| Literature DB >> 32753867 |
Stefania D Iancu1,2, Camelia Albu1,3, Liviu Chiriac1,3,4, Remus Moldovan1,3, Andrei Stefancu1,2, Vlad Moisoiu1,2,3, Vasile Coman1,5, Laszlo Szabo1,2, Nicolae Leopold1,2, Zoltán Bálint1,2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents are pharmaceuticals that enable a better visualization of internal body structures. In this study, we present the synthesis, MRI signal enhancement capabilities, in vitro as well as in vivo cytotoxicity results of gold-coated iron oxide nanoparticles (Fe3O4@AuNPs) as potential contrast agents.Entities:
Keywords: D407 cells; MRI contrast agent; cytotoxicity; gold-coated iron oxide nanoparticles; histopathology; rats
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32753867 PMCID: PMC7355080 DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S253184
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Nanomedicine ISSN: 1176-9114
Figure 1(A) UV-Vis absorption spectra of Fe3O4NPs and Fe3O4@AuNPs after the first (Fe3O4@Au1) and second (Fe3O4@Au2) covering steps; (B) zeta potential of the final Fe3O4@AuNPs; (C) typical TEM image of Fe3O4@AuNPs; and (D) the corresponding elemental composition of O, Fe and Au measured via EDX.
The Fe and Au Content of Fe3O4NPs and Fe3O4@AuNPs as Measured by Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES)
| Fe (µg/mL) | Au (µg/mL) | |
|---|---|---|
| Fe3O4NPs | 5.436 | – |
| Fe3O4@AuNPs | 0.405 | 2.01 |
The Results of the Elemental Analysis of Fe3O4@AuNPs for Points Depicted in Figure 2, Calculated Using EDX (Values are mean±SD)
| Points | %Fe | %O | %Au |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 38.4±1.9 | 16.5±3.0 | 45.1±2.3 |
| 2 | 40.8±1.8 | 16.9±2.8 | 42.3±2.1 |
| 3 | 1.0±0.2 | 11.0±0.6 | 88.0±0.6 |
Figure 2The results of the D407 cell viability (WST-1 test) for different concentrations of Fe3O4@AuNPs.
Notes: Data are presented as mean ± SD. The Fe3O4@AuNP concentration used for cells treatment is presented in . *Statistically significant difference as compared to control (p<0.05).
Figure 3(A) MR images of the vials and (B) relaxometry curves for 4 dilutions of Fe3O4@AuNPs (1:50, 1:10, 1:6, 1:1) and for the NaCl control.
Figure 4In vivo MR images of contrast evolution of Fe3O4@Au NPs in rats (A) saline control, at (B) 0 h, (C) 2 h, (D) 6 h, (E) 24 h, (F) 7 days, and (G) 14 days post-injection.
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) and Contrast-to-Noise Ratio (CNR) of the MR Images of Rats Treated with Fe3O4@AuNPs at Different Time Intervals Post-Injection (Up to 14 Days)
| Time Since Injection | SNR | CNR |
|---|---|---|
| Control | 5.52 | 0.45 |
| 0 h | 6.91 | 2.60 |
| 2 h | 7.20 | 4.66 |
| 6 h | 3.90 | 1.54 |
| 24 h | 5.70 | 3.39 |
| 7 d | 5.12 | 1.85 |
| 14 d | 3.71 | 1.40 |
Notes: The signal intensity was measured on the slices presented in Figure 4A–G. The collecting points for each MR image are detailed in ).
Figure 5Overall evaluation of inflammatory response (A) and cellular damage (B) after injection of Fe3O4@AuNPs in rats.
Figure 6Histopathological evaluation of inflammatory response.
Figure 7Hyperspectral images of inflammatory response on the same, but unstained samples as used for Figure 6.
Note: Inset shows the corresponding spectra of the marked points (red for NP-treated, green and purple - control).