Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
2.
Inorg Chem ; 52(1): 144-59, 2013 Jan 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23259486

ABSTRACT

Three complexes of Mn(III) with "scorpionate" type ligands have been investigated by a variety of physical techniques. The complexes are [Tp(2)Mn]SbF(6) (1), [Tp(2)*Mn]SbF(6) (2), and [{PhB(MeIm)(3)}(2)Mn](CF(3)SO(3)) (3a), where Tp(-) = hydrotris(pyrazolyl)borate anion, Tp*(-) = hydrotris(3,5-dimethylpyrazolyl)borate anion, and PhB(MeIm)(3)(-) = phenyltris(3-methylimidazol-2-yl)borate anion. The crystal structure of 3a is reported; the structures of 1 and 2 have been previously reported, but were reconfirmed in this work. The synthesis and characterization of [{PhB(MeIm)(3)}(2)Mn]Cl (3b) are also described. These complexes are of interest in that, in contrast to many hexacoordinate (pseudo-octahedral) complexes of Mn(III), they exhibit a low-spin (triplet) ground state, rather than the high-spin (quintet) ground state. Solid-state electronic absorption spectroscopy, SQUID magnetometry, and high-frequency and -field electron paramagnetic resonance (HFEPR) spectroscopy were applied. HFEPR, in particular, was useful in characterizing the S = 1 spin Hamiltonian parameters for complex 1, D = +19.97(1), E = 0.42(2) cm(-1), and for 2, D = +15.89(2), E = 0.04(1) cm(-1). In addition, frequency domain Fourier-transform THz-EPR spectroscopy, using coherent synchrotron radiation, was applied to 1 only and gave results in good agreement with HFEPR. Variable-temperature dc magnetic susceptibility measurements of 1 and 2 were also in good agreement with the HFEPR results. This magnitude of zero-field splitting (zfs) is over 4 times larger than that in comparable hexacoordinate Mn(III) systems with S = 2 ground states. Complexes 3a and 3b (i.e., regardless of counteranion) have a yet much larger magnitude zfs, which may be the result of unquenched orbital angular momentum so that the spin Hamiltonian model is not appropriate. The triplet ground state is rationalized in each complex by ligand-field theory (LFT) and by quantum chemistry theory, both density functional theory and unrestricted Hartree-Fock methods. This analysis also shows that spin-crossover behavior is not thermally accessible for these complexes as solids. The donor properties of the three different scorpionate ligands were further characterized using the LFT model that suggests that the tris(carbene)borate is a strong σ-donor with little or no π-bonding.


Subject(s)
Borates/chemistry , Coordination Complexes/chemistry , Manganese/chemistry , Methane/analogs & derivatives , Coordination Complexes/chemical synthesis , Crystallography, X-Ray , Methane/chemistry , Models, Molecular , Pyrazoles/chemistry , Quantum Theory
3.
Pharmacogenomics ; 12(7): 939-51, 2011 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21787188

ABSTRACT

One approach to delivering cost-effective healthcare requires the identification of patients as individuals or subpopulations that are more likely to respond to an appropriate dose and/or schedule of a therapeutic agent, or as subpopulations that are less likely to develop an adverse event (i.e., personalized or stratified medicine). Biomarkers that identify therapeutically relevant variations in human biology are often only uncovered in the later stage of drug development. In this article, the Industry Pharmacogenomics Working Group provides, for regulatory consideration, its perspective on the rationale for the conduct of what is commonly referred to as the prospective-retrospective analysis (PRA) of biomarkers. Reflecting on published proposals and materials presented by the US FDA, a decision tree for generating robust scientific data from samples collected from an already conducted trial to allow PRA is presented. The primary utility of the PRA is to define a process that provides robust scientific evidence for decision-making in situations where it is not necessary, nor practical or ethical to conduct a new prospective clinical study.


Subject(s)
Biomarkers, Pharmacological , Pharmacogenetics/standards , Clinical Trials as Topic , Decision Making , Humans , Industry , Precision Medicine , Prospective Studies , Proto-Oncogene Proteins/genetics , Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras) , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration , ras Proteins/genetics
5.
Bioethics ; 20(1): 24-36, 2006 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16680905

ABSTRACT

This paper is intended to stimulate debate amongst stakeholders in the international research community on the topic of returning individual genetic research results to study participants. Pharmacogenetics and disease genetics studies are becoming increasingly prevalent, leading to a growing body of information on genetic associations for drug responsiveness and disease susceptibility with the potential to improve health care. Much of these data are presently characterized as exploratory (non-validated or hypothesis-generating). There is, however, a trend for research participants to be permitted access to their personal data if they so choose. Researchers, sponsors, patient advocacy groups, ethics committees and regulatory authorities are consequently confronting the issue of whether, and how, study participants might receive their individual results. Noted international ethico-legal guidelines and public policy positions in Europe and the United States are reviewed for background. The authors offer 'Points-to-Consider' regarding returning results in the context of drug development trials based on their knowledge and experience. Theses considerations include: the clinical relevance of data, laboratory qualifications, informed consent procedures, confidentiality of medical information and the competency of persons providing results to participants. The discussion is framed as a benefit-to-risk assessment to balance the potential positive versus negative consequences to participants, while maintaining the integrity and feasibility of conducting genetic research studies.


Subject(s)
Access to Information/ethics , Genetic Research/ethics , Research Subjects , Advisory Committees , Bioethics , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Clinical Trials as Topic/trends , Databases, Genetic , Europe , Family , Genetic Privacy , Genetic Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Guidelines as Topic , Human Experimentation/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Informed Consent , Internationality , Laboratories/legislation & jurisprudence , Laboratories/standards , Liability, Legal , Pharmacogenetics , Public Policy , Research Design , Research Personnel/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Assessment , United States
7.
J Interprof Care ; 16(3): 277-88, 2002 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12201991

ABSTRACT

Social work is concerned with enhancing the well-being of people within their social contexts. It is a broad profession with diverse practices. These range from a focus on the personal distress of individuals to the collective arrangements and social processes that influence the well-being of groups and communities. The unique contribution of social work to the caring professions is its broad contextualised approach to addressing human needs. Yet this breadth of scope also provides fertile ground for competing discourses within the profession. This paper provides an overview of the 'highly contested' nature of social work's goals, theories and methods of practice.


Subject(s)
Social Work/methods , Social Work/standards , Attitude of Health Personnel , Ethics, Professional , Global Health , Humans , Professional Practice , Professional-Patient Relations , Research Design , Social Environment , Social Welfare , Social Work/education , Social Work/trends
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...