| Literature DB >> 22510488 |
Clare Hoskins1, Alfred Cuschieri, Lijun Wang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22510488 PMCID: PMC3384250 DOI: 10.1186/1477-3155-10-15
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nanobiotechnology ISSN: 1477-3155 Impact factor: 10.435
Figure 1FTIR spectra of freeze dried MNP (red), MNP-PEI (blue) and MNP-PEI-PEG (purple) carried out on a Nicolet IS5 with and ID5 diamond tip ATR attachment. 64 scans were carried out for each sample.
Figure 2Size estimations of MNPs analysed by A) Photon correlation spectroscopy showing the surface charge and B) Polydispersity index of particles measured at 1 mgmL.
Figure 3Stability of 1)MNP-PEI (open marker) and 2) MNP-PEI-PEG (filled marker) in RPMI-1640 media of pH 7.2 (◇), pH 4.6 (○) and pH 4.6 containing sodium citrate (20 mM) (□). Study carried out using 2 mL, 100 μgmL.
Cellular uptake of polymer coated MNP in SH-SY5Y, MCF-7 and U973 cells at 25 µgmL-1 over 72 h (n = 3 ± SD).
| Particle | Incubation time h | Concentration of Fe3+ uptake per cell, pg (± SE) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SH-SY5Y | MCF-7 | U937 | ||
| MNP-PEI | 0 | 0.560 (0.017) | 0.261 (0.004) | 0.121 (0.087) |
| 1 | 16.205(0.867) | 7.990 (3.581) | 7.017 (0.377) | |
| 4 | 14.426 (0.577) | 14.257 (0.415) | 11.640 (0.405) | |
| 24 | 23.277 (0.506) | 16.167 (1.258) | 12.057 (1.315) | |
| 72 | 25.580 (0.353) | 19.847 (1.305) | 13.803 (1.842) | |
| MNP-PEI-PEG | 0 | 0.560 (0.017) | 0.261 (0.004) | 0.121 (0.087) |
| 1 | 8.227 (0.523) | 7.027 (0.424) | 5.163 (0.484) | |
| 4 | 9.997 (0.451) | 9.963 (0.791) | 7.353 (0.380) | |
| 24 | 17.770 (1.462) | 14.257 (0.297) | 9.740 (0.986) | |
| 72 | 18.700 (0.360) | 16.593 (0.756) | 9.627 (0.997) | |
Figure 4Trypan blue exclusion assay using A) Fe3O4-PEI and B) Fe3o4-PEI-PEG on 1) SH-SY5Y, 2) MCF-7 and 3) U937 cells over □ 24, ■ 72, ■120 and ■168 h (n = 3 ± SD).
Percentage cytotoxicity on cell membrane measured via LDH leakage using MNP-PEI and MNP-PEI-PEG on SH-SY5Y cells over 1, 4, 24 and 72 h (n = 3 ± SD)
| Particle | Incubation time h | MNP concentration µgmL-1 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 6.25 | 12.5 | 25 | 50 | 100 | ||
| MNP-PEI | 1 | 10.29 (0.607) | 12.89 (0.282) | 12.15 (0.152) | 12.16 (0.357) | 12.66 (0.952) | 14.42 (0.997) |
| 4 | 9.73 (0.014) | 13.30 (1.052) | 13.21 (1.192) | 12.38(0.183) | 12.16 (0.339) | 12.35 (0.428) | |
| 24 | 10.26 (0.014) | 10.75 (0.080) | 11.07 (0.344) | 11.38 (0.021) | 13.90 (0.132) | 24.94 (0.789)* | |
| 72 | 11.86 (0.288) | 32.43 (2.366)* | 35.51 (1.897)* | 33.03 (2.103)* | 30.86 (1.464)* | 31.37 (0.788)* | |
| MNP-PEI-PEG | 1 | 10.44 (0.007) | 10.43 (0.526) | 9.95 (0.120) | 9.85 (0.010) | 9.80 (0.288) | 9.93 (0.087) |
| 4 | 10.52 (1.539) | 11.61 (0.616) | 11.66 (0.158) | 11.62 (0.350) | 11.71 (0.102) | 11.63 (0.484) | |
| 24 | 10.35 (1.531) | 9.02 (0.027) | 8.67 (0.153) | 8.84 (0.072) | 9.00 (0.024) | 9.50 (0.295) | |
| 72 | 11.13 (0.242) | 11.29 (0.591) | 11.17 (0.443) | 12.11 (2.964) | 10.69 (0.254) | 12.98 (0.000) | |
* Denotes a significant increase from basal levels (p < 0.05).
ROS (% of control cell) and LPO induction by MNPs in SH-SY5Y cells incubated with 25 µgmL-1 for 1, 4, 24 and 72 h (n = 3 ± SD).
| Particle | Incubation time h | ROS Assay | LPO Assay |
|---|---|---|---|
| % DCF | MDA nM/mg protein | ||
| MNP-PEI | 1 | 99.00 (5.568) | 2.702 (0.015)* |
| 4 | 115.67 (5.033)* | 2.567 (0.188) | |
| 24 | 121.67 (7.371)* | 2.667 (0.321) | |
| 72 | 113.67 (4.509)* | 2.638 (0.157) | |
| MNP-PEI-PEG | 1 | 97.33 (6.658) | 2.282 (0.341) |
| 4 | 101.00 (5.292) | 2.383 (0.018) | |
| 24 | 103.33 (3.512) | 2.383 (0.299) | |
| 72 | 102.00 (2.000) | 2.651 (0.107) | |
* Denotes a significant increase from basal levels (p < 0.05).
Figure 5AFM topography images of SH-SY5Y cells. A) control cells without MNPs, B) cells incubated with 25 µgmL. Cells were fixed after incubation and AFM imaging was performed in air using a RTESPA tip of spring constant 40 N/m, carrying out 896 scans/line at a scan rate of 0.32 Hz and 1.102 V amplitude.
Figure 6Roughness analysis carried out on fixed SH-SY5Y cells of AFM topography images and analysed using NanoScope Analysis software (n = 3 ± SE). * Denotes a significant increase compared to control cells (p < 0.05).