Physiology, pathology and the biomolecular corona: the confounding factors in nanomedicine design

Liu, Kai; Salvati, Anna; Sabirsh, Alan

doi:10.1039/d1nr08101b

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 220 publications

(197 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[19][20][21][22][23] Consequently, understanding formation of the protein corona on NPs and characterizing its composition are major challenges for suc-cessful development of nanomedicine. [24][25][26] This task is especially challenging as many factors influence the protein corona formation, in particular the physicochemical properties of NPs, 27,28 such as chemical composition, 29 size, 30,31 morphology, 32 hydrophobicity, 33 chirality, 34 and surface charge. The latter has been extensively studied and there is broad consensus in the literature on the importance of electrostatic forces in protein corona formation, with positively charged NPs consistently attracting higher quantities of proteins than negatively charged ones, as reported for a range of nanomaterials such as polymeric, 35 inorganic, 36 gold, 37 or lipidbased 38 NPs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface charge influences protein corona, cell uptake and biological effects of carbon dots

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface charge influences protein corona, cell uptake and biological effects of carbon dots

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BC is rapidly emerging as a critical diagnostic and therapeutic tool in nanomedicine as it mediates the interaction between living systems and nanomaterials. [ 27 ] To provide the scientific community with robust and reproducible results, efforts are aimed at standardizing experimental protocols. In this study, we demonstrate that when two independent operators execute the same experimental protocol in different laboratories highly reproducible results are obtained that are not affected by the use of automatic systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproducibility of Biomolecular Corona Experiments: A Primer for Reliable Results

Giulimondi

Quagliarini

Digiacomo

et al. 2022

Part & Part Syst Charact

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

disease-specific [9] and evolves over time. [10] The analysis of corona composition comparing healthy subjects and patients led to accurate diagnostic results in pancreatic cancer [11][12][13] and glioblastoma research. [14] From a methodological point of view, BC isolation and extraction are generally obtained by incubating NPs at a controlled temperature and then purifying samples by washing losingly attached proteins via different methods [15] before proteomics analysis. However, BC composition can be affected by methodologies used for sample preparation, storage, and analysis, leading to possible misinterpretations. In an effort of standardization, a series of recommendations have been recently postulated for BC scientists, to improve the accuracy and robustness of BC results. In 2019, the checklist for experimental design and reporting guidelines to outline Minimum Information about Nanomaterial Biocorona Experiments (MINBE) has been proposed. [16] MINBE consists of four main questions concerning exposure to biofluids, isolation, separation, and analysis and aims at correctly reporting experimental conditions to compare different study results. Furthermore, in a recent paper, it has been highlighted how analysis of BC should foresee proper characterization of nanoparticle polydispersity, rigorous authentication of biological fluids, accurate control samples, and contamination control. [17] Despite this, there are still open questions concerning the appropriate methodology for BC sample preparation. First, it is not clear how operator bias is relevant to results obtained in different laboratories and/ or in comparison with automated analysis systems. Second, protocol step criticalities consist of i) the number of washes before BC analysis, ii) the order of incubation steps, and iii) the concentration of the biological fluid. This work focuses on the assessment of the influence of these parameters on BC results. To this aim, three NP types, i.e., gold NPs, graphene oxide (GO) nanoflakes, and 1,2-dioleoyl-3-trimethylammonium-propane (DOTAP) cationic liposomes (CLs) have been incubated with HP to determine the effect of protocol steps in BC results. Initially, we compared results obtained from the same samples processed by operators working in different laboratories and verified whether operator variability could be affected by using automatic tools. Then, the protocol has been varied by using different plasma concentrations, diluting samples in various stages, and changing the number of washing steps before BC analysis. We conclude this work by appealing to researchers to

show abstract

“…This was a surprising result, because it is not immediately obvious why apolipoproteins would have significant affinity for synthetic moieties such as polystyrene-based NPs of varying spherical diameters and surface charges. Since the publication of this seminal work, several thorough studies have confirmed the binding of apolipoproteins to soft NPs that are commonly used in the clinic such as poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG)-ylated liposomes (∼5 mol % PEG) that form the shells of anticancer treatments such as Doxil. − Prominent apolipoproteins found on PEGylated liposomes include ApoAI, ApoAII, ApoB100, ApoCIII, and ApoE. There are variations in the amounts of these factors bound to each PEGylated liposome, but the overall postulate that apolipoproteins bind many types of NPs has been confirmed .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions of Apolipoproteins with Lipid-Based Nanoparticles

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serum proteins bind and form a dynamic protein corona around nanoparticles (NPs) that have been injected into the mammalian vasculature. Several fundamental studies have shown that apolipoproteins are prominent components of the NP corona. Since apolipoproteins control the distribution of lipoproteins, they may also control the distribution of NPs. Indeed, apolipoprotein affinity for NPs has been recently taken advantage of to deliver CRISPR reagents encapsulated in NPs to cells that express particular lipoprotein receptors. In this scenario, an apolipoprotein binds an NP and the resulting apolipoprotein-NP complex binds a cell that expresses the (apo)lipoprotein receptor. But the NP will be diverted from the target cell if it does not express the (apo)lipoprotein receptor. This may hamper NP treatment of diseases. Therefore, we must understand the kinetics of apolipoprotein-NP affinity and how apolipoprotein-NP interactions affect NP biodistribution. In this Perspective, we discuss the evolving topic of apolipoprotein-NP interactions, which is of great interest for all NP-based disease treatments. Many properties of apolipoprotein-NP complexes are yet to be determined and will have a significant impact on NP efficacy for many NP-based treatments in animal models and in the clinic.

show abstract

Physiology, pathology and the biomolecular corona: the confounding factors in nanomedicine design

Abstract: The biomolecular corona that forms on nanomedicines in different physiological and pathological environments confers a new biological identity. How the recipient biological system's state can potentially affect nanomedicine corona formation...

Cited by 14 publications

References 220 publications

Surface charge influences protein corona, cell uptake and biological effects of carbon dots

Surface charge influences protein corona, cell uptake and biological effects of carbon dots

Reproducibility of Biomolecular Corona Experiments: A Primer for Reliable Results

Interactions of Apolipoproteins with Lipid-Based Nanoparticles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About