4.5 Article

Synthesis, characterization, crystallographic structure, theoretical studies, and in vitro cytotoxicity assessment of two Gd(III) and Ce(IV) complexes containing pyridine-2,6-dicarboxylate

期刊

POLYHEDRON
卷 211, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.poly.2021.115561

关键词

Gadolinium complex; Cerium complex; X-ray crystallography; DFT calculations; In vitro antimicrobial activity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study synthesized two metal complexes C1 and C2 through one-pot reactions, and characterized them using spectroscopic methods and X-ray crystallography. The results showed that the metal-ligand interactions are mainly driven by electrostatic interactions. In vitro experiments demonstrated that both C1 and C2 exhibited significant cytotoxic activity against the MCF7 cell line.
This paper reports the synthesis of two complexes through one-pot reactions of pyridine-2,6-dicarboxylic acid (pydcH2), phenanthroline, and 2-aminopyridine, with Gd(NO3)3.6H2O and Ce (NO3)3.6H2O metal salts. The new coordination complexes C1 and C2 were identified by spectroscopic methods. The complexes were characterized by X-ray crystallography. The nature of metal-ligand interactions was studied theoretically using NBO and EDANOCV analyses. The results showed that the contribution of electrostatic interactions in both complexes is considerably larger than that of orbital. However, the contribution of orbital interactions in [CeL3]2-, is more than that in [GdL3]3- (28.8% vs. 21.8%). In following, the cytotoxic effect of synthetic complexes was investigated in vitro using oxaliplatin as a standard against three cancer cell lines including human breast cancer (MCF7), human colon adenocarcinoma (HT29), human lymphocyte (HL60) and also one normal cell, human foreskin fibroblast (HFF). The most significant inhibition activity was observed by both C1 (IC50 = 80.7 mu M, Viability inhibition = 83.41%) and C2 (IC50 = 98.3 mu M, Viability inhibition = 77.19%) toward the MCF7 cell line.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据