Pharmaceutical Research

, 36:44 | Cite as

In vitro Pharmacokinetic Cell Culture System that Simulates Physiologic Drug and Nanoparticle Exposure to Macrophages

  • Hilliard L. Kutscher
  • Gene D. Morse
  • Paras N. Prasad
  • Jessica L. ReynoldsEmail author
Research Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Nanomedicine for Infectious Diseases



An in vitro dynamic pharmacokinetic (PK) cell culture system was developed to more precisely simulate physiologic nanoparticle/drug exposure.


A dynamic PK cell culture system was developed to more closely reflect physiologic nanoparticle/drug concentrations that are changing with time. Macrophages were cultured in standard static and PK cell culture systems with rifampin (RIF; 5 μg/ml) or β-glucan, chitosan coated, poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid (GLU-CS-PLGA) nanoparticles (RIF equivalent 5 μg/ml) for 6 h. Intracellular RIF concentrations were measured by UPLC/MS. Antimicrobial activity against M. smegmatis was tested in both PK and static systems.


The dynamic PK cell culture system mimics a one-compartment elimination pharmacokinetic profile to properly mimic in vivo extracellular exposure. GLU-CS-PLGA nanoparticles increased intracellular RIF concentration by 37% compared to free drug in the dynamic cell culture system. GLU-CS-PLGA nanoparticles decreased M. smegmatis colony forming units compared to free drug in the dynamic cell culture system.


The PK cell culture system developed herein enables more precise simulation of human PK exposure (i.e., drug dosing and drug elimination curves) based on previously obtained PK parameters.

Key words

cell culture macrophage nanoparticles pharmacokinetic 



Colony forming units








Dynamic light scattering


1,3 β-glucan


Human immunodeficiency virus




Poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid


Poly(vinyl alcohol)








Transmission electron microscope


Ultra performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry


Acknowledgments and Disclosures

Research reported in this publication was supported in part by 1R01AI129649-01A1 (NIAID) (JR); 1R56AI114298 (NIAID) (JR); University of Rochester Center for AIDS Research (CFAR) grant P30AI078498 (NIAID) (HK); and through a supplement to the University at Buffalo Pharmacology Specialty Laboratory, funded by UM1AI068634, UM1AI068636, and UM1AI106701 (NIAID)(GDM). HK was supported by Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Institutional Research Training Grant 1T32GM099607 and UL1TR001412 (NCATS) (JR, HK). Research reported in this publication was supported in part by equipment donated by Waters Corporation. We acknowledge Dr. Martin Pavelka, University of Rochester, for the gernerous donation of M. Smegmatis. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

Supplementary material

11095_2019_2576_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.2 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1276 kb)


  1. 1.
    Ross KA, Brenza TM, Binnebose AM, Phanse Y, Kanthasamy AG, Gendelman HE, et al. Nano-enabled delivery of diverse payloads across complex biological barriers. J Control Release. 2015:S0168–3659.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zahoor A, Sharma S, Khuller GK. Inhalable alginate nanoparticles as antitubercular drug carriers against experimental tuberculosis. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005;26(4):298–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Semete B, Booysen L, Kalombo L, Ramalapa B, Hayeshi R, Swai HS. Effects of protein binding on the biodistribution of PEGylated PLGA nanoparticles post oral administration. Int J Pharm. 2012;424(1–2):115–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Semete B, Booysen L, Lemmer Y, Kalombo L, Katata L, Verschoor J, et al. In vivo evaluation of the biodistribution and safety of PLGA nanoparticles as drug delivery systems. Nanomedicine. 2010;6(5):662–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Edagwa BJ, Guo D, Puligujja P, Chen H, McMillan J, Liu X, et al. Long-acting antituberculous therapeutic nanoparticles target macrophage endosomes. FASEB J. 2014;28(12):5071–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kalluru R, Fenaroli F, Westmoreland D, Ulanova L, Maleki A, Roos N, et al. Poly(lactide-co-glycolide)-rifampicin nanoparticles efficiently clear Mycobacterium bovis BCG infection in macrophages and remain membrane-bound in phago-lysosomes. J Cell Sci. 2013;126(Pt 14):3043–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dube A, Reynolds J, Law WC, Maponga CC, Prasad PN, Morse GD. Multimodal nanoparticles that provide immunomodulation and intracellular drug delivery for infectious diseases. Nanomedicine. 2014;10(4):831–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parumasivam T, Leung S, Quan D, Triccas J, Britton W, Chan H. Rifapentine-loaded PLGA microparticles for tuberculosis inhaled therapy: preparation and in vitro aerosol characterization. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2016;88:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sarkar S, Leo BF, Carranza C, Chen S, Rivas-Santiago C, Porter AE, et al. Modulation of human macrophage responses to Mycobacterium tuberculosis by silver nanoparticles of different size and surface modification. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0143077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jaryal N, Kaur H. Plumbago auriculata leaf extract-mediated AgNPs and its activities as antioxidant, anti-TB and dye degrading agents. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2017:1–12.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jafari A, Mosavari N, Movahedzadeh F, Nodooshan SJ, Safarkar R, Moro R, et al. Bactericidal impact of Ag, ZnO and mixed AgZnO colloidal nanoparticles on H37Rv Mycobacterium tuberculosis phagocytized by THP-1 cell lines. Microb Pathog. 2017;110:335–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gopala Krishna P, Paduvarahalli Ananthaswamy P, Trivedi P, Chaturvedi V, Bhangi Mutta N, Sannaiah A, et al. Antitubercular activity of ZnO nanoparticles prepared by solution combustion synthesis using lemon juice as bio-fuel. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017;75:1026–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Owens Iii DE, Peppas NA. Opsonization, biodistribution, and pharmacokinetics of polymeric nanoparticles. Int J Pharm. 2006;307(1):93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choi SR, Britigan BE, Moran DM, Narayanasamy P. Gallium nanoparticles facilitate phagosome maturation and inhibit growth of virulent Mycobacterium tuberculosis in macrophages. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0177987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rawal T, Kremer L, Halloum I, Butani S. Dry-powder inhaler formulation of rifampicin: an improved targeted delivery system for alveolar tuberculosis. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2017;30:388–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rawal T, Parmar R, Tyagi RK, Butani S. Rifampicin loaded chitosan nanoparticle dry powder presents an improved therapeutic approach for alveolar tuberculosis. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces. 2017;154:321–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gaspar DP, Faria V, Goncalves LM, Taboada P, Remunan-Lopez C, Almeida AJ. Rifabutin-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles for inhaled antitubercular therapy: physicochemical and in vitro studies. Int J Pharm. 2016;497(1–2):199–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Clemens DL, Lee BY, Xue M, Thomas CR, Meng H, Ferris D, et al. Targeted intracellular delivery of antituberculosis drugs to Mycobacterium tuberculosis-infected macrophages via functionalized mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(5):2535–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Anisimova YV, Gelperina SI, Peloquin CA, Heifets LB. Nanoparticles as antituberculosis drugs carriers: effect on activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis in human monocyte-derived macrophages. J Nanopart Res. 2000;2:165–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhou TLZ, Puligujja P, Palandri D, Hilaire J, Arainga M, Smith N, et al. Optimizing the preparation and stability of decorated antiretroviral drug nanocrystals. Nanomedicine. 2018;13(8):871–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Abolhasani MH, Safavi M, Goodarzi MT, Kassaee SM, Azin M. Identification and anti-cancer activity in 2D and 3D cell culture evaluation of an Iranian isolated marine microalgae Picochlorum sp. RCC486. Daru. 2018;26:105–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bonnier F, Keating ME, Wrobel TP, Majzner K, Baranska M, Garcia-Munoz A, et al. Cell viability assessment using the Alamar blue assay: a comparison of 2D and 3D cell culture models. Toxicol in Vitro. 2015;29(1):124–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hess MW, Pfaller K, Ebner HL, Beer B, Hekl D, Seppi T. 3D versus 2D cell culture implications for electron microscopy. Methods Cell Biol. 2010;96:649–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Database National Center for Biotechnology Information. Rifampicin [Available from:]. Accessed 12/21/2018.
  25. 25.
    Horita Y, Alsultan A, Kwara A, Antwi S, Enimil A, Ortsin A, et al. Evaluation of the adequacy of WHO revised dosages of the first-line Antituberculosis drugs in children with tuberculosis using population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(9).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Prasad PN. Introduction to nanomedicine and nanobioengineering. New Jersey: Wiley; 2012.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Essaji Y, Yang Y, Albert CJ, Ford DA, Brown RJ. Hydrolysis products generated by lipoprotein lipase and endothelial lipase differentially impact THP-1 macrophage cell signalling pathways. Lipids. 2013;48(8):769–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kim SHCS, Lim YJ, Choi JA, Lee J, Go D, Song CH. Phagocytosis influences the intracellular survival of Mycobacterium smegmatis via the endoplasmic reticulum stress response. Cell Biosci. 2018;8(52).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    The Advantages of Hollow Fiber Bioreactors in Cell Culture [Available from:]. Accessed 12/21/2018.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hilliard L. Kutscher
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Gene D. Morse
    • 1
    • 4
  • Paras N. Prasad
    • 2
  • Jessica L. Reynolds
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Translational Pharmacology Research Core, NYS Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics and Life SciencesUniversity at BuffaloBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Institute for Lasers, Photonics and BiophotonicsUniversity at BuffaloBuffaloUSA
  3. 3.Department of AnesthesiologyUniversity at BuffaloBuffaloUSA
  4. 4.Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical SciencesUniversity at BuffaloBuffaloUSA
  5. 5.Department of Medicine, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical SciencesUniversity at BuffaloBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations