Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparative solution equilibrium studies of antitumor ruthenium(η 6 -p-cymene) and rhodium(η 5 -C 5 Me 5 ) complexes of 8-hydroxyquinolines.

Complex formation processes of [Ru(η6 -p-cymene)(H2 O)3 ]+ and [Rh(η5 -C5 Me5 )(H2 O)3 ]+ organometallic cations with 8-hydroxyquinoline (HQ) ligands were studied in aqueous solution by the combined use of 1 H NMR spectroscopy, UV-visible spectrophotometry and pH-potentiometry. Solution stability, chloride ion affinity and lipophilicity of the complexes were characterized together with the in vitro cytotoxicity against a pair of cancer cell lines, responsive and resistant to classic chemotherapy. The solid phase structure of the [Rh(η5 -C5 Me5 )(8-quinolinolato)(Cl)] complex was characterized by single-crystal X-ray diffraction analysis. In addition to the unsubstituted HQ its 7-(1-piperidinylmethyl) (PHQ) and 5-sulfonate (HQS) derivatives were involved. PHQ has a significant preference for targeting multidrug resistant cancer cell lines, while HQS served as a water soluble model compound. The equilibrium studies revealed the formation of mono[M(L)(H2 O)] complexes with prominently high solution stability, which predominate at physiological pH even in the micromolar concentration range, and the formation of mixed hydroxido [M(L)(OH)] complexes was characterized by relatively high pKa values (8.5-10.3). In comparison to the Rh(η5 -C5 Me5 ) species the complexation process with Ru(η6 -p-cymene) is much slower, and both the pKa values and the H2 O/Cl- co-ligand exchange constants are lower by 1-1.5 orders of magnitude. The stability order obtained for these organometallic complexes is as follows: HQS > HQ > PHQ. The cytotoxicity of the ligands and their Ru(η6 -p-cymene) and Rh(η5 -C5 Me5 ) complexes was investigated against MES-SA (human uterine sarcoma) cell line and its multidrug resistant counterpart (MES-SA/Dx5). HQ and its complexes show similar cytotoxicity in both cell lines. In contrast, PHQ and its Rh(η5 -C5 Me5 ) complex are more potent against MES-SA/Dx5 cells, while this selectivity could not be observed for the Ru(η6 -p-cymene) complex.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app