Protein-Nanoparticle Interactions

In the recent decade, the fabrication of nanoparticles and exploration of their properties have attracted the attention of all branches of science such as physicists, chemists, biologists, engineers, and even medical doctors. Interests for nanoparticles arise from the fact that their mechanical, chemical, electrical, optical, magnetic, electro-optical, and magneto-optical properties of these nanoparticles are completely different from their bulk properties and the predetermined differences are depended on the physicochemical properties of the nanoparticles. There are numerous areas where nanoparticles are of scientific and technological interest, specifically for medical community, where the synthetic and biologic worlds come together and lead to an important concern for design of safe nano-biomaterials. In this chapter, we review and discuss the major biomedical applications of nanoparticles. 1.1 Nanoscience in Medicine Nanomedicine is the application of nanosciences to health and exploits the physical, chemical, and biological properties of nanomaterials. The advent of nanoscience and nanotechnologies is shaping the face of industrial production and economics. As a matter of fact, nano-based products now include electronic components, paint, sports equipment, fabrics, sunscreens, and other cosmetics [1]. However, the most exciting nano-innovations reside in the conception of new medical products such as heart valves, drug-delivery systems, and imaging techniques [1], which will surely obliterate the long-established boundaries amidst chemistry, physics, and biology. It is anticipated that nanotechnology will have substantial economic impacts by encouraging productivity and competitiveness, converging different disciplines of science and technologies, and stimulating education and human development [2]. Experts predict market growth to hundreds of billions of dollars in the next decade. The worldwide market for products exploiting nanotechnology reached M. Rahman et al., Protein-Nanoparticle Interactions, Springer Series in Biophysics 15, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-37555-2_1, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 1 about US$254 billion in 2009, with nanomedical products accounting for a margin of US$72.8 billion in 2011 [3]. The US government has granted more than US$20 billion to the US National Nanotechnology Initiative for nanotechnology research and development activities, facilities, and workforce training since 2000 [4]. In 2011, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) have granted US $16 million in funding to seven new research projects on regenerative medicine and nanomedicine [5]. The European Framework Program [6] will invest about 600 million euros per year for nanotechnology research until 2013, with a supplementary, comparable sum provided by individual countries [7]. The economic landscape is thus being dramatically altered by nanotechnology. For instance, in 2004, worldwide corporations spent US$3.8 billion on research and development [8]. More importantly, there is a shift from the discovery stage to applications on nanotechnology, as demonstrated by the ratio increased corporate patent applications to scientific publications from 0.23 in 1999 to 1.2 in 2008 [2]. Additionally, analysts estimate that by 2014, nanotechnology will be responsible for 15 % of all manufactured merchandise, valuing approximately US$2.6 trillion and will create 10 million jobs globally [1]. Physicochemical properties of nanoparticles such as their small size, large surface area, and kinetics of adsorption make them particularly interesting as tools for molecular diagnostics, in vivo imaging, and improved treatment of disease. Metal oxides have been introduced in the early 1960s as ferromagnetic separation moieties and have brought about the use of nanoparticles for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the late 1970s. More recently, application of nanoparticles to medicine has expanded to cellular therapy [9], tissue repair [10], drug delivery [11], hyperthermia [12], (MRI) [13], magnetic resonance spectroscopy [14], magnetic separation [15], and as sensors for metabolites and other biomolecule [16]. Moreover, the unique magnetic properties and small size of magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) make them appealing for biomolecule labeling in bioassays, as well as MRI contrast agents [17]. Superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) can also be used as magnetic gradients for cell sorting in bioreactors [18], as well as absorbing material in radio-frequency hyperthermia. Moreover, the exceptional physical, mechanical, and electronic properties of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) allow them to be used as biosensors, probes, actuators, nanoelectronic devices, drug-delivery systems, and tissue-repair scaffolds within biomedical applications [19–21]. Recent research has focused on conjugating nanocarriers to specific ligands such as peptides, antibodies, and small molecules and subsequently directing them to sites of interest [22]. These techniques can prove to be appealing alternatives for current cancer and cardiovascular applications. Thus, a vast array of nanotechnologies can be applied to medical devices, materials, and processes that will affect the prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. However, the risk–benefit balance for these materials, with regard to their toxicological profile and any potential adverse pathogenic reactions from exposure, will ultimately define their clinical outcome. 2 1 The Biological Significance of “Nano”-interactions

[1]  M. Mahmoudi,et al.  Protein-nanoparticle interactions: opportunities and challenges. , 2011, Chemical reviews.

[2]  S. K. Sundaram,et al.  Adsorbed proteins influence the biological activity and molecular targeting of nanomaterials. , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[3]  M. Mahmoudi,et al.  Physiological temperature has a crucial role in amyloid β in the absence and presence of hydrophobic and hydrophilic nanoparticles. , 2013, ACS chemical neuroscience.

[4]  V. Torchilin,et al.  Which polymers can make nanoparticulate drug carriers long-circulating? , 1995 .

[5]  P. Kehoe,et al.  Interdisciplinary challenges and promising theranostic effects of nanoscience in Alzheimer's disease , 2012 .

[6]  J. Brash,et al.  Protein adsorption to polyethylene glycol modified liposomes from fibrinogen solution and from plasma. , 2001, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[7]  P. Cullis,et al.  β2-Glycoprotein I Is a Major Protein Associated with Very Rapidly Cleared Liposomes in Vivo, Suggesting a Significant Role in the Immune Clearance of "Non-self" Particles (*) , 1995, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[8]  Janos Szebeni,et al.  Complement activation-related pseudoallergy: a new class of drug-induced acute immune toxicity. , 2005, Toxicology.

[9]  Molly M. Stevens,et al.  Exploring and exploiting chemistry at the cell surface. , 2011, Nature chemistry.

[10]  R. Müller,et al.  Polysorbate-stabilized solid lipid nanoparticles as colloidal carriers for intravenous targeting of drugs to the brain: Comparison of plasma protein adsorption patterns , 2005, Journal of drug targeting.

[11]  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.

[12]  P. Couvreur,et al.  Analysis of plasma protein adsorption onto PEGylated nanoparticles by complementary methods: 2‐DE, CE and Protein Lab‐on‐chip® system , 2007, Electrophoresis.

[13]  S M Moghimi,et al.  Long-circulating and target-specific nanoparticles: theory to practice. , 2001, Pharmacological reviews.

[14]  J. Kamps,et al.  The role of apolipoprotein E in the elimination of liposomes from blood by hepatocytes in the mouse. , 2005, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[15]  James L. McGrath,et al.  The influence of protein adsorption on nanoparticle association with cultured endothelial cells. , 2009, Biomaterials.

[16]  Jan E. Schnitzer,et al.  Caveolae: mining little caves for new cancer targets , 2003, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[17]  E. Kosenko,et al.  Effects of hydrated forms of C60 fullerene on amyloid 1-peptide fibrillization in vitro and performance of the cognitive task. , 2007, Journal of nanoscience and nanotechnology.

[18]  Urs O. Häfeli,et al.  Crucial Ignored Parameters on Nanotoxicology: The Importance of Toxicity Assay Modifications and “Cell Vision” , 2012, PloS one.

[19]  Iseult Lynch,et al.  The evolution of the protein corona around nanoparticles: a test study. , 2011, ACS nano.

[20]  J. Lippincott-Schwartz,et al.  New roles for endosomes: from vesicular carriers to multi-purpose platforms , 2009, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[21]  Alexandra Kroll,et al.  Testing Metal‐Oxide Nanomaterials for Human Safety , 2010 .

[22]  Jianjun Cheng,et al.  Protein corona significantly reduces active targeting yield. , 2013, Chemical communications.

[23]  Morteza Mahmoudi,et al.  Toxicity evaluations of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles: cell "vision" versus physicochemical properties of nanoparticles. , 2011, ACS nano.

[24]  D. Simberg,et al.  Interactions of nanoparticles with plasma proteins: implication on clearance and toxicity of drug delivery systems , 2011, Expert opinion on drug delivery.

[25]  R. Müller,et al.  Protein adsorption patterns on poloxamer- and poloxamine-stabilized solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN). , 2005, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[26]  H. Iwata,et al.  Complement activation by polymers carrying hydroxyl groups. , 2009, ACS applied materials & interfaces.

[27]  M. Mahmoudi,et al.  Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles: promises for diagnosis and treatment of cancer. , 2011, International journal of molecular epidemiology and genetics.

[28]  Iseult Lynch,et al.  Designing the nanoparticle-biomolecule interface for "targeting and therapeutic delivery". , 2012, Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society.

[29]  Howard Riezman,et al.  Proteasome-Independent Functions of Ubiquitin in Endocytosis and Signaling , 2007, Science.

[30]  Morteza Mahmoudi,et al.  Cell "vision": complementary factor of protein corona in nanotoxicology. , 2012, Nanoscale.

[31]  The effects of aggregation and protein corona on the cellular internalization of iron oxide nanoparticles. , 2011, Biomaterials.

[32]  C. Hunt,et al.  Murine plasma fibronectin depletion after intravenous injection of liposomes , 1987 .

[33]  Parag Aggarwal,et al.  Nanoparticle interaction with plasma proteins as it relates to particle biodistribution, biocompatibility and therapeutic efficacy. , 2009, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[34]  R. Weissleder,et al.  Uptake of dextran‐coated monocrystalline iron oxides in tumor cells and macrophages , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

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

[36]  M. Foote Using nanotechnology to improve the characteristics of antineoplastic drugs: improved characteristics of nab-paclitaxel compared with solvent-based paclitaxel. , 2007, Biotechnology annual review.

[37]  R. Müller,et al.  'Stealth' corona-core nanoparticles surface modified by polyethylene glycol (PEG): influences of the corona (PEG chain length and surface density) and of the core composition on phagocytic uptake and plasma protein adsorption. , 2000, Colloids and surfaces. B, Biointerfaces.

[38]  M. Dobrovolskaia,et al.  Immunological properties of engineered nanomaterials , 2007, Nature Nanotechnology.

[39]  Morteza Mahmoudi,et al.  Assessing the in vitro and in vivo toxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles. , 2012, Chemical reviews.

[40]  M. Morandi,et al.  Nanoparticle‐induced platelet aggregation and vascular thrombosis , 2005, British journal of pharmacology.

[41]  Jayanth Panyam,et al.  Biodegradable nanoparticles for drug and gene delivery to cells and tissue. , 2003, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[42]  J. Eaton,et al.  Albumin-binding surfaces for implantable devices. , 1992, Journal of biomedical materials research.