| Literature DB >> 34207182 |
Marcus Mkhatshwa1, Joshua Mamolatelo Moremi1, Katlego Makgopa1, Amanda-Lee Ezra Manicum1.
Abstract
Globally, cancer is the second (to cardiovascular diseases) leading cause of death. Regardless of various efforts (i.e., finance, research, and workforce) to advance novel cancer theranostics (diagnosis and therapy), there have been few successful attempts towards ongoing clinical treatment options as a result of the complications posed by cancerous tumors. In recent years, the application of magnetic nanomedicine as theranostic devices has garnered enormous attention in cancer treatment research. Magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) are capable of tuning the magnetic field in their environment, which positively impacts theranostic applications in nanomedicine significantly. MNPs are utilized as contrasting agents for cancer diagnosis, molecular imaging, hyperfusion region visualization, and T cell-based radiotherapy because of their interesting features of small size, high reactive surface area, target ability to cells, and functionalization capability. Radiolabelling of NPs is a powerful diagnostic approach in nuclear medicine imaging and therapy. The use of luminescent radioactive rhenium(I), 188/186Re, tricarbonyl complexes functionalised with magnetite Fe3O4 NPs in nanomedicine has improved the diagnosis and therapy of cancer tumors. This is because the combination of Re(I) with MNPs can improve low distribution and cell penetration into deeper tissues.Entities:
Keywords: cancer; iron oxide; nanoparticles; nanotheranostic.; rhenium(I) tricarbonyl
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34207182 PMCID: PMC8235741 DOI: 10.3390/ijms22126546
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1A schematic representation of nanotheranostics used for simultaneous release and imaging.
The categories of radionuclides used as therapeutic and diagnostic agents [5].
| Radionuclide | Half-Life (t1/2) | Emission | Emax |
|---|---|---|---|
| 188Re | 89.2 h |
| 1.07 MeV |
| 186Re | 17.0 h |
| 2.12 MeV |
| 99mTc | 6.0 h |
| 140 KeV |
Scheme 1Design of the magnetoluminescent iron oxide nanoparticles. Red and blue circles represent hydrophilic Fe3O4 NPs with multiple acid functions and the luminophore, respectively [22].
Scheme 2Synthetic procedure for the IO-ReL1 and IO-ReL2 molecules. (a) 2 eq. 1,10-Phenanthroline (L1) or 2,2-bipyridine (L2), 1 eq. ClRe(CO)5, benzene, 333 K, 5 h. (b) AgOTf, THF/MeCN, 16 h. (c) H2O/THF, HCl, 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide (EDC), N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS), sonicate 30 min. (d) H2O/CAN, NaHCO3, 223 K, 17 h [22].
Figure 2Design strategies and mechanism of different theranostic approaches.
Figure 3Re(I) tricarbonyl complexes with favorable photophysical properties. Complexes 4–17 also show biological activities.
Photophysical properties of Re(I) tricarbonyl complexes 1–3 [75], 4–7 [76], 8 (L1–L7) [77] and 9–18 [78].
| Complexes | Solvent | Emission | Absorption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| τ (μs) | Φ (%) | λmax (nm) | λmax (nm)/ | ||
|
| Acetonitrile | 0.46 | 0.12 ± 0.03 | 580 | 310 (13,400); 350 (10,600) |
|
| Acetonitrile | 0.45 | 0.12 | 609 | 310 (9700); 350 (7300) |
|
| Acetonitrile | 0.58 | 0.18 | 593 | 310 (13,100), 350 (8200) |
|
| Air-equilibrated aqueous | 0.31 | 1.66 | 560 | 225 (31,300 ± 1300) 257 (18,200 ± 800) |
|
| Air-equilibrated aqueous | 0.52 | 2.14 | 560 | 24 (30,700 ± 1900) |
|
| Air-equilibrated aqueous | 0.47 | 2.38 ± 0.31 | 560 | 22 (32,300 ± 1000) |
|
| Air-equilibrated aqueous | 0.62 | 3.09 ± 0.30 | 545 | 23 (35,300 ± 600) |
| Chloroform | 0.170 | - | 577 | 276, 362, 410 | |
| Chloroform | 0.153 | - | 585 | 277, 339, 423 | |
| Chloroform | 0.143 | - | 581 | 277, 338, 423 | |
| Chloroform | 0.141 | - | 586 | 277, 337, 423 | |
| Chloroform | 0.158 | - | 582 | 282, 349, 423 | |
| Chloroform | 0.162 | - | 580 | 279, 352, 419 | |
| Chloroform | 0.185 | - | 586 | 288, 342, 423 | |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 1.5 | 5.1 ± 1.1 | 528 | 226 (36,800 ± 1300), 275 (26,800 ± 900), 322 (6400 ± 200), 366 (3600 ± 100) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 1.9 | 10.7 ± 0.6 | 516 | 225 (41,600 ± 7300), 275 (27,200 ± 4900), 323 (5700 ± 900), 367 (3200 ± 400) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 1.0 | 4.5 ± 0.4 | 518 | 228 (34,600 ± 1200), 286 (23,400 ± 800), 308 (11,900 ± 400), 372 (2100 ± 70) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 2.0 | 7.2 ± 0.2 | 507 | 227 (36,800 ± 6800), 285 (23,800 ± 700), 309 (11,500 ± 300), 373 (2100 ± 50) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 0.4 | 6.1 ± 1.7 | 536 | 222 (18,900 ± 200), 249 (20,100 ± 1900), 308 (10,700 ± 400), 318 (12,500 ± 400), 343 (3600 ± 700) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 0.6 | 9.1 ± 3.0 | 528 | 246 (22,600 ± 500), 308 (107,00 ± 200), 319 (13,000 ± 300), 345 (3400 ± 100) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 0.4 | 6.5 ± 2.0 | 528 | 252 (24,000 ± 3000), 304 (11,800 ± 1500), 315 (13,400 ± 1700), 338 (4600 ± 500) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 0.6 | 11.5 ± 3.9 | 518 | 250 (82,00 ± 4300), 305 (12,800 ± 2000), 315 (14,900 ± 2300), 339 (4000 ± 400) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 0.3 | 3.4 ± 1.1 | 537 | 223 (33,900 ± 1000), 251 (30,500 ± 900), 303 (8800 ± 300), 337 (4500 ± 80) |
|
| Air-equilibrqted Phosphate-Buffered Saline (pH 7.40) | 0.4 | 7.1 ± 3.0 | 527 | 224 (41,400 ± 2000), 251 (34,100 ± 1900), 303 (9600 ± 500), 332 (4700 ± 300) |
IC50 values of Re(I) tricarbonyl complexes 4–7 [76], 8 (L1–L7) [77], 9–18 [78], 19–22 [93], 23 [95], as compared to the cisplatin drug 24 [96,97,98,99,100].
| Complex | Cell Lines | Cell Line Target Description | IC50 (µM) | Cytotoxicity (IC50) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | >164 | Inactive (<100 μM) |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | >185 | Inactive (<100 μM) |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 36 ± 3 | Modest activity (51 μM) |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 51 ± 5 | Modest activity (36 μM) |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 26.4 ± 9.2 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 5.9 ± 1.4 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 9.6 ± 4.2 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 19.2 ± 2.9 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 14.9 ± 3.2 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 60.3 ± 18.2 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 68.0 ± 4.3 | Active |
|
| HeLa | Cervical cancer cell | 24.3 ± 9.1 | Active |
|
| A2780 | Human ovary epithelial cell, ovarian endometrioid adenocarcinoma. | 3.5 ± 2.8 | Active |
|
| A2780 | Human ovary epithelial cell, ovarian endometrioid adenocarcinoma. | 2.2 ± 1.8 | Active |
|
| A2780 | Human ovary epithelial cell, ovarian endometrioid adenocarcinoma. | 2.2 ± 0.2 | Active |
|
| HT-29 | Human colon epithelial cell, adenocarcinoma. | <250 | Active |
| PT-45 | Human pancreas epithelial cell, adenocarcinoma. | <250 | Active | |
|
| T98G | Human brain fibroblast, glioblastoma. | >50 | Active |
| PC3 | Human prostate epithelial cell, adenocarcinoma. | >50 | Active | |
|
| HT-29 | Human colon epithelial cell, adenocarcinoma. | 32.6 ± 0.7 | Active |
| PT-45 | Human pancreas epithelial cell, adenocarcinoma. | 2.2 ± 0.3 | Active | |
| HepG2 | Human liver epithelial cell, hepatocellular carcinoma. | 10.5 ± 0.5 | Active | |
| T98G | Human brain fibroblast, glioblastoma. | 6.45 ± 1.64 | Active | |
| PC3 | Human prostate epithelial cell, adenocarcinoma. | 2.19 ± 0.11 | Active | |
| A2780 | Human ovary epithelial cell, ovarian endometrioid adenocarcinoma. | 0.23 ± 0.07 | Active | |
| HeLa | Cervical cancer | 6.6 ± 0.7 | Active |
Figure 4Biologically active Re(I) tricarbonyl complexes 19–23 as compared to cisplatin 24.