4.8 Article

Bilirubin Nanoparticles as a Nanomedicine for Anti-inflammation Therapy

期刊

ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION
卷 55, 期 26, 页码 7460-7463

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/anie.201602525

关键词

bilirubin; inflammation therapy; nanomedicine; nanoparticles; self-assembled nanostructures

资金

  1. Global Research Laboratory grant through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning [2015045887]
  2. KAIST Future Systems Healthcare Project through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning
  3. Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning, Republic of Korea [kaisthealthcare42, KAISTHEALTHCARE42] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012K1A1A2045436] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the high potency of bilirubin as an endogenous anti-inflammatory compound, its clinical translation has been hampered because of its insolubility in water. Bilirubin-based nanoparticles that may overcome this critical issue are presented. A polyethylene glycol compound (PEG) was covalently attached to bilirubin, yielding PEGylated bilirubin (PEG-BR). The PEG-BR self-assembled into nanoscale particles with a size of approximately 110 nm, termed bilirubin nanoparticles (BRNPs). BRNPs are highly efficient hydrogen peroxide scavengers, thereby protecting cells from H2O2-induced cytotoxicity. In a murine model of ulcerative colitis, intravenous injection of BRNPs showed preferential accumulation of nanoparticles at the sites of inflammation and significantly inhibited the progression of acute inflammation in the colon. Taken together, BRNPs show potential for use as a therapeutic nanomedicine in various inflammatory diseases.

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