4.1 Article

Transcellular Model for Neutral and Charged Nanoparticles Across an In Vitro Blood-Brain Barrier

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 11, 期 6, 页码 607-620

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13239-020-00496-6

关键词

Transcellular model; Blood– brain barrier; Nanoparticle; Charge; Permeability; bEnd3 (mouse brain microvascular endothelial cells)

资金

  1. NSF [CBET-0754158]
  2. NIH [CA 153325-01, 1UH3TR002151-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The therapeutic drug-loaded nanoparticles (NPs, 20-100 nm) have been widely used to treat brain disorders. To improve systemic brain delivery efficacy of these NPs, it is necessary to quantify their transport parameters across the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and understand the underlying transport mechanism. Methods Permeability of an in vitro BBB, bEnd3 (mouse brain microvascular endothelial cells) monolayer, to three neutral NPs with the representative diameters was measured using an automated fluorometer system. To elucidate the transport mechanism of the neutral NPs across the in vitro BBB, and that of positively charged NPs whose BBB permeability was measured in a previous study, we developed a novel transcellular model, which incorporates the charge of the in vitro BBB, the mechanical property of the cell membrane, the ion concentrations of the surrounding salt solution and the size and charge of the NPs. Results Our model indicates that the negative charge of the surface glycocalyx and basement membrane of the BBB plays a pivotal role in the transcelluar transport of NPs with diameter 20-100 nm across the BBB. The electrostatic force between the negative charge at the in vitro BBB and the positive charge at NPs greatly enhances NP permeability. The predictions from our transcellular model fit very well with the measured BBB permeability for both neutral and charged NPs. Conclusion Our model can be used to predict the optimal size and charge of the NPs and the optimal charge of the BBB for an optimal systemic drug delivery strategy to the brain.

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

4.1
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