4.6 Article

Fluorine-containing graphene quantum dots with a high singlet oxygen generation applied for photodynamic therapy

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY B
卷 8, 期 13, 页码 2598-2606

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c9tb02529d

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51772001]
  2. Key Laboratory of Structure and Functional Regulation of Hybrid Materials (Anhui University), Ministry of Education, Hefei, P. R. China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently, graphene quantum dots (GQDs) have been extensively studied in biomedical areas such as bio-imaging, bio-sensing and photothermal therapy due to their superior optical and physiochemical properties compared to traditional organic biomarkers. Application of GQDs in photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been explored since 2014, but currently the main challenges are inadequate singlet oxygen (O-1(2)) quantum yield (QY), poor solubility and biocompatibility. Herein, we report on the synthesis of a new class of fluorine-containing GQDs (F-GQDs) by an oxidative cutting method using fluorinated graphite as the raw material. The as-synthesized F-GQD sample demonstrates an average particle size of 2.1 nm with a fluorine doping content of 1.43%. The F-GQDs have a better water solubility and biocompatibility than the GQDs, and emit strong green fluorescence at 365 nm excitation with a relative fluorescence QY of 13.72%. Moreover, the fluorescence imaging effect as well as photodynamic activity was successfully tested in both an in vitro HepG2 cell line model and a 3D multicellular spheroid model, the latter of which mimics the tumour microenvironment. Further studies using UV-visible spectroscopy to monitor the degradation of water-soluble 9,10-anthracenediyl-bis(methylene)dimalonic acid (ABDA) demonstrate that the F-GQD sample generates O-1(2) efficiently (QY = 0.49) under visible light irradiation. Compared to non-fluorinated GQDs, the as-reported F-GQDs appear to be a more promising photosensitizer for image-guided PDT.

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