Two new monofunctional platinum(<scp>ii</scp>) dithiocarbamate complexes:<i>phenanthriplatin</i>-type axial protection, equatorial-axial conformational isomerism, and anticancer and DNA binding studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The syntheses of two platinum(ii) dithiocarbamate complexes (1 and 2) that show quinoplatin- and phenanthriplatin-type axial protection of the Pt-plane are described. The Pt-plane of complex 2 is axially more protected than that of complex 1. Furthermore, both complexes adopt two different stereochemical conformations in the solid state (based on single-crystal X-ray structures) owing to the structurally flexible piperazine backbone; i.e., C-e,e-Anti (1) and C-e,a-Syn (2), where "C" stands for the chair configuration, "e" and "a" stand for the equatorial and axial positions and "Anti" (opposite side) and "Syn" (same side) represent the relative orientations in space of the terminal substituents on the piperazine ring. In complex 2, the C-e,a-Syn conformation may provide additional steric hindrance to the Pt-plane. Despite the lower lipophilicity of 2 as compared to that of 1, the in vitro anticancer action against selected cancer cell lines is better for the former revealing the superior role of the axial protection over lipophilicity in modulating anticancer activity. The activity against the cancer promoting protein NF-κB signifies that the mode of cancer cell death may be the result of hindering the activity of NF-κB in the initiation of apoptosis. The apoptotic mode of cell death has been established earlier in a study using Annexin V-FITC. Finally, DNA binding studies revealed that the complex-DNA adduct formation is spontaneous and the mode of interaction is non-intercalative (electrostatic/covalent).
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".