4.0 Article

Quantification of gold nanoparticles in histologically thin tissue slices using TXRF

期刊

X-RAY SPECTROMETRY
卷 51, 期 3, 页码 271-278

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/xrs.3271

关键词

cancer; gold nanoparticles; quantification; tissue slices; total X-ray reflection fluorescence

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [PGSD3 - 519331 2018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The potential of using gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) in cancer applications is still actively researched. Total X-ray reflection fluorescence (TXRF) spectroscopy can effectively quantify the uptake of AuNPs in tissue samples, with nearly 100% accuracy, and with the use of a simulation toolkit to model tissue containing Au.
The promise of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) in cancer applications remains an active area of research. The assessment of tumoral uptake can provide valuable insights into their intended efficacy. Total X-ray reflection fluorescence (TXRF) spectroscopy offers low detection limits coupled with direct quantification through internal standardization. These features enable TXRF to measure uptake of AuNPs in the presence of organic matrix. In this work, we demonstrate TXRF's ability to directly quantify AuNP concentration in slices of tissue. Bovine liver was cut into 5 mu m thin slices, and 10 nm reference material AuNPs were deposited either above or below the tissue. The tissue slice was then spiked with a lanthanum (La) internal standard. In order to extend the investigation to homogenous samples, a TOPAS-based simulation toolkit was used to model Au-containing tissue. Additionally, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to examine the distribution of the Au and La on the tissue slices, revealing elemental uniformity on the tissue surface. The experimental and simulation results revealed nearly 100% quantification accuracy of AuNPs in all permutations of sample configuration-making TXRF a viable option for assessment of tumoral AuNP uptake with minimal sample preparation.

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

4.0
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