4.3 Article

Shell matters: Magnetic targeting of SPIONs and in vitro effects on endothelial and monocytic cell function

期刊

CLINICAL HEMORHEOLOGY AND MICROCIRCULATION
卷 61, 期 2, 页码 259-275

出版社

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/CH-151998

关键词

Atherosclerosis; magnetic nanoparticles; SPION uptake; endothelial-monocytic cell interactions; endothelial migration; monocytic cell chemotaxis; live-cell analysis

资金

  1. DFG [CI 162/2-1]
  2. EU (NanoAthero project) [FP7-NMP-2012-LARGE-6-309820]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) are versatile and easily functionalized agents with high potential for diagnostic and therapeutic intravascular applications. In this study, we analyzed the responses of endothelial (ECs) and monocytic cells to three different types of SPIONs, in order to assess the influence of physico-chemical properties on the biological reactions to SPIONs. The following formulations were used: (1) Lauric acid-coated and BSA-stabilized SPION-1,(2) Lauric acid/BSA-coated SPION-2 and (3) dextran-coated SPION-3. SPION-1 were strongly internalized by ECs and reduced their viability in static conditions. Additionally, they had a dose-dependent inhibitory effect on monocytic cell chemotaxis to MCP-1, but did not affect monocytic cell recruitment by ECs. SPION-2 uptake was less pronounced, both in ECs and monocytic cells, and these particles were better tolerated by the vascular cells. Not being internalized by endothelial or monocytic cells, SPION-3 did not induce relevant effects on cell viability, motility or endothelial-monocytic cell interactions. Taken together, localized accumulation of circulating SPION under physiologic-like flow conditions and their cellular uptake depends on the physicochemical characteristics. Our findings suggest that SPION-2 are suitable for magnetic targeting of atherosclerotic plaques. Due to their excellent biocompatibility and low internalization, SPION-3 may represent a suitable imaging agent for intravascular applications.

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

4.3
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