Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 199

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DNA Binding and Photocleavage in Vitro by New Dirhodium(II) dppz Complexes: Correlation to Cytotoxicity and Photocytotoxicity

Angeles-Boza, Alfredo M., Bradley, Patricia M., Fu, Patty K.-L., Wicke, Sara E., Bacsa, John, Dunbar, Kim R., Turro, Claudia·2004·Inorganic Chemistry

Abstract

Two new dirhodium(II) complexes possessing the intercalating dppz ligand (dppz = dipyrido[3,2-a:2',3'-c]phenazine), cis-[Rh(2)(mu-O(2)CCH(3))(2)(dppz)(eta(1)-O(2)CCH(3))(CH(3)OH)](+) (1) and cis-[Rh(2)(mu-O(2)CCH(3))(2)(dppz)(2)](2+) (2), were synthesized and characterized as potential agents for photochemotherapy. Various techniques show that 1 binds to DNA through intercalation, although some aggregation of the complex on the DNA surface is also present. In contrast, 2 does not intercalate between the DNA bases; however, strong hypochromic behavior is observed in the presence of DNA, which can be attributed to intermolecular pi-stacking of 2 enhanced by the polyanion. The apparent DNA binding constants determined using optical titrations are compared to those from dialysis experiments. Both complexes photocleave pUC18 plasmid in vitro under irradiation with visible light (lambda(irr) >or= 395 nm, 15 min), resulting in the nicked, circular form. Greater photocleavage is observed for 1 relative to 2, which may be due to the ability of 1 to intercalate between the DNA bases. The cytotoxicity toward human skin cells (Hs-27) measured as the concentration at which 50% cell death is recorded, LC(50), was found to be 135 +/- 8 microM for 2 in the dark (30 min), which is significantly lower than those of 1 (LC(50) = 27 +/- 2 microM) and Rh(2)(O(2)CCH(3))(4) (LC(50) = 15 +/- 2 microM). Irradiation of cell cultures containing 1 and Rh(2)(O(2)CCH(3))(4) with visible light (400-700 nm, 30 min) has little effect on their cytotoxicity, with LC(50) values of 21 +/- 3 and 13 +/- 2 microM, respectively. Interestingly, a 3.4-fold increase in the toxicity of 2 is observed when the cell cultures are irradiated (400-700 nm, 30 min), resulting in LC(50) = 39 +/- 1 microM. The greater toxicity of 1 compared to 2 in the dark may be related to the ability of the former compound to intercalate between the DNA bases. The lower cytotoxicity of 2, together with its significantly greater photocytotoxicity, makes this complex a potential agent for photodynamic therapy (PDT). These results suggest that intercalation or strong DNA binding may not be a desirable property of a potential PDT agent.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ic049091h

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Angeles-Boza, A. M., Bradley, P. M., Fu, P. K.-L., Wicke, S. E., Bacsa, J., Dunbar, K. R., & Turro, C.
Venue
Inorganic Chemistry
Published
2004-11-18
Volume
43
Issue
26
Pages
8510-8519
ISSN
  • 0020-1669 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-510X
OpenAlex
W2053987411
Cited by
199
References
2
FWCI
2.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: DNA Binding and Photocleavage in Vitro by New Dirhodium(II) dppz Complexes: Correlation to Cytotoxicity and Photocytotoxicity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/ic049091h
The paper
Angeles-Boza, A. M., Bradley, P. M., Fu, P. K.-L., Wicke, S. E., Bacsa, J., Dunbar, K. R., & Turro, C. (2004). DNA Binding and Photocleavage in Vitro by New Dirhodium(II) dppz Complexes: Correlation to Cytotoxicity and Photocytotoxicity. Inorganic Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic049091h

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.