| Literature DB >> 32309278 |
Riccardo Rampado1,2, Sara Crotti2, Paolo Caliceti3, Salvatore Pucciarelli1, Marco Agostini1,2.
Abstract
In the last decades, the staggering progress in nanotechnology brought around a wide and heterogeneous range of nanoparticle-based platforms for the diagnosis and treatment of many diseases. Most of these systems are designed to be administered intravenously. This administration route allows the nanoparticles (NPs) to widely distribute in the body and reach deep organs without invasive techniques. When these nanovectors encounter the biological environment of systemic circulation, a dynamic interplay occurs between the circulating proteins and the NPs, themselves. The set of proteins that bind to the NP surface is referred to as the protein corona (PC). PC has a critical role in making the particles easily recognized by the innate immune system, causing their quick clearance by phagocytic cells located in organs such as the lungs, liver, and spleen. For the same reason, PC defines the immunogenicity of NPs by priming the immune response to them and, ultimately, their immunological toxicity. Furthermore, the protein corona can cause the physical destabilization and agglomeration of particles. These problems induced to consider the PC only as a biological barrier to overcome in order to achieve efficient NP-based targeting. This review will discuss the latest advances in the characterization of PC, development of stealthy NP formulations, as well as the manipulation and employment of PC as an alternative resource for prolonging NP half-life, as well as its use in diagnostic applications.Entities:
Keywords: anti-fouling; characterization; immunology; interface; nanoparticles; protein corona; stealth; theranostics
Year: 2020 PMID: 32309278 PMCID: PMC7145938 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00166
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
Figure 1Schematic representation of the possible effects of protein corona (PC) on nanoparticle (NP) stability, safety, and pharmacokinetics.
NP features influencing the formation, composition, and characteristics of the PC.
| Size | • Larger particles have lower and offer more surface interaction for each protein. | Xu et al., |
| Shape | • Shape change the mass/surface ratio of NPs. Spherical NPs (maximum mass/minimal surface) thus minimize the interactions with the environment. | García-Álvarez et al., |
| Hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity | • Hydrophobic NPs interact with hydrophobic proteins through Wan der Waals or π-π interactions. | Saha et al., |
| Surface charge | • More densely charged NPs tend to have thicker and denser PCs. | Almalik et al., |
Environmental and experimental settings influencing the formation, composition, and characteristics of the PC.
| Medium | Protein amount | • Total proteins amount in the medium affect the thickness and composition of PC. | Zhang et al., |
| Composition | • Biofluids' origin (e.g., interstitial fluid, blood, plasma, serum) influences the PC composition. | Bonvin et al., | |
| Source | • The species of animal (e.g., rat, bovine, or human) affect the PC composition. | Corbo et al., | |
| Temperature and pH | • Temperature of incubation influences the protein diffusivity and the affinity toward NPs. | Raoufi et al., | |
| Time | • Following the Vroman effect, the time of incubation is a critical parameter, especially for short time points, since the protein-binding dynamics change very quickly within a few minutes of incubation. | Tenzer et al., | |
| Fluidics | • Dynamic conditions (especially PC formed after | Hadjidemetriou et al., | |
| Isolation technique | • Centrifugation may remove loosely bound proteins from the NPs, thus providing only a rough picture of the hard PC. | Carrillo-Carrion et al., | |
Figure 2(A) Workflow of the study for the in vivo time-dependent assessment of Doxil PC composition. (B) Top 10 proteins for abundance in decreasing order at the three registered time points. (C) Composition by functional class of the Doxil® PC over time. Figure reproduced with permission from Hadjidemetriou et al. (2016) with modifications.
Figure 3(A,B) Size and zeta potential of NPs coated with amino-polyethylene glycol (PEG), carboxy-PEG, both (zwitterionic), or with methoxy-PEG. (C) Protein amount per NP surface among differently coated NPs. (D) Normalized FRET ratio used to quantify Dil leakage from different NP formulations over time during incubation with FCS. (E) Quantification of fluorescence on agarose gel in which amino-PEG NPs were run after incubation with increasing amounts of BSA or FCS. Figure reproduced with permission from Abstiens et al. (2019) with modifications. *p < 0.05.
Figure 4Schematic representation of the differential immunoglobulin-binding capabilities of liposomes and leukosomes. Figure reproduced with permission from Corbo et al. (2017b). Copyright (2017) American Chemical Society.