4.5 Article

Complex pBAE Nanoparticle Cell Trafficking: Tracking Both Position and Composition Using Super Resolution Microscopy

期刊

CHEMMEDCHEM
卷 17, 期 13, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cmdc.202100633

关键词

direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (dSTORM); poly(beta-aminoester) nanoparticles; nanoparticle stability; cell trafficking

资金

  1. MINECO/FEDER [RTI2018-094734B C22]
  2. Agencia de Gestio d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca (AGAUR) from the Generalitat de Catalunya [SGR 2017 1559]
  3. Horizon2020 [ERC-StG757397]
  4. NWO through the VIDI Grant [192.028]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of dSTORM technology to study the time stability and cell trafficking of OM-pBAE nanoparticles reveals that different oligopeptide combinations can affect the properties and performance of the nanoparticles. This study provides a strong basis for the future selection of specific pBAE nanoparticle compositions.
Nanomedicine emerged some decades ago with the hope to be the solution for most unmet medical needs. However, tracking materials at nanoscale is challenging to their reduced size, below the resolution limit of most conventional techniques. In this context, we propose the use of direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (dSTORM) to study time stability and cell trafficking after transfection of oligopeptide end-modified poly(beta-aminoester) (OM-pBAE) nanoparticles. We selected different combinations of cationic end oligopeptides (arginine - R; histidine - H; and lysine - K) among polymer libraries, since the oligopeptide combination demonstrated to be useful for different applications, such as vaccination and gene silencing. We demonstrate that their time evolution as well as their cell uptake and trafficking are dependent on the oligopeptide. This study opens the pave to broad mechanistic studies at nanoscale that could enable a rational selection of specific pBAE nanoparticles composition after determining their stability and cell trafficking.

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