4.7 Article

Macrophage scavenger receptor A mediates the uptake of gold colloids by macrophages in vitro

Journal

NANOMEDICINE
Volume 6, Issue 7, Pages 1175-1188

Publisher

FUTURE MEDICINE LTD
DOI: 10.2217/NNM.11.41

Keywords

cellular uptake; gold nanoparticle; phagocytosis; pinocytosis; scavenger receptor

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute, NIH [N01-CO-12400, HHSN261200800001E]
  2. Leonardo da Vinci Program
  3. Xunta de Galicia (INBIOMED) [2009/63]
  4. Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia (Nanobiomed)
  5. SUDOE-FEDER [IMMUNONET-SOE1/P1/E014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: While numerous studies have reported on nanoparticle uptake by phagocytic cells, the mechanisms of this uptake are poorly understood. A metastudy of research focusing on biological particulate matter has postulated that nanoparticles cannot be phagocytosed and therefore must enter cells via pinocytosis. The purpose of this study was to identify the route(s) of uptake of gold nanoparticles in vitro and to determine if these route(s) depend on particle size. Materials & Methods: The parent RAW264.7 cell line and its derivatives, transduced with a virus carrying siRNA to macrophage scavenger receptor A, were used as model phagocytes. Citrate-stabilized gold colloids were used as model nanoparticles. We used chemical inhibitors known to interfere with specific routes of particulate uptake. We developed multifocal light microscopy methods including multifocal stack ana-lysis with NIH ImageJ software to analyze cell uptake. Results: Irrespective of size, gold nanoparticles are internalized by macrophages via multiple routes, including both phagocytosis and pinocytosis. If either route was blocked, the particles entered cells via the other route. Conclusion: Gold nanoparticles with hydrodynamic sizes below 100 nm can be phagocytosed. Phagocytosis of anionic gold colloids by RAW264.7 cells is mediated by macrophage scavenger receptor A.

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