Antinociceptive properties and nitric oxide synthase inhibitory action of new ruthenium complexes
ABSTRACT This study evaluates the actions of the new ruthenium complexes trans-[RuCl2(nic)4] (Complex I) and trans-[RuCl2(i-nic)4] (Complex II) as antinociceptives, and their interaction with nitric oxide isoenzymes and with acetylcholine-induced relaxation of rat and rabbit aorta. Complex II inhibited, in a graded manner, neuronal and inducible nitric oxide (NO) synthase, and was about two fold more effective in inhibiting the neuronal NO synthase than the inducible form of the enzyme. Complex I was inactive. Both complexes failed to interfere with constitutive endothelial nitric oxide synthase because they did not change the mean arterial blood pressure of rats. The vasorelaxant effect of acetylcholine was markedly antagonised by the Complexes I and II in rings of both rat and rabbit aorta. Complexes I and II, given intraperitoneally, like Nω-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester (l-NAME) and NG-nitro-l-arginine (l-NOARG), inhibited, in a graded manner, both phases of the pain response induced by formalin. The actions of l-NAME, l-NOARG and Complex II, but not that of Complex I, were largely reversed by l-arginine. Both complexes failed to affect the motor response of animals in the rota-rod test and had no effect in the hot-plate assay. Together, these findings provide indications that the new ruthenium complexes, especially Complex II and its derivatives, might be of potential therapeutic benefit in the management of pain disorders.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In this article, we report the effects of acute administration of ruthenium complexes, trans-[RuCl(2)(nic)(4)] (nic=3-pyridinecarboxylic acid) 180.7 micromol/kg (complex I), trans-[RuCl(2)(i-nic)(4)] (i-nic=4-pyridinecarboxylic acid) 13.6 micromol/kg (complex II), trans-[RuCl(2)(dinic)(4)] (dinic=3,5-pyridinedicarboxylic acid) 180.7 micromol/kg (complex III) and trans-[RuCl(2)(i-dinic)(4)]Cl (i-dinic=3,4-pyridinedicarboxylic acid) 180.7 micromol/kg (complex IV) on succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) and cytochrome oxidase (COX) activities in brain (hippocampus, striatum and cerebral cortex), heart, skeletal muscle, liver and kidney of rats. Our results showed that complex I inhibited SDH activity in hippocampus, cerebral cortex, heart and liver; and inhibited COX in heart and kidney. Complex II inhibited SDH in heart and hippocampus; COX was inhibited in hippocampus, heart, liver and kidney. SDH activity was inhibited by complex III in heart, muscle, liver and kidney. However, COX activity was increased in hippocampus, striatum, cerebral cortex and kidney. Complex IV inhibited SDH activity in muscle and liver; COX activity was inhibited in kidney and increased in hippocampus, striatum and cerebral cortex. In a general manner, the complexes tested in this work decrease the activities of SDH and COX in heart, skeletal muscle, liver and kidney. In brain, complexes I and II were shown to be inhibitors and complexes III and IV activators of these enzymes. In vitro studies showed that the ruthenium complexes III and IV did not alter COX activity in kidney, but activated the enzyme in hippocampus, striatum and cerebral cortex, suggesting that these complexes present a direct action on COX in brain.Chemico-Biological Interactions 11/2007; 170(1):59-66. · 2.97 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: From the thousands of years, metal compounds have been used in medicine for treatment of various diseases including various types of cancers. Ruthenium was seen as a promising metal due to its similar kinetics to platinum and its lower toxicity. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the newer mononuclear ruthenium (II) compounds for antinociceptive and antitumor activities. Ruthenium (II) compounds were evaluated for antinociceptive and antitumor activity using the various in vitro and in vivo models. The compounds were injected to mice at concentrations of 1 and 2 mg kg(-1) intraperitoneally and were screened for antinociceptive activity, and the antiproliferative effect was evaluated against murine leukemia cells (L1210), human T-lymphocyte cells (CEM) and human cervix carcinoma cells (HeLa) using MTT assay. The results for antitumor activity clearly indicated that compound R1 was potent cytotoxic agent than R2 with IC50 values ranging from 4-6 μM for R1, whereas IC50 values for compound R2 ranging from 65-103 μM. The compounds have shown a significant anti-inflammatory effect in carrageenan and dextran models but do not having the central analgesic activity, this indicating that the antinociceptive activity is related to the peripheral nervous system. The results for 5-Lipoxygenase (5-LOX) activity showed that both R1 and R2 compounds were found to be significant 5-LOX inhibitory activity with IC50 values of 14.35 μg ml(-1) and 29.24 μg ml(-1) respectively. These findings concluded that the new ruthenium compounds might be the promising antiproliferative agents as these compounds showing significant 5-LOX inhibitory activity and potential agents in the management of pain related disorders.Journal of research in medical sciences 03/2013; 18(3):215-21. · 0.68 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: 1. The ruthenium complexes are important tools in inorganic chemistry. Different biological properties are found in the presence of distinct coordinate ligands, which offer a variety of potential clinical and pharmacological uses. 2. The aim of this work was to evaluate the antinociceptive and behavioural effects of the ruthenium complex, trans-[RuCl(2)(i-dinic)(4)]Cl, in mice. 3. The potential analgesic activity was tested using the formalin and hot plate tests and the behavioural effect was evaluated using the rotarod and spontaneous locomotor tests. The complex was administered at concentrations of 1.3, 4.5 and 18.0 mumol kg(-1) i.p. Morphine (6.0 mg kg(-1), i.p.) and diclofenac sodium (20.0 mg kg(-1), i.p.) were used as reference drugs. 4. The compound had no sedative activity on motor ataxia in the behavioural and analgesic tests. No significant effect was observed in the first phase of the formalin test, however, an effect was observed in the second phase. 5. The complex studied was probably more powerful than the reference drugs as an antinociceptive agent, as this mechanism also involved the nitric oxide (NO) pathway. From this perspective, further experimental studies will be useful to understand the effect of these compounds on NO and the relationship between prostaglandin and NO biosynthesis.Autonomic & Autacoid Pharmacology 10/2008; 28(4):103-8.