4.7 Article

Solid lipid nanoparticles as intracellular drug transporters: An investigation of the uptake mechanism and pathway

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
Volume 430, Issue 1-2, Pages 216-227

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.03.032

Keywords

Solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN); Polysorbates; Flow cell cytometry; Fluorescence microscopy; Endocytosis; Human glioma cell lines

Funding

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal [SFRH/BD/37364/2007]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/37364/2007] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this work was to develop a systematic analysis of the cellular internalisation mechanism and pathway of solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN) internalisation. To evaluate if SLN show cell uptake and to understand the mechanism of internalisation, four human glioma cell lines (A172, U251, U373 and U87) and a human macrophage cell line (THP1) were used. For this purpose rhodamine 123 (R123) was loaded into SLN coated with polysorbate 60 and 80. Fluorescence microscopy and flow cell cytometry techniques were assessed to study internalisation of these systems within the cells. MTT studies were performed to evaluate the cytotoxicity of the R123-loaded SLN. To assess the SLN internalisation mechanism and intracellular pathway, excluding endocytosis mechanisms were applied. Our results revealed that R123-loaded SLN with mean size below 200 nm and slight negative surface charge (around -20 mV) have the ability to be internalised by gliomas in a higher amount than by macrophages. The mechanism of internalisation was found to be mainly through a clathrin-dependent endocytic pathway. In addition, the cytotoxicity of SLN was higher for gliomas than for macrophages. These results suggest that SLN can be a promising alternative in brain tumours treatment. (C) 2012 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available