Effect of Surface Chemistry and Associated Protein Corona on the Long-Term Biodegradation of Iron Oxide Nanoparticles In Vivo.
read more
Citations
Magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for imaging, targeting and treatment of primary and metastatic tumors of the brain
Particle toxicology and health - where are we?
How Entanglement of Different Physicochemical Properties Complicates the Prediction of in Vitro and in Vivo Interactions of Gold Nanoparticles
Aggregation effects on the magnetic properties of iron oxide colloids
Corona of Thorns: The Surface Chemistry-Mediated Protein Corona Perturbs the Recognition and Immune Response of Macrophages
References
Understanding the Warburg Effect: The Metabolic Requirements of Cell Proliferation
Renal clearance of quantum dots.
Monodisperse MFe2O4 (M = Fe, Co, Mn) Nanoparticles
'Stealth' corona-core nanoparticles surface modified by polyethylene glycol (PEG): influences of the corona (PEG chain length and surface density) and of the core composition on phagocytic uptake and plasma protein adsorption.
Nanoparticle size and surface chemistry determine serum protein adsorption and macrophage uptake.
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (10)
Q2. What are the future works mentioned in the paper "Effect of surface chemistry and associated protein corona on the long-term biodegradation of iron oxide nanoparticles in vivo" ?
Further research will increase their understanding of NPs biodegradation associated to PC, opening the way to adopt strategies to control NPs behavior on the long-term frame.
Q3. What is the role of the PC in the biodegradation of NPs?
4 PC can dramatically change the nanomaterial size, aggregation state and interfacial properties, dominating in an uncontrolled way the biological behavior of NPs.
Q4. How long did the PEG take to passivate the surface of the NP?
There is a general consensus that protein adsorption and consequently biodistribution is highly dependent on the PEG molecular weight, therefore a long PEG of 5000 Da was chosen to passivate the surface of the NP.
Q5. What is the NPs concentration in the spleen?
If in the spleen the core of the NPs@Glc remained barely unmodified during the four months, the decrease of NPs concentration could be related to: i) a different degradation mechanism than in the liver, i.e. a small fraction of NPs are being degraded while the vast majority is unaffected; ii) an excretion of the NPs from the tissue, reducing the amount of NPs but not degrading them.
Q6. What is the effect of opsonins on NP fate in vivo?
Although the precise effect of PC composition on NP fate in vivo remains unclear, proteins considered opsonins are thought to enhance recognition and uptake of NPs by macrophages resulting in their accumulation in the organs of mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS), mainly in the liver and spleen.
Q7. What was the effect of the protein quantification assay on the NPs?
Protein quantification assay revealed that functionalization of the NP surface with either glucose or PEG molecules reduced significantly the amount of non-specifically adsorbed proteins in respect to the un-functionalized NPs@PMAO (Fig. 1a).
Q8. how many nm NPs were selected for the in vivo studies?
In this case, 12 nm NPs were selected for the in vivo studies (Fig. S1) as this diameter will likely avoid renal clearance,11 allowing to track their biodistribution in vivo.
Q9. What is the reason why NPs@Glc were completely transformed in vivo?
The fact that in vivo NPs@PEG were cleared faster than NPs@Glc and completely transformed whilst in vitro where almost unmodified, may result from several reasons: i) in vitro the used medium does not exactly reproduce the lysosome conditions; ii) differences in the composition of the PC in vivo and in vitro that could ultimately affect the degradation rate of both PCs.7 iii) alternatively, the variation in the degradation rate could be related with the density of NPs in lysosomes.
Q10. What is the effect of the magnetic measurements on the NPs?
In this case, AC magnetic measurements corroborated the results obtained from the fluorescence examination of tissue sections (Fig. S17 and S18) showing that four months after the injection NPs@Glc were still present in the liver and spleen, whereas NPs@PEG were only present in the liver (Fig. 7).