Ru(III) anticancer agents with aromatic and non-aromatic dithiocarbamates as ligands: Loading into nanocarriers and preliminary biological studies

Anticancer Ruthenium(III) Complexes and Ru(III)-Containing Nanoformulations: An Update on the Mechanism of Action and Biological Activity

“…the selected copolymer, hence preventing unwanted release of the loaded compounds ( Figure 6b for the schematic representation of the micelle formation). [117] As verified by UV-VIS analysis in saline solution (NaCl 0.9% w/v), the prepared Ru(III)-incorporating micellar nanocarriers did not show significant changes in the UV spectra over time, at least over 72 h monitoring. [117] Both naked CDT-or PDT-based ruthenium compounds as well as their nanoformulations were then tested in preliminary bioactivity assays on two human tumour epithelial cell lines, i.e., HeLa (cervix adenocarcinoma) and HCT 116 (colon carcinoma) over 72 h treatment, using cisplatin as the control.…”

“…These compounds were fully characterized by physico-chemical techniques such as elemental analysis, ESI-MS spectrometry, 1 H NMR UV-VIS and FT-IR spectroscopic studies. [117] In order to address the solubility issues typically associated with ruthenium drugs under physiological conditions, both CDT and PDT Ru(III)-based derivatives were encapsulated in watersoluble micellar carriers by using the biocompatible copolymer Pluronic ® F127. [117] Such block copolymer is a non-ionic surfactant consisting of hydrophilic poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) and hydrophobic poly(propylene oxide) (PPO), arranged in A-B-A tri-block structure which comprise a hydrophobic PPO region covered by a hydrophilic shell, made up of PEO chains.…”

“…[117] In order to address the solubility issues typically associated with ruthenium drugs under physiological conditions, both CDT and PDT Ru(III)-based derivatives were encapsulated in watersoluble micellar carriers by using the biocompatible copolymer Pluronic ® F127. [117] Such block copolymer is a non-ionic surfactant consisting of hydrophilic poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) and hydrophobic poly(propylene oxide) (PPO), arranged in A-B-A tri-block structure which comprise a hydrophobic PPO region covered by a hydrophilic shell, made up of PEO chains. [118] The incorporation of the selected Ru(III)-based compounds during the micellization process was driven by the hydrophobic interactions established between the compounds and the PPO domain of Then, Ru-containing liposome formulations were prepared mixing phosphatidylcholine (PC)/cholesterol (Chol)/DSPEPeg2000 in 57/38/5 molar ratio ( Figure 5b).…”

“…Fregona et al [117] proposed novel mono-and dinuclear Ru(III)-complexes with aromatic and non-aromatic dithiocarbamates as ligands: in particular, carbazolyldithiocarbamato derivatives (CDT) and pyrrolidinedithiocarbamate (PDT) analogues were prepared ( Figure 6a). These compounds were fully characterized by physico-chemical techniques such as elemental analysis, ESI-MS spectrometry, 1 H NMR UV-VIS and FT-IR spectroscopic studies [117]. the selected copolymer, hence preventing unwanted release of the loaded compounds ( Figure 6b for the schematic representation of the micelle formation).…”

Recent developments in the nanostructured materials functionalized with ruthenium complexes for targeted drug delivery to tumors

“…30,31 However, one of the foremost drawbacks of Ru complexes is their rather limited stability in aqueous solutions. Therefore, designing long-life Ru-based antineoplastic agents is the primary goal to overcome this limitation, and nanostructured materials functionalized with Ru complexes serve as one of the alternatives for targeted drug delivery.…”