Search

The current study describes the encapsulation of hydroxychloroquine, widely used in traditional medicine due to its diverse pharmacological and medicinal uses, in chitosan nanoparticles (CNPs). This work aims to combine the HCQ drug with CS NPs to generate a novel nanocomposite with improved characteristics and bioavailability. HCQ@CS NPs are roughly shaped like roadways and have a smooth surface with an average size of 159.3 ± 7.1 nm, a PDI of 0.224 ± 0.101, and a zeta potential of +46.6 ± 0.8 mV. To aid in the development of pharmaceutical systems for use in cancer therapy, the binding mechanism and affinity of the interaction between HCQ and HCQ@CS NPs and BSA were examined using stopped-flow and other spectroscopic approaches, supplemented by molecular docking analysis. HCQ and HCQ@CS NPs binding with BSA is driven by a ground-state complex formation that may be accompanied by a non-radiative energy transfer process, and binding constants indicate that HCQ@CS NPs–BSA was more stable than HCQ–BSA. The stopped-flow analysis demonstrated that, in addition to increasing BSA affinity, the nanoformulation HCQ@CS NPS changes the binding process and may open new routes for interaction. Docking experiments verified the development of the HCQ–BSA complex, with HCQ binding to site I on the BSA structure, primarily with the amino acids, Thr 578, Gln 579, Gln 525, Tyr 400, and Asn 404. Furthermore, the nanoformulation HCQ@CS NPS not only increased cytotoxicity against the A549 lung cancer cell line (IC50 = 28.57 ± 1.72 μg/mL) compared to HCQ (102.21 ± 0.67 μg/mL), but also exhibited higher antibacterial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria when compared to HCQ and chloramphenicol, which is in agreement with the binding constants. The nanoformulation developed in this study may offer a viable therapy option for A549 lung cancer.

In this study, poly(AA-co-ACMO) and polyurethane-based nanofibers were prepared in a ratio of 1:1 (NF11) and 2:1 (NF21) as antimicrobial carriers for chronic wound management. Different techniques were used to characterize the nanofibers, and poly(AA-co-ACMO) was mostly found on the surface of PU. With an increase in poly(AA-co-ACMO) dose from 0 (PU) and 1:1 (NF11) to 2:1 (NF21) in the casting solution, the contact angle (CA) was reduced from 137 and 95 to 24, respectively, and hydrophilicity was significantly increased. As most medications inhibit biological processes by binding to a specific protein, in vitro protein binding was investigated mechanistically using a stopped-flow technique. Both NF11 and NF21 bind to BSA via two reversible steps: a fast second-order binding followed by a slow first-order one. The overall parameters for NF11 (Ka = 1.1 × 104 M−1, Kd = 89.0 × 10−6, ΔG0 = −23.1 kJ mol−1) and NF21 (Ka = 189.0 × 104 M−1, Kd = 5.3 × 10−6 M, ΔG0 = −27.5 kJ mol−1) were determined and showed that the affinity for BSA is approximately (NF11)/(NF21) = 1/180. This indicates that NF21 has much higher BSA affinity than NF11, although BSA interacts with NF11 much faster. NF21 with higher hydrophilicity showed effective antibacterial properties compared to NF11, in agreement with kinetic data. The study provided an approach to manage chronic wounds and treating protein-containing wastewater.

This work aimed to evaluate in vitro DNA binding mechanistically of cationic nitrosyl ruthenium complex [RuNOTSP]+ and its ligand (TSPH2) in detail, correlate the findings with cleavage activity, and draw conclusions about the impact of the metal center. Theoretical studies were performed for [RuNOTSP]+, TSPH2, and its anion TSP−2 using DFT/B3LYP theory to calculate optimized energy, binding energy, and chemical reactivity. Since nearly all medications function by attaching to a particular protein or DNA, the in vitro calf thymus DNA (ctDNA) binding studies of [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2 with ctDNA were examined mechanistically using a variety of biophysical techniques. Fluorescence experiments showed that both compounds effectively bind to ctDNA through intercalative/electrostatic interactions via the DNA helix’s phosphate backbone. The intrinsic binding constants (Kb), (2.4 ± 0.2) × 105 M−1 ([RuNOTSP]+) and (1.9 ± 0.3) × 105 M−1 (TSPH2), as well as the enhancement dynamic constants (KD), (3.3 ± 0.3) × 104 M−1 ([RuNOTSP]+) and (2.6 ± 0.2) × 104 M−1 (TSPH2), reveal that [RuNOTSP]+ has a greater binding propensity for DNA compared to TSPH2. Stopped-flow investigations showed that both [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2 bind through two reversible steps: a fast second-order binding, followed by a slow first-order isomerization reaction via a static quenching mechanism. For the first and second steps of [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2, the detailed binding parameters were established. The total binding constants for [RuNOTSP]+ (Ka = 43.7 M−1, Kd = 2.3 × 10−2 M−1, ΔG0 = −36.6 kJ mol−1) and TSPH2 (Ka = 15.1 M−1, Kd = 66 × 10−2 M, ΔG0 = −19 kJ mol−1) revealed that the relative reactivity is approximately ([RuNOTSP]+)/(TSPH2) = 3/1. The significantly negative ΔG0 values are consistent with a spontaneous binding reaction to both [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2, with the former being very favorable. The findings showed that the Ru(II) center had an effect on the reaction rate but not on the mechanism and that the cationic [RuNOTSP]+ was a more highly effective DNA binder than the ligand TSPH2 via strong electrostatic interaction with the phosphate end of DNA. Because of its higher DNA binding affinity, cationic [RuNOTSP]+ demonstrated higher cleavage efficiency towards the minor groove of pBR322 DNA via the hydrolytic pathway than TSPH2, revealing the synergy effect of TSPH2 in the form of the complex. Furthermore, the mode of interaction of both compounds with ctDNA has also been supported by molecular docking.

Two copper (II) complexes based on the mixed ligand system were synthesized and structurally characterized. The molecular formulae for complex (1), [Cu2L1L′] and complex (2), [CuL2L′] were determined based on analytical data, molar conductance, and thermal analysis results. The optimized structures of complexes (1) and (2) were determined by magnetic and spectroscopic measurements (FTIR, UV–Vis, and ESR) and confirmed by processing powder X‐ray diffraction data by Expo 2014 software. The geometry index (τ5), determined by ESR spectra and structural analysis based on powder X‐ray, demonstrates the square pyramidal geometry of the Cu (II) center of [Cu2L1L′] and [CuL2L′]. Cyclic voltammetry measurements were performed to elucidate the relationship between the redox properties of (1) and (2) and their oxidase‐mimicking catalytic activity. Catalytic aerobic oxidation of the polyphenols 3,5‐di‐tert‐butylcatechol (3,5‐DTBCH2), 4‐nitrocatechol, and 2‐aminophenol (2‐APH3) was studied by stopped‐flow technique. Promising catechol oxidase (COX) and phenoxazinone synthase (PHS) mimetic activity have been demonstrated for (1) and (2). Electrochemical data were used to determine the free energy (ΔG°) or driving force (−λ), and their correlation with the oxidase mimetic activity of(1) and (2) was examined. Several experimental procedures have been performed that have helped describe the catalytic mechanisms of the catalytic reactions taking place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reaction of bis(2-picolyl)amine (BPA) with Ni(II) salt yielded [(BPA)NiCl2(H2O)] (NiBPA). The Ni(II) in NiBPA bound to a BPA ligand, two chloride, and one aqua ligands. Because most medications inhibit biological processes by binding to a specific protein, the stopped-flow technique was used to investigate DNA/protein binding in-vitro, and a mechanism was proposed. NiBPA binds to DNA/protein more strongly than BPA via a static quenching mechanism. Using the stopped-flow technique, a mechanism was proposed. BSA interacts with BPA via a fast reversible step followed by a slow irreversible step, whereas NiBPA interacts via two reversible steps. DNA, on the other hand, binds to BPA and NiBPA via the same mechanism through two reversible steps. Although BSA interacts with NiBPA much faster, NiBPA has a much higher affinity for DNA (2077 M) than BSA (30.3 M). Compared to NiBPA, BPA was found to form a more stable BSA complex. When BPA and NiBPA bind to DNA, the Ni(II) center was found to influence the rate but not the mechanism, whereas, for BSA, the Ni(II) center was found to change both the mechanism and the rate. Additionally, NiBPA exhibited significant cytotoxicity and antibacterial activity, which is consistent with the binding constants but not the kinetic stability. This shows that in our situation, biological activity is significantly more influenced by binding constants than by kinetic stability. Due to its selectivity and cytotoxic activity, complex NiBPA is anticipated to be used in medicine.

Two zinc(II) complexes, DBZ and DBZH4, that have (ZnN3S2) cores and differ in the bridging mode of the ligating backbone, effectively bind to BSA. The binding affinity varies as DBZ > DBZH4 and depends on the ligand structure. At low concentrations, both complexes exhibit dynamic quenching, whereas at higher concentrations they exhibit mixed (static and dynamic) quenching. The energy transfer mechanism from the BSA singlet excited state to DBZ and DBZH4, is highly likely according to steady-state fluorescence and time-correlated singlet photon counting. Molecular docking was used to support the mode of interaction of the complexes with BSA and showed that DBZ had more energy for binding. Furthermore, antibacterial testing revealed that both complexes were active but to a lesser extent than chloramphenicol. In comparison to DBZH4, DBZ has higher antibacterial activity, which is consistent with the binding constants, molecular docking, and particle size of adducts. These findings may have an impact on biomedicine.

Titanium (IV)–dithiophenolate complex chitosan nanocomposites (DBT–CSNPs) are featured by their antibacterial activities, cytotoxicity, and capacity to bind with DNA helixes. In this study, their therapeutic effects against rat liver damage induced by carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) and their anti-proliferative activity against human liver cancer (HepG2) cell lines were determined. Results of treatment were compared with cisplatin treatment. Markers of apoptosis, oxidative stress, liver functions, and liver histopathology were determined. The results showed that DBT–CSNPs and DBT treatments abolished liver damage induced by CCl4 and improved liver architecture and functions. DNA fragmentation, Bax, and caspase-8 were reduced, but Bcl-2 and the Bcl-2/Bax ratios were increased. However, there was a non-significant change in the oxidative stress markers. DBT–CSNPs and DBT inhibited the proliferation of HepG2 cells by arresting cells in the G2/M phase and inducing cell death. DBT–CSNPs were more efficient than DBT. Low doses of DBT and DBT–CSNPs applied to healthy rats for 14 days had no adverse effect. DBT and DBT–CSNP treatment gave preferable results than the treatment with cisplatin. In conclusion, DBT–CSNPs and DBT have anti-apoptotic activities against liver injuries and have anti-neoplastic impacts. DBT–CSNPs are more efficient. Both compounds can be used in pharmacological fields.

Highlights: Theoretical studies were performed on [RuNOTSP]+, TSPH2, and its anion TSP2− using the DFT/B3LYP method. Cationic complex [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2 were investigated mechanistically for ctDNA interaction. Spontaneous ctDNA binding via a static mechanism with two steps was reported. Detailed kinetic data are reported and relative reactivity is [RuNOTSP]+/TSPH2 = 3/1. The ruthenium effect on affinity and mechanism is reported. The ruthenium center improves the reaction rate through coordination affinity, but does not change its mechanism. Molecular docking was used to predict the binding between [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2 and the receptors. DNA cleavage studies are correlated with kinetic data. This work aimed to evaluate in vitro DNA binding mechanistically of cationic nitrosyl ruthenium complex [RuNOTSP]+ and its ligand (TSPH2) in detail, correlate the findings with cleavage activity, and draw conclusions about the impact of the metal center. Theoretical studies were performed for [RuNOTSP]+, TSPH2, and its anion TSP−2 using DFT/B3LYP theory to calculate optimized energy, binding energy, and chemical reactivity. Since nearly all medications function by attaching to a particular protein or DNA, the in vitro calf thymus DNA (ctDNA) binding studies of [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2 with ctDNA were examined mechanistically using a variety of biophysical techniques. Fluorescence experiments showed that both compounds effectively bind to ctDNA through intercalative/electrostatic interactions via the DNA helix's phosphate backbone. The intrinsic binding constants (Kb), (2.4 ± 0.2) × 105 M−1 ([RuNOTSP]+) and (1.9 ± 0.3) × 105 M−1 (TSPH2), as well as the enhancement dynamic constants (KD), (3.3 ± 0.3) × 104 M−1 ([RuNOTSP]+) and (2.6 ± 0.2) × 104 M−1 (TSPH2), reveal that [RuNOTSP]+ has a greater binding propensity for DNA compared to TSPH2. Stopped-flow investigations showed that both [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2 bind through two reversible steps: a fast second-order binding, followed by a slow first-order isomerization reaction via a static quenching mechanism. For the first and second steps of [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2, the detailed binding parameters were established. The total binding constants for [RuNOTSP]+ (Ka = 43.7 M−1, Kd = 2.3 × 10−2 M−1, ΔG0 = −36.6 kJ mol−1) and TSPH2 (Ka = 15.1 M−1, Kd = 66 × 10−2 M, ΔG0 = −19 kJ mol−1) revealed that the relative reactivity is approximately ([RuNOTSP]+)/(TSPH2) = 3/1. The significantly negative ΔG0 values are consistent with a spontaneous binding reaction to both [RuNOTSP]+ and TSPH2, with the former being very favorable. The findings showed that the Ru(II) center had an effect on the reaction rate but not on the mechanism and that the cationic [RuNOTSP]+ was a more highly effective DNA binder than the ligand TSPH2 via strong electrostatic interaction with the phosphate end of DNA. Because of its higher DNA binding affinity, cationic [RuNOTSP]+ demonstrated higher cleavage efficiency towards the minor groove of pBR322 DNA via the hydrolytic pathway than TSPH2, revealing the synergy effect of TSPH2 in the form of the complex. Furthermore, the mode of interaction of both compounds with ctDNA has also been supported by molecular docking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]