3.8 Proceedings Paper

Determining the Size and Concentration Dependence of Gold Nanoparticles in Vitro Cytotoxicity (IC50) Test using WST-1 Assay

Journal

Publisher

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.4915189

Keywords

AuNPs; cytotoxicity; IC50; MCF-7 cell lines; WST-1 assays

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) received a great deal of attention for biomedical applications, especially in diagnostic imaging and therapeutics. Even though AuNPs have potential benefits in biomedical applications, the impact of AuNPs on human and environmental health still remains unclear. The use of AuNPs which is a high-atomic-number materials, provide advantages in terms of radiation dose enhancement. However, before this can become a clinical reality, cytotoxicity of the AuNPs has to be carefully evaluated. Cytotoxicity test is a rapid, standardized test that is very sensitive to determine whether the nanoparticles produced are harmful or benign on cellular components. In this work the size and concentration dependence of AuNPs cytotoxicity in breast cancer cell lines (MCF-7) are tested by using WST-1 assay. The sizes of AuNPs tested were 13 nm, 50 nm, and 70 nm. The cells were seeded in the 96-well plate and were treated with different concentrations of AuNPs by serial dilution for each size of AuNPs. The high concentration of AuNPs exhibit lower cell viability compared to low concentration of AuNPs. We quantified the toxicity of AuNPs in MCF-7 cell lines by determining the IC50 values in WST-1 assays. The IC50 values (inhibitory concentrations that effected 50% growth inhibition) of 50 nm AuNPs is lower than 13 nm and 70 nm AuNPs. Mean that, 50nm AuNPs are more toxic to the MCF-7 cells compared to smaller and larger sizes AuNPs. The presented results clearly indicate that the cytotoxicity of AuNPs depend not only on the concentration, but also the size of the nanoparticles.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available