Arene Ruthenium Complexes Specifically Inducing Apoptosis in Breast Cancer Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monocationic arene ruthenium complexes (RuL1–RuL4) incorporating phenothiazinyl-hydrazinyl-thiazole ligands (L1–L4) have been synthesized, characterized and evaluated as anticancer agents. Their cytotoxicity, antiproliferative activity and alteration of apoptotic gene expression were studied on three cancer cell lines, a double positive breast cancer cell line MCF-7 and two triple negative breast cancer cell lines Hs578T and MDA-MB-231. All arene ruthenium complexes were able to reduce the viability of the breast cancer cell lines, with the highest cytotoxicities being recorded for the [(p-cymene)RuL3Cl]+ (RuL3) complex on the MCF-7 (IC50 = 0.019 µM) and Hs578T cell lines (IC50 = 0.095 µM). In the double positive MCF-7 breast cancer cells, the complexes [(p-cymene)RuL1Cl]+ (RuL1) and [(p-cymene)RuL2Cl]+ (RuL2) significantly upregulated pro-apoptotic genes including BAK, FAS, NAIP, CASP8, TNF, XIAP and BAD, while downregulating TNFSF10. In the triple negative breast cancer cell line Hs578T, RuL1 reduced TNFSF-10 and significantly upregulated BAK, CASP8, XIAP, FADD and BAD, while complex RuL2 also increased BAK and CASP8 expression, but had limited effects on other genes. The triple negative MDA-MB-231 cancer cells treated with RuL1 upregulated NOD1 and downregulated p53, while RuL2 significantly downregulated p53, XIAP and TNFSF10, with minor changes in other genes. The significant alterations in the expression of key apoptotic genes suggest that such complexes have the potential to target cancer cells.
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".