4.5 Article

Multi-Modal Visualization of Uptake and Distribution of Iron Oxide Nanoparticles in Macrophages, Cancer Cells, and Xenograft Models

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL NANOTECHNOLOGY
卷 15, 期 8, 页码 1801-1811

出版社

AMER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1166/jbn.2019.2810

关键词

Multi-Modal Visualization; Iron Oxide Nanoparticles; Uptake; Distribution

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81572617, 81630101]
  2. Sichuan Science and Technology Program [2019JDRC0019, 2018SZ0009]
  3. 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs) have shown great potential in various biomedical applications. However, information on the interaction between IONPs and biological systems, especially the uptake and distribution of IONPs in cells and tissues, as well as the mechanism of biological action, is relatively limited. In the present study, multi-modal visualization methods, including confocal fluorescence microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, and fluorescence optical imaging, were utilized to unveil the uptake and distribution of IONPs in macrophages, cancer cells, and xenograft models. Our results demonstrated that uptake of IONPs in RAW264.7 macrophages and SKOV-3 cancer cells were dose- and cell type-dependent. Cellular uptake of IONPs was an energy-dependent process, and caveolae-mediated endocytosis was the main uptake pathway. All the IONPs were primarily present in endocytic compartments (e.g., endosomes, lysosomes) inside the cells. At 48 hours after intravenous injection of IONPs in SKOV-3 tumor bearing mice, most of the IONPs was distributed in the liver and spleen, with obvious uptake in the tumor, less but significant amount in the kidney and brain. Taken together, multi-modal visualization approaches in our study provide detailed information on the cellular uptake and tissue distribution of IONPs from multiple levels and perspectives.

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

4.5
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