4.6 Article

Inflammatory Changes in Lung Tissues Associated with Altered Inflammation-Related MicroRNA Expression after Intravenous Administration of Gold Nanoparticles in Vivo

期刊

ACS BIOMATERIALS SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
卷 2, 期 11, 页码 1959-1967

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00358

关键词

ennanotoxicology; gold nanoparticleslammation; miRNAs

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF), Prime Minister's Office, Singapore, under its Campus for Research Excellence and Technological Enterprise (CREATE) programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Potential adverse effects of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are gaining attention due to their wide industrial, consumer, and biomedical applications. This may give rise to possible health risks from direct exposure to the NPs. Excessive inflammatory response is known to be one of the main effects induced by NPs. In this study, inflammatory and miRNA expression changes in lung tissues were evaluated in rats following intravenous administration of AuNPs. AuNPs (20 nm) at a mass concentration of 256 mu g/mL were intravenously injected into 6-8 week old male Wistar rats at single doses of 0.025, 0.05, 0.1, and 0.2 mg/kg and sacrificed at 1 week, 1 month, and 2 months, respectively. The biodistribution of AuNPs in the lungs of the rats was determined by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. There were no apparent changes observed in the body weight of the experimental rats. Histopathological examination revealed the presence of infiltrating lymphocytes in lung interstitial tissues and enhanced ILl alpha immunostaining in the lung tissues. Out of 84 rat microRNAs (miRNAs) analyzed, the expression of three miRNAs in rat lungs were dysregulated by more than 2-fold in the 0.1 and 0.2 mg/kg AuNP-treated rats 1 week after exposure. In particular, miR-327 was significantly downregulated in both groups of treated rats. Taken together, it would seem that miRNAs may regulate inflammatory changes in the lungs after exposure to AuNPs in vivo.

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

4.6
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