug developers still face pressure to deliver faster and with fewer side effects. Substances like 3,5-Di-O-Benzoyl-2-Deoxy-2,2-Difluoro-D-Erythropentane-1,4-Lactone let them move quickly on promising ideas. Building a drug isn’t just mixing chemicals in a bottle. It’s about smart shortcuts, well-chosen handles, and working from pieces you know will deliver results. That’s what this compound gives modern pharmaceutical teams—a head start and a toolset for designing tomorrow’s antiviral and anticancer drugs.
Most folks working with pharma grade compounds understand that a lot rides on the details. The small print on the safety data sheet doesn’t just exist for show—handling practices lock in the actual safety and quality a lab claims on paper. Many seasoned technicians, including myself, have learned from close calls that keeping a compound within its sweet spot guards both results and reputations.
Let’s talk temperature. The specific range always matters. Product that’s just a few degrees above its suggested condition can start to degrade, even if it looks fine. Many of us remember days where a shipment sat in the wrong spot for just half a shift and had to be tossed. Most pharma compounds require a stable 2°C–8°C, with the monitoring log sheet to back up claims. I once watched a regulatory inspector ignore the clean sparkle of our refrigerator and focus entirely on the daily checks and temperature alarms.
Few things can crumble a batch faster than creeping moisture. Moisture control isn’t just critical for powders or anything hygroscopic. Even the wrong humidity in a general storage area can lead to slow changes you’d only spot far too late. In my first months in the lab, the old timers always mentioned how one bad spell of damp heat warped both packaging and trust with our customers. Modern HVAC systems paired with basic silica packets often keep this risk in check, but they only work when checked. Compound stored in an atmosphere-controlled chamber—never close to water sources or open windows—gives the best shot at keeping things right.
Light feels like no big deal until a product’s color dulls or its reactivity profile shifts. Pharma compounds with labels like “keep in the dark” or “protect from light” aren’t making idle suggestions. The industry grew smarter after too many turned out batches that passed initial quality checks but failed months later. No clear jars, no unshaded benches—a lightproof cabinet or amber vials have become the rule for sensitive stock.
Security means more than just locking cabinets. Lax practices can lead to a dose of cross-contamination or mislabeling. Assigning a clear responsibility for every batch during storage and movement has cut down headaches in more than one facility I’ve worked in. To stay ready for audits, every opening and move gets written down. It’s the difference between catching a barcode scan error in minutes, or at the recall stage.
Handling pharma grade compounds, especially any with known toxicity or allergenic risks, demands respect and the right barrier gear. I’ve seen colleagues develop sensitivity after rushing a routine transfer without gloves. Standard practice now involves gloves, lab coats, safety goggles, and fit-tested masks for volatile or dust-forming materials. Immediate access to spill kits, eye washes, and clear signage for storage sites makes all the difference. Facilities with regular drills experience less panic and less waste.
Transport always threatens stability. Cold chain logistics sound impressive, but they only work with trained staff and reliable data loggers. I recall a case where a broken logger led the recipient to quarantine an entire batch, rather than risk compromised supply. Only transport with proper UN-rated containers, seals intact, full documentation, and evidence of stable conditions wins trust from reviewing authorities.
Regular retraining beats cutting corners. Storage protocols aren’t static—audits, fresh data, and new supplier instructions mean procedures need tuning. Open conversation in a team helps everyone take pride in their role protecting patients and partners down the line. The goal isn’t perfection, just vigilance. By focusing on strong habits and honest records, teams do more to protect the public than any pile of paperwork alone.
Working in pharma, the word “compliance” comes up every day. BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia) set the rules for what counts as quality and safety in raw materials and medicines. These standards aren’t just checkboxes—they affect people’s lives. As a scientist who’s worked in both quality control labs and on manufacturing floors, I’ve seen how products labeled as “compliant” sometimes fall short after deeper scrutiny.
Misunderstandings pop up when someone asks, “Is this product compliant?”—yet the batch documents, supplier data sheets, or lab results don’t actually line up with the pharmacopeial monographs. More than once, our team caught paperwork that suggested compliance, only to find contaminants or out-of-spec properties in independent tests. At that point, it’s not just about rules—it’s about risk to patients and real financial fallout.
Standards in BP, EP, and USP go beyond simple purity and identification tests. They reach into trace metals, residual solvents, water content, and test procedures. It’s tempting to take supplier statements at face value, but real compliance means every batch continues to meet the specification—through documented, validated testing done at GMP-level labs. Experience taught me: shortcutting the verification process can backfire fast.
One memorable case involved a supplier assuring us their excipient checked all the boxes for EP and USP, but their COA (Certificate of Analysis) referenced outdated test methods. By the time our lab detected heavy metals above EP limits, production ground to a halt. That’s where detailed audits and method validation become necessary. Practically, compliance means not just passing tests once, but repeatable, proven quality in every lot.
Overlooking full pharmacopeial compliance leads to a host of problems. Patients could experience unexpected reactions. Hospitals would recall products, and your company might face regulatory fines or lawsuits. Reputations can disappear faster than you think. Fake compliance costs more than just money—it erodes trust.
I’ve witnessed production stops because of missing microbial results or a mismatched reference standard. The fix often takes far longer (and costs far more) than if we’d double-checked the compliance upfront. Job stress goes through the roof while teams scramble to find alternatives, reschedule validations, and provide extra documentation for auditors.
Instead of relying on supplier claims, teams should compare product specs, batch records, and independently verified COAs to the full list of pharmacopeial requirements. Make direct audits of new suppliers, review their quality systems, and verify that analytical methods match current monographs. Put real trust in solid documentation, routine trend monitoring, and proactive validation—rather than last-minute fixes.
Good training makes all the difference. When everyone handling release testing or paperwork knows the current BP, EP, and USP standards, mistakes drop. Communication, both up and down the supply chain, turns overlooked compliance gaps into manageable challenges. Everyone from lab analyst to QA manager needs access to up-to-date standards and time to keep their skills fresh.
At the end of the day, ticking all the boxes for BP, EP, and USP creates stronger products. It lets companies scale internationally and gives patients and healthcare professionals confidence. For me, seeing a batch record that’s earned robust compliance feels a whole lot better than scrambling on the defensive. It also saves time, money, and peace of mind in every corner of the pharma world.
Anyone working in labs knows the purity of a compound tells a big part of the safety and success story. A slight impurity can send research in a different direction or skew pharmaceutical results. From my time in an academic lab, aiming for at least 98% purity became an unspoken rule. This level stands as a line between reliable data and endless troubleshooting. High-performance liquid chromatography, gas chromatography, and mass spectrometry all stand as gatekeepers, flagging traces of anything that shouldn’t be there. Companies like Sigma-Aldrich and Thermo Fisher usually post purity figures openly: ninety-eight percent, ninety-nine percent, sometimes higher. These numbers aren’t just marketing points—they signal clarity, reliability, and trust to anyone who has to repeat an experiment or follow regulatory standards.
Poor purity introduces side reactions, unexpected byproducts, and compliance headaches. Researchers working on drug development or polymer synthesis often share stories of chasing ghosts in spectra or dealing with dead-end reactions that trace back to purity lapses. I've seen entire weeks lost to trying to trace what seemed like human error, only for the source to be a cheap batch of chemicals with too much noise in the data. Making a case for high-purity always feels personal when you’re the one redoing experiments.
The packaging side gets less attention than it should. Typical sizes run from as low as one gram up to kilograms, shaped around cost, stability, and safety. For everyday reagents, small vials—one, five, or ten grams—cut down exposure to air and moisture and help manage budgets. Large industrial customers, especially in food or electronics, order bulk—fifty kilograms, or even drums measured by the hundredweight. At a teaching lab I worked in, we ordered just a few grams at a time. That kept compounds fresh and prevented storage problems. Large manufacturers might prize sealed containers for safer transit. Reliable suppliers use heavy-duty, tamper-evident packaging and often nitrogen or argon atmospheres for sensitive materials. If you find yourself paying a bit more for powder in a sealed flask, remember the headaches it’s saving long term.
Regulations often demand documentary evidence for quality—pharmacopeias call for measured purity levels. For the U.S., USP and ACS grades define benchmarks. If a pharmaceutical project rolls out, suppliers might state “USP compliant, >99.5%.” Industrial and electronic applications sometimes work with slightly lower grades, but the bar stays high. Laxity here risks damage to devices or exposure to contaminants that nobody wants. I recall a project team investigating residue on semiconductor wafers; the culprit turned out to be a supplier drop in purity. Once we switched to a better grade, the defects vanished.
Choosing compounds with published certificates of analysis has become non-negotiable in most serious labs. Cross-verification using in-house tests gives peace of mind. Building solid relationships with trusted distributors pays off. If you spot a price that looks too good to be true, it usually is—cut-rate packaging and vague purity figures bring hidden costs. Some research groups group orders to keep shipping and handling more affordable, and many catalog suppliers allow for customized packaging sizes to avoid waste. Asking up front for purity details and packaging specs saves everyone from costly setbacks. Keeping integrity at the center of every order supports better science and safer industry practices.
Years ago, during a lab internship, I watched someone mix solvents a little too casually. The spill stained their coat and reeked up the place—luckily, nothing worse. That moment taught me to never underestimate a bottle simply because its label sounds technical or dull.
Every chemical behaves differently once it's out of the storage cabinet. Some burn, some eat through skin, others poison with just a sniff. Before popping a lid, check the safety data sheet. It’s not just a long paper to file away—inside those pages, you’ll find clear warnings on what the chemical can do and what will make it react. If that’s a new name or formula, set time aside for this step, always. There’s no glory in pretending you know.
Never trust that a chemical is 'safe' without gear. Gloves matter, but so do goggles, a lab coat, and closed shoes. Some solvents burn right through cheap gloves, while acids splash higher than you think. Airborne fumes call for a proper mask or even a respirator. Buy real PPE, not the thin stuff that falls apart in a pinch. The short time it takes to suit up beats weeks of healing burns or lung trouble.
Lunch and chemistry mix about as well as bleach and ammonia. Wash your hands, bag your snacks, and keep bottles away from the workspace. Contamination creeps up on people who get too comfortable. If a chemical splashes or lingers on hands, crumbs and sips can bring it right inside.
Open windows don’t count as proper ventilation if the job gets smelly or makes any kind of gas or vapor. Fume hoods and strong exhaust fans move air out fast so toxins don’t hang around. This protects everyone in the building, not just the person at the bench.
Chemicals react with stuff they weren’t meant to touch. Mix-ups in storage—putting acids next to bases, or oxidizers near flammables—have led to fires and ruined labs. It’s not enough to glance at shelf labels. Keep chemicals in their original containers, with clear labels and lids tightened. If you’re unsure where it should go, double-check with someone who’s handled it before.
Preparation doesn’t just mean preventing spills or burns. Every worker should know emergency exits, how to use an eyewash station, and what to do if a bottle tips over. Safety drills might feel boring until something bursts or smoke rolls up. Quick action beats panic—keep emergency numbers posted where everyone can see them.
Experienced workers need reminders just as much as newcomers. New hires bring questions, but even veterans miss details if they skip training updates. Keep knowledge fresh, and encourage people to speak up about near misses or equipment that looks sketchy. Mistakes shared can prevent future injuries for everyone.
Routine check-ins and annual safety reviews catch habits that slip through the cracks. Bringing in outside trainers once in a while can help people spot shortcuts they’ve started taking. Label shelves and bottles so no one has to guess. Keep chemicals locked when not in use so no one wanders in and gets hurt just for being curious.
| Identifiers | |
| Beilstein Reference | 489950 |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
