4.2 Article

Toxicity Evaluation of Hydrophilic CdTe Quantum Dots and CdTe@SiO2 Nanoparticles in Mice

期刊

JOURNAL OF NANOSCIENCE AND NANOTECHNOLOGY
卷 12, 期 11, 页码 8287-8292

出版社

AMER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1166/jnn.2012.6667

关键词

Quantum Dots; CdTe@SiO2; Cytotoxicity; In Vivo

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council (CSC) Beijing, China
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China [60877024, 61177033, 21104009]
  3. Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education [20090092110015]
  4. Science Foundation for The Excellent Youth Scholars of Southeast University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quantum dots have drawn tremendous attention in the field of in vitro and small animal in vivo fluorescence imaging in the last decade. However, concerns over the cytotoxicity of their heavy metal constituents have limited their use in clinical applications. Here, we report our comparative studies on the toxicities of quantum dots (QDs) and silica coated CdTe nanoparticles (NPs) to mice after intravenous injection. The blood cells analysis showed significant increased level of white blood cells (WBCs) in groups treated with CdTe QDs as compared to the control while red blood cells (RBCs) and platelet counts were normal in treated as well as control groups. The concentration of biochemical markers of hepatic damage, alanine amino transferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) were in the normal range in all the groups. However, renal function analyses of mice showed significantly increased in the concentration of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine (CREA) in mice treated with CdTe QDs while remained within normal ranges in both the CdTe@SiO2 NPs and control group. The results of histopathology showed that the CdTe QDs caused mild nephrotoxicity while other organs were normal and no abnormalities were detected in control and CdTe@SiO2 treated group. These findings suggest that the nephrotoxicity could be minimized by silica coating which would be useful for many biomedical applications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据