Wirkstoffe

In vitro studies with the ruthenium(II) and analogous iridium(III) complexes [Ru(η6- p-cymene)Cl2{Ph2PCH2CH2CH2S(O)xPh-κP}], [Ru(η6-p-cymene)Cl{Ph2PCH2CH2CH2S(O)xPh- κP,κS}][PF6] (1–4), [Ir(η5-C5Me5)Cl2{Ph2PCH2CH2CH2S(O)xPh-κP}] and [Ir(η5-C5Me5)Cl{Ph2 PCH2CH2CH2S(O)xPh-κP,κS}][PF6] (5–8; x = 0, 1) revealed the high selectivity toward the 8505C, A253, MCF-7, SW480 and 518A2 cancer cell lines. Thus, the cationic ruthenium complex 4 proved to be the most selective one. In case of the neutral and cationic ruthenium complexes 1–4 the caspase-dependent apoptotic cell death was proven as the main cause of the drug’s tumoricidal action on 8505C cell line.

(O,O′-Diisobutyl-ethylenediamine-N,N′-di-3-propionate)tetrachloridoplatinum(IV), [PtCl4(iBu2eddp)], shows an improved pharmacological profile in comparison to cisplatin. This is manifested through accelerated dying process led by necrotic cell death, reflected through mitochondrial collapse, strong ATP depletion and reactive oxygen species production. Loss of mitochondrial potential was further followed with intensive apoptosis that finalized with DNA fragmentation.Different dynamic of tumoricidal action could be partly ascribed to less affected repair mechanisms in comparison to cisplatin. Importantly, [PtCl4(iBu2eddp)] did not induce necrosis in primary fibroblasts suggesting different intracellular response of normal vs. tumor cells. This selectivity toward malignant phenotype is further confirmed by retained tumoricidal potential in hypoxic conditions, while cisplatin became completely inefficient.