4.7 Article

Comparisons of the biodistribution and toxicological examinations after repeated intravenous administration of silver and gold nanoparticles in mice

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-03015-1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [81560537]
  2. Training Plan for the Young Scientist (Jinggang Star) of Jiangxi Province [20142BCB23004]
  3. Major Program of Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province [20143ACB21003]
  4. Ganpo Talent 555 Engineering Project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nanoparticles (NPs) size, surface functionalization, and concentration were claimed to contribute to distribution and toxicity outcomes of NPs in vivo. However, intrinsic chemical compositions of NPs caused inconsistent biodistribution and toxic profiles which attracted little attention. In this study, silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) and gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) were used to determine the biodistribution, toxickinetic, and genotoxicity variances in murine animals. The results demonstrated AgNPs and AuNPs were primarily deposited in the mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS) such as the liver and spleen. In particular, AuNPs seemed to be prominently stored in the liver, whereas AgNPs preferentially accumulated in more organs such as the heart, lung, kidney, etc. Also, the circulation in the blood and fecal excretions showed higher AgNPs contents in comparison with the AuNPs. Measurements of the mouse body and organ mass, hematology and biochemistry evaluation, and histopathological examinations indicated slight toxic difference between the AgNPs and AuNPs over a period of two months. RT-qPCR data revealed that AgNPs induced greater changes in gene expression with relevance to oxidative stress, apoptosis, and ion transport. Our observations proved that the NPs chemical composition played a critical role in their in vivo biodistribution and toxicity.

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