| Literature DB >> 34298905 |
Joanna Masternak1, Małgorzata Zienkiewicz-Machnik2, Iwona Łakomska3, Maciej Hodorowicz4, Katarzyna Kazimierczuk5, Milena Nosek6, Amelia Majkowska-Młynarczyk7, Joanna Wietrzyk8, Barbara Barszcz1.
Abstract
To evaluate the antioxidant activity of potential synthetic enzyme mimetics, we prepared new five copper(II) complexes via a self-assembly method and named them [Cu(2-(HOCH2)py)3](ClO4)2 (1), [Cu(2-(HOCH2)py)2(H2O)2]SiF6 (2), [Cu2(2-(HOCH2CH2)py)2(2-(OCH2CH2)py)2](ClO4)2 (3), [Cu(pyBIm)3](BF4)2·1.5H2O (4) and [Cu(py2C(OH)2)2](ClO4)2 (5). The synthetic protocol involved N,O- or N,N-donors: 2-(hydroxymethyl)pyridine (2-(HOCH2)py), 2-(hydroxyethyl)pyridine (2-(HOCH2CH2)py), 2-(2-pyridyl)benzimidazole (pyBIm), di(2-pyridyl)ketone (py2CO). The obtained Cu(II) complexes were fully characterised by elemental analysis, FTIR, EPR, UV-Vis, single-crystal X-ray diffraction and Hirshfeld surface analysis. Crystallographic and spectroscopic analyses confirmed chromophores of both monomeric ({CuN3O3} (1), {CuN2O4} (2), {CuN6} (4), {CuN4O2} (5)) and dimeric complex ({CuN2O3} (3)). Most of the obtained species possessed a distorted octahedral environment, except dimer 3, which consisted of two copper centres with square pyramidal geometries. The water-soluble compounds (1, 3 and 5) were selected for biological testing. The results of the study revealed that complex 1 in solutions displayed better radical scavenging activity than complexes 3, 5 and free ligands. Therefore, complex 1 has been selected for further studies to test its activity as an enzyme mimetic. The chosen compound was tested on the erythrocyte lysate of two groups of patients after undergoing chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. The effect of the tested compound (1) on enzyme activity levels (TAS, SOD and CAT) suggests that the selected complex can be treated as a functional mimetic of the enzymes.Entities:
Keywords: N,O- and N,N-donors; X-ray crystal structure; antioxidant activity; copper(II) complexes; enzyme mimetic
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34298905 PMCID: PMC8307904 DOI: 10.3390/ijms22147286
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Scheme 1Schematic representation of the preparation of copper(II) perchlorate(VII) complexes.
Scheme 2Schematic representation of copper(II) complexes synthesis from copper(II) tetrafluoroborate hydrate.
Crystal data and structure refinement for compounds 1–5.
|
|
|
| |
| CCDC | 2079678 | 2079599 | 2079677 |
| Empirical formula | C18H21Cl2CuN3O11 | C12H18F6CuN2O4Si | C28H34Cl2Cu2N4O12 |
| Formula weight, g mol−1 | 589.82 | 459.91 | 816.57 |
| Temperature (K) | 120(2) | 293(2) | 120(2) |
| Wavelength (Å) | 0.71073 | 0.71073 | 0.71073 |
| Crystal system, space group | Monoclinic, | Monoclinic, | Orthorhombic, |
| Unit cell dimensions | a = 19.2825(15) Å | a = 10.274(2) Å | a = 14.4167(3) Å |
| Volume (Å3) | 4319.7(6) | 1688.20(6) | 3235.97(13) |
| Z, Calculated density (Mg/m3) | 4, 1.659 | 4, 1.810 | 4, 1.676 |
| F(000) | 2208 | 932 | 1672 |
| Crystal size (mm) | 0.32 × 0.28 × 0.23 | 0.20 × 0.10 × 0.10 | 0.23 × 0.20 × 0.18 |
| Theta range for data collection (°) | 2.561–25.499 | 2.825–27.472 | 2.697–25.499 |
| Index ranges | −21≤ h ≤ 23, −14 ≤ k ≤ 14, −24 ≤ l ≤ 24 | −12 ≤ h ≤ 13, −13 ≤ k ≤ 12, −21 ≤ l ≤ 21 | −16≤ h≤ 17, −9≤ k≤ 10, −30≤ l≤ 30 |
| Reflections collected/unique/observed [Rint] | 16,300/3808 [Rint = 0.0848] | 3861/3494 [Rint = 0.0394] | 21,812/3024 [Rint = 0.0715] |
| Max. and min. transmission | 0.7012 and 0.8339 | 0.760 and 0.869 | 0.7339 and 0.7937 |
| Data/restraints/parameters | 4019/0/316 | 3861/0/260 | 3024/0/248 |
| Goodness-of-fit on F2 | 1.233 | 1.020 | 1.222 |
| Final R indices [I > 2sigma(I)] | R1 = 0.056, wR2 = 0.1532 | R1 = 0.02412, wR2 = 0.0582 | R1 = 0.0824, wR2 = 0.1886 |
| R indices (all data) | R1 = 0.0485, wR2 = 0.1362 | R1 = 0.0281, wR2 = 0.0600 | R1 = 0.0871, wR2 = 0.1905 |
| Largest differences in peak and hole (e/Å−3) | 0.771 and −1.200 | 0.402 and −0.387 | 1.681 and −0.761 |
|
|
| ||
| CCDC | 2079602 | 2079600 | |
| Empirical formula | C36H31B2F8Cu2N9O3 | CuC22H20N4Cl2O12 | |
| Formula weight, g mol−1 | 874.89 | 666.86 | |
| Temperature (K) | 293(2) | 130(2) | |
| Wavelength (Å) | 0.71073 | 0.71073 | |
| Crystal system, space group | Orthorombic, | Monoclinic, | |
| Unit cell dimensions | a = 11.901(5) Å | a = 7.7600(3) Å | |
| Volume (Å3) | 3953(2) | 1259.01(7) | |
| Z, Calculated density (Mg/m3) | 4, 1.470 | 2, 1.759 | |
| F(000) | 1780 | 678 | |
| Crystal size (mm) | 0.45 × 0.21 × 0.14 | 0.30 × 0.20 × 0.15 | |
| Theta range for data collection (°) | 3.338–28.589 | 3.026–27.476 | |
| Index ranges | −15 ≤ h ≤ 15, −18 ≤ k ≤ 19, −30 ≤ l ≤ 30 | −10 ≤ h ≤ 8, −17 ≤ k ≤ 17, −16 ≤ l ≤ 16 | |
| Reflections collected/unique/observed [Rint] | 4874/3674 [Rint = 0.0978] | 2874/2348 [Rint = 0.0655] | |
| Max. and min. transmission | 0.682 and 0.857 | 0.723 and 0.846 | |
| Data/restraints/parameters | 4874/206/359 | 2873/0/196 | |
| Goodness-of-fit on F2 | 1.079 | 1.044 | |
| Final R indices [I > 2σ(I)] | R1 = 0.0894, wR2 = 0.1934 | R1 = 0.0493, wR2 = 0.0880 | |
| R indices (all data) | R1 = 0.0703, wR2 = 0.1786 | R1 = 0.0358, wR2 = 0.0815 | |
| Largest differences in peak and hole (e/Å−3) | 0.683 and −1.026 | 0.556 and −0.467 |
Absorption correction—Semi-empirical from equivalents; Refinement method—Full-matrix least-squares on F2.
Figure 1Perspective view of (a) the molecular structure and (b) the crystal packing with marked O-H···O/Cl bonds of [Cu(2-(HOCH2)py)3](ClO4)2 (1).
Figure 2(a) Molecular structure of [Cu(2-(HOCH2)py)2(H2O)2]SiF6 (2) and (b) the hydrogen bonding formed by the water molecules and heksafluorosilicate ions in complex 2.
Figure 3(a) Perspective view of the molecular structure of [Cu2(2-(HOCH2CH2)py)2(2-(OCH2CH2)py)2](ClO4)2 (3) ((i) −x + 1, y, −z + ½) and (b) the C-H···O interactions in the asymmetric unit of complex 3.
Figure 4(a) Molecular structure of [Cu(pyBIm)3](BF4)2 · 1.5H2O (4) and (b) selected intra- and intermolecular H-bonding interactions.
Figure 5(a) Molecular structure of [Cu(py2C(OH)2)2](ClO4)2 (5) and (b) the C-H···O and O-H···O interactions in crystal structure of the complex.
Structural features for the Cu(II) complexes with di-(2-pyridyl)methanediol as ligand and different anions.
| Complex | Anions | Crystal System, | Bond Lenghts (Å) | Chromophore, Polyhedron | Ligand Coordination Mode | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cu-O | Cu-N | Cu-X | |||||
| [Cu2Br3(C11H9N2O2)] [ | Br− | Triclinic, | 1.9513 (17) | 1.981(2) | 2.4592(4) | {CuNOBr2} | |
| [Cu2Br4(C11H10N2O2)2]·2H2O [ | Br− | Monoclinic, C2/c | - | 2.034 (5) | 2.4222(10) | {CuN2Br2} | κ2N,N′ |
| [Cu(dpydiol)2](Br)2·4H2O [ | Br− | Monoclinic, C2/c | 2.464(3) | 2.011(4) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(C11H10N2O2)2](BF4)2·2H2O [ | BF4− | Monoclinic, P21/c | 2.4312(17) | 2.0099(19) | - | {CuN4O2] | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(pk·HO)2](NCS)2·H2O [ | NCS− | Triclinic, | 2.389(1) | 2.008(1) 2.012(1) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(C11H10N2O2)2](C1O4)2 [ | ClO4− | Monoclinic P21/n | 2.454(2) | 2.009(2) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(py2C(OH)2)2](C1O4)2
| ClO4− | Monoclinic P21/c | 2.0089(19) | 2.0097(19) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(C11H10N2O2)2](C2H3O2)2·4H2O [ | CH3COO− | Monoclinic P21/n | 2.3990(14) | 1.9918(17) 2.0257(18) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(C11H10N2O2)2](C2H3O2)2·4H2O [ | CH3COO− | Monoclinic, C2/c | 2.394(1) | 2.021(2) 2.002(2) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu[(2-Py)2CO(OH)]2(HO2CCH3)2 [ | CH3COO− | Monoclinic, C2/c | 2.367(8) | 2.00(1) 2.03(1) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu4[(2-Py)2CO(OH)]2(O2CCH3)6(H2O)2]·CH2Cl2 [ | CH3COO− | Triclinic, | 1.964(4) 1.938(4) 2.258(4) | 1.991(6) | 2.277(5) 1.940(4) 1.974(4) 1.952(5) 1.946(4) | {CuN4O2} | |
| [Cu(C11H10N2O2)2]C4H4O6 [ | C4H4O62− | Triclinic, | 2.3920 (19) 2.3920 (19) | 2.003(2) | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
| [Cu(dpk·H2O)2]C6H5PO2OH2[C6H5PO(OH)2] [ | C6H5PO2OH− | Monoclinic, C2/c | 2.418–2.425 | 2.007 | - | {CuN4O2} | κ3N,O,N′ |
Figure 6The percentage of non-covalent interactions for the analysed complexes extracted from 2D fingerprint plots.
The comparison of FTIR bands for free ligands and their copper(II) complexes.
| Compound | Assignments | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ν(OH)H2O | ν(OH)ligand | ν(NH) | ν(C-O) | ν(C=O) | ν(C=C) | ν(C=N) | νClO4− | νSiF62− | νBF4− | |
| 2-(HOCH2)py | - | 3245 | - | 1054 | - | 1594, 1574 | 1479, 1435 | - | - | - |
|
| - | 3425 | - | 1068 | - | 1610, 1576 | 1487, 1444 | 1091 | - | - |
|
| - | 1068 | - | 1613, 1573 | 1495, 1448 | - | 764, 725 | - | ||
| 2-(HOCH2CH2)py | - | 3245 | - | 1057 | - | 1593, 1568 | 1476, 1435 | - | - | - |
|
| - | 3450 | - | 1066 | - | 1610, 1570 | 1487, 1437 | 1086 | - | - |
| pyBIm | - | - | 3057 | - | - | 1593, 1568 | 1441, 1400 | - | - | - |
|
| 3590 | - | 3590 | - | - | 1598, 1567 | 1450, 1422 | - | - | 1052 |
| py2CO | - | - | - | - | 1683 | 1581 | 1429 | - | - | - |
|
| - | 3485 | - | 1067 | - | 1606 | 1447 | 1090 | - | - |
Figure 7UV-Vis spectra with inserted of d-d transition of (a) 2-(HOCH2)py (red line) and complex 1 (pink line) in ethanol, (b) 2-(HOCH2CH2)py (red line) and complex 3 (blue line), (c) pyBIm (red line) and complex 4 (celadon line), (d) py2CO (red line) and complex 5 (violet line) in methanol.
Electronic absorption spectral data of complexes.
| Compound | Chromophore | Equatorial Donor Atoms | Colour | d-d | LMCT | n→π* | π→π* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2-(HOCH2)py | - | 261 | 203 | ||||
| {CuN3O3} | N3O | light blue | 654 (51) | 261 | 209 | ||
| 2-(HOCH2CH2)py | - | 266, 257 | 211 | ||||
| {CuN2O3} | N2O2 | blue | 662 (105) | 346, 303 | 261 | 209 | |
| pyBIm | - | 320, 308 | 238, 204 | ||||
| {CuN6} | N4 | green | 702 (29) | 320, 313 | 236, 215 | ||
| py2CO | - | 268, 240 | 204 | ||||
| {CuN4O2} | N4 | violet | 560 (52) | 264, 255 | 209 |
Complex 2—spectrum not determined due to low solubility; π*—antibonding orbital.
Figure 8The EPR spectra of complex 1 recorded for polycrystalline powder at (a) room temperature (RT), (b) temperature of 77 K (LNT) (black line), and (c) frozen water solution, paired with the simulated EPR spectra (blue line).
Figure 9The EPR spectrum of frozen MeOH solution of 3 (black) together with the theoretical spectrum (blue).
Figure 10(a) ABTS radical scavenging potential of the selected complexes and free ligands, (b) example absorption spectra of ABTS•+ with various concentrations of complex 1 and plot of antioxidant properties (% inhibition) of ABTS+.
Activity levels of blood antioxidants of oncology patients and the control group.
| Parameter | Control Group | Oncology Patients after Treatment | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chemotherapy | Radiochemotherapy | ||
| TAS (mmol/L) | 1.44 ± 0.33 | 1.05 ± 0.16 | 1.32 ± 0.26 |
| SOD (U/mL) | 172.70 ± 66.12 | 221.13 ± 54.51 | 263.70 ± 126.87 |
| CAT (U/mL) | 2.85 ± 0.41 | 2.53 ± 0.77 | 2.60 ± 1.12 |
| GPx (U/mL) | 0.19 ± 0.11 | 0.15 ± 0.07 | 0.11 ± 0.05 |
Values are presented as mean ± SD (25–75%); p < 0.05.
Figure 11The activity of (a) TAS, (b) SOD and (c) CAT in the control group and the post-chemotherapy group (*).
Figure 12The activity of (a) TAS, (b) SOD and (c) CAT in the control group and the post-chemoradiotherapy group (**).
Figure 13The activity of (a) TAS, (b) SOD and (c) CAT in the control group, the post-chemotherapy group (*) and the post-chemotherapy group with the copper(II) complex 1 (***).
Figure 14The activity of (a) TAS, (b) SOD and (c) CAT in the control group, the post-chemoradiotherapy group (**) and the post-chemoradiotherapy group with the copper(II) complex 1 (***).