PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11466062

Platinum(II) hydrazido complexes.

Abstract

Reaction of 1,2-dimethylhydrazine with the platinum hydroxo complex [(dppp)Pt(mu-OH)](2)(BF(4))(2) gives the bridging 1,2-dimethylhydrazido(-2) product [(dppp)(2)Pt(2)(mu-eta(2):eta(2)-MeNNMe)](BF(4))(2) 1. Crystals of 1.CH(2)Cl(2) from CH(2)Cl(2)/Et(2)O are monoclinic (C/2) with a = 19.690(1), b = 18.886(1), c = 17.170 (1) A, and beta = 92.111(1) degrees. Treatment of [(dppp)Pt(mu-OH)](2)(OTf)(2) with 1,1-dimethylhydrazine gives [(dppp)(2)Pt(2)(mu-OH)(mu-NHNMe(2))](OTf)(2) 2. Crystals of 2.CH(2)Cl(2) from CH(2)Cl(2)/Et(2)O are triclinic (P-1) with a = 12.910 (3), b = 13.927(3), c = 17.5872 (3) A, alpha = 87.121(3), beta = 89.997(4), and gamma = 84.728(3) degrees. Reaction of [(dppp)Pt(mu-OH)](2)(OTf)(2) with 1 equiv of phenylhydrazine in CH(2)Cl(2) gives [(dppp)(2)Pt(2)(mu-OH)(mu-NHNHPh)](OTf)(2) 3. Two equivalents of phenylhydrazine with [(dppp)Pt(mu-OH)](2)(X)(2) gives [(dppp)Pt(mu-NHNHPh)](2)(X)(2) 4 (X = BF(4), OTf). Crystals of 3.ClCH(2)CH(2)Cl from ClCH(2)CH(2)Cl/(i)()Pr(2)O are monoclinic (P2(1)/n) with a = 20.990(2), b = 13.098(1), c = 25.773 (2) A, and beta = 112.944(2) degrees. Crystals of 4(X = BF(4)).ClCH(2)CH(2)Cl(.)()2((t)()BuOMe) from ClCH(2)CH(2)Cl/(t)()BuOMe are monoclinic (C2/m) with a = 30.508(1), b = 15.203(1), c = 19.049 (1) A, and beta = 118.505(2) degrees.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A Xia, P R Sharp. 2001-07-30. Platinum(II) hydrazido complexes.. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic001432d

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗