Inter-laboratory comparison of nanoparticle size measurements using dynamic light scattering and differential centrifugal sedimentation

Nanoparticle in vitro toxicity studies often report contradictory results with one main reason being insufficient material characterization. In particular the characterization of nanoparticles in biological media remains challenging. Our aim was to provide robust protocols for two of the most commonly applied techniques for particle sizing, i.e. dynamic light scattering (DLS) and differential centrifugal sedimentation (DCS) that should be readily applicable also for users not specialized in nanoparticle physico-chemical characterization. A large number of participants (40, although not all participated in all rounds) were recruited for a series of inter-laboratory comparison (ILC) studies covering many different instrument types, commercial and custom-built, as another possible source of variation. ILCs were organized in a consecutive manner starting with dispersions in water employing well-characterized near-spherical silica nanoparticles (nominal 19 nm and 100 nm diameter) and two types of functionalized spherical polystyrene nanoparticles (nominal 50 nm diameter). At first each laboratory used their in-house established procedures. In particular for the 19 nm silica particles, the reproducibility of the methods was unacceptably high (reported results were between 10 nm and 50 nm). When comparing the results of the first ILC round it was observed that the DCS methods performed significantly worse than the DLS methods, thus emphasizing the need for standard operating procedures (SOPs). SOPs have been developed by four expert laboratories but were tested for robustness by a larger number of independent users in a second ILC (11 for DLS and 4 for DCS). In a similar approach another SOP for complex biological fluids, i.e. cell culture medium containing serum was developed, again confirmed via an ILC with 8 participating laboratories. Our study confirms that well-established and fit-for-purpose SOPs are indispensable for obtaining reliable and comparable particle size data. Our results also show that these SOPs must be optimized with respect to the intended measurement system (e.g. particle size technique, type of dispersant) and that they must be sufficiently detailed (e.g. avoiding ambiguity regarding measurand definition, etc.). SOPs may be developed by a small number of expert laboratories but for their widespread applicability they need to be verified by a larger number of laboratories.

[1]  G. Phillies Contribution of nonhydrodynamic interactions to the concentration dependence of the friction factor of the mutual diffusion coefficient , 1981 .

[2]  Iseult Lynch,et al.  What the cell "sees" in bionanoscience. , 2010, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[3]  Paolo A Netti,et al.  Transport across the cell-membrane dictates nanoparticle fate and toxicity: a new paradigm in nanotoxicology. , 2014, Nanoscale.

[4]  Philip Demokritou,et al.  Estimating the effective density of engineered nanomaterials for in vitro dosimetry , 2014, Nature Communications.

[5]  D. Lison,et al.  Development of a PIXE analysis method for the determination of the biopersistence of SiC and TiC nanoparticles in rat lungs , 2012, Nanotoxicology.

[6]  Jeremy C Simpson,et al.  Time resolved study of cell death mechanisms induced by amine-modified polystyrene nanoparticles. , 2013, Nanoscale.

[7]  O. Toussaint,et al.  Physicochemical and toxicological evaluation of silica nanoparticles suitable for food and consumer products collected by following the EC recommendation , 2015, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry.

[8]  Matt Trau,et al.  A comparative study of submicron particle sizing platforms: accuracy, precision and resolution analysis of polydisperse particle size distributions. , 2013, Journal of colloid and interface science.

[9]  Philip M. Kelly,et al.  Transferrin-functionalized nanoparticles lose their targeting capabilities when a biomolecule corona adsorbs on the surface. , 2013, Nature nanotechnology.

[10]  C. Minelli,et al.  Improved Metrological Traceability of Particle Size Values Measured with Line-Start Incremental Centrifugal Liquid Sedimentation. , 2017, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[11]  Wolfgang J Parak,et al.  Quantitative Particle-Cell Interaction: Some Basic Physicochemical Pitfalls. , 2017, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[12]  M. Wiemann,et al.  Interlaboratory comparison of size measurements on nanoparticles using nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) , 2013, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[13]  H. Emons,et al.  Challenges in the size analysis of a silica nanoparticle mixture as candidate certified reference material , 2016, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[14]  Werner Österle,et al.  Characterisation of silica nanoparticles prior to in vitro studies: from primary particles to agglomerates , 2011 .

[15]  P. Netti,et al.  Effect of silica nanoparticles with variable size and surface functionalization on human endothelial cell viability and angiogenic activity , 2014, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[16]  A. Galeone,et al.  Negligible particle-specific toxicity mechanism of silver nanoparticles: the role of Ag+ ion release in the cytosol. , 2015, Nanomedicine : nanotechnology, biology, and medicine.

[17]  Warren C W Chan,et al.  Understanding and controlling the interaction of nanomaterials with proteins in a physiological environment. , 2012, Chemical Society reviews.

[18]  Fengjuan Wang,et al.  The biomolecular corona is retained during nanoparticle uptake and protects the cells from the damage induced by cationic nanoparticles until degraded in the lysosomes. , 2013, Nanomedicine : nanotechnology, biology, and medicine.

[19]  Wolfgang J Parak,et al.  A quantitative fluorescence study of protein monolayer formation on colloidal nanoparticles. , 2009, Nature nanotechnology.

[20]  F. Rossi,et al.  Critical experimental evaluation of key methods to detect, size and quantify nanoparticulate silver. , 2014, Analytical chemistry.

[21]  R. Zhou,et al.  Binding of blood proteins to carbon nanotubes reduces cytotoxicity , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  C. Fan,et al.  Protein corona-mediated mitigation of cytotoxicity of graphene oxide. , 2011, ACS nano.

[23]  Craig A. Poland,et al.  Asbestos, carbon nanotubes and the pleural mesothelium: a review of the hypothesis regarding the role of long fibre retention in the parietal pleura, inflammation and mesothelioma , 2010, Particle and Fibre Toxicology.

[24]  Simon R. Cherry,et al.  A Smart and Versatile Theranostic Nanomedicine Platform based on Nanoporphyrin , 2014, Nature Communications.

[25]  Christoffer Åberg,et al.  Mapping protein binding sites on the biomolecular corona of nanoparticles. , 2015, Nature nanotechnology.

[26]  Molly M. Stevens,et al.  Emerging techniques for submicrometer particle sizing applied to Stöber silica. , 2012, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[27]  Tian Xia,et al.  Processing pathway dependence of amorphous silica nanoparticle toxicity: colloidal vs pyrolytic. , 2012, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[28]  B. Chithrani,et al.  Applications of nanoparticles in nanomedicine. , 2014, Journal of biomedical nanotechnology.

[29]  Caterina Minelli,et al.  A systematic comparison of different techniques to determine the zeta potential of silica nanoparticles in biological medium , 2015 .

[30]  Qing Huang,et al.  Effects of serum proteins on intracellular uptake and cytotoxicity of carbon nanoparticles , 2009 .

[31]  Kenneth A. Dawson,et al.  High Content Analysis Provides Mechanistic Insights on the Pathways of Toxicity Induced by Amine-Modified Polystyrene Nanoparticles , 2014, PloS one.

[32]  Andrée Lamberty,et al.  A new certified reference material for size analysis of nanoparticles , 2012, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[33]  R. Baggs,et al.  Correlation between cadmium-induced pulmonary carcinogenicity, metallothionein expression, and inflammatory processes: a species comparison. , 1994, Environmental health perspectives.

[34]  Stefan Tenzer,et al.  Rapid formation of plasma protein corona critically affects nanoparticle pathophysiology. , 2013, Nature nanotechnology.

[35]  Iseult Lynch,et al.  Physical-chemical aspects of protein corona: relevance to in vitro and in vivo biological impacts of nanoparticles. , 2011, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[36]  K. Dawson,et al.  Time and space resolved uptake study of silica nanoparticles by human cells. , 2011, Molecular bioSystems.

[37]  Younan Xia,et al.  The effect of sedimentation and diffusion on cellular uptake of gold nanoparticles. , 2011, Nature nanotechnology.

[38]  Sara Linse,et al.  Understanding the nanoparticle–protein corona using methods to quantify exchange rates and affinities of proteins for nanoparticles , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[39]  F. Stellacci,et al.  A general mechanism for intracellular toxicity of metal-containing nanoparticles† †Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c4nr01234h Click here for additional data file. , 2014, Nanoscale.

[40]  T. Xia,et al.  Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano-bio interface. , 2009, Nature materials.

[41]  Kenneth A Dawson,et al.  Suppression of nanoparticle cytotoxicity approaching in vivo serum concentrations: limitations of in vitro testing for nanosafety. , 2014, Nanoscale.

[42]  Kenneth A. Dawson,et al.  Effects of the presence or absence of a protein corona on silica nanoparticle uptake and impact on cells. , 2012, ACS nano.

[43]  B. Berne,et al.  Dynamic Light Scattering: With Applications to Chemistry, Biology, and Physics , 1976 .

[44]  Marco P Monopoli,et al.  Biomolecular coronas provide the biological identity of nanosized materials. , 2012, Nature nanotechnology.

[45]  Roberto Cingolani,et al.  Effects of cell culture media on the dynamic formation of protein-nanoparticle complexes and influence on the cellular response. , 2010, ACS nano.

[46]  Andrée Lamberty,et al.  Interlaboratory comparison for the measurement of particle size and zeta potential of silica nanoparticles in an aqueous suspension , 2011 .

[47]  G. Roebben,et al.  Interlaboratory comparison of size and surface charge measurements on nanoparticles prior to biological impact assessment , 2011 .