Dinuclear orthometallated gold(I)-gold(III) anticancer complexes with potent <i>in vivo</i> activity through an ROS-dependent mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasingly explored over the last decade, gold complexes have shown great promise in the field of cancer therapeutics. A major obstacle to their clinical progression has been their lack of in vivo stability, particularly for gold(III) complexes, which often undergo a facile reduction in the presence of biomolecules such as glutathione. Herein, we report a new class of promising anticancer gold(I)-gold(III) complexes with the general formula [XAuI(μ-2-C6F4PPh2)(κ2-2-C6F4PPh2)AuIIIX] [X = Cl (1), Br (2), NO3 (3)] which feature two gold atoms in different oxidation states (I and III) in a single molecule. Interestingly, gold(I)-gold(III) complexes (1-3) are stable against glutathione reduction under physiological-like conditions. In addition, complexes 1-3 exhibit significant cytotoxicity (276-fold greater than cisplatin) toward the tested cancer cells compared to the noncancerous cells. Moreover, the gold(I)-gold(III) complexes do not interact with DNA-like cisplatin but target cellular thioredoxin reductase, an enzyme linked to the development of cisplatin drug resistance. Complexes 1-3 also showed potential to inhibit cancer and endothelial cell migration, as well as tube formation during angiogenesis. In vivo studies in a murine HeLa xenograft model further showed the gold compounds may inhibit tumor growth on par clinically used cisplatin, supporting the significant potential this new compound class has for further development as cancer therapeutic.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".