Modular syntheses of H<sub>4</sub>octapa and H<sub>2</sub>dedpa, and yttrium coordination chemistry relevant to<sup>86</sup>Y/<sup>90</sup>Y radiopharmaceuticals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ligands H2dedpa, H4octapa, p-SCN-Bn-H2dedpa, and p-SCN-Bn-H4octapa were synthesized using a new protection chemistry approach, with labile tert-butyl esters replacing the previously used methyl esters as protecting groups for picolinic acid moieties. Additionally, the ligands H2dedpa and p-SCN-Bn-H2dedpa were synthesized using nosyl protection chemistry for the first time. The use of tert-butyl esters allows for deprotection at room temperature in trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), which compares favorably to the harsh conditions of refluxing HCl (6 M) or LiOH that were previously required for methyl ester cleavage. H4octapa has recently been shown to be a very promising (111)In and (177)Lu ligand for radiopharmaceutical applications; therefore, coordination chemistry studies with Y(3+) are described to assess its potential for use with (86)Y/(90)Y. The solution chemistry of H4octapa with Y(3+) is shown to be suitable via solution NMR studies of the [Y(octapa)](-) complex and density functional theory (DFT) calculations of the predicted structure, suggesting properties similar to those of the analogous In(3+) and Lu(3+) complexes. The molecular electrostatic potential (MEP) was mapped onto the molecular surface of the DFT-calculated coordination structures, suggesting very similar and even charge distributions between both the Lu(3+) and Y(3+) complexes of octapa(4-), and coordinate structures between 8 (ligand only) and 9 (ligand and one H2O). Potentiometric titrations determined H4octapa to have a formation constant (log K(ML)) with Y(3+) of 18.3 ± 0.1, revealing high thermodynamic stability. This preliminary work suggests that H4octapa may be a competent ligand for future (86)Y/(90)Y radiopharmaceutical applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".