4.7 Article

A mixed-valence biotinylated Cu(I/II) complex for tumor-targeted chemodynamic therapy accompanied by GSH depletion

期刊

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY FRONTIERS
卷 10, 期 14, 页码 4045-4053

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d3qi00254c

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study successfully synthesized a targeted Fenton-like agent, VBio-(CuCuII)-Cu-I, which demonstrated high selectivity and cytotoxicity towards tumor cells and could generate highly active hydroxyl radicals through Fenton reactions at the tumor site, resulting in significant inhibition of tumor growth.
Chemodynamic therapy (CDT), in which highly toxic hydroxyl radicals (OH) could be triggered by a Fenton or Fenton-like reaction to kill cancer cells, has emerged recently. Compared to traditional CDT nanomaterials, herein, an atomically-precise biotinylated Cu(i/ii) complex [(CuCuCl2)-Cu-I-Cl-II(VBio)]center dot CH3OH (VBio = deprotonated O-vanillin biotinylhydrazone), denoted VBio-(CuCuII)-Cu-I, was rationally designed and synthesized successfully. This targeted Fenton-like agent, VBio-(CuCuII)-Cu-I, is constructed from a hydroxyl radical-producible Cu-I ion, a Cu-II center as a GSH depletor for an augmented CDT effect, and a biotin moiety as a cancer-targeting unit. Owing to the obvious cell selectivity discrepancy of biotin towards normal and cancerous cells, VBio-(CuCuII)-Cu-I was able to preferentially accumulate in tumor cells. Meanwhile, the Cu-I metal center could be used as a Fenton-like agent to generate OH. Furthermore, the Cu-II in VBio-(CuCuII)-Cu-I was available for successive OH production via a Cu-I/Cu-II-circulation strategy under a GSH-rich tumor site, thereby improving catalytic efficiency. More importantly, in vivo results further demonstrate that VBio-(CuCuII)-Cu-I could significantly inhibit tumor growth without obvious damage toward major organs. Therefore, this multiple-identity Fenton-like agent could provide an appreciable reference value for the design of atomically precise CDT agents.

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

4.7
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