Issue

Vol. 31 No. 1 (2019): Vol 31 Issue 1

Copyright (c) 2019 AJC

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A Comparative Reactivity Study of Adenine versus Guanine Base through Transition State Formation with cis-Platinum(IV) Complex using DFT

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2019.21566
L.H. Khdium
Department of Chemistry, College of Science, University of Babylon, Hilla 51002, Iraq
A.A. Ali Drea
Department of Chemistry, College of Science, University of Babylon, Hilla 51002, Iraq

Corresponding Author(s) : A.A. Ali Drea

aadreab22@yahoo.com; liqaa.aljailawi@uokufa.edu.iq

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 31 No. 1 (2019): Vol 31 Issue 1

Abstract

B3LYP, Lanl2DZ basis sets at density functional theory (DFT) method has been used on a ground state geometry optimized for all proposed structures that have been involved in this study. Structural parameters such as bond lengths, bond angles and dihedral angles have been calculated in the same way to achieve a global reactivity description of Pt(IV) complex. We suggested a minimal energy structure of diaminobis((4-hydroxy-4-butanol)oxy)platinum(IV) chloride complex (DOP) as a new chemotherapy formula of cis-platinum complex. The reactive site of nucleophilic attachment at DOP occurs on carbon atoms due to their positive charge, while other atoms (nitrogen, oxygen, chlorine) are carried negative charges due to the delocalization of electron pair by a resonance effect. Bonds of Pt-Cl with 2.290 Å are more reactive bounds toward the replacement reactions than other chemical bonds in the DOP complex. Investigation revealed that the thermodynamic functions values are increased due to increasing vibrational intensities of cisplatin complex. The fourth transition state (TS4) is the most probable transition state than other suggested transition states for both guanine and adenine bases. The TS4 of platinum complex binding with guanine is the most probable by a factor of -18.134 a.u. of optimization energy value than other suggested states. TS4-guanine is the most probable than other suggested states by factor 7.354 kcal/mol of zero point energy (ZPE). Hence, platinum complex (DOP) is binded with guanine base of DNA through N7.

Keywords

DFT studies Adenine Guanine base cis-Platinum(IV) complex
Khdium, L., & Ali Drea, A. (2018). A Comparative Reactivity Study of Adenine versus Guanine Base through Transition State Formation with cis-Platinum(IV) Complex using DFT. Asian Journal of Chemistry, 31(1), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2019.21566
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. M.D. Hall, H.R. Mellor, R. Callaghan and T.W. Hambley, J. Med. Chem., 50, 3403 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1021/jm070280u.
  2. (a) J.Z. Zhang, E. Wexselblatt, T.W. Hambley and D. Gibson, Chem. Commun., 48, 847 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1039/C1CC16647F. (b) L.T. Ellis, H.M. Er and T.W. Hambley, Aust. J. Chem., 48, 793 (1995); https://doi.org/10.1071/CH9950793. (c) S. Choi, C. Filotto, M. Bisanzo, S. Delaney, J.L. Whitworth, D. Lagasee, A. Jusko, C. Li, N.A. Wood, J. Willingham, A. Schwenker and K. Spaulding, Inorg. Chem., 37, 2500 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1021/ic971047x.
  3. (a) M.D. Hall, S. Amjadi, M. Zhang, P.J. Beale and T.W. Hambley, J. Inorg. Biochem., 98, 1614 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2004.05.017. (b) W.H. Ang, S. Pilet, R. Scopelliti, F. Bussy, L. Juillerat-Jeanneret and P.J. Dyson, J. Med. Chem., 48, 8060 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1021/jm0506468.
  4. W.H. Ang, I. Khalaila, C.S. Allardyce, L. Juillerat-Jeanneret and P.J. Dyson, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 127, 1382 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1021/ja0432618.
  5. N.J. Wheate, S. Walker, G.E. Craig and R. Oun, Dalton Trans., 39, 8113 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1039/c0dt00292e.
  6. Z.H. Siddik, Oncogene, 22, 7265 (2003); https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1206933.
  7. (a) L. Galluzzi, L. Senovilla, I. Vitale, J. Michels, I. Martins, O. Kepp, M. Castedo and G. Kroemer, Oncogene, 31, 1869 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2011.384. (b) E. Wexselblatt, E. Yavin and D. Gibson, Inorg. Chim. Acta, 393, 75 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ica.2012.07.013.
  8. J. Feng, B. Xiao, J. Chen, Y. Du, J. Yu and R. Zhou, Mater. Des., 32, 3231 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2011.02.043.
  9. M.D. Hall and T.W. Hambley, Coord. Chem. Rev., 232, 49 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-8545(02)00026-7.
  10. M. Reithofer, M. Galanski, A. Roller and B.K. Keppler, Eur. J. Inorg. Chem., 2006, 2612 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1002/ejic.200600108.
  11. H. Varbanov, S.M. Valiahdi, A.A. Legin, M.A. Jakupec, A. Roller, M. Galanski and B.K. Keppler, Eur. J. Med. Chem., 46, 5456 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmech.2011.09.006.
  12. C.H. Vosko, L. Wilk and M. Nusair, Can. J. Phys., 58, 1200 (1980); https://doi.org/10.1139/p80-159.
  13. A.D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys., 98, 5648 (1993); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.464913.
  14. A.D. Becke, Phys. Rev. A, 38, 3098 (1988); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.38.3098.
  15. M.J. Frisch, G.W. Trucks, H.B. Schlegel, G.E. Scuseria, M.A. Robb, J.R. Cheeseman, G. Scalmani, V. Barone, B. Mennucci, G.A. Petersson, H. Nakatsuji, M. Caricato, X. Li, H.P. Hratchian, A.F. Izmaylov, J. Bloino, G. Zheng, J.L. Sonnenberg, M. Hada, M. Ehara, K. Toyota, R. Fukuda, J. Hasegawa, M. Ishida, T. Nakajima, Y. Honda, O. Kitao, H. Nakai, T. Vreven, J.A. Montgomery, J.J.E. Peralta, F. Ogliaro, M. Bearpark, J.J. Heyd, E. Brothers, K.N. Kudin, V.N. Staroverov, R. Kobayashi, J. Normand, K. Raghavachari, A. Rendell, J.C. Burant, S.S. Iyengar, J. Tomasi, M. Cossi, N. Rega, J.M. Millam, M. Klene, J.E. Knox, J.B. Cross, V. Bakken, C. Adamo, J. Jaramillo, R. Gomperts, R.E. Stratmann, O. Yazyev, A.J. Austin, R. Cammi, C. Pomelli, J.W. Ochterski, R.L. Martin, K. Morokuma, V.G. Zakrzewski, G.A. Voth, P. Salvador, J.J. Dannenberg, S. Dapprich, A.D. Daniels, O. Farkas, J.B. Foresman, J.V. Ortiz, J. Cioslowski and D.J. Fox, Gaussian 09, Gaussian Inc., Wallingford, CT (2009).
  16. A.E. Reed and F. Weinhold, J. Chem. Phys., 78, 4066 (1983); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.445134.
  17. R. Dennington, T. Keth and T. Millan, Gaussview version 5, emichem Inc., Shawnee Mission KS (2009).
  18. C. Lee, W. Yang and R.G. Parr, Phys. Rev. B, 37, 785 (1988); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.37.785.
  19. S. Dheivamalar, L. Sugi and K. Ambigai, J. Comput. Chem., 4, 17 (2016); https://doi.org/10.4236/cc.2016.41003.
  20. G.H.W. Milburn and M.R. Truter, J. Chem. Soc. A, 1609 (1966); https://doi.org/10.1039/j19660001609.
  21. R.E. Siavash Solmaz, S. Shima, R. Mohammad, N. Parviz, M. Hamid, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci., 4, 1407 (2009).
  22. H.P. Varbanov, M.A. Jakupec, A. Roller, F. Jensen, M. Galanski and B.K. Keppler, J. Med. Chem., 56, 330 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1021/jm3016427.
  23. M.K. Salim, E. Elbashir, S.H. Ali and M.A. Nozha, Z. Naturforschung A, 68, 581 (2013); https://doi.org/10.5560/zna.2013-0037.
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0