PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14759197

Donor-acceptor (electronic) coupling in the precursor complex to organic electron transfer: intermolecular and intramolecular self-exchange between phenothiazine redox centers.

Abstract

Intermolecular electron transfer (ET) between the free phenothiazine donor (PH) and its cation radical (PH*+) proceeds via the [1:1] precursor complex (PH)(2)*+ which is transiently observed for the first time by its diagnostic (charge-resonance) absorption band in the near-IR region. Similar intervalence (optical) transitions are also observed in mixed-valence cation radicals with the generic representation: P(br)P*+, in which two phenothiazine redox centers are interlinked by p-phenylene, o-xylylene, and o-phenylene (br) bridges. Mulliken-Hush analysis of the intervalence (charge-resonance) bands afford reliable values of the electronic coupling element H(IV) based on the separation parameters for (P/P*+) centers estimated from some X-ray structures of the intermolecular (PH)(2)*+ and the intramolecular P(br)P*+ systems. The values of H(IV), together with the reorganization energies lambda derived from the intervalence transitions, yield activation barriers DeltaG(ET)() and first-order rate constants k(ET) for electron-transfer based on the Marcus-Hush (two-state) formalism. Such theoretically based values of the intrinsic barrier and ET rate constants agree with the experimental activation barrier (E(a)) and the self-exchange rate constant (k(SE)) independently determined by ESR line broadening measurements. This convergence validates the use of the two-state model to adequately evaluate the critical electronic coupling elements between (P/P*+) redox centers in both (a) intermolecular ET via the precursor complex and (b) intramolecular ET within bridged mixed-valence cation radicals. Important to intermolecular ET mechanism is the intervention of the strongly coupled precursor complex since it leads to electron-transfer rates of self-exchange that are 2 orders of magnitude faster (and activation barrier that is substantially lower) than otherwise predicted solely on the basis of Marcus reorganization energy.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Duoli Sun, Sergiy V Rosokha, Jay K Kochi. 2004-02-11. Donor-acceptor (electronic) coupling in the precursor complex to organic electron transfer: intermolecular and intramolecular self-exchange between phenothiazine redox centers.. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja038746v

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↗