| Literature DB >> 29321581 |
Valdenizia Rodrigues Silva1, Rodrigo S Corrêa2, Luciano de Souza Santos1, Milena Botelho Pereira Soares1,3, Alzir Azevedo Batista4, Daniel Pereira Bezerra5.
Abstract
Combination of multifunctionalities into one compound is a rational stEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29321581 PMCID: PMC5762908 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-18639-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Synthetic route to obtain the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6.
Figure 2Crystal structure of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 with main atoms labelled and ellipsoids at 30% probability. For clarity, the PF6 − was omitted.
Cytotoxic activity of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU).
| Cells | IC50 in µM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DOX | OXA | 5-FU | RU/5-FU | |
| MCF7 | 1.4 | 6.0 | 14.1 | 7.6 |
| 0.6–2.4 | 4.0–10.0 | 11.3–18.1 | 3.8–15.4 | |
| HCT116 | 0.5 | 4.3 | 4.1 | 1.5 |
| 0.1–0.7 | 2.8–6.1 | 1.9–8.5 | 1.3–1.8 | |
| HepG2 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 2.8 |
| 0.1–0.8 | 0.8–2.4 | 0.3–6.1 | 2.1–3.8 | |
| SCC9 | 0.4 | N.d | 127.1 | 2.3 |
| 0.3–0.9 | 117.0–143.3 | 1.7–3.0 | ||
| HSC3 | 0.8 | 3.4 | 16.3 | 1.7 |
| 0.3–1.2 | 1.5–5.4 | 11.3–19.5 | 1.4–2.0 | |
| HL-60 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 12.6 | 2.6 |
| 0.2–0.9 | 0.1–2.2 | 9.5–16.7 | 2.3–2.9 | |
| K562 | 0.2 | 1.2 | 19.4 | 2.0 |
| 0.1 - 0.6 | 0.5–2.5 | 12.7–24.7 | 1.7–2.5 | |
| B16-F10 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 3.5 | 2.1 |
| 0.1–0.4 | 0.1–1.4 | 2.1–5.9 | 1.8–2.4 | |
| MRC-5 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 57.9 | 9.5 |
| 1.1–2.3 | 0.7–2.2 | 39.8–84.4 | 8.3–10.9 | |
| PBMC | 5.1 | 12.4 | 78.0 | 5.7 |
| 2.3–8.8 | 8.5–17.4 | 66.4–84.1 | 4.1–7.4 | |
Data are presented as IC50 values in μM and their respective 95% confidence interval obtained by nonlinear regression from at the least three independent experiments performed in duplicate, measured by alamar blue assay after 72 h incubation. Cancer cells: MCF7 (human breast carcinoma); HCT116 (human colon carcinoma); HepG2 (human hepatocellular carcinoma); SCC-9 (human oral squamous cell carcinoma); HSC-3 (human oral squamous cell carcinoma); HL-60 (human promyelocytic leukemia); K-562 (human chronic myelogenous leukemia); and B16-F10 (mouse melanoma). Non-cancer cells: MRC-5 (human lung fibroblast) and PBMC (human peripheral blood mononuclear cells). Doxorubicin (DOX), oxaliplatin (OXA) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were used as the positive controls. N.d. Not determined.
Selectivity index of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU).
| Cancer cells | Non-cancer cells | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRC-5 | PBMC | |||||||
| DOX | OXA | 5-FU | RU/5-FU | DOX | OXA | 5-FU | RU/5-FU | |
| MCF7 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 4.1 | 1.3 | 3.6 | 2 | 5.5 | 0.8 |
| HCT116 | 3.2 | 0.3 | 14.1 | 6.3 | 10.2 | 2.9 | 19 | 3.8 |
| HepG2 | 5.3 | 0.9 | 44.5 | 3.4 | 17 | 8.3 | 60 | 2.1 |
| SCC-9 | 4 | N.d. | 0.5 | 4.1 | 12.8 | N.d. | 0.6 | 2.5 |
| HSC-3 | 2 | 0.4 | 3.6 | 5.6 | 6.4 | 3.7 | 4.8 | 3.4 |
| HL-60 | 3.2 | 2.8 | 4.6 | 3.7 | 10.2 | 24.8 | 6.2 | 2.2 |
| K-562 | 8 | 1.2 | 3 | 4.8 | 25.5 | 10.3 | 4 | 2.9 |
| B16-F10 | 8 | 2 | 16.5 | 4.5 | 25.5 | 17.7 | 22.3 | 2.7 |
Data are presented the selectivity index (SI) calculated using the following formula: SI = IC50[non-cancer cells]/IC50[cancer cells]. Cancer cells: MCF7 (human breast carcinoma); HCT116 (human colon carcinoma); HepG2 (human hepatocellular carcinoma); SCC-9 (human oral squamous cell carcinoma); HSC-3 (human oral squamous cell carcinoma); HL-60 (human promyelocytic leukemia); K-562 (human chronic myelogenous leukemia); and B16-F10 (mouse melanoma). Non-cancer cells: MRC-5 (human lung fibroblast) and PBMC (human peripheral blood mononuclear cells). Doxorubicin (DOX), oxaliplatin (OXA) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were used as the positive controls. N.d. Not determined.
Figure 3Effect of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) in the cell viability of HCT116 cells determined by trypan blue staining. The gray bars represent number of viable cells (x104cells/mL) and the white bars represent cell inhibition (%). The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX, 1 µM), oxaliplatin (OXA, 2.5 µM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU, 4 µM) were used as the positive controls. Data are presented as the mean ± S.E.M. of three independent experiments performed in duplicate. *P < 0.05 compared with the negative control by ANOVA followed by Student Newman-Keuls test.
Figure 4Effect of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) in 3D in vitro model of cancer multicellular spheroids formed from HCT116 cells. (A) Cells examined by light microscopy (bar = 100 µm). (B) IC50 values in μM and their respective 95% confidence interval obtained by nonlinear regression from three independent experiments performed in duplicate, measured by alamar blue assay 72 h after incubation. The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX), oxaliplatin (OXA) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were used as the positive controls.
Effect of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) in the cell cycle distribution of HCT116 cells.
| Treatment | Concentration (µM) | DNA content (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sub-G0/G1 | G0/G1 | S | G2/M | ||
|
| |||||
| CTL | — | 3.9 ± 1.0 | 42.0 ± 2.5 | 12.6 ± 2.8 | 28.1 ± 5.5 |
| DOX | 1 | 9.7 ± 2.5 | 28.0 ± 6.3 | 10.0 ± 2.5 | 44.1 ± 3.4* |
| OXA | 2.5 | 8.8 ± 3.5 | 32.4 ± 3.7 | 13.5 ± 3.1 | 41.6 ± 1.6* |
| 5-FU | 4 | 11.5 ± 4.6 | 37.7 ± 1.8 | 25.9 ± 3.4* | 16.9 ± 1.1 |
| RU/5-FU | 1 | 8.8 ± 1.8 | 43.6 ± 2.9 | 8.8 ± 2.3 | 32.1 ± 1.7 |
| 2 | 15.4 ± 3.2 | 35.3 ± 2.0 | 14.5 ± 2.7 | 28.0 ± 3.0 | |
| 4 | 25.9 ± 5.1* | 19.9 ± 3.6* | 15.1 ± 2.3 | 27.0 ± 2.5 | |
|
| |||||
| CTL | — | 3.3 ± 0.7 | 44.8 ± 1.1 | 13.5 ± 2.4 | 26.0 ± 2.3 |
| DOX | 1 | 18.3 ± 2.5 | 22.5 ± 4.0* | 14.9 ± 2.5 | 44.2 ± 4.4* |
| OXA | 2.5 | 17.7 ± 1.9 | 36.2 ± 2.6 | 7.6 ± 0.4 | 38.0 ± 3.4 |
| 5-FU | 4 | 18.1 ± 3.0 | 28.9 ± 3.9* | 31.8 ± 1.5* | 17.3 ± 1.2 |
| RU/5-FU | 1 | 21.8 ± 4.7* | 34.5 ± 2.9 | 14.1 ± 1.6 | 18.8 ± 2.4 |
| 2 | 28.9 ± 4.7* | 31.8 ± 2.3* | 9.3 ± 1.7 | 21.2 ± 2.8 | |
| 4 | 55.3 ± 2.7* | 15.1 ± 0.9* | 6.9 ± 1.3 | 17.1 ± 2.2 | |
Data are presented as the mean ± S.E.M. of three independent experiments performed in duplicate. The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX), oxaliplatin (OXA) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were used as the positive controls. Ten thousand events were evaluated per experiment and cellular debris was omitted from the analysis. *P < 0.05 compared with the negative control by ANOVA followed by Student Newman-Keuls Test.
Figure 5Effect of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) in the morphological analysis of HCT116 cells after 24 and 48 h incubation. The cells were stained with may-grunwald-giemsa and examined by light microscopy (bar = 20 µm). Arrows indicated cells with reduction in the cell volume, chromatin condensation or fragmented DNA. The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX, 1 µM), oxaliplatin (OXA, 2.5 µM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU, 4 µM) were used as positive controls.
Figure 6Effect of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) in the apoptosis induction in HCT116 cells determined by flow cytometry using annexin V-FITC/PI staining 24 and 48 h after incubation. (A) Representative flow cytometry dot plots showing the percentage of cells in viable, early apoptotic, late apoptotic and necrotic stages. (B) Quantification of the cell viability. The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX, 1 µM), oxaliplatin (OXA, 2.5 µM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU, 4 µM) were used as the positive controls. Data are presented as the mean ± S.E.M. of three independent experiments performed in duplicate. Ten thousand events were evaluated per experiment and cellular debris was omitted from the analysis. *p < 0.05 compared with the negative control by ANOVA followed by Student Newman-Keuls test.
Figure 7Effect of the caspase-3 inhibitor (Z-DEVD-FMK) in the apoptosis induced by the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) on HCT116 cells determined by flow cytometry using annexin V-FITC/PI staining. (A) Representative flow cytometric dot plots showing the percentage of cells in viable, early apoptotic, late apoptotic and necrotic stages. (B) Quantification of apoptotic cells. The cells were pre-treated for 2 h with 50 µM Z-DEVD-FMK, then incubated with 4 μM RU/5-FU for 48 h. The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX, 1 µM), oxaliplatin (OXA, 2.5 µM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU, 4 µM) were used as the positive controls. Data are presented as the mean ± S.E.M. of three independent experiments performed in duplicate. Ten thousand events were evaluated per experiment and cellular debris was omitted from the analysis. *p < 0.05 compared with the negative control by ANOVA followed by Student Newman-Keuls test. # p < 0.05 compared with the respective treatment without inhibitor by ANOVA followed by Student Newman-Keuls test.
Figure 8Effect of the complex [Ru(5-FU)(PPh3)2(bipy)]PF6 (RU/5-FU) in the caspase-3 activity and mitochondrial membrane potential on HCT116 cells. (A) Caspase-3 activity determined by colorimetric assay 48 h after incubation. (B) Mitochondrial membrane potential determined by flow cytometry using rhodamine 123 staining 24 h after incubation. The negative control (CTL) was treated with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO) used for diluting the compound tested. Doxorubicin (DOX, 1 µM), oxaliplatin (OXA, 2.5 µM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU, 4 µM) were used as the positive controls. Data are presented as the mean ± S.E.M. of three independent experiments performed in duplicate. Ten thousand events were evaluated per experiment and cellular debris was omitted from the analysis. *p < 0.05 compared with the negative control by ANOVA followed by Student Newman-Keuls test.