| Literature DB >> 31635211 |
Tyler K T Smith1,2, Zaina Kahiel3, Nicholas D LeBlond4,5, Peyman Ghorbani6,7, Eliya Farah8, Refel Al-Awosi9, Marceline Cote10,11, Suresh Gadde12,13, Morgan D Fullerton14,15.
Abstract
Activation of the transcription factor liver X receptor (LXR) has beneficial effects on macrophage lipid metabolism and inflammation, making it a potential candidate for therapeutic targeting in cardiometabolic disease. While small molecule delivery via nanomedicine has promising applications for a number of chronic diseases, questions remain as to how nanoparticle formulation might be tailored to suit different tissue microenvironments and aid in drug delivery. In the current study, we aimed to compare the in vitro drug delivering capability of three nanoparticle (NP) formulations encapsulating the LXR activator, GW-3965. We observed little difference in the base characteristics of standard PLGA-PEG NP when compared to two redox-active polymeric NP formulations, which we called redox-responsive (RR)1 and RR2. Moreover, we also observed similar uptake of these NP into primary mouse macrophages. We used the transcript and protein expression of the cholesterol efflux protein and LXR target ATP-binding cassette A1 (ABCA1) as a readout of GW-3956-induced LXR activation. Following an initial acute uptake period that was meant to mimic circulating exposure in vivo, we determined that although the induction of transcript expression was similar between NPs, treatment with the redox-sensitive RR1 NPs resulted in a higher level of ABCA1 protein. Our results suggest that NP formulations responsive to cellular cues may be an effective tool for targeted and disease-specific drug release.Entities:
Keywords: ABCA1; LXR agonists; drug delivery; macrophages; nanomedicine; nanoparticles; redox-responsive nanoparticle
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31635211 PMCID: PMC6833070 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24203751
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Schematic diagram of nanoparticles used in this study (inset), and chemical structures of polymers (R = COOH) and GW-3965.
Figure 2Nanoparticle characterization. (A) Hydrodynamic size of three different GW-3965 encapsulated NPs measured by ZetaView and zetasizer (n = 3). (B) Transmission electron microscopy images of GW-NPs showing spherical structure, scale bar = 200 nm. (C) Surface charge potentials of GW-NPs measured using zetasizer (n = 3). (D) Stability studies were performed by measuring the GW-NPs size, pre and 1 h post incubation in 5%, 10%, and 20% FBS (n = 3).
Figure 3Nanoparticle formulations are effectively up-taken by macrophages and form punctate foci. WT BMDM were treated with 1.0 × 109 Cy5.5-tagged nanoparticles (red) for 1.5 h, then fixed and stained with an anti-LAMP1 antibody as a lysosomal marker (green) and propidium iodide as a DNA stain (blue). Images representative of at least 5 fields of view from n = 3. Scale bar represents 5 μm.
Figure 4Liver X receptor (LXR) target mRNA expression is unchanged by GW-NP addition. WT BMDM were treated with nanoparticles encapsulating 5 µM GW-3965 for 1.5 h. Abca1 mRNA transcript expression was measured in samples (A) 2 h, (B) 6 h, or (C) 24 h post-GW-NP treatment by RT-qPCR. Data represent mean ± SEM where *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, and * p < 0.05 are differences compared with vehicle control determined by one-way ANOVA (n = 10–13).
Figure 5ABCA1 protein expression is upregulated with RR1-GW nanoparticle treatment. WT BMDM were treated with nanoparticles encapsulating 5 µM GW-3965 for 1.5 h. ABCA1 protein was measured 24 h post-treatment and normalized to ß actin. Data represent mean ± SEM where *** p < 0.001 and * p < 0.05 are differences compared with vehicle control, while ### p < 0.001 and # p < 0.05 is compared to acute GW-3965 dose determined by one-way ANOVA (n = 5).