Dalton transactions (Cambridge, England : 2003) · 2023
Ruthenium(II) polypyridyl complexes with visible light-enhanced anticancer activity and multimodal cell imaging.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kang Yan, Zhao Yao, Wei Yuanyuan, Zhang Yang, Wang Zhaoying, Luo Qun, Du Jun, Wang Fuyi
Аннотация
Ruthenium(II) polypyridyl complexes have drawn growing attention due to their photophysical properties and anticancer activity. Herein we report four ruthenium(II) polypyridyl complexes [(N^N)2RuII(L)]2+ (1-4, L = 4-anilinoquinazoline derivatives, N^N = bidentate ligands with bis-nitrogen donors) as multi-functional anticancer agents. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is overexpressed in a broad range of cancer cells and related to many kinds of malignance. EGFR inhibitors, such as gefitinib and erlotinib, have been approved as clinical anticancer drugs. The EGFR-inhibiting 4-anilinoquinazoline ligands greatly enhanced the in vitro anticancer activity of these ruthenium(II) polypyridyl complexes against a series of human cancer cell lines compared to [Ru(bpy)2(phen)], but interestingly, these complexes were actually not potent EGFR inhibitors. Further mechanism studies revealed that upon irradiation with visible light, complexes 3 and 4 generated a high level of singlet oxygen (1O2), and their in vitro anticancer activities against human non-small-cell lung (A549), cervical (HeLa) and squamous (A431) cancer cells were significantly improved. Specifically, complex 3 displayed potent phototoxicity upon irradiation with blue light, of which the photo-toxicity indexes (PIs) against HeLa and A431 cells were 11 and 8.3, respectively. These complexes exhibited strong fluorescence emission at ca. 600 nm upon excitation at about 450 nm. A subcellular distribution study by fluorescence microscopy imaging and secondary ion mass spectrometry imaging (ToF-SIMS) demonstrated that complex 3 mainly localized at the cytoplasm and complex 4 mainly localized in the nuclei of cells. Competitive binding with ctDNA showed that complex 4 was more favorable to bind to the DNA minor groove than complex 3. These differences support that complex 3 possibly exerts its anticancer activities majorly by photo-induced 1O2 generation and complex 4 by binding to DNA.