| Literature DB >> 22272220 |
Don N Ho1, Nathan Kohler, Aruna Sigdel, Raghu Kalluri, Jeffrey R Morgan, Chenjie Xu, Shouheng Sun.
Abstract
Iron oxide nanoparticles are a useful diagnostic contrast agent and have great potential for therapeutic applications. Multiple emerging diagnostic and therapeutic applications and the numerous versatile parameters of the nanoparticle platform require a robust biological model for characterization and assessment. Here we investigate the use of iron oxide nanoparticles that target tumor vasculature, via the tumstatin peptide, in a novel three-dimensional tissue culture model. The developed tissue culture model more closely mimics the in vivo environment with a leaky endothelium coating around a glioma tumor mass. Tumstatin-iron oxide nanoparticles showed penetration and selective targeting to endothelial cell coating on the tumor in the three-dimensional model, and had approximately 2 times greater uptake in vitro and 2.7 times tumor neo-vascularization inhibition. Tumstatin provides targeting and therapeutic capabilities to the iron oxide nanoparticle diagnostic contrast agent platform. And the novel endothelial cell-coated tumor model provides an in vitro microtissue environment to evaluate nanoparticles without moving into costly and time-consuming animal models.Entities:
Keywords: anti-angiogenesis; drug delivery; imaging; iron oxide nanoparticles; magnetic; multicellular tumor spheroids; nanoparticle; theranostic; tumor penetration; tumstatin
Year: 2012 PMID: 22272220 PMCID: PMC3263517 DOI: 10.7150/thno.3568
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1(A) Fe3O4 particles as-synthesized and (B) after DPA-PEG-COOH modification and tumstatin conjugation imaged by TEM.
Figure 2(A) RG2 and BPAE cells uptake more particles at a higher concentration of tumstatin-Fe3O4 NP as measured by elemental analysis. (B) BPAE cell viability was not significantly affected by the addition of functionalized tumstatin-Fe3O4 particles as compared to untargeted Fe3O4 NPs as measured by an MTT viability assay after 24-hours of incubation. (C) Proliferation of BPAE cells decreased when incubated with tumstatin-Fe3O4 NPs versus non-functionalized Fe3O4 NPs (Fe=0.1mg/ml).
Figure 3(A) Top-view bright field and custom side-view microscopic images of RG2 and BPAE spheroids with distinct smooth, compact and round, cobblestone morphology (scale bar = 200 μm). (B) Epifluorescence images of BPAE-RG2 MTS in agarose micro-wells show an inital mixed dispersion settling during initial assembly stage and sort to a BPAE-coated RG2 core 24 hours after cell seeding (scale bar = 200 μm). (C) Fluorescent confocal cross-section view of BPAE coverage on RG2 core after 24 hours of assembly. (D) SEM images of BPAE-RG2 MTS having BPAE cells grafted on RG2 cells.
Figure 4Tumstatin-Fe3O4 NPs (red) selectively target BPAE endothelial cells (blue) in the heterogeneous culture with RG2 glioma cells (green). Median section of BPAE-RG2 spheroids were imaged with confocal microscopy (A). Greater magnification shows cell specificity (B) and an overlay of confocal images shows co-localization throughout the spheroid. Yellow arrow points to one RG2 cell surrounded by the BPAE cells, where BPAE cells showed fluoresce from tumstatin-Fe3O4 NPs but RG2 cell didn't.
Figure 5TEM examination of MTS labeled with Tumstatin-Fe3O4 NPs. (A) Illustration of the MTS structure; (B) image of the interface between RG2 core and BPAE shell; (C, 2 micron scale bar, and D, 1 micron scale bar) close examination of Tumstatin-Fe3O4 NPs in the endosome and cytoplasm of one BPAE cell (NPs denoted by arrows).