| Literature DB >> 32825480 |
Miljan N M Milunović1, Oleg Palamarciuc2, Angela Sirbu2, Sergiu Shova3, Dan Dumitrescu4, Dana Dvoranová5, Peter Rapta5, Tatsiana V Petrasheuskaya6,7, Eva A Enyedy6,7, Gabriella Spengler7,8, Marija Ilic9,10,11, Harald H Sitte10, Gert Lubec11, Vladimir B Arion1.
Abstract
A class="Chemical">series of fourEntities:
Keywords: copper(II) complexes; cytotoxicity; organic cation transporters (OCT1–3), inhibitors; thiosemicarbazones
Year: 2020 PMID: 32825480 PMCID: PMC7565988 DOI: 10.3390/biom10091213
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Figure 1Basic structural features of thiosemicarbazones determining their biological activity.
Figure 2The line drawings of salicylaldehyde thiosemicarbazone (STSC) analogues [H and their copper(II) complexes 1–4. The C atoms (1–18) and N atoms (1′–4′) labelling in the proligands is used for NMR resonances assignment.
Crystallographic data for 2–4.
| Parameter | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Empirical formula | C26H49.81Cl4Cu2N8O6.91S2 | C14H28.45ClCuN4O4.22S | C18H32Cl2CuN4O6S |
| Formula weight | 918.03 | 451.51 | 566.97 |
| Temperature/K | 293 | 100 | 293 |
| Crystal system | triclinic | monoclinic | monoclinic |
| Space group | |||
| 11.8147(4) | 16.951(3) | 8.7395(8) | |
| 13.5950(5) | 25.050(5) | 34.147(2) | |
| 13.7575(5) | 9.7040(19) | 8.8692(6) | |
|
| 89.099(3) | ||
| 65.774(4) | 106.39(3) | 108.701(9) | |
|
| 86.133(3) | ||
| 2010.38(14) | 3952.9(15) | 2507.1(4) | |
|
| 2 | 8 | 4 |
| 1.517 | 1.517 | 1.502 | |
| 5.143 | 1.320 | 1.208 | |
| Crystal size/mm3 | 0.30 × 0.10 × 0.02 | 0.05 × 0.04 × 0.015 | 0.01 × 0.01 × 0.01 |
| 6.516 to 133.18 | 2.94 to 48.586 | 6.028 to 50.05 | |
| Reflections collected | 12,762 | 20,627 | 16,513 |
| Independent reflections | 70,383 [ | 3294 [ | 4421 [ |
| Data/restraints/parameters | 7038/0/467 | 3294/0/253 | 4421/0/292 |
| GOF c | 0.984 | 1.04 | 1.043 |
| 0.0482 | 0.0826 | 0.0584 | |
| 0.1395 | 0.2586 | 0.1035 | |
| Largest diff. peak/hole/e Å−3 | 0.76/−0.84 | 1.08/−0 | 0.34/−0.38 |
aR1 = Σ||Fo| − |Fc||/Σ|Fo|. b wR2 = {Σ[w(Fo2 − Fc2)2]/Σ[w(Fo2)2]}1/2. c GOF = {Σ[w(Fo2 − Fc2)2]/(n − p)}1/2, where n is the number of reflections and p is the total number of parameters refined.
Figure 3ORTEP (Oak Ridge Thermal-Ellipsoid Plot Program) view of the complexes [Cu(HL (2) (left), [Cu(L (3) (middle) and [Cu(HL (4) (right) with atom labeling scheme and thermal ellipsoids at 50% probability level. In the case of 2, only one of the crystallographically independent cations (A) is shown. Selected bond distances (Å) and bond angles (deg) for 2: Cu1–O1 = 1.910(2), Cu1–N1 = 1.960(2), Cu1–S1 = 2.2577(10), Cu1–Cl1 = 2.2397(10); O1–Cu1–N1 = 92.44(10), N1–Cu1–S1 = 85.85(8); for 3: Cu1–O1 = 1.899(5), Cu1–N1 = 1.979(5), Cu1–S1 = 2.245(2), Cu1–Cl1 = 2.240(2); O1–Cu1–N1 = 92.5(2), N1–Cu1–S1 = 86.51(17); for 4: Cu1–O1 = 1.908(3), Cu1–N1 = 1.971(3), Cu1–S1 = 2.2562(12), Cu1–Cl1 = 2.2653(11); O1–Cu1–N1 = 91.49(12), N1–Cu1–S1 = 85.96(9). The solvents and counter-anions are omitted for clarity.
Figure 4(a) UV/Vis absorption spectra of proligand [H at various pH values, and (b) its concentration distribution curves plotted together with the absorbance changes at 364 nm (●) (cL = 50 μM; I = 0.1 M (KCl); t = 25 °C).
Proton dissociation constants (pKa) of the studied proligands; overall stability constants (logβ), pKa and derived constants (logKderived) of their copper(II) complexes, pCu (=−log[Cu(II)]) values calculated (I = 0.1 M (KCl); t = 25 °C), distribution coefficients (logD7.4) of the proligands and copper(II) complexes at pH 7.4, as well as the observed rate constants (kobs) for the redox reaction of the complexes with GSH (pH = 7.4; ccomplex = 25 μM; cGSH = 1.25 mM).
| [H2LH]Cl | [H2LMe]Cl | [H2LEt]Cl | [H2LPh]Cl | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| p | 7.46 ± 0.01 | 7.54 ± 0.01 | 7.31 ± 0.01 | 7.03 ± 0.01 |
| % HL at pH 7.4 | 47% | 42% | 55% | 70% |
| log | −0.84 ± 0.03 | −0.39 ± 0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.04 | 0.68 ± 0.04 |
| log | 12.00 ± 0.01 | 11.73 ± 0.02 | 11.66 ± 0.03 | 11.26 ± 0.02 |
| log | 8.14 ± 0.01 | 7.76 ± 0.02 | 7.67 ± 0.03 | 8.55 ± 0.02 |
| log | −1.66 ± 0.02 | −1.48 ± 0.08 | −1.65 ± 0.09 | −1.31 ± 0.05 |
| p | 3.86 | 3.97 | 3.99 | 2.71 |
| p | 9.80 | 9.24 | 9.32 | 9.86 |
| log | 0.68 | 0.22 | 0.36 | 1.52 |
| pCu [e] | 12.21 | 11.79 | 11.82 | 12.80 |
| log | −1.00 ± 0.01 | −0.79 ± 0.01 | −0.40 ± 0.01 | −0.17 ± 0.01 |
| 0.080 ± 0.008 | 0.073 ± 0.002 | 0.058 ± 0.001 | 0.025 ± 0.005 |
[a]β [Cu(HL)]2+ = [Cu(HL)]2+/[Cu2+] × [HL]. [b] β [CuL]+ = [CuL]+ × [H]+/[Cu2+] × [HL]. [c] β [CuLH−1] = [CuLH−1] × [H]+ × [H]+/[Cu2+] × [HL]. [CuLH−1] = [CuL(OH)]. [d] logKderived = logβ [CuL]+ − pKa (H2L+) for the equilibrium: Cu2+ + H2L+ [CuL]+ + 2H+. [e] pCu = −log[Cu(II)] at pH = 7.4; cCu(II) = 10 μM; cL = 10 μM.
Figure 51H NMR spectra of the proligand [H (with different zooming of the selected regions for the better visibility) at various pH values with symbols used for proton resonances assignment in case of the major E isomer (black symbols) and minor Z isomer (grey symbols) and their pKa values calculated from the chemical shift changes (cL = 200 μM; I = 0.1 M (KCl); t = 25 °C; 10% (v/v) D2O/H2O).
Figure 6(a) UV/Vis absorption spectra recorded for copper(II) complex of [H (1) at various pH values, and (b) its concentration distribution curves plotted together with the absorbance changes at 330 (×) and 370 nm (●) (ccomplex = 50 μM; I = 0.1 M (KCl); t = 25 °C).
Figure 7(a) Time-dependent UV/Vis absorption spectra of 2 in the presence of 50 equiv. glutathione (GSH) before (red line) and after mixing the reactants (black lines) in a tandem cuvette. (b) Absorbance values at 370 nm (grey dots) for 2 and at 376 nm (black dots)for 4 independent of time. Absorbance read from the first spectrum recorded after mixing is considered as 100%, the empty symbols denote the absorbance values measured before mixing (pH = 7.4 (50 mM HEPES); ccomplex = 25 μM; cGSH = 1.25 mM; I = 0.1 M (KCl); t = 25 °C). The measurement was done anaerobically.
Figure 8UV/Vis spectra measured upon cathodic reduction of ca. 0.1 mM aqueous solution of 1 at pH 7 at the first reduction peak by using a honeycomb platinum working electrode (scan rate 10 mV s−1). (a) UV/Vis spectra measured upon cathodic reduction in the forward scan and (b) UV/Vis spectra measured during one cyclic voltammetric scan (inset: the corresponding in situ cyclic voltammogram).
Figure 9(a) EPR spectra of ca. 0.1 mM of 1 in aqueous solution at pH 7 measured before (red trace) and after addition of excess GSH after 10 min (blue trace) and 20 min (dark yellow trace) of the reaction; (b) EPR spectra of ca. 0.1 mM of 3 in aqueous solution at pH 7 measured before (red trace) and after addition of excess GSH after 10 min (blue trace) of the reaction; (c) EPR spectra of DMPO spin-adducts for 1 in water + DMPO + H2O2 system measured on air after 2 min of reactions (blue trace) and for 1 in water + GSH + DMPO + H2O2 system measured on air after 2 min of reactions (red trace): c0(1) = 0.4 mM, c0(H2O2) = 0.01 M, c0(DMPO) = 0.04 M, c0(GSH) = 1.2 mM.
IC50 values after inhibition of cell growth by the proligands [H and 1–4 in human doxorubicin-sensitive (Colo205), multidrug-resistant (Colo320) adenocarcinoma, neuroblastoma (SH-SY5Y) cell lines and non-cancerous human embryonal lung fibroblast (MRC-5).
| Compound | Colo205 | Colo320 | SH-SY5Y | MRC-5 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 h [b] | 72 h [b] | 24 h | 72 h | 24 h | 72 h | 24 h | 72 h | |
|
| >100 [c] | >100 | >100 | 88.77 ± 5.32 | >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | 74.43 ± 3.85 | >100 | >100 | >100 | >100 |
|
| >100 | >100 | 63.83 ± 3.92 | 53.30 ± 2.44 | 88.13 ± 9.19 | 49.86 ± 3.97 | >100 | >100 |
|
| >100 | >100 | >100 | 95.81 ± 1.58 | >100 | 31.46 ± 2.66 | >100 | >100 |
|
| 88.79 ± 4.40 | >100 | >100 | 65.38 ± 3.71 | 45.44 ± 9.1 | 38.15 ± 1.15 | >100 | >100 |
|
| 73.4 ± 2.24 | 53.34 ± 3.31 | >100 | 80.64 ± 1.57 | 23.35 ± 3.57 | 15.35 ± 1.74 | >100 | 51.53 ± 4.67 |
|
| 27.51 ± 1.68 | 28.59 ± 2.02 | 30.47 ± 3.27 | 35.41 ± 1.87 | 10.34 ± 2.65 | 8.93 ± 0.5 | 57.79 ± 2.65 | 22.6 ± 1.81 |
|
| 36.99 ± 3.06 | 42.81 ± 4.23 | 45.02 ± 2.49 | 65.14 ± 2.93 | 38.07 ± 5.18 | 58.64 ± 7.18 | 52.71 ± 6.49 | 25.64 ± 2.57 |
|
| 68.82 ± 5.08 | 8.14 ± 1.59 | 12.69 ± 0.79 | 2.12 ± 0.14 | 26.03 ± 2.38 | 0.65 ± 0.08 | 55.67 ± 4.06 | 1.73 ± 0.28 |
[a] IC50 values were calculated as mean values obtained from three independent experiments. IC50 values are quoted with their standard deviations (SD). [b] IC50 values were established after the exposure time of 24 and 72 h. [c] The sign > indicates that the IC50 value is not reached in the examined range of concentrations.
Figure 10Concentration-response curves of [H and 1–4 for the inhibition of [3H]-MPP+ uptake via organic cation transporter (OCT) 1–3. HEK cells stably expressing human isoforms of OCT1–3 were incubated with the increasing concentrations of the tested drugs and tritiated substrate, [3H]-MPP+, for 10 min. Curves were fitted using nonlinear regression and data points are expressed as the mean ± SD of 3–4 experiments performed in triplicates. [H (○), [H (□), [H (), [H (), 1 (●), 2 (■), 3 (▲), 4 (▼).
[3H]-MPP+ uptake inhibition by [H and 1–4 in HEK OCT1–3 cells.
| Compound | OCT1 | OCT2 | OCT3 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 740.2 ± 194.8 | >4000 | 105.1 ± 32.8 |
|
| 390.8 ± 40.0 | >4000 | 102.8 ± 23.4 |
|
| 168.6 ± 26.2 | 236.2 ± 97.1 | 63.1 ± 8.9 |
|
| 118.9 ± 50.0 | 370.8 ± 123.2 | 27.8 ± 5.0 |
|
| 268.6 ± 31.5 | 8.5 ± 0.9 | 6.6 ± 1.9 |
|
| 113.4 ± 21.8 | 7.6 ± 0.2 | 2.4 ± 0.4 |
|
| 32.2 ± 2.9 | 4.0 ± 0.3 | 1.3 ± 0.5 |
|
| 0.25 ± 0.08 | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 0.62 ± 0.27 |
|
| 0.98 ± 0.31 | 1.13 ± 0.19 | 0.09 ± 0.01 |
|
| 1.84 ± 0.48 | >100 | 12.6 ± 2.93 |
|
| 21.7 ± 2.44 | 34.2 ± 6.47 | 0.29 ± 0.04 |
[a] IC50 values derived from concentration-response curves. IC50 values are quoted with their standard deviations (SD). Values are mean ± SD of 3–4 independent experiments performed in triplicates. [b] IC50 values were taken from ref. [33].