Claudio Colombo1, Min Li2,3, Shojiro Watanabe3, Piergiorgio Messa3, Alberto Edefonti4, Giovanni Montini4, Davide Moscatelli1, Maria Pia Rastaldi3, Francesco Cellesi2,3,1. 1. Dipartimento di Chimica, Materiali ed Ingegneria Chimica "G. Natta". Politecnico di Milano, Via Mancinelli 7, 20131 Milan, Italy. 2. Fondazione CEN - European Centre for Nanomedicine, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milan, Italy. 3. Renal Research Laboratory, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Via Pace 9, 20122 Milan, Italy. 4. Pediatric Nephrology and Dialysis Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda - Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Via Commenda, 20122 Milano, Italy.
Abstract
Specific therapeutic targeting of kidney podocytes, the highly differentiated ramified glomerular cells involved in the onset and/or progression of proteinuric diseases, could become the optimal strategy for preventing chronic kidney disease. With this aim, we developed a library of engineered polymeric nanoparticles (NPs) of tuneable size and surface properties and evaluated their interaction with podocytes. NP cytotoxicity, uptake, and cytoskeletal effects on podocytes were first assessed. On the basis of these data, nanodelivery of dexamethasone loaded into selected biocompatible NPs was successful in repairing damaged podocytes. Finally, a three-dimensional in vitro system of co-culture of endothelial cells and podocytes was exploited as a new tool for mimicking the mechanisms of NP interaction with glomerular cells and the repair of the kidney filtration barrier.
Specific therapeutic targeting of kidney podocytes, the highly differentiated ramified glomerular cells involved in the onset and/or progression of proteinuric diseases, could become the optimal strategy for preventing chronic kidney disease. With this aim, we developed a library of engineered polymeric nanoparticles (NPs) of tuneable size and surface properties and evaluated their interaction with podocytes. NP cytotoxicity, uptake, and cytoskeletal effects on podocytes were first assessed. On the basis of these data, nanodelivery of dexamethasone loaded into selected biocompatible NPs was successful in repairing damaged podocytes. Finally, a three-dimensional in vitro system of co-culture of endothelial cells and podocytes was exploited as a new tool for mimicking the mechanisms of NP interaction with glomerular cells and the repair of the kidney filtration barrier.
The study of the interaction
of kidneys with nanoparticles (NPs)
is becoming an important area of research in nanomedicine,[1] particularly in the field of nanotoxicology and
theragnostics.[2−5]In the renal glomerulus, the ramified cells covering the external
side of the glomerular basement membrane, that is, the podocytes,
are the main gatekeeper of protein filtration. When podocytes work
less efficiently due to stress or damage, proteinuria, the loss of
proteins in the urine, and glomerular dysfunction inevitably take
place. If not promptly treated, these conditions lead to progression
of glomerular damage and renal failure.[6]Several experimental results have suggested that most drugs
currently
in use to treat or slow progression of glomerular damage, such as
steroids, immunosuppressive agents, and ACE-inhibitors, have a direct
action on podocytes.[7−9]These therapies are charged by severe side
effects, particularly
when a systemic prolonged administration is required. Therefore, the
future development of a specific podocyte-targeted nanodelivery system
may represent a major breakthrough in kidney disease research because
it would minimize dose and adverse drug reactions in current therapies
and promote the safe utilization of novel drugs directed against specific
molecular pathways activated during cell damage. In addition, a deeper
understanding of the mechanisms of the interaction between podocytes
and engineered NPs could be beneficial for developing new diagnostics
of podocyte-associated diseases.[1]Although renal clearance and accumulation of NPs have been the
focus of recent studies,[2,3] precise characterization
of the interaction between different nanomaterials and glomerular
cells is still lacking. In the context of nanotoxicology, recent reports
have shown that administration of inorganic NPs (such as nanosized
silver and copper) to healthy rodents stimulated morphological changes
of primary and second podocyte ramifications[10] and induced apoptosis through oxidative stress in vitro.[11,12] On the other hand, in vivo evidence of inorganic (iron oxide,[13] gold[14]) NP uptake
by podocytes without affecting kidney function was also reported.
Quantum dots functionalized with cyclo(RGD) peptide promoted selective
binding of ανβ3 integrin receptor on podocytes,
followed by internalization in vitro, in view of a possible application
as targeted therapy and diagnostics.[1]The goal of this work was to develop in vitro models to evaluate
the interaction of engineered polymeric NPs with podocytes, aiming
to (a) unveil fundamental mechanisms of podocyte response to colloidal
nanomaterials, depending on the physicochemical characteristics of
the NPs, and (b) design new nanocarriers for potential targeted drug
delivery to podocytes in proteinuric diseases.To fulfill our
goals, a library of colloidal nanomaterials of defined
size and surface chemistry was prepared. Poly(ε-caprolactone)-based
NPs of a narrow size distribution and tunable size in the 30–120
nm range were synthesized according to emulsion free radical polymerization
techniques.[15−17] Bulk ring-opening polymerization of ε-caprolactone
with 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) as an initiator was first
carried out to produce biodegradable polyester-based methacrylates,
which were used as macromonomers in starved semibatch emulsion polymerization
(MSSEP) and batch emulsion polymerization (BEP).[15] With the optimal use of polymerizable methacryloyl surfactants
(i.e., positively, negatively charged, PEGylated surfmers), the surface
chemistry of the NPs was also controlled (Figure ).
Figure 1
(A) Sketch of the BEP and MSSEP methods used
for the synthesis
of polymeric NPs. (B) Chemical structure of the monomers/surfmers
used for the synthesis of NPs with different sizes and surface properties
(a). Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images of NP9 (b) and
NP10 (c) (scale bar 100 nm).
(A) Sketch of the BEP and MSSEP methods used
for the synthesis
of polymeric NPs. (B) Chemical structure of the monomers/surfmers
used for the synthesis of NPs with different sizes and surface properties
(a). Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images of NP9 (b) and
NP10 (c) (scale bar 100 nm).In vitro assessment of the effects of nanomaterials on podocytes
was carried out by testing NP cytotoxicity and uptake, and cytoskeleton
stress.Possible podocyte repair by controlled drug nanodelivery
was then
analyzed. Finally, we took advantage of a recently developed 3D in
vitro system based on a co-culture of endothelial cells and podocytes,[18,19] in mimicking the mechanisms of NP interaction with glomerular cells
and the repair of the filtration barrier.
Results and Discussion
Library
of Engineered Polymeric NPs
First, polyester-based
NPs were synthesized with controlled particle size and surface properties,
using emulsion free radical polymerization techniques (Figure ). Custom-made poly(ε-caprolactone)-based
macromonomer (HEMA-CL3) was co-polymerized with suitable
surfmers, namely, poly(ethylene glycol) methacrylate (PEGMA), 3-sulfopropyl
methacrylate potassium salt (SPMAK), and methacrylate choline chloride
(MACC), to obtain neutral, negatively charged, and positively charged
NPs, respectively (Figure ).The HEMA-CL3 macromonomer was obtained
through a bulk ring-opening polymerization of ε-caprolactone,
using HEMA as the initiator, according to a recently developed procedure.[15]This hydrolyzable oligoester composed
of three units of CL was
selected as the macromonomer because of its capability to generate
NPs with excellent biocompatibility, absence of toxicity in vitro
and in vivo,[17,20] and a relatively fast degradation
kinetics.[21−24]BEP was adopted as the standard polymerization procedure,
whereas
MSSEP, in which the HEMA-CL3 macromonomer was slowly fed
into the reactor, was used to obtain smaller NPs (Figure A). By changing the surfmer
type and its weight ratio to the HEMA-CL3 macromonomer,
NP latexes were produced with controlled size and surface charge.
The average size, polydispersity index (PDI), and Z-potential of the
produced NPs were evaluated via dynamic light scattering (DLS) measurements
and are reported in Table . Size distributions are shown in Figure .
Table 1
NP Name, Emulsion
Polymerization Conditions,
and Final Physicochemical Characteristics Obtained by DLS
name
surface charge
surfmer content (% w/w)
feeding modality
av. size
(nm)
PDI
Z-pot (mV)
NP1
(−)
20% PEGMA and 5% SPMAK
MSSEP
37
0.02
–5.2
NP2
0
20% PEGMAa
MSSEP
40
0.07
–9.6
NP3
0
20% PEGMA
MSSEP
70
0.08
–3.2
NP4
0
9% PEGMA
MSSEP
118
0.07
–2.4
NP5
+
20% MACC
MSSEP
33
0.10
39.3
NP6
+
10% MACC
MSSEP
75
0.09
42.8
NP7
+
5% MACC
MSSEP
119
0.10
35.6
NP8
–
20% SPMAK
MSSEP
33
0.11
–42.4
NP9
–
5% SPMAK
BP
64
0.11
–37.8
NP10
–
3% SPMAK
BP
117
0.14
–35.3
NP11
(+)
25% MACC and 11% PEGMA
MSSEP
38
0.18
25.2
Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) (5%
w/w) was also added to the surfmer mixture to produce NP2.
Figure 2
Size distribution curves of NPs NP1–NP11
obtained by DLS
analysis.
Size distribution curves of NPs NP1–NP11
obtained by DLS
analysis.Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) (5%
w/w) was also added to the surfmer mixture to produce NP2.The synthesis conditions were chosen
with the aim of obtaining
nearly monodisperse NPs with different sizes for each type of surface
charge: a small average size between 30 and 40 nm, a medium one comprised
between 60 and 70 nm, and a larger one between 110 and 120 nm (Figure ) to test whether
the particle size may influence the podocyte behavior in vitro.Low hydrodynamic diameters were obtained by increasing the amount
of surfmer and using MSSEP.[25] Small PEGylated
NPs (sample NP2, 40 nm) were obtained by using PEGMA together with
SDS as the surfactant because it was not possible to obtain such a
small average size with only a PEGylated surfmer (Table ). As expected, the PEGylated
NPs produced with only PEGMA showed a slightly negative Z-potential
due to the presence of sulfate groups from the free radical initiator
KPS, which are covalently attached to the polymers.[26] Alternatively, by mixing PEGMA with either SPMAK or MACC,
weakly charged PEGylated NPs were also obtained (NP1, negatively charged,
37 nm, and NP11, positively charged, 38 nm). NP1 presented mostly
the same particle size as NP2, with the advantage of avoiding the
use of potentially toxic SDS surfactant. NP11 instead was prepared
with the aim of exploiting the ability of positively charged groups
to enhance cellular uptake, while mitigating their typical cytotoxic
behavior with the shielding effect of PEG chains.[27]For these types of polymeric NPs, particle size and
colloidal stability
remained unaltered during the in vitro biological tests, as confirmed
by previous studies conducted in cell culture media and physiological
buffers.[17,21]
Cytotoxicity Tests
Cytotoxicity
tests were first carried
out to assess which polymeric NP has a safe/toxic effect on podocytes,
depending on the size, surface properties, and concentration. SV1
cells were cultured at 37 °C with a medium containing different
concentrations of NPs (0.01–2 mg/mL) for 24 h. Lactate dehydrogenase
(LDH) colorimetric assay was used to quantify the amount of the cytosolic
enzyme LDH released by damaged cells as an indicator of cellular toxicity.
PEGylated NPs (NP1–NP4) showed a safe cytotoxic profile up
to a concentration of 1 mg/mL (Figure A). A slight increase in cytotoxicity was noticed at
a concentration of 2 mg/mL for small-sized NPs (NP1–NP2), which
could be ascribed to the co-presence of negatively charged species
and PEG macromolecules, as previously discussed. These peculiar surface
properties and/or their small size may have a different effect on
the cell surface at high concentrations. In the case of positively
charged NPs (NP5, NP6, NP7, Figure B), a marked cytotoxic effect was already evident at
concentrations above 0.2 mg/mL, most likely because of their strong
electrostatic interaction with the cell membrane and the consequent
damage.[28] Because of their cytotoxicity,
we decided not to use this set of NPs for further study. Negatively
charged NPs (NP8, NP9, NP10, Figure C) showed no cytotoxicity for concentrations up to
0.5 mg/mL. Above 1 mg/mL, NPs showed a toxic effect, which may be
due to the elevated uptake by podocytes (as confirmed afterward in
the uptake tests). Cytotoxicity profiles of small PEG-based NPs (NP1,
NP2, NP11) are compared in Figure D. Whereas NP1 and NP2 showed a very similar trend,
NP11 presented high cytotoxicity at a relatively low concentration
(>0.2 mg/mL), suggesting that the presence of positive charges
on
NP surface, despite the co-presence of PEG chains, led to cell membrane
damage.
Figure 3
LDH assay on murine podocytes (SV1) incubated with NP1–NP11
NPs (NP1–NP4 (A), NP5–NP7 (B), NP8–NP10 (C),
NP1–NP2–NP11 (D)) for 24 h, at concentrations from 0.01
to 2 mg/mL (Y axis: normalized cytotoxicity).
LDH assay on murine podocytes (SV1) incubated with NP1–NP11
NPs (NP1–NP4 (A), NP5–NP7 (B), NP8–NP10 (C),
NP1–NP2–NP11 (D)) for 24 h, at concentrations from 0.01
to 2 mg/mL (Y axis: normalized cytotoxicity).
Cell Morphology and Cytoskeleton
Rearrangement
In addition
to cytotoxicity tests, fluorescence microscopy was also necessary
to evaluate the effects of NP exposure on the podocyte cytoskeleton,
in particular actin fiber rearrangements, as a sign of cellular stress.[29,30]In fact, recent advances in podocyte biology have pointed
out how cell function is strongly dependent on the actin cytoskeleton,[31] and how actin fiber alterations may be a sign
of cell damage triggered by external chemical and biological stimuli.[30,31]PEGylated NPs do not seem to alter the actin fiber density
and
orientation significantly, even at high concentrations (up to 1 mg/mL)
(NP1, Figure ). On
the other hand, negatively charged NPs induced a marked actin rearrangement
at high concentrations (NP8, 1 mg/mL, Figure ). In this case, the actin density decreased
around the nucleus, while accumulating near the cell membrane. The
fiber rearrangement was associated with considerable NP uptake, demonstrated
by the presence of red spots (rhodamine-labeled NPs) within the green
phalloidin staining. At lower concentrations (<0.5 mg/mL), negative
NPs did not show substantial actin fiber modification, although NP
internalization was still significant. Positively charged NPs clearly
damaged the cell cytoskeleton at all tested concentrations (0.05–1
mg/mL), which may be ascribed to the effect of a strong electrostatic
interaction between the nanomaterial and cell membrane before internalization.[28]
Figure 4
Phalloidin staining (green) of filamentous actin in podocytes
after
24 h NP exposure (NP1, NP8, NP11, red staining) at different concentrations
(1, 0.5, and 0.05 mg/mL). Scale bar 20 μm.
Phalloidin staining (green) of filamentous actin in podocytes
after
24 h NP exposure (NP1, NP8, NP11, red staining) at different concentrations
(1, 0.5, and 0.05 mg/mL). Scale bar 20 μm.
NP Internalization
A well-established approach based
on the selective inhibition of endocytic pathways[32] was employed to investigate which NP uptake mechanisms
were predominantly used by podocytes, depending on the particle size
and surface chemistry (Figure ).
Figure 5
(A) Effect of endocytosis inhibitors on 24 h NP uptake (NP1–NP3–NP4
(a), NP8–NP9–NP10 (b), NP1–NP8–NP11 (c),
particle concentration 0.5 mg/mL) (NC, negative control; CHLOR, chlorpromazine;
GENIS, Genistein; WORT, Wortmannin; BAFIL, Bafilomycin A1; NaN3, sodium azide). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. (B) Localization of rhodamine-labeled NPs (red)
in relation to endolysosomes (green, LysoTracker green) in SV1 podocytes.
NP1 (PEGylated 37 nm, 0.5 mg/mL) and NP8 (sulfonate, 30 nm, 0.5 mg/mL)
were incubated for 24 h (a, c) and their localization visualized just
after NP incubation and after 48 h (b, d). Scale bar 20 μm.
(A) Effect of endocytosis inhibitors on 24 h NP uptake (NP1–NP3–NP4
(a), NP8–NP9–NP10 (b), NP1–NP8–NP11 (c),
particle concentration 0.5 mg/mL) (NC, negative control; CHLOR, chlorpromazine;
GENIS, Genistein; WORT, Wortmannin; BAFIL, Bafilomycin A1; NaN3, sodium azide). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. (B) Localization of rhodamine-labeled NPs (red)
in relation to endolysosomes (green, LysoTracker green) in SV1 podocytes.
NP1 (PEGylated 37 nm, 0.5 mg/mL) and NP8 (sulfonate, 30 nm, 0.5 mg/mL)
were incubated for 24 h (a, c) and their localization visualized just
after NP incubation and after 48 h (b, d). Scale bar 20 μm.We noticed that the uptake of
PEGylated NPs (NP1, NP3, NP4, Figure A(a)) was very limited
when compared with that of the other types of NPs (Figure A(b)) and that the positively
charged NP11 (Figure A(c)) showed the highest uptake.In the case of PEGylated NPs
(Figure A(a)), a slight
decrease in NP uptake by
increasing the particle size could be appreciated in the range 30–120
nm. However, the effect of uptake inhibitors was not particularly
marked, and this may be due to the low percent uptake measured. Even
the sodium azide treatment, which should inhibit all energy-dependent
endocytic pathways, did not seem to have a statistically relevant
effect.On the other hand, negatively charged NPs (NP8, NP9,
NP10) showed
a different trend (Figure A(b)). The uptake was enhanced; it was almost 3 times higher
for the negatively charged NP8 than that for the PEGylated NP1, although
their sizes were approximately the same.When the particle size
was varied, we noticed maximum uptake at
the intermediate average diameter (NP9, 64 nm), which might be interpreted
as a sign of a preferential endocytic mechanism. In fact, caveolae
typically appear as rounded plasma membrane invaginations with diameters
of 50–80 nm,[33] although other works
suggested that the pit diameter may not be the limiting factor in
the pathway selection of NP entry into cells.[34,35] Anyway, the clear inhibition effect of Genistein supported the hypothesis
of a caveolin-dependent endocytosis, whereas inhibition of clathrin-dependent
uptake (chlorpromazine) showed a very limited effect. The presence
of an energy-dependent endocytic mechanism was confirmed by particle
uptake decrease after NaN3 treatment, which was apparent
for all negatively charged NPs (NP8, NP9, NP10), and in particular,
for particles larger than 30 nm. There was no evidence of micropinocytosis
(wortmannin inhibition). Moreover, the absence of effects of bafilomycin
A1 could indicate a nonreceptor-mediated process,[36] as expected.Positively charged NP11 (Figure A(c)) showed a similar trend
to that in negative NPs
but with much higher percent uptake (about 6 times higher than that
of PEG-NP and 2 times higher than that of the negative NP). In this
case, the internalization seemed to be energy dependent and followed
preferentially a caveolin pathway. Notably, together with the electrostatic
interactions between this type of NPs and cell membrane, adsorption
of the negatively charged albumin present in the FBS of the medium
may also take place; this could regulate NP interfacing with the cell
membrane and trigger an energy-dependent endocytosis.[37] The effect of NP concentration on the internalization process
was also assessed (see the Supporting Information).Figure B
shows
how the NP uptake followed a typical endosomal pathway, particularly
for negatively charged NPs. Fluorescently labeled small PEGylated
NPs (NP1, red) did not show strong evidence of co-localization with
the endosomal compartments stained with lysotracker green (Figure B(a, b)). This result
may be due to the very limited internalization of PEG-based NPs. On
the other hand, small negatively charged NPs (NP8) showed clear co-localization
(orange color, Figure B(c, d)), which persisted even after 48 h.In summary, we identified
the surface properties of the NPs (charge,
PEGylation) as the dominant factors that affect both nanotoxicity
and uptake on podocytes. Once cell–particle interactions are
guaranteed by their surface, the particle size may also play a role
in promoting specific endocytic pathways, thus influencing the uptake.
In Vitro Release of Dexamethasone (DEX)
Taking into
account the marked ability of podocytes to interact with engineered
polymeric NPs and internalize them according to their physicochemical
characteristics, we investigated the effect of drug-loaded NPs on
podocyte repair, aiming at designing novel polymeric nanocarriers,
which may potentially target podocytes in proteinuric diseases. The
sustained therapeutic effects of nanoencapsulated drugs were demonstrated
on cultures of podocytes, whose damage was induced in vitro by incubation
with Adriamycin (doxorubicin hydrochloride) for 24 h.[29,30] Damaged podocytes displayed shortened cell processes and substantial
remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton, with loss of filament bundles
and rounding of the cell shape[30] (Figure ). DEX was chosen
as the model drug for loading and release, first because it is a steroid
with a proved efficacy in repairing podocytes[38,39] (although literature data are generally referred to the water-soluble
DEX phosphate) and second because its low molecular weight and high
hydrophobicity are key characteristics for efficient encapsulation
in these types of polyester-based NPs,[40] through interaction with the hydrophobic poly(ε-caprolactone)
core. A set of four different NPs, having two different sizes (30
and 120 nm) and either PEGylated or negatively charged (i.e., NP1,
NP4, NP8, NP10), was chosen for drug delivery tests. Positively charged
NPs, including NP11, were not taken into account because of their
high cell toxicity.
Figure 7
Podocytes were
first damaged by ADR, then treated for 24 and 48
h with DEX-loaded large NPs (NP4, NP10) (A) and small NPs (NP1, NP8)
(B), at two different concentrations (1 mg/mL and 20 μg/mL).
DEX (5% w/w), scale bar 20 μm.
Because high temperature and the presence
of radicals were unsuitable conditions for simultaneous drug loading
during NP synthesis, a postsynthesis swelling/diffusion encapsulation
method[20] was optimized for this study (see
the Methods section). We obtained for each
type of NP a target value of 50 ± 1 μg of DEX encapsulated
per mg of dry polymer (as determined by high-performance liquid chromatography
(HPLC)). Drug release tests were carried out under sink conditions
in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at 37 °C. Release profiles
were followed by HPLC and are shown in Figure . The drug release mechanism was purely diffusive,
and polymer degradation had no influence within the time scale of
the experiment.[17,21,41] Clearly, small NPs (NP1, NP8) presented a faster release due to
their higher surface area per mg of polymer compared to bigger NPs.
In fact, NP4 and NP10 reached 97% release in 72 h, whereas NP1 and
NP8 achieved 100% release in 24 h. Moreover, NPs having the same size
but different surface properties showed a very similar release curve;
this result suggested that the DEX release mechanism was not significantly
influenced by the presence of a PEG corona.
Figure 6
DEX release from NPs
NP1, NP4, NP8, and NP10 in PBS at 37 °C.
Error bars indicate ±SD from experiments run in triplicate.
DEX release from NPs
NP1, NP4, NP8, and NP10 in PBS at 37 °C.
Error bars indicate ±SD from experiments run in triplicate.Although the NPs presented a relatively
fast drug release profile
(release curves plateaued at 24–72 h, depending on the particle
size), these results may be compatible with targeted drug delivery
to the kidneys, taking into account that a more sustained delivery
would be outweighed by the high turnover of fluids in kidney glomeruli
(the renal blood flow is approximately 20% of the cardiac output,
corresponding to a glomerular filtration rate of 1.2 L/min, and the
total glomerular filtrate in 24 h is 50–60 times the volume
of blood plasma in adults[42]).The
effect of DEX release by the NPs is summarized in Figure . Cytoskeleton damage, triggered by Adriamicyn, was highlighted
by staining the actin fibers (green phalloidin) and observing that
they were mostly localized in the proximity of the cell membrane and
their density was reduced within the cell body and around the nucleus.
When damaged cells were treated with DEX-loaded PEGylated NPs (NP4,
20 μg/mL, loaded with DEX 5% w/w) for 24 h, they started recovering
the normal orientation of actin stress fibers (Figure A), a process which was almost completed
in 48 h. A very similar trend was observed with negatively charged
NPs (NP10, the same size as NP4) but with a much higher internalization
(see red spots within the cytosolic space). On the other hand, at
higher NP concentrations (1 mg/mL), the toxic effect (which perhaps
was also enhanced by the presence of a high drug concentration) of
NP10 as well as NP4 overwhelmed the repairing effect of DEX.Podocytes were
first damaged by ADR, then treated for 24 and 48
h with DEX-loaded large NPs (NP4, NP10) (A) and small NPs (NP1, NP8)
(B), at two different concentrations (1 mg/mL and 20 μg/mL).
DEX (5% w/w), scale bar 20 μm.Treatment with DEX-loaded small NPs NP1 and NP8 (size 37
and 33
nm, respectively) showed very similar results to those obtained with
the larger NP4 and NP10 (Figure B). At 1 mg/mL concentration, both PEGylated and negatively
charged NPs showed some toxic effects, in particular a large amount
of NP8 were internalized. At a low concentration (0.02 mg/mL), the
toxic effect was reduced and DEX release triggered recovery of actin
fiber density and orientation. The use of small NPs is clearly preferred
for possible future in vivo application because reduced size would
facilitate drug permeation through the kidney filtration barrier,
thus reaching the podocyte layer more efficiently.[43] In this case (Figure B), we also noticed a marked recovery of actin fiber
orientation and density already after 24 h incubation with NP8, whereas
with NP1, the effect was pronounced only after 48 h. These results
may be ascribed to a much higher internalization of negatively charged
NPs, which allowed better intracellular release of DEX, and therefore,
an enhanced repairing effect of the drug, whose receptors reside in
the cytosol.[39]
In Vitro Drug Testing in
a 3D Co-culture System
Nanodelivery
of DEX was also successful in repairing damaged co-cultures of endothelial
cells and podocytes, which were exploited as a tool for mimicking
the glomerular filtration barrier in vitro.The 3D co-culture
model is based on an isoporous (1 μm pore size) poly(ethylene
terephthalate) membrane insert, coated on both sides with collagen
type IV, and finally covered with podocytes and endothelial cells
on the respective external and internal sides[18,19] (Figure A). The
presence of the membrane between the two cell types permits performing
separate assays in the two compartments and allows the functional
assessment of albumin permeability through the membrane.
Figure 8
(A) Sketch
of the 3D co-culture system designed to mimic glomerular
filtration barrier in vitro. (B) Percent increase of albumin (ALB)
permeability following Adriamycin treatment (ADR), and recovery by
24 and 48 h of incubation with standard medium (MED) and DEX-loaded
NP8 at a high concentration (DEX-H; NP8 1 mg/mL + DEX 5% w/w, corresponding
to 100 μM) and a low concentration (DEX-L; NP8 0.02 mg/mL +
DEX 5% w/w corresponding to 2 μM).
(A) Sketch
of the 3D co-culture system designed to mimic glomerular
filtration barrier in vitro. (B) Percent increase of albumin (ALB)
permeability following Adriamycin treatment (ADR), and recovery by
24 and 48 h of incubation with standard medium (MED) and DEX-loaded
NP8 at a high concentration (DEX-H; NP8 1 mg/mL + DEX 5% w/w, corresponding
to 100 μM) and a low concentration (DEX-L; NP8 0.02 mg/mL +
DEX 5% w/w corresponding to 2 μM).To establish whether this model could be useful in testing
our
NP-based drug delivery system, the co-culture was pretreated with
Adriamycin to induce cellular damage and increase albumin permeability.
Afterward, the membrane was incubated with DEX-loaded NP8 NPs, that
is, the NP type showing the best performance in terms of low cytotoxicity,
high uptake, DEX release, and podocyte-repairing effect in a 2D culture
system.NP concentrations were selected to achieve an optimal
DEX concentration
range below 100 μM, that is, concentrations already reached
in humans after intravenous injection and oral administration.[44]NP treatment led to progressive reduction
of albumin permeability
that was not observed with medium alone at 24 and 48 h of incubation
(Figure B). In particular,
a low concentration of NPs (0.02 mg/mL, which encapsulated 5% w/w
of DEX, corresponding to 2 μM in the co-culture system) achieved
a reduction in albumin permeability, which was comparable to the response
to a high NP concentration (1 mg/mL, corresponding to 100 μM
in the co-culture system). This may indicate either the presence of
a concentration threshold, above which cells respond in a similar
way, or a more complex balance between the DEX effects and toxic effects
of the polymeric nanomaterial at higher concentrations.It is
noteworthy that the incubation with these DEX-loaded NPs
did not return albumin permeability to its initial value (prior Adriamycin
treatment), but markedly reduced it below the control values. This
result could be ascribed to the role of DEX in stimulating better
cellular layer organization, with a consequent decrease in the membrane
pore size/number.
Conclusions
Engineered polymeric
NPs of tuneable size and surface properties
were successfully produced and used to evaluate their interactions
with kidney podocytes in vitro. The cytotoxicity, uptake, and cytoskeleton
stress were markedly dependent on the particle size, surface charge,
and PEG corona. Damaged podocytes were successfully repaired with
controlled nanodelivery of DEX, in view of developing new kidney-specific
nanotherapeutics. A 3D co-culture system based on endothelial cells
and podocytes was also employed to study the mechanisms of NP interaction
with glomerular cells and the repair of a podocyte–endothelium
membrane, designed to mimic the kidney filtration barrier in vitro.
Methods
NP Synthesis,
Drug Loading, and in Vitro Release
Materials,
synthesis of the HEMA-CL3 macromonomer, and synthesis of
the fluorescent HEMA-RhB monomer are reported in the Supporting Information.
Synthesis of Polyester-Based
NPs
NP synthesis was carried
out in a three-neck flask, equipped with a condenser, containing 49
mL of distilled water; the system was purged through repeated vacuum–nitrogen
cycles and kept at 80 °C through the use of an external oil bath.
Depending on the target particle size and surface charge, different
surfmers (PEGMA, SPMAK, and MACC), macromonomer/surfmer mass ratios,
and either BEP or MSSEP were used, as summarized in Table . In BEP, the macromonomer,
HEMA-CL3, and the surfmer were loaded together into the
reactor, whereas in MSSEP, the water-soluble surfmer was added into
the reactor, whereas the hydrophobic HEMA-CL3 macromonomer
was fed using a syringe pump (model NE 300; New Era Pump System, the
flow rate was changed for each sample to maintain the feeding equal
to 1 h).[17] One gram of total monomer mixtures
(macromonomer and surfmer) was used for all reactions, unless specifically
noted; 0.1% w/w HEMA-RhB was also added when fluorescently labeled
NPs were required for biological experiments.KPS (20 mg) was
used as the initiator for synthesizing negatively charged and PEGylated
NPs, whereas 20 mg of AAPH was employed for positively charged NPs.
In all cases, the reaction was carried out for 3 h, and before any
further use, NPs were dialyzed (3500 Da cutoff membranes) against
PBS buffer (10 mM) to remove any possible impurities. The particle
size distribution, average size, PDI, and Z-potential of the final
products were evaluated via DLS (Malvern Zetasizer Nano). TEM samples
of selected NP latexes were investigated on a Zeiss EFTEM Leo 912AB
transmission electron microscope working at 80 kV. The sample was
prepared by placing a 5 μL drop of NP colloidal suspension on
a Formvar/carbon-coated copper grid and was dried overnight. Digital
images were acquired by a charge-coupled device Esi Vision Proscan
camera.
Drug Loading and in Vitro Release
NP latexes (NP1,
NP8, NP4, NP10) were concentrated up to 5% w/w under a rotavapor,
and DLS analysis confirmed the absence of aggregation. DEX was dissolved
in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) (20 mg/mL) under gentle magnetic stirring
at room temperature. The two phases (NP latex and drug in DMSO) were
injected axially into a poly(tetrafluoroethylene) mixing device[20] at a flow rate of 30 and 5 mL/min, respectively.
DEX-loaded NPs were collected from the mixer outlet, and the absence
of DEX aggregates was confirmed by DLS.The drug-loading efficiency
was evaluated by placing drug-loaded NP latexes in centrifugal filters
(Amicon Ultra, 100 kDa cutoff), which were centrifuged at 4500 rpm
for 15 min to separate the NPs from the supernatant and the free drug.
The final concentration of free drug in the supernatant was calculated
by HPLC analysis.[23]Release studies
were conducted via HPLC by dialyzing 3 mL of DEX-loaded
NPs against 200 mL of PBS buffer at 37 °C with Slyde A Lyzer
Dialysis cassettes (Thermo Scientific, 3500 Da cutoff). At selected
times, small aliquots (50 μL) were withdrawn and replaced with
an equal volume of PBS. These aliquots were dried under a nitrogen
stream and extracted with a fixed volume of acetonitrile under vortex
mixing. After centrifugation at 4000 rpm for 10 min, the supernatant
was injected into the HPLC system (Agilent 1200 series) equipped with
a UV–vis detector (λ = 250 nm); the mobile phase was
composed of water and acetonitrile (70/30 v/v) under isocratic conditions
at a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min (DEX elution time 10 min).Before
in vitro experiments, 3 mL of the selected DEX-loaded NPs
were dialyzed against 200 mL of PBS to remove solvent and impurities
from the formulations.
LDH Cytotoxicity
The NP cytotoxicity
was measured using
an LDH-Cytotoxicity Colorimetric Assay Kit (BioVision Incorporated),
which was used according to supplier’s protocol (experimental
details are reported in the Supporting Information).
Fluorescence Microscopy Examination
Conditionally immortalized
murine kidney podocytes SV1 (CLS Cell Line Service Ltd, Eppelheim,
Germany) were cultured on coverslips and fixed with 4% of paraformaldehyde
at room temperature for 10 min. After washing, cells were permeabilized
with 0.3% of Triton in PBS for 5 min and incubated with 1% of bovine
serum albumin in PBS at room temperature for 30 min. Phalloidin-FITC
(Sigma-Aldrich) at 1:100 dilution together with DAPI at 1:1000 dilution
(Sigma-Aldrich) was added, and the cells were incubated for 1 h. After
3 times washing with PBS, the cells were mounted with Fluorsave aqueous
mounting medium (Merck, Milano, Italy). Images were acquired using
a Zeiss AxioObserver microscope equipped with a high-resolution digital
videocamera (AxioCam, Zeiss) and an Apotome system for structured
illumination, and recorded by the AxioVision software, version 4.8.
NP Uptake
SV1 cells (6000–8000 per well) were
plated on a 96-well black plate and cultured at 37 °C without
γ-interferon for 3–4 days. Then, the culture medium was
replaced by medium containing different endocytosis inhibitors (Chlorpromazine
10 μg/mL; Genistein 200 μM; Wortmannin 100 nM; Bafilomycin
A1 200 nM; Sodium azide 10 mM, all purchased from Sigma), which were
preincubated with the cells for 30 min. After 30 min preincubation,
NP1–NP11 were added at a concentration of 0.5 mg/mL, alone
or together with the inhibitors, and incubated with cells for 24 h.
At the end of incubation, the supernatants were removed, and the cells
were thoroughly washed thrice with PBS. The intracellular NP was measured
using SAFAS spectrophotometry at an excitation wavelength of 540 nm
and an emission wavelength of 584 nm. Janus Green cell normalization
stain was used to adjust the cell plating difference among the wells.
NP–lysosome co-localization was characterized by incubating
the cells with LysoTracker green (Life technologies) at a concentration
of 666 nM together with Hoechst 33342 (Life technologies) at a concentration
of 5 μg/mL in culture medium for 1 h. At the end of incubation,
the staining solution was replaced with fresh medium without phenol
red, and the cells were observed using a Zeiss AxioObserver microscope.
DEX Release on Podocytes
SV1 cells (20 000)
were plated on a 35 mm Petri dish containing four cell culture coverslips
and cultured at 37 °C without γ-interferon for 3–4
days. Afterwards, cells were incubated with 0.8 μM Adriamycin
(ADR, Sigma-Aldrich) in cell culture medium for 24 h. After 24 h incubation,
ADR was replaced by fresh medium (as the control group) or medium
with a different concentration of NPs loaded with DEX and incubated
for another 24 or 48 h. Cells were finally washed thrice with PBS
and characterized by fluorescence microscopy, as described above.
Co-Culture System and Assessment of Permeability
Preparation
of the three-dimensional podocyte–endothelial cell co-cultures
and protein permeability assessment were carried out according to
a previously reported procedure.[19] Experimental
conditions for Adriamicin treatment and NP incubation are described
in the Supporting Information.
Authors: Klaus Pollinger; Robert Hennig; Miriam Breunig; Joerg Tessmar; Andreas Ohlmann; Ernst R Tamm; Ralph Witzgall; Achim Goepferich Journal: Small Date: 2012-08-08 Impact factor: 13.281
Authors: Vicente de Paulo Castro Teixeira; Simone Monika Blattner; Min Li; Hans-Joachim Anders; Clemens David Cohen; Ilka Edenhofer; Novella Calvaresi; Monika Merkle; Maria Pia Rastaldi; Matthias Kretzler Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 10.612