4.7 Article

The effect of nanoparticle size on the probability to cross the blood-brain barrier: an in-vitro endothelial cell model

Journal

JOURNAL OF NANOBIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12951-015-0075-7

Keywords

Blood-brain Barrier; Gold Nanoparticles; Barbiturate; bEnd.3 cells; Nanoparticle size

Funding

  1. Israel Cancer Research Fund (ICRF)
  2. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. under the Israeli National Network of Excellence in Neuroscience (NNE)
  3. Christians for Israel Chair in Medical Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: During the last decade nanoparticles have gained attention as promising drug delivery agents that can transport through the blood brain barrier. Recently, several studies have demonstrated that specifically targeted nanoparticles which carry a large payload of therapeutic agents can effectively enhance therapeutic agent delivery to the brain. However, it is difficult to draw definite design principles across these studies, owing to the differences in material, size, shape and targeting agents of the nanoparticles. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to develop general design principles that link the size of the nanoparticle with the probability to cross the blood brain barrier. Specifically, we investigate the effect of the nanoparticle size on the probability of barbiturate coated GNPs to cross the blood brain barrier by using bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells as an in vitro blood brain barrier model. Results: The results show that GNPs of size 70 nm are optimal for the maximum amount of gold within the brain cells, and that 20 nm GNPs are the optimal size for maximum free surface area. Conclusions: These findings can help understand the effect of particle size on the ability to cross the blood brain barrier through the endothelial cell model, and design nanoparticles for brain imaging/therapy contrast agents.

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