Mononuclear η6-arene ruthenium(II) complexes with pyrazolyl–pyridazine ligands: synthesis, CT-DNA binding, reactivity towards glutathione, and cytotoxicity

Organometallic η⁶-arene ruthenium(II) complexes with 3-chloro-6-(1H-pyrazol-1-yl)pyridazine (Ru1, Ru2, and Ru5) and 3-chloro-6-(3,5-dimethyl-1H-pyrazol-1-yl)pyridazine (Ru3-4) N,N’ heterocyclic and η⁶-arene (cymene (Ru1-4) or toluene (Ru 5)) have been synthesized. The ruthenium(II) complexes have common “three-legged piano-stool” pseudo-octahedral structures known for half-sandwich complexes. Evolution of their UV–Visible absorption spectra in PBS buffer or DMSO over 24 h confirmed their good solvolysis stability. Titrations of the complexes with the calf thymus DNA (CT-DNA) were monitored using UV–Visible absorption and fluorescence spectroscopies. The complexes interact moderately with CT-DNA and their binding constants are in the order of 10⁴ M⁻¹. Competitive binding of the complexes to a DNA-Hoechst 33,258 depicted competitive displacement of Hoechst from DNA’s minor grooves. These complexes bind to glutathione forming GSH-adducts through S coordination by replacement of a halide, with the iodo-analogues having higher binding constants than the chloro-complexes. Cyclic voltammograms of the complexes exhibited one electron-transfer quasi-reversible process. Trends in the molecular docking data of Ru1-5/DNA were similar to those for DNA binding constants. Of the five, only Ru1, Ru3 and Ru5 showed some activity (moderate) against the MCF-7 breast cancer cells with IC₅₀ values in the range of 59.2–39.9 for which Ru5 was the most active. However, the more difficult-to-treat cell line, MDA-MB 231 cell was recalcitrant to the treatment by these complexes.

Graphical abstract

Molecular docking simulations visualized the interactions of arene Ru(II) complexes with CT-DNA via minor grooving. The trends were corroborated by electrochemical and cytotoxicity data.