Volume 94, Issue 5

Novel psychoactive substances (NPS) are today considered one of the major ticking public health time bombs in regard to drug abuse. The inability to identify these substances with current screening methods, sees their distribution remain uninterrupted and contributes to the high death rates amongst users. To tackle this problem, it is vital that new robust screening methods are developed, addressing the limitation of those currently in place, namely colour subjectivity and lack of compatibility with the complex matrices these substances may be found within. To this avail, electrochemical methods have been assessed. These low cost and extremely portable sensors have been successfully applied for the direct detection of a broad range of compounds of interest in a range of matrices including, herbal material, commercial drinks and biological fluids (serum, saliva, sweat and urine). With their high versatility, gifted through a significant degree of flexibility in regard to electrode material a range of sensors have to date been reported. In this review the various electrochemical sensors developed to date for NPS detection will be compared and contrasted, with a special focus upon those utilising electrochemiluminescence (ECL) technology.

Frequently referred to as the “magic methyl” effect, the introduction of a methyl group into a biologically active molecule has the potential to drastically alter its physical and biological properties and significantly increase potency. This effect is most pronounced when the methyl group is added at the α-position of an aliphatic heterocycle or ortho to a large rotatable group on an aromatic ring. Although seminal developments in C–H activation strategies offered solutions to the latter, until recent years there had been no selective and functional-group-tolerant method for C(sp 3 )–H methylation at late stages of synthesis. For many years, the lack of a generally applicable methylation strategy necessitated arduous de novo synthesis approaches to access methylated drug candidates, and discouraged further investigation and understandings of the magic methyl effect. This review will provide a summary of the most recent advances that enabled non-directed late-stage C(sp 3 )–H methylation, including through hydride transfer, chemical or anodic oxidation, and photocatalytic hydrogen atom transfer.

A number of human activities require that certain complex molecules, referred to as active species (drugs, dyes, peptides, proteins, genes, radioactive labels, etc.), be combined with substrates, often a macromolecule, to form temporary or permanent conjugates. The existing IUPAC organic, polymer, and inorganic nomenclature principles can be applied to name such conjugates but it is not always appropriate. These nomenclatures have two major shortcomings: (1) the resulting names are often excessively long and (2) identification of the components (substrate, active species, and link) can be difficult. The new IUPAC naming system elaborates rules for unambiguous and facile naming of any conjugate. This naming system is not intended to replace the existing nomenclature but to provide a suitable alternative when dictated by necessity. Although the rules are intended to be primarily applicable to the naming of polymer conjugates, they are also applicable to naming conjugates with other substrates, which include micelles, particles, minerals, surfaces, pores, etc. The naming system should be used when recognition of the substrate and active substance is essential and will also be useful when constraints of name length make the otherwise preferred IUPAC nomenclatures untenable. The proposed rules for the new naming system are complemented by a glossary of relevant terms.

Following the reviews of atomic-weight determinations and other cognate data in 2015, 2017, 2019 and 2021, the IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) Commission on Isotopic Abundances and Atomic Weights (CIAAW) reports changes of standard atomic weights. The symbol A r °(E) was selected for standard atomic weight of an element to distinguish it from the atomic weight of an element E in a specific substance P, designated A r (E, P). The CIAAW has changed the values of the standard atomic weights of five elements based on recent determinations of terrestrial isotopic abundances: Ar (argon): from 39.948 ± 0.001 to [39.792, 39.963] Hf (hafnium): from 178.49 ± 0.02 to 178.486 ± 0.006 Ir (iridium): from 192.217 ± 0.003 to 192.217 ± 0.002 Pb (lead): from 207.2 ± 0.1 to [206.14, 207.94] Yb (ytterbium): from 173.054 ± 0.005 to 173.045 ± 0.010 The standard atomic weight of argon and lead have changed to an interval to reflect that the natural variation in isotopic composition exceeds the measurement uncertainty of A r (Ar) and A r (Pb) in a specific substance. The standard atomic weights and/or the uncertainties of fourteen elements have been changed based on the Atomic Mass Evaluations 2016 and 2020 accomplished under the auspices of the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP). A r ° of Ho, Tb, Tm and Y were changed in 2017 and again updated in 2021: Al (aluminium), 2017: from 26.981 5385 ± 0.000 0007 to 26.981 5384 ± 0.000 0003 Au (gold), 2017: from 196.966 569 ± 0.000 005 to 196.966 570 ± 0.000 004 Co (cobalt), 2017: from 58.933 194 ± 0.000 004 to 58.933 194 ± 0.000 003 F (fluorine), 2021: from 18.998 403 163 ± 0.000 000 006 to 18.998 403 162 ± 0.000 000 005 (Ho (holmium), 2017: from 164.930 33 ± 0.000 02 to 164.930 328 ± 0.000 007) Ho (holmium), 2021: from 164.930 328 ± 0.000 007 to 164.930 329 ± 0.000 005 Mn (manganese), 2017: from 54.938 044 ± 0.000 003 to 54.938 043 ± 0.000 002 Nb (niobium), 2017: from 92.906 37 ± 0.000 02 to 92.906 37 ± 0.000 01 Pa (protactinium), 2017: from 231.035 88 ± 0.000 02 to 231.035 88 ± 0.000 01 Pr (praseodymium), 2017: from 140.907 66 ± 0.000 02 to 140.907 66 ± 0.000 01 Rh (rhodium), 2017: from 102.905 50 ± 0.000 02 to 102.905 49 ± 0.000 02 Sc (scandium), 2021: from 44.955 908 ± 0.000 005 to 44.955 907 ± 0.000 004 (Tb (terbium), 2017: from 158.925 35 ± 0.000 02 to 158.925 354 ± 0.000 008) Tb (terbium), 2021: from 158.925 354 ± 0.000 008 to 158.925 354 ± 0.000 007 (Tm (thulium), 2017: from 168.934 22 ± 0.000 02 to 168.934 218 ± 0.000 006) Tm (thulium), 2021: from 168.934 218 ± 0.000 006 to 168.934 219 ± 0.000 005 (Y (yttrium), 2017: from 88.905 84 ± 0.000 02 to 88.905 84 ± 0.000 01) Y (yttrium), 2021: from 88.905 84 ± 0.000 01 to 88.905 838 ± 0.000 002