Next Article in Journal
Interactions of Clotrimazole with Certain d-Metal Compounds and with Organic Acids
Next Article in Special Issue
The Hexacoordinate Si Complex SiCl4(4-Azidopyridine)2—Crystallographic Characterization of Two Conformers and Probing the Influence of SiCl4-Complexation on a Click Reaction with Phenylacetylene
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancement of the Cytotoxicity of Quinazolinone Schiff Base Derivatives with Copper Coordination
Previous Article in Special Issue
Coupling Pyrazine to Dithiocarbonates for Molybdopterin Model Ligands—Indispensable Tin
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Inorganics
Volume 11
Issue 10
10.3390/inorganics11100392
inorganics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Novel Sulfone 2-Aminobenzimidazole Derivatives and Their Coordination Compounds: Contribution of the Ethyl and Phenyl Substituents on Non-Covalent Molecular Interactions; Biological Antiproliferative Activity

by
David Colorado-Solís
1,
Rodrigo Castro-Ramírez
1,
Francisco Sánchez-Bartéz
2,
Isabel Gracia-Mora
2 and
Norah Barba-Behrens
1,*
1
Departamento de Química Inorgánica, Facultad de Química, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad Universitaria, Coyoacán, Ciudad de México 04510, Mexico
2
Unidad de Investigación Preclínica (UNIPREC), Facultad de Química, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad Universitaria, Coyoacán, Ciudad de México 04510, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Inorganics 2023, 11(10), 392; https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11100392
Submission received: 6 September 2023 / Revised: 28 September 2023 / Accepted: 1 October 2023 / Published: 3 October 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Editorial Board Members’ Collection Series in “Featuring Ligands and Their Applications in Coordination Chemistry”)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
New sulfone 2-aminobenzimidazole derivatives were designed and synthesized. Their nickel(II), copper(II), zinc(II), cadmium(II) and mercury(II) compounds were obtained and fully characterized by spectroscopic and analytical techniques. Single crystal X-ray structural analysis was performed in order to study the relevant intra and inter non-covalent interactions, mainly H···π, lone pair···π, and π···π, highlighting the difference between the terminal ethyl and phenyl groups in such interactions. Dimeric and trimeric supramolecular syntons were found for some of these compounds. Additionally, their antiproliferative activity was investigated, finding that the copper(II) compounds with the sulfone phenyl derivative were the most active.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Since the pioneering work of cis-platinum and other related platinum compounds [1], biologically active coordination compounds became a new field for bioinorganic chemistry. Platinum is still part of many newly synthetic compounds that attempt to use the covalent mechanism of cis-platinum but using different ligands [2,3]. Although cis-platinum and other metallic compounds are quite useful and effective, their well-known toxicity [4,5] is still a problem to overcome by the design of new compounds with fewer side effects [6]. There is an interest on focusing on coordination compounds of essential trace elements, such as Fe, Co, Ni, Cu and Zn [7,8,9], commonly found in biological systems as part of metalloproteins or cofactors for many enzymes [10]. The use of trace elements aims to take advantage of pre-existent metabolic routes, so they could be less toxic than heavier metals.
Considerable research has been undertaken to elucidate the biological activity of coordination compounds and how they work inside human cells. Different mechanisms have been proposed, mainly related to the molecular structure of the compounds, such as redox activity of the ligand or its metal center, covalent bonding to DNA and other biomolecules, non-covalent interactions with biomolecules or a combination of them [11]. While redox activity and covalent bonding are more direct and unspecific, a mechanism based on non-covalent interactions may be more difficult to elucidate, but it will be more sensitive to changes in the structure of the coordination compound and the conformation adopted by the biomolecules [12,13,14].
DNA is an example of the different ways in which the same biomolecule interacts with transition metal coordination compounds. With B-DNA, the complexes may interact through the phosphate backbone of the strands, stablishing interactions with the nitrogenated bases at the mayor or the minor grooves, intercalation of aromatic moieties between two nucleotides or a combination of these possibilities. All these interactions lead to conformational changes of this biomolecule, affecting its stability and the processes in which it is involved [15]. An example of the relevance of the specificity of non-covalent interactions is found with the interaction of coordination compounds with the quadruplex conformation of DNA, found at the telomeres of chromosomes in guanine rich sections, and that has been related to cell aging and apoptosis [16,17,18,19,20]
The continuous study of non-covalent interactions has been relevant to the design of biologically active compounds [21]. We have been interested in the design of biologically active ligands and their corresponding transition metal coordination compounds, specifically focused on the influence of non-covalent interactions into their biological properties [22].
In previous work with tinidazole (tnz) and its copper(II) and zinc(II) compounds, it was found that tetrahedral coordination compounds showed excellent antiparasitic or antibacterial activity [23,24]. An important factor for the activity of these compounds was the presence of a bifurcated intramolecular lone pair···π interaction (lp), within an O atom of the sulfone group with both imidazolic rings from the coordinated tnz ligands. This interaction stabilized the molecular tetrahedral structure, allowing it to be conserved in solution. The biological activity of the tinidazole copper(II) compounds was further investigated. Different counterions were used to generate tnz-based complexes of various geometries to study the influence of the geometry in the biological activity. Cyclic voltammetry and gel electrophoresis experiments were performed to evaluate their oxidative-damaging properties, and their redox properties were attributable to both the ligand and the metal ion, as has been observed in similar tinidazole compounds [25]. Additionally, DNA-interacting ability and cytotoxicity of tnz copper(II) complexes were evaluated. These complexes interact with DNA by means of electrostatic interactions or/and groove binding. In the presence of a reducing agent, these compounds induce DNA damage by ROS generation. Cytotoxicity studies with different cancer cell lines revealed that complexes [Cu(tnz)2(µ-Cl)Cl]2 and [Cu(tnz)2Br2] showed the highest cytotoxicity, while being moderately toxic to normal cells [26,27]
Generally, the reported cytotoxic transition metal compounds have been synthesized using chelating ligands [28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. The results with non-chelating ligands, tinidazole and clotrimazole [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42], have shown that weak interactions, such as hydrogen bonding, electrostatic interactions, π stacking, lp···π or hydrophobic contacts, as well as geometry and redox properties, have an important role in the biological activity of coordination compounds with monocoordinated ligands.
Based on these results, we were interested in investigating 2-aminobenzimidazole sulfonated derivatives, where the presence of the amino group has been found to be of great importance for interactions with biomolecules, thanks to the high hydrogen donor character of the group [12]. These interactions have been observed in previous studies of coordination compounds with the unsubstituted 2-aminobenzimidazole ligand, where the -NH2 gives place to intramolecular hydrogen bonding with the coordinated halides or acetates stabilized in the molecular structure [43,44]. Additionally, the sulfone group gives place to weak interactions, lp···π contacts and, the presence of a phenyl group, yields π···π stacking interactions [45].
Herein we present the structural and spectroscopic characterization, as well as a non-covalent interactions analysis of the ethyl and phenyl sulfonated ligands, 2-amino-1-(2-phenylsulphonyl)ethylbenzimidazole (sfabz); 2-amino-1-(2-ethylsulfonyl) ethylbenzimidazole (seabz) and their coordination compounds. The antiproliferative activity of the obtained compounds was also investigated.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Spectroscopic Characterization and Magnetic Susceptibility

Chlorido and bromido, NiII, CuII, ZnII, CdII and HgII coordination compounds of 2-amino-1-(2-phenylsulfonyl)ethylbenzimidazole (sfabz) and 2-amino-1-(2-ethylsulfonyl)ethylbenzimidazole (seabz), were obtained. Their general structures were proposed based on spectroscopical data as well as elemental analyses. When single crystals were obtained, the proposed structure was confirmed by the X-ray diffraction structure. The magnetic moments were also determined.

2.1.1. IR Spectra

The phenylsulfonated ligand (sfabz) presented the νas(NH2) and the νs(NH2) vibrations in 3434 and 3341 cm−1, respectively; it also presented a band at 1664 cm−1 that was assigned as the contributions from the ν(C=C), the δsc(NH2) and the ν(C2-N3) vibrations. In a similar way, the band at 1552 cm−1 was assigned as the sum of the contributions from the ν(C=N), the ρ(NH2) and the ν(C2-N10) vibrations. Finally, the spectra presented bands at 1286 and 1140 cm−1, which were assigned to the νas(SO2) and νs(SO2) vibrations, respectively (Figure S1). Benzimidazolic bands were assigned as proposed by Sudha and coworkers [46].
Upon coordination of sfabz through the N3, the band centered in 1664 cm−1 was shifted to lower energy (1656–1627 cm−1). Additionally, the sulfone bands, νas(SO2) and νs(SO2), were shifted to higher energy (1294–1289 cm−1 and 1144–1141 cm−1, respectively). Only in compounds 5 and 10 was the νs(SO2) band shifted to lower energy (1138–1136 cm−1). This can be attributable to the different non-covalent interactions this group presented in the different compounds (vide infra).
On the other hand, the ethylsulfonated ligand (seabz) presented bands at 3460 and 3373 cm−1, assigned to the νas(NH2) and νs(NH2) vibrations, respectively. Additionally, the bands at 1639 and 1549 cm−1 were assigned in the same composed way as in the sfabz ligand (Figure S2). Finally, bands at 1281 and 1132 cm−1, attributed to the νas(SO2) and νs(SO2) and both vibrations of the amino group (3414–3365 cm−1 and 3332–3306 cm−1, respectively), were shifted upon coordination (examples of the IR spectra for coordination compounds with sfabz and seabz are depicted in Figure S3 and Figure S4, respectively).

2.1.2. Electronic Spectroscopy and Magnetic Susceptibility

For all nickel(II) and copper(II) compounds, the effective magnetic moment was determined and the UV-Vis-NIR was recorded. All the nickel(II) compounds were assigned to a tetrahedral geometry and because of that it was possible to calculate the ν1 transition according to the graphical method described by Lever [47]. The assigned transitions, as well as the effective magnetic moment are shown in Table 1.
The electronic transitions agree with the expected values for a nickel(II) (d8) tetrahedral compounds. The effective magnetic moment for these complexes is well within the range of 3.2–4.1 B.M. for nickel(II) showing this geometry [48]. Furthermore, the experimental results presented here are supported by their X-ray structure (vide infra).
Similarly, the diffuse reflectance electronic spectra for copper(II) compounds 5–8, show the d-d transition ca. 10,000 cm−1. Previously reported distorted tetrahedral copper(II) compounds have shown d-d transitions around these values [49,50]. To further assess the stability of these compounds in solution, the spectra in a DMSO solution was obtained. Table 1 shows the values of the d-d electronic transitions at similar values to those in solid state, suggesting the conservation of the ligands in solution (Figures S5 and S6). Compounds 5–8 depict a µeff within the expected range of 1.8–2.2 B.M. [48].

2.1.3. NMR Studies

1H, 13C and HSQC spectra were obtained for both ligands and compounds 9, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16. The 1H-NMR and 13C-NMR signals were assigned, according to Figure 1a, and are in agreement with the HSQC spectra (Tables S5 and S6). Similarly, Figure 1b, depicts the assignation for the ligand seafz, corroborated through HSQC (Tables S7 and S8).
For both series of coordination compounds, signals of the ligands, in both 1H and 13C spectra, are shifted upon coordination (Δδ = ligand-complex, Δδ > 0.05 ppm for 1H and Δδ > 0.1 ppm for 13C). Table 2 and Table 3 resume the effect of coordination in the 1H and 13C signals of the ligands except for their ethyl and phenyl substituents.
According to the 1H spectra, it is possible to differentiate the behavior of the three groups of protons: the benzimidazolic protons, the amino group, and the aliphatic chain protons. For the benzimidazolic protons of both series of compounds, the deshielding effect is more pronounced in H6 and H7 and smaller in H5. Comparing the effect of different metals, the deshielding at H5-H7 follows the trend Hg = Zn < Cd, while at H4 all metals cause almost similar displacements in the sfabz series and Cd causes the bigger effect in the seabz series.
In both ligands’ series the amino protons are deshielded upon coordination to the metal ion. This effect is more predominant with Zn, and lower with Cd. Similarly, the aliphatic chain shows a significant displacement, with same tendency seen in the amino group, namely, Zn > Hg > Cd.
Comparing the effect of the metal in the 13C spectra, the shielding and deshielding are more pronounced in the Zn compounds and less prominent in the Hg and Cd compounds. The 13C chemical shifts of the aliphatic chain showed a slight deshielding at C11, and a shielding effect on the C12, an effect that can be attributed to the sulfone group in the chain. The terminal chain is also affected by the sulfone, where the aliphatic ethyl chain shows no significant changes in its chemical shifts for both 1H and 13C data, while the phenyl group shows significant changes at the C16 and C17 positions (Δδ C16máx = 0.5 ppm, Δδ C17máx = 0.3 ppm).

2.2. X-ray Structures of the Ligands and Their Coordination Compounds

2.2.1. Crystal Structure of the 2-Aminobenzimidazolic Ligands

Despite the difference in the terminal substituent, both the seabz and sfabz ligands crystallize in a P 21/n space group, within a monoclinic crystal system. However, these two ligands show different intramolecular interactions. For the seabz ligand, one of the oxygen atoms in the sulfone group is orientated towards the benzimidazolic ring, due to a lone pair···πbz interaction at 3.775 Å (Figure 2a), as has been observed in purine nucleobases, where the lone pair···π interactions are evenly distributed in the intersection of the fused aromatic rings, [51,52].
Alternatively, the sfabz ligand depicts the sulfone group away from the benzimidazolic ring, thus, generating a weak H···πphe at 3.791 Å, between a benzimidazolic proton and the centroid in the terminal phenyl ring (Figure 2b).
Another difference found in the crystal structures of both ligands is the type of intermolecular interactions, mainly the hydrogen bonding involving the N3 of the benzimidazolic ring. The sfabz ligand depicts two strong hydrogen bonds with the amino group acting as the donor and the N3, the acceptor. This interaction is at 2.041 Å with an angle of 174.58°. Two neighboring molecules show one of these hydrogen bonds each, forming a dimer as depicted in Figure 3a. On the other hand, the seabz ligand also shows a hydrogen bond with the N3 as the acceptor. However, this is a weak hydrogen bond, given the donor is a –CH2– group at 2.603 Å and 157.15°. Alternatively, what seems to be a major stabilizing interaction, between four seabz molecules, is a series of hydrogen bonds with the amino group acting as the donor, with the S=O accepting two protons form different molecules. Their angles and distances (2.088 Å, 2.127 Å and 171.03°, 164.33°) indicate that these interactions are moderate. Figure 3b depicts these hydrogen bonds.

2.2.2. Crystal Structure of the Coordination Compounds of seabz and sfabz

Tetrahedral coordination compounds have been synthesized herein with both alkylsulfonated benzimidazole ligands to be able to compare the effect of the substituents in the non-covalent interactions found in the crystal structures. As mentioned above, all compounds show the formula [ML2X2] (M2+ = Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, Hg; L = seabz, sfabz; X = Cl−, Br−), without the presence of water molecules, despite that hydrated metal salts were used to synthesize them. For some of the seabz complexes, adequate crystals for X-ray diffraction were not obtained. This could be due to the fact that the ethyl group presents far fewer non-covalent interactions than the phenyl ring does (vide infra). Due to this, for compounds 11, 14, and 16, only basic structural features and connectivity are discussed.
Compounds 1, 2 (L = sfabz) and 3 (L = seabz) depict a Ni center with either a Cl− or Br− anion. Compounds 1 and 2 are both obtained in a P-1 space group, within a triclinic crystal system, regardless of the acetone molecule from the solvent in compound 2. Alternatively, compound 3 is obtained in a P 21/c space group and a monoclinic system. The bond lengths and angles around the metal ion for these three compounds are shown in Table 4. From the results shown in this table, it is noticeable that the terminal substituent in the alkylsulfonated chain does not have a major effect in the bonds around the metal ion.
However, the terminal group affects the interactions that each of these compounds present. Even between the two sfabz Ni coordination compounds, different intramolecular contacts are found. The crystal structure for compound 1 (Figure 4a) depicts both ligands in different conformations, one being extended and the other one with both aromatic rings facing each other. In doing so, a H···πbz contact can be found at 2.954 Å. In contrast with the H···πphe interaction observed in the free ligand (vide supra), in the nickel compound this interaction is between two different ligands, where the aromatic rings, acting as donor and acceptor, are reversed giving a H···πbz contact. Compound 2, also a sfabz derivative, shows a similar interaction, between benzimidazolic moieties. The H··· πbz contact (3.577 Å) is shown in Figure 4b. Finally, compound 3, rather than depicting a H···π contact, depicts a lone pair···π intramolecular interaction between the sulfone group and the benzimidazolic ring (Figure 4c). This interaction is at 3.416 Å and with an angle centroid-N-O of 85.51°, indicative of a strong non-covalent interaction that stabilizes the crystal structure. This emphasizes the importance of the terminal substituent in this type of ligands, when the substituent is a phenyl ring, primarily depicting H···π contacts. Whereas, when it is an ethyl group, this interaction is no longer present, giving place to a different interaction, namely, lp···π.
Regarding the intermolecular interactions of these nickel(II) complexes, both sfabz compounds show very different contacts in their crystal structure. Compound 2 depicts a displaced π···π stacking interaction between two benzimidazolic rings at 3.673 Å (centroid-centroid) (Figure 5b). Alternatively, compound 1 shows hydrogen bonds with the amino and a –CH2– group acting as the donor, and an oxygen of the sulfone group as the acceptor (Figure 5a). These differences in intermolecular interactions between these two compounds can be attributed, mainly, to the fact that compound 2 crystalizes with an acetone molecule. Performing a similar analysis with compound 3 with seabz, what seems to be the most important contact is a lone pair···π interaction between S=O and the benzimidazolic ring at 3.347Å and 89.59°, directed towards the center of the imidazolic ring of this molecule (Figure 5c). Interestingly, the other oxygen of the same sulfone group is the one showing the intramolecular lone pair···π interaction (vide supra). This is relevant because in our previous work with alkylsulfonated ligands [44,45], when one oxygen of the sulfone group is depicting such interactions, the other oxygen does not show any other contact, not even weak hydrogen bonds.
As mentioned above, adequate crystals for X-ray diffraction were easier to obtain with the sfabz ligand. However, the copper(II) complex (compound 5) shows great disorder in one of the sfabz ligands. Regardless, it is still possible to see its connectivity and geometrical features. Compound 5 crystalizes in a P-1 space group, within a triclinic system. Although this compound still stabilizes a tetrahedral geometry, it is more distorted than the nickel and zinc coordination compounds, as its noticeable for its larger N-Cu-N’ angle of 135.54° (Figure 6). No relevant intramolecular contacts could be assigned in this structure, due to the structural disorder.
Two compounds with Zn(II) and sfabz were obtained, crystallizing in a triclinic system and a P-1 space group. Angles and bond distance around the metal ion are summarized in Table 5. Although compound 10 depicts an acetone molecule in the crystal structure, this does not seem to affect the intramolecular interactions, as both Zn(II) sfabz complexes depict a H···π contact with one benzimidazolic ring acting as the donor, and the other one as the acceptor, with a distance of 3.404 Å for compound 9 and 3.630 Å for compound 10. In contrast with the NiX2 derivatives discussed above, where the crystal structure is either stabilized through either hydrogen bonds with the sulfone or through π stacking between the benzimidazolic rings, compounds 9 and 10 depict both interactions at the same time with one neighboring molecule. Figure 7 shows the intermolecular interactions for compound 9, as an example with the relevant angle and distances. The corresponding values for compound 10 can be found in parenthesis in the same figure.
The connectivity and general structure features for compounds 11, 14 and 16 (Zn, Cd and Hg, respectively) are depicted in Figure 8. As the obtained crystals were not adequate to properly obtain their X-ray structure, only general aspects of the compounds can be assessed. Namely, all three compounds depict two alkylsulfone ligands and two halogens, yielding tetracoordinated compounds, a distorted tetrahedral geometry, as seen for all the crystal structures depicted herein. It is noteworthy that, for these three compounds, an acetonitrile molecule is present in the crystal structure. This highlights the importance of the solvent being used for crystallization as, even though some crystal structures depict acetone molecules, this does not affect the quality of the X-ray diffractions obtained. Whereas, using acetonitrile as a solvent introduces disorder, and lower-quality crystals are obtained.

2.3. Stability in Solution and Antiproliferative Activity

The stability in solution of the copper(II) compounds was assessed as described in the methods section of this article. In all cases, the same electronic transitions described above were observed without significant change after a day in solution, indicating no changes in the geometry or coordination. As the Cu(II) compounds and zinc(II) compounds showed no significant variation in their NMR spectra after the same time period, both series of compounds are considered as suitable for biological activity studies.
To determine their antiproliferative activity, a cell-viability assay was carried out with the aforementioned copper(II) and zinc(II) compounds against HeLa (cervix carcinoma), HCT-15 (colorectal adenocarcinoma), MCF-7 (breast adenocarcinoma), A549 (lung adenocarcinoma) and L929 (healthy connective mice tissue).
The IC50 of the compounds was determined and is presented below (Table 6). As observed in the table, IC50 for both ligands was the highest of all compounds for every cancer cell line, indicating that the ligands alone were not active. In fact, most of the coordination compounds were significantly less active than cis-platinum in most cancer cell lines. Only copper(II) sfabz coordination compounds were active enough to be compared with cis-platinum when tested in the HeLa cell line, being [Cu(sfabz)2Br2] (6) slightly better than the Pt reference compound.
Although only few compounds showed IC50 comparable to cisplatin, there is a visible pattern for the antiproliferative activity of the compounds. Despite the substituent of the benzimidazolic ligand, copper(II) compounds showed higher activity than their zinc(II) homologues. Additionally, bromo-containing compounds were typically more active than their chloro counterparts. Comparing both series of complexes, seabz compounds were substantially less active than the sfabz compounds.
Finally, all compounds were generally less active than cis-platinum towards healthy mice tissue. Given the selectivity of copper(II) sfabz compounds on cancer cell lines, they are worth further investigation.

3. Experimental

3.1. Materials

2-aminobenzimidazole, phenylvinyl sulfone and ethylvinyl sulfone were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and used without further purification. The metal salts K2CO3 (99%), CuCl2·2H2O (97%), CuBr2 (98%), NiCl2·6H2O (99%), ZnBr2 (>97%), HgCl2 (98%) and CdCl2·2.5H2O (99%) were purchased from J.T. Baker, the salt ZnCl2 (>97%) was obtained from Sigma Aldrich and the salt NiBr2·3H2O (99%) was purchased from Merck. All solvents were obtained from J.T. Baker. Both salts and solvents were used without further purification.

3.2. Synthesis of the Ligands

3.2.1. Synthesis of 2-Amino-1-(2-phenylsulfonyl)ethylbenzimidazole (sfabz)

The ligand was synthesized by mixing phenylvinyl sulfone (3.3182 mmol, 0.5582 g), 2-aminobenzimidazole (3.3182 mmol, 0.4418 g), and K2CO3 (1.6591 mmol, 0.2293 g) in 10 mL of acetonitrile. The mixture was stirred under reflux for ten minutes, left to stand at room temperature and then filtered. The precipitate was washed with a concentrated solution of NH4Cl and then with distilled water. Crystals suitable for single crystal X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of a solution of the ligand in methanol. Yield: 92%. Anal. calculated for C15H15N3O2S: C, 59.78%; H, 5.02%; N, 13.95%; S, 10.62%. Experimental: C, 59.58%; H, 4.82%; N, 14.19%; S, 10.76%. IR (ν cm−1): vs. 3434 νas(NH2), w 3341 νs(NH2), vs. 1664 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1552 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1286 νas(SO2), s 1140 νs(SO2). RMN: δ 7.86 (H17, d, J = 7.4 Hz, 2H), 7.71 (H19, t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 7.58 (H18, t, J = 7.4 Hz, 2H), 7.05 (H4, d, J = 7.5 Hz, 1H), 6.89 (H5, t, J = 7.5, 1H), 6.79 (H6, t, J = 7.5 Hz, 1H), 6.74 (H7, d, J = 7.5 Hz, 1H), 6.43 (H10, s, 2H), 4.28 (H11, t, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H), 3.72 (H12, t, J = 7.0 Hz, 2H).

3.2.2. Synthesis of 2-Amino-1-(2-ethylsulfonyl)ethylbenzimidazole (seabz)

The ligand was prepared by mixing ethylvinyl sulfone (4.768 mmol, 0.5755 g) and 2-aminobenzimidazole (4.768 mmol, 0.6376 g) in 10 mL of acetonitrile. This mixture was stirred under reflux for 30 min, then was left to stand at room temperature. The precipitate was filtered and washed with 5 mL of ethylacetate. Crystals suitable for single crystal X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of a solution of the ligand in methanol. Yield: 66%. Anal. calculated for C11H15N3O2S: C, 51.24%; H, 6.06%; N, 16.30%; S, 12.44%. Experimental: C, 51.27%; H, 5.93%; N, 16.35%; S, 12.50%. IR (ν cm−1): vs. 3460 νas(NH2), vs. 3373 νs(NH2), vs. 1639 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1549 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1281 νas(SO2), s 1132 νs(SO2). RMN: δ 7.13 y 7.15 (H4 y H7, dd, J = 7.4, 1.2 Hz, 2H), 6.94 (H6, td, J = 7.4, 1.2 Hz, 1H), 6.88 (H5, td, J = 7.4, 1.2 Hz, 2H), 6.48 (H10, s, 2H), 4.39 (H11, d, J = 7.2 Hz, 2H), 3.46 (H12, t, J = 7.2 Hz, 2H), 3.08 (H16, q, J = 7.4 Hz, 2H), 1.15 (H17, t, J = 7.4 Hz, 2H).

3.3. Synthesis of the Coordination Compounds

Coordination compounds of sfabz and seabz were synthesized by similar procedures. A mixture of the ligand and the metal salt in a methanol solution (10 mL) was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature, the obtained products were filtered and washed with cold ethanol. Details of the reaction conditions are discussed below.

3.3.1. [Ni(sfabz)2Cl2] (1)

A solution of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and NiCl2·6H2O (0.0594 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Crystals suitable for single crystal X-ray diffraction were obtained preparing a solution in acetone of the solid obtained and leaving it to slow evaporation. Yield: 80%. Anal. calculated for NiC30H32N6O5S2Cl2: C, 48.02%; H, 4.30%; N, 11.20%; S, 8.55%. Experimental: C, 47.62%; H, 3.56%; N, 10.80%; S, 8.01%. IR (ν cm−1): s 3387 νas(NH2), s 3305 νs(NH2), vs. 1645 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1552 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1292 νas(SO2), s 1141 νs(SO2).

3.3.2. [Ni(sfabz)2Br2] (2)

A solution of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and NiBr2·3H2O (0.0681 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetone, and crystals suitable for single crystal X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 71%. Anal. calculated for NiC30H30N6O4S2Br2: C, 43.88%; H, 3.68%; N, 10.23%; S, 7.81%. Experimental: C, 43.56%; H, 3.20%; N, 10.10%; S, 7.66%. IR (ν cm−1): s 3418 νas(NH2), s 3307 νs(NH2), s 1643 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1549 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), vs. 1290 νas(SO2), vs. 1146 νs(SO2).

3.3.3. [Ni(seabz)2Cl2] (3)

A solution of the ligand (0.1267 g, 0.5 mmol) and NiCl2·6H2O (0.0594 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetone, and crystals suitable for single crystal X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 89%. Anal. calculated for NiC22H34N6O6S2Cl2: C, 39.31%; H, 5.10%; N, 12.50%; S, 9.54%. Experimental: C, 39.69%; H, 4.82%; N, 12.56%; S, 8.80%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3407 νas(NH2), s 3321 νs(NH2), vs. 1646 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1559 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1295 νas(SO2), s 1128 νs(SO2).

3.3.4. [Ni(seabz)2Br2] (4)

A solution of the ligand (0.1267 g, 0.5 mmol) and NiBr2·3H2O (0.0681 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 69%. Anal. calculated for NiC22H35N6O6.5S2Br2: C, 34.31%; H, 4.58%; N, 10.91%; S, 8.37%. Experimental: C, 33.97%; H, 4.11%; N, 11.25%; S, 7.84%. IR (ν cm−1): vs. 3387 νas(NH2), vs. 3311 νs(NH2), vs. 1645 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1550 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), vs. 1294 νas(SO2), s 1126 νs(SO2).

3.3.5. [Cu(sfabz)2Cl2] (5)

A solution of 0.0426 g (2.5 mmol) of CuCl2·2H2O and 0.2260 g (7.5 mmol) of the ligand sfabz in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for one hour. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Crystals suitable for single crystal X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the remanent ethanolic reaction mixture. Yield: 65%. Anal. calculated for CuC30H31N6O4.5S2Cl2: C, 48.29%; H, 4.19%; N, 11.26%; S, 8.60%. Experimental: C, 48.10%; H, 3.94%; N, 11.36%; S, 8.95%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3440 νas(NH2), m 3372 νs(NH2), s 1638 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), m 1546 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1289 νas(SO2), s 1138 νs(SO2).

3.3.6. [Cu(sfabz)2Br2] (6)

A solution of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and CuBr2 (0.0558 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 97%. Anal. calculated for CuC30H32N6O5S2Br2: C, 42.69%; H, 3.82%; N, 9.96%; S, 7.60%. Experimental: C, 42.41%; H, 3.49%; N, 9.87%; S, 7.31%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3525 νas(NH2), s 3318 νs(NH2), s 1643 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), m 1557 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1294 νas(SO2), vs. 1141 νs(SO2).

3.3.7. [Cu(seabz)2Cl2] (7)

A solution of 0.0426 g (2.5 × 10−4 mol) of CuCl2·2H2O and 0.1267 g (5 × 10−4 mol) of the ligand seabz in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The solvent was evaporated under heating and the precipitate was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 80%. Anal. calculated for CuC22H34N6O6S2Cl2: C, 39.11%; H, 5.08%; N, 12.45%; S, 9.47%. Experimental: C, 39.17%; H, 5.44%; N, 12.68%; S, 7.97%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3397 νas(NH2), m 3308 νs(NH2), vs. 1645 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1558 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1294 νas(SO2), s 1125 νs(SO2).

3.3.8. [Cu(seabz)2Br2] (8)

A solution of 0.0558 g (2.5 × 10−4 mol) of CuBr2 and 0.1267 g (5 × 10−4 mol) of the ligand in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The solution of the reaction mixture was evaporated under heating. The precipitate was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 81%. Anal. calculated for CuC22H30N6O4S2Br2: C, 36.20%; H, 4.14%; N, 11.51%; S, 8.79%. Experimental: C, 36.40%; H, 4.46%; N, 11.66%; S, 8.18%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3388 νas(NH2), m 3321 νs(NH2), vs. 1639 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1549 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1289 νas(SO2), s 1123 νs(SO2).

3.3.9. [Zn(sfabz)2Cl2] (9)

A solution of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and ZnCl2 (0.0341 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetone. Crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 84%. Anal. calculated for ZnC30H31N6O4.5S2Cl2: C, 48.17%; H, 4.18%; N, 11.23%; S, 8.57%. Experimental: C, 48.17%; H, 3.35%; N, 11.28%; S, 8.39%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3390 νas(NH2), m 3315 νs(NH2), vs. 1646 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1556 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1293 νas(SO2), s 1142 νs(SO2).

3.3.10. [Zn(sfabz)2Br2] (10)

A mixture of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and ZnBr2 (0.0563 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetone. Crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 78%. Anal. calculated for ZnC30H30N6O4S2Br2: C, 43.52%; H, 3.65%; N, 10.15%; S, 7.28%. Experimental: C, 43.28%; H, 3.30%; N, 10.11%; S, 7.28 IR (ν cm−1): m 3415 νas(NH2), m 3312 νs(NH2), s 1627 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1552 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), vs. 1290 νas(SO2), vs. 1136 νs(SO2).

3.3.11. [Zn(seabz)2Cl2] (11)

A solution of the ligand (0.1267 g, 0.5 mmol) and ZnCl2 (0.0341 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetonitrile. Crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 79%. Anal. calculated for ZnC22H32N6O5S2Cl2: C, 39.98%; H, 4.88%; N, 12.72%; S, 9.70%. Experimental: C, 40.02%; H, 5.46%; N, 13.12%; S, 9.08%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3411 νas(NH2), m 3328 νs(NH2), vs. 1650 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1562 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1295 νas(SO2), s 1128 νs(SO2).

3.3.12. [Zn(seabz)2Br2] (12)

A solution of the ligand (0.1267 g, 0.5 mmol) and ZnBr2 (0.0563 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 92%. Anal. calculated for ZnC22H30N6O4S2Br2: C, 36.11%; H, 4.13%; N, 11.48%; S, 8.76%. Experimental: C, 35.87%; H, 3.86%; N, 11.90%; S, 7.62%. IR (ν cm−1): s 3400 νas(NH2), m 3330 νs(NH2), vs. 1640 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1550 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), vs. 1290 νas(SO2), vs. 1124 νs(SO2).

3.3.13. [Cd(sfabz)2Cl2] (13)

A solution of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and CdCl2·2.5H2O (0.0572 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 90%. Anal. calculated for CdC30H30N6O4S2Cl2: C, 45.84%; H, 3.85%; N, 10.69%; S, 8.16%. Experimental: C, 46.10%; H, 3.88%; N, 10.82%; S, 7.21%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3419 νas(NH2), s 3356 νs(NH2), vs. 1655 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1568 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1289 νas(SO2), vs. 1144 νs(SO2).

3.3.14. [Cd(seabz)2Cl2] (14)

A solution of the ligand (0.1267 g, 0.5 mmol) and CdCl2·2.5H2O (0.0572 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetonitrile. Crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 89%. Anal. calculated for CdC22H31N6O4.5S2Cl2: C, 37.80%; H, 4.47%; N, 12.02%; S, 9.18%. Experimental: C, 37.96%; H, 4.77%; N, 11.73%; S, 8.13%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3400 νas(NH2), s 3332 νs(NH2), vs. 1648 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), vs. 1558 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), vs. 1295 νas(SO2), s 1127 νs(SO2).

3.3.15. [Hg(sfabz)2Cl2] (15)

A solution of the ligand (0.1507 g, 0.5 mmol) and HgCl2 (0.0679 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. Yield: 93%. Anal. calculated for HgC30H30N6O4S2Cl2: C, 41.22%; H, 3.46%; N, 9.61%; S, 7.34%. Experimental: C, 41.10%; H, 3.35%; N, 9.91%; S, 6.40%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3387 νas(NH2), s 3311 νs(NH2), vs. 1645 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1552 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), vs. 1292 νas(SO2), vs. 1141 νs(SO2).

3.3.16. [Hg(seabz)2Cl2] (16)

A solution of the ligand (0.1267 g, 0.5 mmol) and HgCl2 (0.0678 g, 0.25 mmol) in 15 mL of ethanol was stirred under reflux for 30 min. The reaction mixture was left to stand at room temperature. The obtained product was filtered and washed with 10 mL of cold ethanol. The compound was dissolved in acetonitrile. Crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction were obtained by slow evaporation of the solvent. Yield: 68%. Anal. calculated for HgC22H30N6O4S2Cl2: C, 33.96%; H, 3.89%; N, 10.80%; S, 8.24%. Experimental: C, 33.95%; H, 4.28%; N, 10.73%; S, 7.08%. IR (ν cm−1): m 3403 νas(NH2), m 3331 νs(NH2), vs. 1647 ν(C=C) + δsc(NH2) + ν(C2-N3), s 1559 ν(C=N) + ρ(NH2) + ν(C2-N10), s 1295 νas(SO2), s 1125 νs(SO2).

3.4. Physical Measurements

FT IR spectra were recorded with an FT-IR/FT-FIR Spectrum 400 spectrophotometer using a universal ATR accessory Perkin-Elmer (4000–400 cm−1). Selected vibrations and their intensities are presented in Table S1. The UV-Vis-NIR spectra (diffuse reflectance, 40,000–5000 cm−1) were recorded on a Cary-5000 (Varian) spectrophotometer, spectra recorded in solution for the copper(II) compounds was obtained from a 1 × 10−3 M solution of the compounds in DMSO. Elemental analyses were conducted in a Fisons EA 1180 analyzer. The 1H and 13C NMR spectra were recorded with a Varian Unity Inova spectrometer with a frequency of 400 MHz for 1H and 100 MHz for 13C, using DMSO-d6 as solvent, chemical shifts (δ) are reported in ppm referred to tetramethylsilane (TMS).

3.5. Solution Studies

In order to study the stability of the copper(II) compounds in solution, their spectra were recorded in DMSO (1 × 10−3M) on a Cary-5000 (Varian) spectrophotometer for 24 h. For the zinc(II) compounds, their 1H-NMR spectra were obtained using a Varian Unity Inova spectrometer with a frequency of 400 MHz, using DMSO-d6 as solvent, chemical shifts (δ) are reported in ppm referred to tetramethylsilane (TMS).

3.6. X-ray Crystallography

X-ray diffraction data for the ligands and the compounds 1, 2, 3 and 10 were obtained using standard procedures on an Oxford Diffraction Gemini “A” instrument with a CCD area detector using graphite-monochromated Mo(Kα) radiation for both ligands and the compounds 1, 2 and 3, and Cu(Kα) for compound 10. Data for both ligands and the compounds 1, 2, 3 and 10 were obtained at 130 K. Intensities were measured using φ + ω scans.
Diffraction data for compounds 5 and 9 were obtained on a Bruker D8 Venture\k-geometry diffractometer equipped with a CCD detector using graphite-monochromated Mo(Kα) radiation at 293.15 K for compound 5, and 150 K for compound 9. All structures were solved using direct methods, using the package SHELXS-2012 and refined with an anisotropic approach for non-hydrogen atoms using the SHELXL-2014/7 program. All hydrogen atoms that couldn’t be detected were positioned geometrically as riding on their parent atoms, with C–H = 0.93–0.99 A and Uiso(H) = −1.2Ueq(C) for aromatic and methylene groups [53,54,55]. All crystallographic data can be found in Tables S2–S4.

3.7. Cell Growth Inhibition

3.7.1. Cell Culture

HeLa (cervix-uterine) MCF-7 (breast), HCT-15 (colorectal) and A549 (lung) human carcinoma cell lines, and L929 mouse fibroblast, were acquired from ATCC (American Tissue Culture Collection) and maintained in incubation at 310 K and 5% CO2 with RPMI (GIBCO®, Invitrogen corporation) supplemented with 10% BFS (GIBCO®, Invitrogen corporation), 1% L-glutamine and 1% penicillin/streptomycin. Experiments were performed with cells within at least 5 passages from each other. All cells were split when around 80–95% confluence was reached using 0.25% trypsin/EDTA.

3.7.2. In Vitro Growth Inhibition Assay

After plating 2 × 104 cells/well in a 96-well microplate (Costar®) with 300 μL capacity and allowed to attach incubating at 310 K for 48 h, HeLa (cervix-uterine) MCF-7 (breast), HCT-15 (colorectal) and A549 (lung) human carcinoma cell lines, and L929 mouse fibroblast were treated with sfabz, seabz and their Cu(II), and Zn(II) coordination compounds. The test metal compounds were made up in 5% DMSO and saline to give a 1 mM stock solution by initial dissolution in DMSO followed by dilution with saline. Sonication was sometimes used to facilitate complete dissolution. Serial dilutions were carried out to give final screening concentrations of ligands and the coordination compounds of 400, 200, and 20 μM (final concentration of DMSO of 0.5% (v/v)). Aliquots of 50 μL of these solutions were added to the wells (in triplicate) already containing 150 μL of media, so that the final concentrations were 100, 50 and 5 μM (final concentration of DMSO of 0.125% (v/v)). The cells were exposed to the complex for 24 h, which then was removed and the cells washed with washing media followed by the addition of 200 μL of fresh RPMI media. Then the cells were incubated for 72 h of recovery time. The remaining biomass was then estimated by the sulforhodamine B assay [56] (SRBassay). The three screening concentrations were used in an initial test of activity. The selected complexes were then tested for half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) value determination. The previously described assay was then repeated but using six different concentrations of complex instead, ranging from 0.1 to 100 μM. Each assay was performed in triplicate. IC50 values were obtained from plots of % cell survival against log of the drug concentration.

4. Conclusions

Novel sulfone ethyl and phenyl 2-aminobenzimidazole derivatives were designed and synthesized, based on our previous work investigating the relevance of the substituents in heterocyclic ligands in terms of their structural and biological properties. The amino group participated in intramolecular hydrogen bonding, giving rise to dimeric and tetrameric arrangements of the ligands. Interestingly, the ethyl and phenyl substitution in the alkyl sulfonated chain modified the nature of the non-covalent interactions; seabz depicted a lp···πbz while sfabz showed a H···πphe. In their coordination compounds, a tetrahedral geometry was stabilized for all metal ions.
For seafz, most of the coordination compounds presented great disorder in the substituted terminal chain, as a consequence, no suitable crystals for X-ray diffraction were obtained and only their molecular connectivity was analyzed. On the other hand, the phenyl substituent of sfabz gave rise to different interactions, allowing the crystallization of compounds with different transition metal ions. In the coordination compounds with sfabz, the presence of the terminal phenyl group induced intramolecular H···π interactions, as well as intermolecular π···π stacking and hydrogen bonding between the NH2 and the sulfone group. Alternatively, for the nickel(II) compound 3 with seafz, the interactions observed were mainly lp···π, both intra and intermolecular.
The antiproliferative activity of all compounds was investigated resulting in two copper(II) sfabz derivatives showing good selectivity towards the HeLa cell line, and thus are worthy of further investigation.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/inorganics11100392/s1, Table S1. Representative vibrations and intensities for the ligands sfabz and seabz, seabz and their coordination compounds; Table S2. Crystallographic data of sfabz, seabz and compound 1.; Table S3. Crystallographic data of 2, 3 and 5.; Table S4. Crystallographic data of 9 and 10.; Table S5. 1H-NMR for sfabz and its coordination compounds (DMSO d6).; Table S6. 13C-NMR for sfabz and its coordination compounds (DMSO d6).; Table S7. 1H-NMR for seabz and its coordination compounds (d6 DMSO).; Table S8. 13C-NMR for seabz and its coordination compounds (d6 DMSO). Figure S1. IR spectrum of sfabz; Figure S2. IR spectrum of seabz; Figure S3. IR spectrum of [Hg(sfabz)2Cl2]; Figure S4. IR spectrum of [Ni(seabz)2Cl2]; Figure S5. Solution spectrum of [Cu(sfabz)2Cl2] in DMSO, 1 × 10−3 M.; Figure S6. Diffuse reflectance spectrum of [Cu(sfabz)2Cl2].

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft, investigation, synthesis, formal analysis, validation, D.C.-S.; writing—original draft, formal analysis, validation, R.C.-R.; biological studies, F.S.-B.; biological studies, formal analysis, I.G.-M.; conceptualization, writing and review, formal analysis, resources, supervision, funding acquisition, N.B.-B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by DGAPA grant number IN206922.

Data Availability Statement

Crystallographic data were deposited with the Cambridge Crystallo-graphic Data Centre, CCDC, 12 Union Road, Cambridge CB21EZ, U.K. These data can be obtained free of charge on quoting the depository numbers CCDC (2292162-2292169) by fax (+44-1223-336-033), email ([email protected]) or their web interface (at http://www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk (accessed on 6 September 2023)).

Acknowledgments

Financial support from UNAM, DGAPA (IN206922) and PAIP 5000-9035, is acknowledged. D.C.-S. thanks scholarship from CONACYT (CVU 941567). We thank Patricia Fierro for technical support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alderden, R.A.; Hall, M.D.; Hambley, T.W. The Discovery and Development of Cisplatin. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 728–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wang, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, J.; Zhao, Y.; He, W.; Guo, Z. Noncovalent Interactions between a Trinuclear Monofunctional Platinum Complex and Human Serum Albumin. Inorg. Chem. 2011, 50, 12661–12668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Qu, Y.; Kipping, R.G.; Farrell, N.P. Solution studies on DNA interactions of substitution-inert platinum complexes mediated via the phosphate clamp. Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 3563–3572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Miller, R.P.; Tadagavadi, R.K.; Ramesh, G.; Reeves, W.B. Mechanisms of Cisplatin Nephrotoxicity. Toxins 2010, 2, 2490–2518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Laurell, G.; Jungnelius, U. High-dose cisplatin treatment: Hearing loss and plasma concentrations. Laryngoscope 1990, 100, 724–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bruijnincx, P.C.A.; Sadler, P.J. New trends for metal complexes with anticancer activity. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2008, 12, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hernández-Romero, D.; Rosete-Luna, S.; López-Monteon, A.; Chávez-Piña, A.; Pérez-Hernández, N.; Marroquín-Flores, J.; Cruz-Navarro, A.; Pesado-Gómez, G.; Morales-Morales, D.; Colorado-Peralta, R. First-row transition metal compounds containing benzimidazole ligands: An overview of their anticancer and antitumor activity. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2021, 439, 213930–213981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Erxleben, A. Interactions of copper complexes with nucleic acids. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2018, 360, 92–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Erxleben, A. Investigation of Non-covalent Interactions of Metal Complexes with DNA in Cell-free Systems. Chimia 2017, 71, 102–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zoroddu, M.A.; Aaseth, J.; Crisponi, G.; Medici, S.; Peana, M.; Nurchi, V.M. The essential metals for humans: A brief overview. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2019, 195, 120–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pages, B.J.; Ang, D.L.; Wright, E.P.; Aldrich-Wright, J.R. Metal complex interactions with DNA. Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 3505–3526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Zhou, P.; Huang, J.; Tian, F. Specific noncovalent interactions at protein-ligand interface: Implications for rational drug design. Curr. Med. Chem. 2012, 19, 226–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Lu, J.P.; Yuan, X.H.; Yuan, H.; Wang, W.L.; Wan, B.; Franzblau, S.G.; Ye, Q.Z. Inhibition of Mycobacterium tuberculosis methionine aminopeptidases by bengamide derivatives. Chem. Med. Chem. 2011, 6, 1041–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lu, J.P.; Yuan, X.H.; Ye, Q.Z. Structural analysis of inhibition of Mycobacterium tuberculosis methionine aminopeptidase by bengamide derivatives. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2012, 47, 479–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rehman, S.U.; Sarwar, T.; Husain, M.A.; Ishqi, H.M.; Tabish, M. Studying non-covalent drug-DNA interactions. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2015, 576, 49–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Burge, S.; Parkinson, G.N.; Hazel, P.; Todd, A.K.; Neidle, S. Quadruplex DNA: Sequence, topology and structure. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006, 34, 5402–5415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Reed, J.E.; Arnal, A.A.; Neidle, S.; Vilar, R. Stabilization of G-Quadruplex DNA and Inhibition of Telomerase Activity by Square-Planar Nickel(II) Complexes. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 5992–5993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Sabater, L.; Fang, P.J.; Chang, C.F.; De Rache, A.; Prado, E.; Dejeu, J.; Garofalo, A.; Lin, J.H.; Mergny, J.L.; Defrancq, E.; et al. Cobalt(iii)porphyrin to target G-quadruplex DNA. Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 3701–3707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Stafford, V.S.; Suntharalingam, K.; Shivalingam, A.; White, A.J.P.; Mann, D.J.; Vilar, R. Syntheses of polypyridyl metal complexes and studies of their interaction with quadruplex DNA. Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 3686–3700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gratteri, P.; Massari, L.; Michelucci, E.; Rigo, R.; Messori, L.; Cinellu, M.A.; Musetti, C.; Sissi, C.; Bazzicalupi, C. Interactions of selected gold(III) complexes with DNA G quadruplexes. Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 3633–3639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Malina, J.; Farrell, N.P.; Brabec, V. DNA Condensing Effects and Sequence Selectivity of DNA Binding of Antitumor Noncovalent Polynuclear Platinum Complexes. Inorg. Chem. 2014, 53, 1662–1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Navarro-Peñaloza, R.; Landeros-Rivera, B.; López-Sandoval, H.; Castro-Ramírez, R.; Barba-Behrens, N. New insights on transition metal coordination compounds with biological active azole and nitroimidazole derivatives. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2023, 494, 215360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Alfaro-Fuentes, I.; Castro-Ramírez, R.; Ortiz-Pastrana, N.; Medina-Guerrero, R.M.; Soler-Jiménez, L.C.; Martínez-Rodríguez, I.; Bethancourt-Lozano, M.; Ibarra-Castro, L.; Barba-Behrens, N.; Fajer-Ávila, E.J. Novel antihelmintic activity of tinidazole coordination compounds. Relevance of the metal ion and structural properties. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2017, 176, 159–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Santra, R.C.; Sengupta, K.; Dey, R.; Shireen, T.; Das, O.; Duin, P.S.; Mukhopashyay, K.; Das, S. X-ray crystal structure of a Cu(II) complex with the antiparasitic drug tinidazole, interaction with calf thymus DNA and evidence for antibacterial activity. J. Coord. Chem. 2014, 67, 265–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Nandy, P.; Santra, R.C.; Lahiri, D.; Nag, M.; Das, S. In Situ Reactivity of Electrochemically Generated Nitro Radical Anion on Tinidazole and Its Monomeric and Dimeric CuII Complexes on Model Biological Targets with Relative Manifestation of Preventing Bacterial Biofilm Formation. ACS Omega 2022, 7, 8268–8280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Castro-Ramírez, R.; Ortiz-Pastrana, N.; Caballero, A.B.; Zimmermann, M.T.; Stadelman, B.S.; Gaertner, A.A.E.; Brumaghim, J.L.; Korrodi-Gregório, L.; Pérez-Tomás, R.; Gamez, P.; et al. DNA interactions of non-chelating tinidazole-based coordination compounds and their structural, redox and cytotoxic properties. Dalton Trans. 2018, 47, 7551–7560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ramírez-Palma, L.G.; Castro-Ramírez, R.; Lozano-Ramos, L.; Galindo-Murillo, R.; Barba-Behrens, N.; Cortés-Guzmán, F. DNA recognition site of anticancer tinidazole copper(ii) complexes. Dalton Trans. 2023, 52, 2087–2095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Novoa-Ramírez, C.S.; Silva-Becerril, A.; González-Ballesteros, M.M.; Flores-, M.; Ortiz-Frade, L.; Gracia-Mora, J.; Ruiz-Azuara, L. Biological activity of mixed chelate copper(II) complexes, with substituted diimine and tridentate Schiff bases (NNO) and their hydrogenated derivatives as secondary ligands: Casiopeína’s fourth generation. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2023, 242, 112097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Pessoa, J.C.; Correia, I. Salan vs. salen metal complexes in catalysis and medicinal applications: Virtues and pitfalls. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2019, 388, 227–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hangan, A.C.; Lucaciu, R.L.; Turza, A.; Dican, L.; Sevastre, B.; Páll, E.; Oprean, L.S.; Borodi, G. New Copper Complexes with Antibacterial and Cytotoxic Activity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 13819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Alem, M.B.; Damena, T.; Desalegn, T.; Koobotse, M.; Eswaramoorthy, R.; Ngwira, K.J.; Ombito, J.O.; Zachariah, M.; Demissie, T.B. Cytotoxic mixed-ligand complexes of Cu(II): A combined experimental and computational study. Front. Chem. 2022, 10, 1028957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Ali, A.; Banerjee, S.; Kamaal, S.; Usman, M.; Das, N.; Afzal, M.; Alarifi, A.; Sepay, N.; Roy, P.; Ahmad, M. Ligand substituent effect on the cytotoxicity activity of two new copper(II) complexes bearing 8-hydroxyquinoline derivatives: Validated by MTT assay and apoptosis in MCF-7 cancer cell line (human breast cancer). RSC Adv. 2021, 11, 14362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Karges, J.; Xiong, K.; Blacque, O.; Chao, H.; Gasser, G. Highly cytotoxic copper(II) terpyridine complexes as anticancer drug candidates. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2021, 516, 120137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Enslin, L.E.; Purkait, K.; Pozza, M.D.; Saubamea, B.; Mesdom, P.; Gasser, G.; Schutte-Smith, M. Unique Metal-Ligand Interplay in Directing Discrete and Polymeric Derivatives of Isomeric Azole-Carboxylate. Varying Electronic Form, C-C Coupling, and Receptor Feature. Inorg. Chem. 2023, 62, 7779–7794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. da Silva dos Reis Conde, C.A.; Querino, A.L.A.; Silva, H.; Navarro, M. Silver(I) complexes containing N-heterocyclic carbene azole drugs: Synthesis, characterization, cytotoxic activity, and their BSA interactions. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2023, 246, 112303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Navarro, M.; Higuera-Padilla, A.R.; Arsenak, M.; Taylor, P. Synthesis, characterization, DNA interaction studies and anticancer activity of platinum–clotrimazole complexes. Transit. Met. Chem. 2009, 34, 869–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fernández-Pampín, N.; Vaquero, M.; Gil, T.; Espino, G.; Fernández, D.; García, B.; Busto, N. A [Pt(cis-1,3-diaminocycloalkane)Cl2] analog exhibits hallmarks typical of immunogenic cell death inducers in model cancer cells. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2022, 226, 11166. [Google Scholar]
  38. Navarro, M.; Justo, R.M.S.; Delgado, G.Y.S.; Visbal, G. Metallodrugs for the Treatment of Trypanosomatid Diseases: Recent Advances and New Insights. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2021, 27, 1763–1789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mohamed, H.A.; Shepherd, S.; William, N.; Blundell, H.A.; Das, M.; Pask, C.M.; Lake, B.R.M.; Phillips, R.M.; Nelson, A.; Willans, C.E. Silver(I) N-Heterocyclic Carbene Complexes Derived from Clotrimazole: Antiproliferative Activity and Interaction with an Artificial Membrane-Based Biosensor. Organometallics 2020, 39, 1318–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Soba, M.; Scales, G.; Casuriaga, F.; Pérez, N.; Veiga, N.; Echeverría, G.A.; Piro, O.E.; Faccio, R.; Pérez-Díaz, L.; Gasser, G.; et al. Multifunctional organometallic compounds for the treatment of Chagas disease: Re(i) tricarbonyl compounds with two different bioactive ligands. Dalton Trans. 2023, 52, 1623–1641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Betanzos-Lara, S.; Gómez-Ruiz, C.; Barrón-Sosa, L.R.; Gracia-Mora, I.; Flores-Álamo, M.; Barba-Behrens, N. Cytotoxic copper(II), cobalt(II), zinc(II), and nickel(II) coordination compounds of clotrimazole. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2012, 114, 82–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Betanzos-Lara, S.; Chmel, N.P.; Zimmerman, M.T.; Barron-Sosa, L.R.; Salassa, L.; Rodger, A.; Brumaghim, J.; Gracia-Mora, I.; Barba-Behrens, N. Redox-active and DNA-binding coordination complexes of clotrimazole. Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 3673–3685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zhao, X.J.; Li, J.; Ding, B.; Wang, X.G.; Yang, E.C. The irreversible crystal transformation of a novel Cadmium(II) supramolecular complex containing planar tetrameric water cluster. Inorg. Chem. Commun. 2007, 10, 605–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Esparza-Ruiz, A.; Peña-Hueso, A.; Mijangos, E.; Osorio-Monreal, G.; Nöth, H.; Flores-Parra, A.; Contreras, R.; Barba-Behrens, N. Cobalt(II), nickel(II) and zinc(II) coordination compounds derived from aromatic amines. Polyhedron 2011, 30, 2090–2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Durán-Solares, G.; Fugarolas-Gómez, W.; Ortíz-Pastrana, N.; López-Sandoval, H.; Villaseñor-Granados, T.O.; Flores-Parra, A.; Altmann, P.J.; Barba-Behrens, N. Lone pair···π interactions on the stabilization of intra and intermolecular arrangements of coordination compounds with 2-methyl imidazole and benzimidazole derivatives. J. Coord. Chem. 2018, 71, 1953–1958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sudha, S.; Karabacak, M.; Kurt, M.; Cinar, M.; Sundaraganesan, N. Molecular structure, vibrational spectroscopic, first-order hyperpolarizability and HOMO, LUMO studies of 2-aminobenzimidazole. Spectrochim. Acta-Part A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc. 2011, 84, 184–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lever, A.B.P. Electronic Spectra of Some Transition Metal Complexes. J. Chem. Ed. 1968, 45, 711–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mugiraneza, S.; Hallas, A.M. Nuclear and magnetic spin structure of the antiferromagnetic triangular lattice compound LiCrTe2 investigated by μ+SR, neutron and X-ray diffraction. Commun. Phys. 2022, 5, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  49. Lever, A.B.P. Inorganic Electronic Spectroscopy; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  50. Navarro-Peñaloza, R.; Vázquez-Palma, A.B.; López-Sandoval, H.; Sánchez-Bartéz, F.; Gracia-Mora, I.; Barba-Behrens, N. Coordination compounds with heterocyclic ester derivatives. Structural characterization and anti-proliferative activity. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2021, 219, 111432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Kruse, H.; Mrazikova, K.; D’Ascenzo, L.; Sponer, J.; Auffinger, P. Short but Weak: The Z-DNA Lone-Pair⋅⋅⋅π Conundrum Challenges Standard Carbon Van der Waals Radii. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2020, 59, 16553–16560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Kalra, K.; Gorle, S.; Cavallo, L.; Oliva, R.; Chawla, M. Occurrence and stability of lone pair-π and OH–π interactions between water and nucleobases in functional RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020, 11, 5825–5838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Sheldrick, G.M. A Short History of SHELX. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. A Found. Crystallogr. 2008, 64, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Clark, R.C.; Reid, J.S. The analytical calculation of absorption in multifaceted crystals. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. A Found. Crystallogr. 1995, 51, 887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hübschle, C.B.; Sheldrick, G.M.; Dittrich, B. ShelXle: A Qt Graphical User Interface for SHELXL. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2011, 44, 1281–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Orellana, E.A.; Kasinski, A.L. Sulforhodamine B (SRB) Assay in Cell Culture to Investigate Cell Proliferation. Bio-protocol 2016, 6, e1984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Inorganics 11 00392 g001
Figure 1. NMR number assignation for (a) sfabz and (b) seabz.
Figure 1. NMR number assignation for (a) sfabz and (b) seabz.
Inorganics 11 00392 g001
Inorganics 11 00392 g002
Figure 2. Crystal structure and intramolecular interactions of (a) seabz with a lp···πbz (green) and (b) sfabz with a H···πphe (green), ORTEP ellipsoids at 50% probability.
Figure 2. Crystal structure and intramolecular interactions of (a) seabz with a lp···πbz (green) and (b) sfabz with a H···πphe (green), ORTEP ellipsoids at 50% probability.
Inorganics 11 00392 g002
Inorganics 11 00392 g003
Figure 3. Intermolecular hydrogen bonds forming (a) a sfabz dimer and (b) a seabz tetramer.
Figure 3. Intermolecular hydrogen bonds forming (a) a sfabz dimer and (b) a seabz tetramer.
Inorganics 11 00392 g003
Inorganics 11 00392 g004
Figure 4. Intramolecular interactions for (a) [Ni(sfabz)2Cl2], depicting a H···πbz, (b) [Ni(sfabz)2Br2], depicting a H···πbz and (c) [Ni(seabz)2Cl2], depicting a lp···πbz.
Figure 4. Intramolecular interactions for (a) [Ni(sfabz)2Cl2], depicting a H···πbz, (b) [Ni(sfabz)2Br2], depicting a H···πbz and (c) [Ni(seabz)2Cl2], depicting a lp···πbz.
Inorganics 11 00392 g004
Inorganics 11 00392 g005
Figure 5. Intermolecular interactions for [Ni(sfabz)2Cl2], (a) depicting a hydrogen bonding, (b) [Ni(sfabz)2Br2], depicting π stacking and (c) [Ni(seabz)2Cl2], depicting both intra and inter lp···πbz.
Figure 5. Intermolecular interactions for [Ni(sfabz)2Cl2], (a) depicting a hydrogen bonding, (b) [Ni(sfabz)2Br2], depicting π stacking and (c) [Ni(seabz)2Cl2], depicting both intra and inter lp···πbz.
Inorganics 11 00392 g005
Inorganics 11 00392 g006
Figure 6. Crystal structure for compound [Cu(sfabz)2Cl2].
Figure 6. Crystal structure for compound [Cu(sfabz)2Cl2].
Inorganics 11 00392 g006
Inorganics 11 00392 g007
Figure 7. Intermolecular interactions between three neighboring molecules of [Zn(sfabz)2Cl2].
Figure 7. Intermolecular interactions between three neighboring molecules of [Zn(sfabz)2Cl2].
Inorganics 11 00392 g007
Inorganics 11 00392 g008
Figure 8. Structural connectivity for compounds left to right: [Zn(seabz)2Cl2], [Cd(seabz)2Cl2] and [Hg(seabz)2Cl2].
Figure 8. Structural connectivity for compounds left to right: [Zn(seabz)2Cl2], [Cd(seabz)2Cl2] and [Hg(seabz)2Cl2].
Inorganics 11 00392 g008
Table 1. Electronic transitions and assignations for the nickel(II) and copper(II) compounds.
Table 1. Electronic transitions and assignations for the nickel(II) and copper(II) compounds.
Compoundυ1 = 3T2(F) ← 3T1(F)υ2 =3A2(F) ← 3T1(F)υ3 = 3T1(P) ← 3T1(F)μeff (B.M.)
[Ni(sfabz)2Cl2] (1)5241 cm−19257 cm−116,993 cm−13.85
[Ni(sfabz)2Br2] (2)5143 cm−19778 cm−116,135 cm−13.91
[Ni(seabz)2Cl2] (3)5423 cm−110,250 cm−116,690 cm−13.60
[Ni(seabz)2Br2] (4)5312 cm−110,096 cm−116,454 cm−13.64
Compoundυ1 = 2T ← 2E
Solid State		υ1 = 2T ← 2E
DMSO Solution		---μeff (B.M.)
[Cu(sfabz)2Cl2] (5)11,000 cm−111,049 cm−1 (905 nm)---1.88
[Cu(sfabz)2Br2] (6)8670 cm−111,481 cm−1 (871 nm)---1.91
[Cu(seabz)2Cl2] (7)9506 cm−110,989 cm−1 (910 nm)---2.15
[Cu(seabz)2Br2] (8)8526 cm−111,521 cm−1(868 nm)---2.16
Table 2. Values of Δδ for the 1H-NMR data. (N.S. = Not significant).
Table 2. Values of Δδ for the 1H-NMR data. (N.S. = Not significant).
Positionsfabz Series (Zn/Cd/Hg)seabz Series (Zn/Cd/Hg)
Δδ (ppm)EffectΔδ (ppm)Effect
H40.16/0.17/0.17deshielding0.13/0.21/0.17deshielding
H50.05/N.S./0.09deshielding0.11/0.10/0.14deshielding
H60.13/0.06/0.15deshielding0.08/N.S./0.09deshielding
H70.18/0.08/0.20deshielding0.13/0.08/0.14deshielding
H100.78/0.32/0.69deshielding0.84/0.38/0.65deshielding
H110.12/N.S./0.11deshielding0.11/N.S./0.08deshielding
H120.09/N.S./0.09deshielding0.09/N.S./0.06deshielding
Table 3. Values of Δδ for the 13C-NMR data.
Table 3. Values of Δδ for the 13C-NMR data.
Positionsfabz Series (Zn/Cd/Hg)seabz Series (Zn/Cd/Hg)
Δδ (ppm)EffectΔδ (ppm)Effect
C20.1/0.2/0.2deshielding0.1/0.1/0.2deshielding
C40.7/0.2/0.9Zn, Hg deshielding
Cd shielding		0.8/0.2/0.8Zn, Hg deshielding
Cd shielding
C51.1/0.4/1.1deshielding1.2/0.5/1.0deshielding
C62.0/1.0/1.9deshielding2.0/1.1/1.8deshielding
C71.3/0.5/1.4deshielding1.2/0.6/1.1deshielding
C81.6/0.8/1.4shielding1.6/0.9/1.3shielding
C93.9/2.0/3.7shielding4.4/2.5/3.4shielding
C110.3/0.1/0.5deshielding0.2/0.1/0.3deshielding
C120.6/0.3/0.7shielding0.6/0.3/0.5shielding
Table 4. Angles and distances around the metal ion for compounds 1, 2 and 3.
Table 4. Angles and distances around the metal ion for compounds 1, 2 and 3.
CompoundAngleDegrees (°)BondDistance (Å)
[Ni(sfabz)2Cl2] (1)N-Ni-N’102.0(1)Ni-Cl2.233(9)
N-Ni-Cl107.91(9)Ni-Cl’2.258(1)
N-Ni-Cl’106.21(9)Ni-N1.987(3)
N’-Ni-Cl111.73(9)Ni-N’1.979(3)
N’-Ni-Cl’106.22(9)
Cl-Ni-Cl’121.06(3)
[Ni(sfabz)2Br2] (2)N-Ni-N’107.94(8)Ni-Br2.392(4)
N-Ni-Br109.49(6)Ni-Br’2.414(4)
N-Ni-Br’103.65(6)Ni-N1.975(2)
N’-Ni-Br112.06(6)Ni-N’1.969(2)
N’-Ni-Br’109.12(6)
Br-Ni-Br’114.09(2)
[Ni(seabz)2Cl2] (3)N-Ni-N’102.00(1)Ni-Cl2.256(10)
N-Ni-Cl109.09(8)Ni-Cl’2.282(9)
N-Ni-Cl’108.79(8)Ni-N1.967(2)
N’-Ni-Cl107.95(8)Ni-N’1.974(3)
N’-Ni-Cl’107.22(8)
Cl-Ni-Cl’120.25(3)
Table 5. Angles and distances around the metal ion for compounds 9 and 10.
Table 5. Angles and distances around the metal ion for compounds 9 and 10.
CompoundAngleDegrees (°)BondDistance (Å)
[Zn(sfabz)2Cl2] (9)N-Zn-N’108.78(1)Zn-Cl2.244(2)
N-Zn-Cl106.71(1)Zn-Cl’2.285(2)
N-Zn-Cl’111.63(1)Zn-N1.996(3)
N’-Zn-Cl115.17(1)Zn-N’1.989(4)
N’-Zn-Cl’106.72(1)
Cl-Zn-Cl’107.91(5)
[Zn(sfabz)2Br2] (10)N-Zn-N’111.07(1)Zn-Br2.399(6)
N-Zn-Br110.34(9)Zn-Br’2.430(6)
N-Zn-Br’106.04(9)Zn-N1.999(3)
N’-Zn-Br110.89(9)Zn-N’1.992(3)
N’-Zn-Br’109.85(9)
Br-Zn-Br’108.52(2)
Table 6. IC50 values of the copper(II) and zinc(II) compounds for all cell lines.
Table 6. IC50 values of the copper(II) and zinc(II) compounds for all cell lines.
HCT-15 IC50 (μM)MCF-7 IC50 (μM)HeLa
IC50 (μM)		A549
IC50 (μM)		L929
IC50 (μM)
Sfabz395.4406.4386.3360.4352.5
[Cu(sfabz)2Cl2] (5)161.3136.629.8153.6148.3
[Cu(sfabz)2Br2] (6)133.9118.615.0135.5122.5
[Zn(sfabz)2Cl2] (9)140.1148.5144.7170.8140.9
[Zn(sfabz)2Br2] (10)144.8130.2189.8140.6137.4
Seabz898.6496.7748.01311.82364.9
[Cu(seabz)2Cl2] (7)168.8147.3109.7166.9176.7
[Cu(seabz)2Br2] (8)159.9139.1142.0163.0147.2
[Zn(seabz)2Cl2] (11)184.2163.6194.0176.9166.3
[Zn(seabz)2Br2] (12)167.8160.8167.3266.3150.8
cisplatin32.732.319.034.943.2
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Colorado-Solís, D.; Castro-Ramírez, R.; Sánchez-Bartéz, F.; Gracia-Mora, I.; Barba-Behrens, N. Novel Sulfone 2-Aminobenzimidazole Derivatives and Their Coordination Compounds: Contribution of the Ethyl and Phenyl Substituents on Non-Covalent Molecular Interactions; Biological Antiproliferative Activity. Inorganics 2023, 11, 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11100392

AMA Style

Colorado-Solís D, Castro-Ramírez R, Sánchez-Bartéz F, Gracia-Mora I, Barba-Behrens N. Novel Sulfone 2-Aminobenzimidazole Derivatives and Their Coordination Compounds: Contribution of the Ethyl and Phenyl Substituents on Non-Covalent Molecular Interactions; Biological Antiproliferative Activity. Inorganics. 2023; 11(10):392. https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11100392

Chicago/Turabian Style

Colorado-Solís, David, Rodrigo Castro-Ramírez, Francisco Sánchez-Bartéz, Isabel Gracia-Mora, and Norah Barba-Behrens. 2023. "Novel Sulfone 2-Aminobenzimidazole Derivatives and Their Coordination Compounds: Contribution of the Ethyl and Phenyl Substituents on Non-Covalent Molecular Interactions; Biological Antiproliferative Activity" Inorganics 11, no. 10: 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11100392

APA Style

Colorado-Solís, D., Castro-Ramírez, R., Sánchez-Bartéz, F., Gracia-Mora, I., & Barba-Behrens, N. (2023). Novel Sulfone 2-Aminobenzimidazole Derivatives and Their Coordination Compounds: Contribution of the Ethyl and Phenyl Substituents on Non-Covalent Molecular Interactions; Biological Antiproliferative Activity. Inorganics, 11(10), 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11100392

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop