| Literature DB >> 27557953 |
Grigore Rischitor1, Mariantonietta Parracino2, Rita La Spina1, Patricia Urbán1, Isaac Ojea-Jiménez1, Elena Bellido1, Andrea Valsesia1, Sabrina Gioria1, Robin Capomaccio1, Agnieszka Kinsner-Ovaskainen1, Douglas Gilliland1, François Rossi1, Pascal Colpo3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The constant increase of the use of nanomaterials in consumer products is making increasingly urgent that standardized and reliable in vitro test methods for toxicity screening be made available to the scientific community. For this purpose, the determination of the cellular dose, i.e. the amount of nanomaterials effectively in contact with the cells is fundamental for a trustworthy determination of nanomaterial dose responses. This has often been overlooked in the literature making it difficult to undertake a comparison of datasets from different studies. Characterization of the mechanisms involved in nanomaterial transport and the determination of the cellular dose is essential for the development of predictive numerical models and reliable in vitro screening methods.Entities:
Keywords: Cell uptake; Colloidal stability; Dosimetry; In vitro assay; Nanoparticle characterization; Nanoparticle transport; Nanoparticles
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27557953 PMCID: PMC4995798 DOI: 10.1186/s12989-016-0157-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Part Fibre Toxicol ISSN: 1743-8977 Impact factor: 9.400
Summary of TEM, CLS and DLS measurements performed in water. Dcore: Diameter measured by TEM, D calculated value of Dcore corresponding to a core-shell structure of apparent density ρapp composed of a core of density 19.3 g.cm-3 and a shell of density 1.064 g.cm-3 (nominal density of the CLS gradient)
| TEM | DLS | CLS | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dcore (nm) |
| Dh (nm) | PdIh | Z-pot mV | Dhs (nm) | HHW | PdIhs | ρapp g/cm3 | |
| HM15 | 11.3 ± 1.8 | 8.69 | 20.3 | 0.04 | −37.0 | 7.8 | 1.5 | 1.08 | 3.8 |
| HM35 | 29.6 ± 4.7 | 31.9 | 34.6 | 0.14 | −40.3 | 29.7 | 4.5 | 1.05 | 13.6 |
| HM75 | 68.9 ± 14.4 | 65.4 | 71.8 | 0.24 | −44.6 | 62.5 | 11.9 | 1.09 | 14.8 |
| CO20 | 15.7 ± 3.2 | 21.3 | 32.9 | 0.11 | −16.1 | 17.1 | 3.0 | 2.34 | 6.0 |
| CO40 | 35.5 ± 5.5 | 39.8 | 54.4 | 0.12 | −20.2 | 38.3 | 11.0 | 1.17 | 8.2 |
| CO80 | 72.8 ± 8.1 | 81.3 | 95.4 | 0.07 | −25.1 | 75.1 | 15.0 | 1.21 | 12.4 |
D : average hydrodynamic diameter, PdI : poly-dispersion index measured by DLS, Z-Pot: Zeta potential, Dhs: hydrodynamic diameter measured by CLS calculated with a density of 19.3 g.cm−3, HHW: half height width of the measured size distribution, PdIhs: poly-dispersion index measure by CLS, ρapp: apparent density calculated with the method described in [31])
NP characterisation in complete cell culture medium conditions
| DLS in CCM | CPS in CCM | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dh nm | PdI | Sedimention time (s) in Water | Sedimention time (s) in CCM | ρapp g.cm−3 |
| |
| HM35 | 69.7 | 0.29 | 28.9 | 42.1 | 3.30 | 34.5 |
| HM75 | 101.9 | 0.16 | 7.7 | 10.3 | 6.21 | 66.6 |
| CO20 | 35.8 | 0.11 | 97.5 | 138.0 | 4.32 | 19.8 |
| CO40 | 66.5 | 0.16 | 25.0 | 31.5 | 5.00 | 39.8 |
| CO80 | 116.7 | 0.09 | 5.3 | 7.1 | 6.72 | 78.9 |
UV-vis SPR peak values measured in water and in CCM
| Sample | HM35 | HM75 | CO20 | CO 40 | CO80 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water | 527 nm | 544 nm | 523 nm | 530 nm | 555 nm |
| CCM | 537 nm | 552 nm | 524 nm | 532 nm | 556 nm |
Fig. 1Method used to determine the effective dose reaching the cell monolayer 1) incubation of the NPs in wells with and without cells. 2) At each time point, transfer of the supernatant into an empty well for UV-vis measurements 3). The cellular dose is then determined by subtracting the calculated areas under the absorbance curves at t = 0 s to the one of the considered time point
Fig. 2Calibration curves obtained by plotting calculated area under the UV-vis absorbance curves as a function of the NP concentration
Fig. 3UV-vis spectra measured for HM75 (40 μM) with (a) and without cells (b), and for CO80 (60 μM) with (c) and without cells (d)
Fig. 4Percentage of NPs up-taken by or deposited on the cell monolayer (filled markers) and deposited on well plate surface (empty markers)
Time of transport for 1 mm calculated from DLS and CLS diameters and mass density of NMs in complete medium
| Sample | DDLS (nm) | Apparent density (g/cm3) | Sedimentation time (s) measured by CLS | Time of transport by diffusion (hours) | Time of transport by sedimentation (hours) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HM 35 | 69.7 | 3.3 | 42.1 | 17.3 | 37.0 |
| HM75 | 101.9 | 6.2 | 10.3 | 25.3 | 7.6 |
| CO20 | 35.8 | 4.3 | 138.0 | 8.9 | 97.2 |
| CO40 | 66.5 | 5.0 | 31.5 | 16.5 | 23.3 |
| CO80 | 116.7 | 6.7 | 7.1 | 28.9 | 5.3 |
Calculated NPs number deposited on a cell
| CO20 | CO40 | CO80 | HM35 | HM75 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Nb. of NPs/ml | 7.20 1011 | 7.20 1010 | 7.80 109 | 7.30 1010 | 5.70 109 |
| NPs/well | 5.76 1010 | 5.76 109 | 6.24 108 | 5.84 109 | 4.56 108 |
| NPs/cell 6 h | 3.7 104 | 1.0 104 | 1.1 103 | 1.3 104 | 7.2 102 |
| NPs/cell 72 h | 8.2 104 | 1.7 104 | 6.7 103 | 1.67 104 | 3.4 103 |
Fig. 5SEM images of cell monolayer incubated for 72 h with the 2 sets of NPs
Peclet number calculated from experimental data
| HM35 | HM75 | CO20 | CO40 | CO80 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peclet number | 5.14 | 36.40 | 1.00 | 7.77 | 60.03 |
Fig. 6Fraction of deposited NPs as a function of the Peclet number