4.8 Article

Superior Penetration and Retention Behavior of 50 nm Gold Nanoparticles in Tumors

Journal

CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 73, Issue 1, Pages 319-330

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-2071

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Chinese Natural Science Foundation project [30970784, 81171455, 31100720]
  2. National Key Basic Research Program of China [2009CB930200]
  3. Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) Hundred Talents Program [07165111ZX]
  4. CAS Knowledge Innovation Program
  5. Tianjin Research Program of Applied Basic & Cutting-edge Technologies [09JCYBJC27200]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nanoparticles offer potential as drug delivery systems for chemotherapeutics based on certain advantages of molecular drugs. In this study, we report that particle size exerts great influence on the penetration and retention behavior of nanoparticles entering tumors. On comparing gold-coated Au@tiopronin nanoparticles that were prepared with identical coating and surface properties, we found that 50 nanoparticles were more effective in all in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo assays conducted using MCF-7 breast cells as a model system. Beyond superior penetration in cultured cell monolayers, 50 nm Au@tiopronin nanoparticles also penetrated more deeply into tumor spheroids ex vivo and accumulated more effectively in tumor xenografts in vivo after a single intravenous dose. In contrast, larger gold-coated nanoparticles were primarily localized in the periphery of the tumor spheroid and around blood vessels, hindering deep penetration into tumors. We found multicellular spheroids to offer a simple ex vivo tumor model to simulate tumor tissue for screening the nanoparticle penetration behavior. Taken together, our findings define an optimal smaller size for nanoparticles that maximizes their effective accumulation in tumor tissue. Cancer Res; 73(1); 319-30. (C)2012 AACR.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available