| Literature DB >> 31636560 |
Raphaël Labruère1, A J Sona2, Edward Turos2.
Abstract
Nanoparticle-based antibiotic constructs have become a popular area of investigation in the biomedical sciences. Much of this work has pertained to human diseases, largely in the cancer therapy arena. However, considerable research has also been devoted to the nanochemistry for controlling infectious diseases. Among these are ones due to bacterial infections, which can cause serious illnesses leading to death. The onset of multi-drug-resistant (MDR) infections such as those caused by the human pathogen Staphylococcus aureus has created a dearth of problems such as surgical complications, persistent infections, and lack of available treatments. In this article, we set out to review the primary literature on the design and development of new nanoparticle materials for the potential treatment of S. aureus infections, and areas that could be further expanded upon to make nanoparticle antibiotics a mainstay in clinical settings.Entities:
Keywords: MRSA; methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; nanoantibiotics; nanoparticle antibiotics; nanoparticles
Year: 2019 PMID: 31636560 PMCID: PMC6787278 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.01121
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
Figure 1Structures of two commercial β-lactams, penicillin G and clavulanic acid.
Figure 2Structures of various commercial antibacterial agents.
Figure 3General types of nanoparticles used for antimicrobial applications.
Figure 4Schematic representation of a perforated (porous) inorganic nanoparticle.
Figure 5Schematic representation of a polyethylene glycol (PEG)–coated liposome.
Figure 6Three dendrimeric constructs used for drug delivery.
Figure 7Polymeric frameworks commonly used as nanoparticle matrices.
Figure 8Molecules incorporated into nanoparticles.
Figure 9Three polyester frameworks used to construct microparticles for antibacterial delivery.
Figure 10Silver carbene complexes.
Figure 11Structure of protonated poly(ethyleneimine).
Figure 12A schematic representation of cationically charged nanoparticles interacting with a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) cell.
Figure 13Structure of an amphiphilic peptide.
Figure 14Structure of an amphiphilic polycarbonate.
Figure 15Chitosan and its cationic (physiological) protonated form.
Figure 16Structure of poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA).
Figure 17A schematic representation of a binary silver-coated iron nanoparticle.
Figure 18Thiols used to surface-coat gold nanoparticles.
Summary of toxicological effects of different nanoparticles.
| Types of nanoparticles | Toxicological effect | References |
|---|---|---|
| PLGA | Generally low cytotoxicity. No inflammatory response in mice. | Makadia, H.K., and Siegel, S.J. |
| Polycaprolactone | No cytotoxicity or histopathological lesions in mice. | Bansal, V. et al. |
| Polyacrylate | No inflammation and cytotoxicity after intranasal or topical administration in a murine model. | Ren, H., and Huang, X. |
| Liposomal | No side effects. | Huwyler, J., Drewe, J., Krahenbuhl, S. |
| Chitosan | Induce malformations, cytotoxicity, and physiological stress in zebra fish embryos. | Hu, Y.L. et al. |
| Silica | Moderate toxicity to lungs, kidneys, liver, and brain depending on the route of administration in mice. | Murugadoss, S. et al. |
| Silver | Histopathological lesions and cytotoxicity in mice. | Cho, Y.-M. et al. |
| Gold | Inflammatory response in mice and rats. | Bahamonde, J. et al. |
| Copper | Important toxicity toward kidney, liver, and spleen in mice. | Chen, Z. et al. |
| Iron oxide | Histopathological lesions in liver and spleen in mice. | Feng, Q. et al. |
| TiO2 | Toxic to liver and brain of mice. | Jia, X. et al. |
| ZnO | Inflammation and damages to different tissues dependent on the mode of administration in mice or rats. | Gao, L. et al. |