Redox-mediated carbon monoxide release from a manganese carbonyl-implications for physiological CO delivery by CO releasing moieties

Antimicrobial and anticancer properties of carbon monoxide releasing molecules of the fac-[Re(CO)3(N-N)L]+ family

The toxicity profile of fac-[Re(CO)3(N-N)L]+ complexes against microbial and tumoral cells has been extensively studied, primarily focusing on modifications to the bidentate diimine (N-N) ligand. However, less attention has been paid to modifications of the axial ligand L, which is perpendicular to the Re-N-N plane. This study reveals that the high toxicity of the fac-[Re(CO)3(bpy)(Ctz)]+ complex may be attributed to the structural effect of the trityl (CPh3) group present in clotrimazole, as removal of phenyl rings causes a significant decrease in the activity against Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus). Moreover, substitution of the 1-tritylimidazole ligand by the structurally related ligands PPh3 and PCy3 maintains similarly high activity levels. These findings contribute to understanding the interactions of toxic complexes with bacterial membranes, suggesting that the ligand structures play a crucial role in inhibiting cell wall synthesis processes, potentially including Lipid II synthesis. Compounds with Ph3E (E = C-imidazole; P) groups also showed to be 10 times more toxic than cisplatin against three mammalian cell lines (IC50: 2-4 μM). In contrast, the analogue 1-benzylimidazole and 1-tert-butylimidazole derivatives were as toxic as cisplatin. We observed that the decomposition of the [Re(I)(CO)3] fragment inside mammalian cell lines liberates CO, which is expected to exert biological effects. Therefore, compounds of this family possessing the structural motif Ph3E seem to combine high antimicrobial and antitumoral activities, the latter being much higher than that of cisplatin.

Carbon Monoxide as a Potential Therapeutic Agent: A Molecular Analysis of Its Safety Profiles

Carbon monoxide (CO) is endogenously produced in mammals, with blood concentrations in the high micromolar range in the hemoglobin-bound form. Further, CO has shown therapeutic effects in various animal models. Despite its reputation as a poisonous gas at high concentrations, we show that CO should have a wide enough safety margin for therapeutic applications. The analysis considers a large number of factors including levels of endogenous CO, its safety margin in comparison to commonly encountered biomolecules or drugs, anticipated enhanced safety profiles when delivered via a noninhalation mode, and the large amount of safety data from human clinical trials. It should be emphasized that having a wide enough safety margin for therapeutic use does not mean that it is benign or safe to the general public, even at low doses. We defer the latter to public health experts. Importantly, this Perspective is written for drug discovery professionals and not the general public.

On the Question of CO's Ability to Induce HO-1 Expression in Cell Culture: A Comparative Study Using Different CO Sources

With the recognition of the endogenous signaling roles and pharmacological functions of carbon monoxide (CO), there is an increasing need to understand CO's mechanism of actions. Along this line, chemical donors have been introduced as CO surrogates for ease of delivery, dosage control, and sometimes the ability to target. Among all of the donors, two ruthenium-carbonyl complexes, CORM-2 and -3, are arguably the most commonly used tools for about 20 years in studying the mechanism of actions of CO. Largely based on data using these two CORMs, there has been a widely accepted inference that the upregulation of heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) expression is one of the key mechanisms for CO's actions. However, recent years have seen reports of very pronounced chemical reactivities and CO-independent activities of these CORMs. We are interested in examining this question by conducting comparative studies using CO gas, CORM-2/-3, and organic CO donors in RAW264.7, HeLa, and HepG2 cell cultures. CORM-2 and CORM-3 treatment showed significant dose-dependent induction of HO-1 compared to "controls," while incubation for 6 h with 250-500 ppm CO gas did not increase the HO-1 protein expression and mRNA transcription level. A further increase of the CO concentration to 5% did not lead to HO-1 expression either. Additionally, we demonstrate that CORM-2/-3 releases minimal amounts of CO under the experimental conditions. These results indicate that the HO-1 induction effects of CORM-2/-3 are not attributable to CO. We also assessed two organic CO prodrugs, BW-CO-103 and BW-CO-111. BW-CO-111 but not BW-CO-103 dose-dependently increased HO-1 levels in RAW264.7 and HeLa cells. We subsequently studied the mechanism of induction with an Nrf2-luciferase reporter assay, showing that the HO-1 induction activity is likely due to the activation of Nrf2 by the CO donors. Overall, CO alone is unable to induce HO-1 or activate Nrf2 under various conditions in vitro. As such, there is no evidence to support attributing the HO-1 induction effect of the CO donors such as CORM-2/-3 and BW-CO-111 in cell culture to CO. This comparative study demonstrates the critical need to consider possible CO-independent effects of a chemical CO donor before attributing the observed biological effects to CO. It is also important to note that such in vitro results cannot be directly extrapolated to in vivo studies because of the increased level of complexity and the likelihood of secondary and/or synergistic effects in the latter.

Plight of CORMs: The unreliability of four commercially available CO-releasing molecules, CORM-2, CORM-3, CORM-A1, and CORM-401, in studying CO biology

Carbon monoxide (CO) is an endogenously produced gaseous signaling molecule with demonstrated pharmacological effects. In studying CO biology, three delivery forms have been used: CO gas, CO in solution, and CO donors of various types. Among the CO donors, four carbonyl complexes with either a transition metal ion or borane (BH3) (termed CO-releasing molecules or CORMs) have played the most prominent roles appearing in over 650 publications. These are CORM-2, CORM-3, CORM-A1, and CORM-401. Intriguingly, there have been unique biology findings that were only observed with these CORMs, but not CO gas; yet these properties were often attributed to CO, raising puzzling questions as to why CO source would make such a fundamental difference in terms of CO biology. Recent years have seen a large number of reports of chemical reactivity (e.g., catalase-like activity, reaction with thiol, and reduction of NAD(P)+) and demonstrated CO-independent biological activity for these four CORMs. Further, CORM-A1 releases CO in an idiosyncratic fashion; CO release from CORM-401 is strongly influenced or even dependent on reaction with an oxidant and/or a nucleophile; CORM-2 mostly releases CO2, not CO, after a water-gas shift reaction except in the presence of a strong nucleophile; and CORM-3 does not release CO except in the presence of a strong nucleophile. All these beg the question as to what constitutes an appropriate CO donor for studying CO biology. This review critically summarizes literature findings related to these aspects, with the aim of helping result interpretation when using these CORMs and development of essential criteria for an appropriate donor for studying CO biology.