Cited by 24

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

In situ formation of magnetopolymersomes via electroporation for MRI

Bain, Jennifer, Ruiz-Pérez, Lorena, Kennerley, Aneurin J., Muench, Stephen P., Thompson, Rebecca, Battaglia, Giuseppe, Staniland, Sarah S.·2015·Scientific Reports

Abstract

As the development of diagnostic/therapeutic (and combined: theranostic) nanomedicine grows, smart drug-delivery vehicles become ever more critical. Currently therapies consist of drugs tethered to, or encapsulated within nanoparticles or vesicles. There is growing interest in functionalising them with magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) to target the therapeutics by localising them using magnetic fields. An alternating magnetic field induces remote heating of the particles (hyperthermia) triggering drug release or cell death. Furthermore, MNPs are diagnostic MRI contrast agents. There is considerable interest in MNP embedded vehicles for nanomedicine, but their development is hindered by difficulties producing consistently monodisperse MNPs and their reliable loading into vesicles. Furthermore, it is highly advantageous to "trigger" MNP production and to tune the MNP's size and magnetic response. Here we present the first example of a tuneable, switchable magnetic delivery vehicle for nanomedical application. These are comprised of robust, tailored polymer vesicles (polymersomes) embedded with superparamagnetic magnetite MNPs (magnetopolymersomes) which show good MRI contrast (R2* = 148.8 s−1) and have a vacant core for loading of therapeutics. Critically, the magnetopolymersomes are produced by a pioneering nanoreactor method whereby electroporation triggers the in situ formation of MNPs within the vesicle membrane, offering a switchable, tuneable magnetic responsive theranostic delivery vehicle.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/srep14311

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Schematic of the proposed mechanism for MNP synthesis within polymersomes using electroporation. (a), which opens pores within the membrane at which point influx of iron ions occurs in parallel with efflux of NaOH (encapsulated) (b). (c) shows the in situ room temperature co-precipitation that then occurs at the interface within the membrane.
Figure 1 Schematic of the proposed mechanism for MNP synthesis within polymersomes using electroporation. (a), which opens pores within the membrane at which point influx of iron ions occurs in parallel with efflux of NaOH (encapsulated) (b). (c) shows the in situ room temperature co-precipitation that then occurs at the interface within the membrane.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Characterisation of the polymersomes. Comparison of two different preparation methods of the NaOH encapsulated polymersomes; Extruded and stirred. (A) DLS data sizing (B) the corresponding TEM grainsizing and (C) TEM image of an extruded polymersome sample (stained with 0.75% uranyl formate) (cryo-TEM image of stirred sample shown in Fig. 3A).
Figure 2 Characterisation of the polymersomes. Comparison of two different preparation methods of the NaOH encapsulated polymersomes; Extruded and stirred. (A) DLS data sizing (B) the corresponding TEM grainsizing and (C) TEM image of an extruded polymersome sample (stained with 0.75% uranyl formate) (cryo-TEM image of stirred sample shown in Fig. 3A).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Analysis of magnetopolymersomes. Single particle cryo-EM images of extruded polymersomes before (A) and after (B) electroporation, with the latter displaying a high density of iron particles around the membrane. (C) shows the same sample as in (B) as imaged by room temperature TEM.
Figure 3 Analysis of magnetopolymersomes. Single particle cryo-EM images of extruded polymersomes before (A) and after (B) electroporation, with the latter displaying a high density of iron particles around the membrane. (C) shows the same sample as in (B) as imaged by room temperature TEM.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Magnetopolymersomes show enhanced contrast in MRI imaging. 7 T magnetic resonance R2 relaxometry data (16 echoes, 9 slices, image shows 5th slice) and 7 T magnetic resonance R2* relaxometry data (12 echoes, 9 slices, image shows 5th slice). Both R2 and R2* relaxometry rates show significant differences between saline (dashes) and electroporated polymersomes (solid).
Figure 4 Magnetopolymersomes show enhanced contrast in MRI imaging. 7 T magnetic resonance R2 relaxometry data (16 echoes, 9 slices, image shows 5th slice) and 7 T magnetic resonance R2* relaxometry data (12 echoes, 9 slices, image shows 5th slice). Both R2 and R2* relaxometry rates show significant differences between saline (dashes) and electroporated polymersomes (solid).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Walde, P., Cosentino, K., Engel, H. & Stano, P. Giant vesicles: Preparations and applications. Chem Bio Chem 11, 848–865, 10.1002/cbic.201000010 (2010). · DOI
  2. Discher, B. M. et al. Polymersomes: Tough Vesicles Made from Diblock Copolymers. Science 284, 1143–1146, 10.1126/science.284.5417.1143 (1999). · DOI
  3. Discher, D. E. & Eisenberg, A. Polymer vesicles. Science 297, 967–973, 10.1126/science.1074972 (2002). · DOI
  4. Al-Jamal, W. T. & Kostarelos, K. Liposomes: From a Clinically Established Drug Delivery System to a Nanoparticle Platform for Theranostic Nanomedicine. Accounts Chem. Res. 44, 1094–1104, 10.1021/ar200105p (2011). · DOI
  5. Fang, C. et al. Fabrication of magnetic nanoparticles with controllable drug loading and release through a simple assembly approach. J. Control. Release 162, 233–241, 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.06.028 (2012). · DOI
  6. Janib, S. M., Moses, A. S. & MacKay, J. A. Imaging and drug delivery using theranostic nanoparticles. Adv. Drug Deliver. Rev. 62, 1052–1063, 10.1016/j.addr.2010.08.004 (2010). · DOI
  7. Qiu, D., An, X., Chen, Z. & Ma, X. Microstructure study of liposomes decorated by hydrophobic magnetic nanoparticles. Chem. Phys. Lipids 165, 563–570, 10.1016/j.chemphyslip.2012.06.004 (2012). · DOI
  8. Ren, T. et al. Multifunctional polymer vesicles for ultrasensitive magnetic resonance imaging and drug delivery. J. Mater. Chem. 22, 12329–12338, 10.1039/C2JM31891A (2012). · DOI
  9. Sanson, C. et al. Doxorubicin loaded magnetic polymersomes: theranostic nanocarriers for MR imaging and magneto-chemotherapy. ACS Nano 5, 1122–1140, 10.1021/nn102762f (2011). · DOI
  10. Pankhurst, Q. A., Connolly, J., Jones, S. & Dobson, J. Applications of magnetic nanoparticles in biomedicine. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 36, R167–R181, 10.1088/0022-3727/36/13/201 (2003). · DOI
  11. Drummond, D. C., Zignani, M. & Leroux, J. Current status of pH-sensitive liposomes in drug delivery. Prog. Lipid Res. 39, 409–460, 10.1016/S0163-7827(00)00011-4 (2000). · DOI
  12. Simões, S., Moreira, J. N., Fonseca, C., Düzgüneş, N. & Pedroso de Lima, M. C. On the formulation of pH-sensitive liposomes with long circulation times. Adv. Drug Deliver. Rev. 56, 947–965, 10.1016/j.addr.2003.10.038 (2004). · DOI
  13. Li, M. H. & Keller, P. Stimuli-responsive polymer vesicles. Soft Matter 5, 927–937, 10.1039/B815725A (2009). · DOI
  14. Schmaljohann, D. Thermo-and pH-responsive polymers in drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deliver. Rev. 58, 1655–1670 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Immordino, M. L., Dosio, F. & Cattel, L. Stealth liposomes: review of the basic science, rationale and clinical applications, existing and potential. Int. J. Nanomedicine 1, 297–315 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Dobson, J. Magnetic nanoparticles for drug delivery. Drug Develop. Res. 67, 55–60, 10.1002/ddr.20067 (2006). · DOI
  17. Dobson, J. Magnetic micro-and nano-particle-based targeting for drug and gene delivery. Nanomedicine 1, 31–37 (2006). · DOI
  18. Laurent, S. et al. Magnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles: Synthesis, Stabilization, Vectorization, Physicochemical Characterizations and Biological Applications. Chem. Rev. 108, 2064–2110, 10.1021/cr068445e (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Deok Kong, S. et al. Magnetic field activated lipid–polymer hybrid nanoparticles for stimuli-responsive drug release. Acta Biomater. 9, 5447–5452, 10.1016/j.actbio.2012.11.006 (2013). · DOI
  20. Escoffre, J. M. et al. What is (still not) known of the mechanism by which electroporation mediates gene transfer and expression in cells and tissues. Mol. Biotechnol. 41, 286–295, 10.1007/s12033-008-9121-0 (2009). · DOI
  21. Weaver, J. C. Electroporation: a general phenomenon for manipulating cells and tissues. J. Cell. Biochem. 51, 426–435, 10.1002/jcb.2400510407 (1993). · DOI
  22. Wang, L. et al. Encapsulation of Biomacromolecules within Polymersomes by Electroporation. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 51, 11122–11125, 10.1002/anie.201204169 (2012). · DOI
  23. Schoenbach, K. H., Beebe, S. J. & Buescher, E. S. Intracellular effect of ultrashort electrical pulses. Bioelectromagnetics 22, 440–448 (2001). · DOI
  24. Hillmyer, M. A. & Bates, F. S. Synthesis and Characterization of Model Polyalkane−Poly(ethylene oxide) Block Copolymers. Macromolecules 29, 6994–7002, 10.1021/ma960774t (1996). · DOI
  25. Blanazs, A., Armes, S. P. & Ryan, A. J. Self-Assembled Block Copolymer Aggregates: From Micelles to Vesicles and their Biological Applications. Macromol. Rapid Comm. 30, 267–277, 10.1002/marc.200800713 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  26. Lee, J. C. M. et al. Preparation, stability and in vitro performance of vesicles made with diblock copolymers. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 73, 135–145 (2001). · DOI
  27. Danino, D. Cryo-TEM of Molecular Assemblies. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 17, 316–329, 10.1016/j.cocis.2012.10.003 (2012). · DOI
  28. Peters, A. M. et al. T2* measurements in human brain at 1.5, 3 and 7 T. Magn. Reson. Imaging 25, 748–753, 10.1016/j.mri.2007.02.014 (2007). · DOI
  29. Mastronarde, D. N. Automated electron microscope tomography using robust prediction of specimen movements. J. Struct. Biol. 152, 36–51, 10.1016/j.jsb.2005.07.007 (2005). · DOI
  30. Kremer, J. R., Mastronarde, D. N. & McIntosh, J. R. Computer visualization of three-dimensional image data using IMOD. J. Struct. Biol. 116, 71–76, 10.1006/jsbi.1996.0013 (1996). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bain, J., Ruiz-Pérez, L., Kennerley, A. J., Muench, S. P., Thompson, R., Battaglia, G., & Staniland, S. S.
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2015-09-22
Volume
5
Issue
1
ISSN
2045-2322
Cited by
24
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review