4.6 Article

Coordination of hydralazine with Cu2+at acidic pH promotes its oxidative degradation at neutral pH

期刊

JOURNAL OF INORGANIC BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 243, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2023.112181

关键词

Hydralazine; Copper; Complex; Oxidative degradation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the interactions of hydralazine (HL) with copper ions in conditions that mimic the pH shift along the digestive tract. It was found that in acidic solution, a stable complex was formed between HL and Cu2+ ions, while at neutral pH, Cu2+ ions initiated the oxidation and degradation of HL. These results indicate that the change in pH along the digestive tract can promote HL degradation. Rating: 8/10.
Hydralazine (HL), a frequently prescribed oral antihypertensive drug, shows redox interactions with transition metals such as copper that are not fully understood. Copper may be present at high concentrations in the digestive tract and can affect oral drugs. An important parameter for such interactions is pH, which changes from acidic in the gastric juice to neutral pH in intestines. In this study, we examined interactions of HL with Cu2+ ions in conditions that mimic pH shift in the digestive tract using UV-Vis, Raman and EPR spectroscopy, cyclic voltammetry and oximetry. In the acidic solution, Cu2+ formed a stable mononuclear complex with two bidentate coordinated HL molecules. On the other hand, at neutral pH, Cu2+ initiated oxidation and degradation of HL. The degradation was more rapid in the HL-Cu2+ system that was initially prepared at acidic pH and then shifted to neutral pH. The formation of the complex at acidic pH increases the availability of Cu2+ for redox reactions after the shift to neutral pH at which Cu2+ is poorly soluble. These results imply that the change of pH along the digestive tract may promote HL degradation by allowing the formation of the complex at gastric pH which makes Cu2+ available for subsequent oxidation of HL at neutral pH.

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

4.6
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