Cationic Ru<sup>II</sup> Cyclopentadienyl Complexes with Antifungal Activity against Several <i>Candida</i> Species
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fungal infections, including those caused by antifungal‐resistant Candida , are a very challenging health problem worldwide. Whereas different ruthenium complexes were previously studied for their anti‐ Candida potential, Ru‐cyclopentadienyl complexes were overlooked. Here, we report an antifungal activity assessment of three Ru‐cyclopentadienyl complexes with some insights into their potential mode of action. Among these complexes, only the cationic species [Ru‐ACN] + and [Ru‐ATZ] + displayed a significant antifungal activity against different Candida strains, notably against the ones that did not respond to one of the most currently used antifungal drugs fluconazole (FCZ). However, no apparent activity was observed for the neutral species, Ru−Cl, thus indicating the important role of the cationic backbone of these complexes in their biological activity. We suggest that reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation might be involved in the mechanism of action of these complexes as, unlike neutral Ru−Cl, [Ru‐ACN] + and [Ru‐ATZ] + could generate intracellular concentration‐dependent ROS. We also observed a correlation between the ruthenium cellular uptake, ROS generation and fungal growth inhibitory activity of the compounds. Furthermore, docking simulations showed that the CYP51 enzyme can form more energetically favorable complexes with [Ru‐ATZ] + than fluconazole (FCZ); this suggests that CYP51 inhibition could also be considered as a potential mode of action.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 it