4.8 Article

Probing nanoparticle translocation across the permeable endothelium in experimental atherosclerosis

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1322725111

关键词

nanotechnology; cardiovascular disease; microfluidics; noninvasive imaging

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH)-National Cancer Institute shared resources [R24 CA095823-04]
  2. National Science Foundation Major Research Instrumentation [DBI-9724504]
  3. NIH shared instrumentation [1 S10 RR0 9145-01]
  4. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  5. NIH [HHSN268201000045C, R01 EB009638, R01CA155432]
  6. National Cancer Institute [CA151884]
  7. David H. Koch Prostate Cancer Foundation Award in Nanotherapeutics
  8. European Framework Program 7
  9. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research ZonMW Vidi [91713324]
  10. Dutch Network for Nanotechnology NanoNext NL
  11. International Atherosclerosis Society and the Foundation De Drie Lichten in the Netherlands

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Therapeutic and diagnostic nanomaterials are being intensely studied for several diseases, including cancer and atherosclerosis. However, the exact mechanism by which nanomedicines accumulate at targeted sites remains a topic of investigation, especially in the context of atherosclerotic disease. Models to accurately predict transvascular permeation of nanomedicines are needed to aid in design optimization. Here we show that an endothelialized microchip with controllable permeability can be used to probe nanoparticle translocation across an endothelial cell layer. To validate our in vitro model, we studied nanoparticle translocation in an in vivo rabbit model of atherosclerosis using a variety of preclinical and clinical imaging methods. Our results reveal that the translocation of lipid-polymer hybrid nanoparticles across the atherosclerotic endothelium is dependent on microvascular permeability. These results were mimicked with our microfluidic chip, demonstrating the potential utility of the model system.

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

4.8
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