Nanoparticles (NPs) assumed an important role in the area of drug delivery. Despite the number of studies including NPs are growing over the last years, their side effects on the immune system are often ignored or omitted. One of the most studied polymers in the nano based drug delivery system field is chitosan (Chit). In the scientific literature, although the physicochemical properties [molecular weight (MW) or deacetylation degree (DDA)] of the chitosan, endotoxin contamination and appropriate testing controls are rarely reported, they can strongly influence immunotoxicity results. The present work aimed to study the immunotoxicity of NPs produced with different DDA and MW Chit polymers and to benchmark it against the polymer itself. Chit NPs were prepared based on the ionic gelation of Chit with sodium tripolyphosphate (TPP). This method allowed the production of two different NPs: Chit 80% NPs (80% DDA) and Chit 93% NPs (93% DDA). In general, we found greater reduction in cell viability induced by Chit NPs than the respective Chit polymers when tested in vitro using human peripheral blood monocytes (PBMCs) or RAW 264.7 cell line. In addition, Chit 80% NPs were more cytotoxic for PBMCs, increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) production (above 156 µg/mL) in the RAW 264.7 cell line and interfered with the intrinsic pathway of coagulation (at 1 mg/mL) when compared to Chit 93% NPs. On the other hand, only Chit 93% NPs induced platelet aggregation (at 2 mg/mL). Although Chit NPs and Chit polymers did not stimulate the nitric oxide (NO) production in RAW 264.7 cells, they induced a decrease in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced NO production at all tested concentrations. None of Chit NPs and polymers caused hemolysis, nor induced PBMCs to secrete TNF-α and IL-6 cytokines. From the obtained results we concluded that the DDA of the Chit polymer and the size of Chit NPs influence the in vitro immunotoxicity results. As the NPs are more cytotoxic than the corresponding polymers, one should be careful in the extrapolation of trends from the polymer to the NPs, and in the comparisons among delivery systems prepared with different DDA chitosans.
Glucan (from Alcaligenes faecalis) is a polymer composed of β-1,3-linked glucose residues, and it has been addressed in different medical fields, namely in nanotechnology, as a vaccine or a drug delivery system. However, due to their small size, nanomaterials may present new risks and uncertainties. Thus, this work aims to describe the production of glucan nanoparticles (NPs) with two different sizes, and to evaluate the influence of the NPs size on immunotoxicity. Results showed that, immediately after production, glucan NPs presented average sizes of 129.7 ± 2.5 and 355.4 ± 41.0 nm. Glucan NPs of 130 nm presented greater ability to decrease human peripheral blood mononuclear cells and macrophage viability and to induce reactive oxygen species production than glucan NPs of 355 nm. Both NP sizes caused hemolysis and induced a higher metabolic activity in lymphocytes, although the concentration required to observe such effect was lower for the 130 nm glucan NPs. Regarding pro-inflammatory cytokines, only the larger glucan NPs (355 nm) were able to induce the secretion of IL-6 and TNF-α, probably due to their recognition by dectin-1. This higher immunomodulatory effect of the larger NPs was also observed in its ability to stimulate the production of nitric oxide (NO) and IL-1β. On the contrary, a small amount of Glu 130 NPs inhibited NO production. In conclusion, on the safe-by-design of glucan NPs, the size of the particles should be an important critical quality attribute to guarantee the safety and effectiveness of the nanomedicine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.