| Literature DB >> 31911890 |
Nikhil Pandey1,2, Jyothi U Menon1,2,3, Masaya Takahashi4, Jer-Tsong Hsieh5, Jian Yang6, Kytai T Nguyen1,2, Aniket S Wadajkar1,2,7,8.
Abstract
Theranostic systems capable of delivering imaging and therapeutic agents at a specific target are the focus of intense research efforts in drug delivery. To overcome non-degradability and toxicity concerns of conventional theranostic systems, we formulated a novel thermo-responsive fluorescent polymer (TFP) and conjugated it on the surface of iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) for imaging and therapeutic applications in solid tumors.Entities:
Keywords: magnetic nanoparticles; photoluminescent polymers; solid tumors; theranostic systems; thermo-responsive polymers
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31911890 PMCID: PMC6940202 DOI: 10.7150/ntno.39810
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanotheranostics ISSN: 2206-7418
Figure 1Physicochemical characterization of nanoparticles. (A) FTIR spectra of TFP-MNPs, TFP NPs, WBPLP-AH and NIPAAm with arrows indicating the peaks associated with bonds in polymer backbone and MNPs. (B) TEM images of MNPs, TFP NPs, and TFP-MNPs (all scale bars = 100 nm). (C) Stability of TFP-MNPs in PBS and 10% FBS at 37°C for 72 hours as measured by changes in nanoparticle size. (D) Phase transition of TFP NPs at LCST (39°C). (E) Temperature-dependent Dox release kinetics showing higher release at 41°C compared to 37°C and 25°C. (F) Degradation profile of TFP shell on MNPs core showing 86% polymer weight loss in 13 days.
Physicochemical characterization of nanoparticles
| Sample | Diameter (nm) | PDI | ζ Potential (mV) | Iron (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MNPs | 10a | 0.30 | -5.1 | 100 |
| Silane-MNPs | 18b | 0.35 | -21.0 | __ |
| TFP NPs | 150 | 0.28 | -13.4 | __ |
| TFP-MNPs | 135 | 0.07 | -31.0 | 75 |
aSize provided by the supplier
bSize obtained from TEM analysis (image not shown)
Figure 2Magnetic properties of nanoparticles. (A) Photographs showing TFP-MNPs suspension in water (left) and recruitment of TFP-MNPs towards a 1.3 T magnet (right). (B) Hysteresis loops of bare MNPs and TFP-MNPs followed the same trend demonstrating their superparamagnetic behavior. (C) T2 weighted MR images of agarose phantoms containing i. agarose only, ii. TFP NPs, and iii-vi. TFP-MNPs at 0.25, 0.5, 1, and 2 mg/ml concentrations, respectively, showing increasing negative contrast with increasing iron oxide concentration in agarose phantoms.
Figure 3Characterization of fluorescence property. (A) Photographs of PNIPAAm-AH, WBPLP and TFP NPs samples in ambient white light and UV light. (B) Fluorescence intensity of TFP NPs was measured at increasing temperatures and plotted as fluorescence intensity lost as a function of temperature.
Figure 4. (A) Cytocompatibility profiles of TFP-MNPs in normal human dermal fibroblasts (HDFs) and (B) normal prostate epithelial cells (PZ-HPV-7) as measured by MTS assays. (C) Cellular uptake profiles of TFP-MNPs on LNCaP and PC3 prostate cancer cells and (D) A431 and G360 skin cancer cells. (E) Cytotoxicity of nanoparticles on skin cancer (A431, G361) and prostate cancer (PC3) cells at 37°C and 41°C as measured by MTS assays. *p < 0.05.
Figure 5. (A) Fluorescent images of prostate cancer tumors in mice after intra-tumoral injection of nanoparticles. (B) Relative fluorescence intensities from the panel A (*p < 0.05). (C) T2-weighted MR images of prostate tumors in mice before and 24 hours after i.v. injection of nanoparticles in the presence or absence of an external magnet. The red arrow indicates negative contrast generated due to accumulation of TFP-MNPs. (D) MRI signal intensity drop in prostate cancer tumors 24 hours post-injection from the panel C (*p < 0.05).
Figure 6. Skin cancer B16F10 tumor volume fold increase in mice after i.v. injection of nanoparticles in the presence of 1.3 T external magnet (*p < 0.05).