Science China Life Sciences

, Volume 55, Issue 10, pp 843–861 | Cite as

Engineering imaging probes and molecular machines for nanomedicine

  • Sheng Tong
  • Thomas J. Cradick
  • Yan Ma
  • ZhiFei Dai
  • Gang Bao
Open Access
Review Special Topic

Abstract

Nanomedicine is an emerging field that integrates nanotechnology, biomolecular engineering, life sciences and medicine; it is expected to produce major breakthroughs in medical diagnostics and therapeutics. Due to the size-compatibility of nano-scale structures and devices with proteins and nucleic acids, the design, synthesis and application of nanoprobes, nanocarriers and nanomachines provide unprecedented opportunities for achieving a better control of biological processes, and drastic improvements in disease detection, therapy, and prevention. Recent advances in nanomedicine include the development of functional nanoparticle based molecular imaging probes, nano-structured materials as drug/gene carriers for in vivo delivery, and engineered molecular machines for treating single-gene disorders. This review focuses on the development of molecular imaging probes and engineered nucleases for nanomedicine, including quantum dot bioconjugates, quantum dot-fluorescent protein FRET probes, molecular beacons, magnetic and gold nanoparticle based imaging contrast agents, and the design and validation of zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs) and TAL effector nucleases (TALENs) for gene targeting. The challenges in translating nanomedicine approaches to clinical applications are discussed.

Keywords

nanomedicine imaging probe contrast agent drug delivery designer nuclease 

References

  1. 1.
    Wgner V, Dullaart A, Bock A K, et al. The emerging nanomedicine landscape. Nat Biotechnol, 2006, 24: 1211–1217Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nie S M, Yun X, Gloria J K, et al. Nanotechnology Applications in Cancer. Ann Rev Biomed Eng, 2007, 9: 257–288Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim B Y, Rutka J T, Chan W C. Nanomedicine. N Engl J Med, 2010, 363: 2434–2443PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith A M, Gao X, Nie S. Quantum dot nanocrystals for in vivo molecular and cellular imaging. Photochem Photobiol, 2004, 80: 377–385PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nitin N, Santangelo P J, Kim G, et al. Peptide-linked molecular beacons for efficient delivery and rapid mRNA detection in living cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 2004, 32: e58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nie S, Emory S R. Probing single molecules and single nanoparticles by surface-enhanced raman scattering. Science, 1997, 275: 1102–1106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chan W C, Nie S. Quantum dot bioconjugates for ultrasensitive nonisotopic detection. Science, 1998, 281: 2016–2018PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emory S R, Haskins W E, Nie S. Direct observation of size-dependent optical enhancement in single metal nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc, 1998, 120: 8009–8010Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Han M, Gao X, Su J Z, et al. Quantum-dot-tagged microbeads for multiplexed optical coding of biomolecules. Nat Biotechnol, 2001, 19: 631–635PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chan W C, Maxwell D J, Gao X, et al. Luminescent quantum dots for multiplexed biological detection and imaging. Curr Opin Biotechnol, 2002, 13: 40–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gao X, Chan W C, Nie S. Quantum-dot nanocrystals for ultrasensitive biological labeling and multicolor optical encoding. J Biomed Opt, 2002, 7: 532–537PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bailey R E, Nie S. Alloyed semiconductor quantum dots: tuning the optical properties without changing the particle size. J Am Chem Soc, 2003, 125: 7100–7106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gao X, Cui Y, Levenson R M, et al. In vivo cancer targeting and imaging with semiconductor quantum dots. Nat Biotechnol, 2004, 22: 969–976PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lidke D S, Nagy P, Heintzmann R, et al. Quantum dot ligands provide new insights into erbB/HER receptor-mediated signal transduction. Nat Biotechnol, 2004, 22: 198–203PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bruchez M, Moronne M, Gin P, et al. Semiconductor nanocrystals as fluorescent biological labels. Science, 1998, 281: 2013–2016PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Akerman M E, Chan W C, Laakkonen P, et al. Nanocrystal targeting in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2002, 99: 12617–12621PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dubertret B, Skourides P, Norris D J, et al. In vivo imaging of quantum dots encapsulated in phospholipid micelles. Science, 2002, 298: 1759–1762PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu X, Liu H, Liu J, et al. Immunofluorescent labeling of cancer marker Her2 and other cellular targets with semiconductor quantum dots. Nat Biotechnol, 2003, 21: 41–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jaiswal J K, Mattoussi H, Mauro J M, et al. Long-term multiple color imaging of live cells using quantum dot bioconjugates. Nat Biotechnol, 2003, 21: 47–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Larson D R, Zipfel W R, Williams R M, et al. Water-soluble quantum dots for multiphoton fluorescence imaging in vivo. Science, 2003, 300: 1434–1436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ishii D, Kinbara K, Ishida Y, et al. Chaperonin-mediated stabilization and ATP-triggered release of semiconductor nanoparticles. Nature, 2003, 423: 628–632PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Medintz I L, Clapp A R, Mattoussi H, et al. Self-assembled nanoscale biosensors based on quantum dot FRET donors. Nat Mater, 2003, 2: 630–638PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dahan M, Levi S, Luccardini C, et al. Diffusion dynamics of glycine receptors revealed by single-quantum dot tracking. Science, 2003, 302: 442–445PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Voura E B, Jaiswal J K, Mattoussi H, et al. Tracking metastatic tumor cell extravasation with quantum dot nanocrystals and fluorescence emission-scanning microscopy. Nat Med, 2004, 10: 993–998PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Garon E B, Marcu L, Luong Q, et al. Quantum dot labeling and tracking of human leukemic, bone marrow and cord blood cells. Leuk Res, 2007, 31: 643–651PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hama Y, Koyama Y, Urano Y, et al. Simultaneous two-color spectral fluorescence lymphangiography with near infrared quantum dots to map two lymphatic flows from the breast and the upper extremity. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2007, 103: 23–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chattopadhyay P K, Price D A, Harper T F, et al. Quantum dot semiconductor nanocrystals for immunophenotyping by polychromatic flow cytometry. Nat Med, 2006, 12: 972–977PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Howarth M, Takao K, Hayashi Y, et al. Targeting quantum dots to surface proteins in living cells with biotin ligase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2005, 102: 7583–7588PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bonasio R, Carman C V, Kim E, et al. Specific and covalent labeling of a membrane protein with organic fluorochromes and quantum dots. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2007, 104: 14753–14758PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chang E, Miller J S, Sun J, et al. Protease-activated quantum dot probes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2005, 334: 1317–1321PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xu C, Xing B, Rao J. A self-assembled quantum dot probe for detecting beta-lactamase activity. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2006, 344: 931–935PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Clapp A R, Medintz I L, Uyeda H T, et al. Quantum dot-based multiplexed fluorescence resonance energy transfer. J Am Chem Soc, 2005, 127: 18212–18221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yao H, Zhang Y, Xiao F, et al. Quantum dot/bioluminescence resonance energy transfer based highly sensitive detection of proteases. Angew Chem Int Ed, 2007, 46: 4346–4349Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Medintz I L, Clapp A R, Brunel F M, et al. Proteolytic activity monitored by fluorescence resonance energy transfer through quantum-dot-peptide conjugates. Nat Mater, 2006, 5: 581–589PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goldman E R, Anderson G P, Tran P T, et al. Conjugation of luminescent quantum dots with antibodies using an engineered adaptor protein to provide new reagents for fluoroimmunoassays. Anal Chem, 2002, 74: 841–847PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang Y A, Li J J, Chen H, et al. Stabilization of inorganic nanocrystals by organic dendrons. J Am Chem Soc, 2002, 124: 2293–2298PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chan W C W, Prendergast T L, Jain M, et al. One-step conjugation of biomolecules to luminescent nanocrystals. Proc SPIE, 2000, 3924: 2–9Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pathak S, Choi S K, Arnheim N, et al. Hydroxylated quantum dots as luminescent probes for in situ hybridization. J Am Chem Soc, 2001, 123: 4103–4104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mirkin C A, Letsinger R L, Mucic R C, et al. A DNA-based method for rationally assembling nanoparticles into macroscopic materials. Nature, 1996, 382: 607–609PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Willard D M, Carillo L L, Jung J, et al. CdSe-ZnS quantum dots as resonance energy transfer donors in a model protein-protein binding assay. Nano Let, 2001, 1: 469–474Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Goldman E R, Balighian E D, Mattoussi H, et al. Avidin: a natural bridge for quantum dot-antibody conjugates. J Am Chem Soc, 2002, 124: 6378–6382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rosenthal S J, Tomlinson I, Adkins E M, et al. Targeting cell surface receptors with ligand-conjugated nanocrystals. J Am Chem Soc, 2002, 124: 4586–4594PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dennis A M, Bao G. Quantum dot-fluorescent protein pairs as novel fluorescence resonance energy transfer probes. Nano Lett, 2008, 8: 1439–1445PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sapsford K E, Pons T, Medintz I L, et al. Biosensing with luminescent semiconductor quantum dots. Sensors-Basel, 2006, 6: 925–953Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Qu L, Peng X. Control of photoluminescence properties of CdSe nanocrystals in growth. J Am Chem Soc, 2002, 124: 2049–2055PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Striolo A, Ward J, Prausnitz J M, et al. Molecular weight, osmotic second virial coefficient, and extinction coefficient of colloidal CdSe nanocrystals. J Phys Chem B, 2002, 106: 5500–5505Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chan W C W, Maxwell D J, Gao X H, et al. Luminescent quantum dots for multiplexed biological detection and imaging. Curr Opin Biotech, 2002, 13: 40–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lakowicz J R. Principles of fluorescence spectroscopy. New York: Springer, 2006Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Clapp A R, Medintz I L, Mattoussi H. Forster resonance energy transfer investigations using quantum-dot fluorophores. Chem Phys Chem, 2006, 7: 47–57PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sapsford K E, Pons T, Medintz I L, et al. Kinetics of metal-affinity driven self-assembly between proteins or peptides and CdSe-ZnS quantum dots. J Phys Chem C, 2007, 111: 11528–11538Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Susumu K, Uyeda H T, Medintz I L, et al. Enhancing the stability and biological functionalities of quantum dots via compact multifunctional ligands. J Am Chem Soc, 2007, 129: 13987–13996PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Shaner N C, Campbell R E, Steinbach P A, et al. Improved monomeric red, orange and yellow fluorescent proteins derived from Discosoma sp. red fluorescent protein. Nat Biotechnol, 2004, 22: 1567–1572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Shaner N C, Steinbach P A, Tsien R Y. A guide to choosing fluorescent proteins. Nat Methods, 2005, 2: 905–909PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Busa W B, Nuccitelli R. Metabolic regulation via intracellular pH. Am J Physiol, 1984, 246: R409–R438PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tyagi S, Kramer F R. Molecular beacons: probes that fluoresce upon hybridization. Nat Biotechnol, 1996, 14: 303–308PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Tyagi S, Bratu D P, Kramer F R. Multicolor molecular beacons for allele discrimination. Nat Biotechnol, 1998, 16: 49–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Li J J, Geyer R, Tan W. Using molecular beacons as a sensitive fluorescence assay for enzymatic cleavage of single-stranded DNA. Nucleic Acids Res, 2000, 28: E52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Dirks R W, Molenaar C, Tanke H J. Methods for visualizing RNA processing and transport pathways in living cells. Histochem Cell Biol, 2001, 115: 3–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Molenaar C, Marras S A, Slats J C, et al. Linear 2′ O-Methyl RNA probes for the visualization of RNA in living cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 2001, 29: E89–89PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sokol D L, Zhang X, Lu P, et al. Real time detection of DNA.RNA hybridization in living cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1998, 95: 11538–11543PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Vet J A, Majithia A R, Marras S A, et al. Multiplex detection of four pathogenic retroviruses using molecular beacons. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1999, 96: 6394–6399PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kostrikis L G, Tyagi S, Mhlanga M M, et al. Spectral genotyping of human alleles. Science, 1998, 279: 1228–1229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Piatek A S, Tyagi S, Pol A C, et al. Molecular beacon sequence analysis for detecting drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Nat Biotech, 1998, 16: 359–363Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bratu D P, Cha B J, Mhlanga M M, et al. Visualizing the distribution and transport of mRNAs in living cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2003, 100: 13308–13313PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Tsourkas A, Behlke M A, Xu Y, et al. Spectroscopic features of dual fluorescence/luminescence resonance energy-transfer molecular beacons. Anal Chem, 2003, 75: 3697–3703PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Santangelo P J, Nix B, Tsourkas A, et al. Dual FRET molecular beacons for mRNA detection in living cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 2004, 32: e57PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Nitin N, Santangelo P J, Kim G, et al. Peptide-linked molecular beacons for efficient delivery and rapid mRNA detection in living cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 2004, 32: e58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Tyagi S, Alsmadi O. Imaging native beta-actin mRNA in motile fibroblasts. Biophys J, 2004, 87: 4153–4162PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Peng X H, Cao Z H, Xia J T, et al. Real-time detection of gene expression in cancer cells using molecular beacon imaging: new strategies for cancer research. Cancer Res, 2005, 65: 1909–1917PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Medley C D, Drake T J, Tomasini J M, et al. Simultaneous monitoring of the expression of multiple genes inside of single breast carcinoma cells. Anal Chem, 2005, 77: 4713–4718PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Tsourkas A, Behlke M A, Bao G. Structure-function relationships of shared-stem and conventional molecular beacons. Nucleic Acids Res, 2002, 30: 4208–4215PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    King F W, Liszewski W, Ritner C, et al. High-throughput tracking of pluripotent human embryonic stem cells with dual fluorescence resonance energy transfer molecular beacons. Stem Cells Dev, 2011, 20: 475–484PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Chen A K, Rhee W J, Bao G, et al. Delivery of molecular beacons for live-cell imaging and analysis of RNA. Methods Mol Biol, 2011, 714: 159–174PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Giles R V, Ruddell C J, Spiller D G, et al. Single base discrimination for ribonuclease H-dependent antisense effects within intact human leukaemia cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 1995, 23: 954–961PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Barry M A, Eastman A. Identification of deoxyribonuclease II as an endonuclease involved in apoptosis. Arch Biochem Biophys, 1993, 300: 440–450PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Giles R V, Spiller D G, Grzybowski J, et al. Selecting optimal oligonucleotide composition for maximal antisense effect following streptolysin O-mediated delivery into human leukaemia cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 1998, 26: 1567–1575PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Walev I, Bhakdi S C, Hofmann F, et al. Delivery of proteins into living cells by reversible membrane permeabilization with streptolysin-O. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2001, 98: 3185–3190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wadia J S, Dowdy S F. Transmembrane delivery of protein and peptide drugs by TAT-mediated transduction in the treatment of cancer. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2005, 57: 579–596PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Brooks H, Lebleu B, Vives E. Tat peptide-mediated cellular delivery: back to basics. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2005, 57: 559–577PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Nitin N, Bao G. NLS peptide conjugated molecular beacons for visualizing nuclear RNA in living cells. Bioconj Chem, 2008, 19: 2205–2211Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Czernin J, Allen-Auerbach M, Schelbert H. Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: literature-based evidence as of September 2006. J Nuclear Med, 2007, 48: 78SGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Judenhofer M S, Wehrl H F, Newport D F, et al. Simultaneous PET-MRI: a new approach for functional and morphological imaging. Nat Med, 2008, 14: 459–465PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Higuchi T, Anton M, Dumler K, et al. Combined reporter gene PET and iron oxide MRI for monitoring survival and localization of transplanted cells in the rat heart. J Nucl Med, 2009, 50: 1088–1094PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Xu H, Regino C A, Koyama Y, et al. Preparation and preliminary evaluation of a biotin-targeted, lectin-targeted dendrimer-based probe for dual-modality magnetic resonance and fluorescence imaging. Bioconjug Chem, 2007, 18: 1474–1482PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Koyama Y, Talanov V S, Bernardo M, et al. A dendrimer-based nanosized contrast agent dual-labeled for magnetic resonance and optical fluorescence imaging to localize the sentinel lymph node in mice. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2007, 25: 866–871PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Lee S K, Chen X. Dual-modality probes for in vivo molecular imaging. Mol Imaging, 2009, 8: 87–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Carmeliet P. Angiogenesis in health and disease. Nat Med, 2003, 9: 653–660PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Lee H Y, Li Z, Chen K, et al. PET/MRI dual-modality tumor imaging using arginine-glycine-aspartic (RGD)-conjugated radiolabeled iron oxide nanoparticles. J Nucl Med, 2008, 49: 1371–1379PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Xie J, Huang J, Li X, et al. Iron oxide nanoparticle platform for biomedical applications. Curr Med Chem, 2009, 16: 1278–1294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Shokeen M, Fettig N M, Rossin R. Synthesis, in vitro and in vivo evaluation of radiolabeled nanoparticles. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2008, 52: 267–277PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Wang Y X, Hussain S M, Krestin G P. Superparamagnetic iron oxide contrast agents: physicochemical characteristics and applications in MR imaging. Eur Radiol, 2001, 11: 2319–2331PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bjornerud A, Wendland M F, Johansson L, et al. Use of intravascular contrast agents in MRI. Acad Radiol, 1998, 5: S223–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Weissleder R, Bogdanov A, Neuwelt E A, et al. Long-circulating iron-oxides for MR imaging. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 1995, 16: 321–334Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Jun Y W, Huh Y M, Choi J S, et al. Nanoscale size effect of magnetic nanocrystals and their utilization for cancer diagnosis via magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Chem Soc, 2005, 127: 5732–5733PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Xu C J, Sun S H. Monodisperse magnetic nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Polymer Int, 2007, 56: 821–826Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lee J H, Huh Y M, Jun Y W, et al. Artificially engineered magnetic nanoparticles for ultra-sensitive molecular imaging. Nat Med, 2007, 13: 95–99PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Nitin N, LaConte L E, Zurkiya O, et al. Functionalization and peptide-based delivery of magnetic nanoparticles as an intracellular MRI contrast agent. J Biol Inorg Chem, 2004, 9: 706–712PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Yu W W, Chang E, Sayes C M, et al. Aqueous dispersion of monodisperse magnetic iron oxide nanocrystals through phase transfer. Nanotechnology, 2006, 17: 4483–4487Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Gossuin Y, Gillis P, Hocq A, et al. Magnetic resonance relaxation properties of superparamagnetic particles. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol, 2009, 1: 299–310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Nahrendorf M, Jaffer F A, Kelly K A, et al. Noninvasive vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 imaging identifies inflammatory activation of cells in atherosclerosis. Circulation, 2006, 114: 1504–1511PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Montet X, Montet-Abou K, Reynolds F, et al. Nanoparticle imaging of integrins on tumor cells. Neoplasia, 2006, 8: 214–222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Winter P M, Morawski A M, Caruthers S D, et al. Molecular imaging of angiogenesis in early-stage atherosclerosis with alpha(v)beta3-integrin-targeted nanoparticles. Circulation, 2003, 108: 2270–2274PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Glaus C, Rossin R, Welch M J, et al. In vivo evaluation of 64Cu-labeled magnetic nanoparticles as a dual-modality PET/MR imaging agent. Bioconjug Chem, 2010, 21: 715–722PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Gillis P, Koenig S H. Transverse relaxation of solvent protons induced by magnetized spheres: application to ferritin, erythrocytes, and magnetite. Magn Reson Med, 1987, 5: 323–345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Gillis P, Moiny F, Brooks R A. On T2-shortening by strongly magnetized spheres: a partial refocusing model. Magn Reson Med, 2002, 47: 257–263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Brooks R A, Moiny F, Gillis P. On T2-shortening by weakly magnetized particles: the chemical exchange model. Magn Reson Med, 2001, 45: 1014–1020PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Koenig S H, Kellar K E. Theory of 1/T1 and 1/T2 NMRD profiles of solutions of magnetic nanoparticles. Magn Reson Med, 1995, 34: 227–233PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Jun Y W, Seo J W, Cheon A. Nanoscaling laws of magnetic nanoparticles and their applicabilities in biomedical sciences. Acc Chem Res, 2008, 41: 179–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Tromsdorf U I, Bigall N C, Kaul M G, et al. Size and surface effects on the MRI relaxivity of manganese ferrite nanoparticle contrast agents. Nano Letters, 2007, 7: 2422–2427PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Yu W W, Falkner J C, Yavuz C T, et al. Synthesis of monodisperse iron oxide nanocrystals by thermal decomposition of iron carboxylate salts. Chem Commun, 2004, 2306–2307Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Xie J, Peng S, Brower N, et al. One-pot synthesis of monodisperse iron oxide nanoparticles for potential biomedical applications. Pure Appl Chem, 2006, 78: 1003–1014Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Li J J, Wang Y A, Guo W Z, et al. Large-scale synthesis of nearly monodisperse CdSe/CdS core/shell nanocrystals using air-stable reagents via successive ion layer adsorption and reaction. J Am Chem Soc, 2003, 125: 12567–12575PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Xie J, Xu C, Kohler N, et al. Controlled PEGylation of monodisperse Fe3O4 nanoparticles for reduced non-specific uptake by macrophage cells. Adv Mater, 2007, 19: 3163–3166Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Torchilin V P, Trubetskoy V S. Which polymers can make nanoparticulate drug carriers long-circulating. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 1995, 16: 141–155Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Tong S, Hou S J, Zheng Z L, et al. Coating optimization of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for high T2 relaxivity. Nano Lett, 2010, 10: 4607–4613PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Josephson L, Perez J M, Weissleder R. Magnetic nanosensors for the detection of oligonucleotide sequences. Angew Chem Int Edit, 2001, 40: 3204–3206Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Hazarika P, Ceyhan B, Niemeyer C M. Reversible switching of DNA-gold nanoparticle aggregation. Angew Chem Int Edit, 2004, 43: 6469–6471Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Montet X, Funovics M, Montet-Abou K, et al. Multivalent effects of RGD peptides obtained by nanoparticle display. J Med Chem, 2006, 49: 6087–6093PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Pellegrino T, Manna L, Kudera S, et al. Hydrophobic nanocrystals coated with an amphiphilic polymer shell: A general route to water soluble nanocrystals. Nano Lett, 2004, 4: 703–707Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Stolnik S, Illum L, Davis S S. Long circulating microparticulate drug carriers. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 1995, 16: 195–214Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Liu Z, Davis C, Cai W, et al. Circulation and long-term fate of functionalized, biocompatible single-walled carbon nanotubes in mice probed by Raman spectroscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2008, 105: 1410–1415PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Glaus C, Rossin R, Welch M J, et al. In vivo evaluation of 64Cu-labeled magnetic nanoparticles as a dual-modality PET/MR imaging agent. Bioconjug Chem, 2010, 21: 715–722PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Torchilin V P. PEG-based micelles as carriers of contrast agents for different imaging modalities. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2002, 54: 235–252PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Johnsson M, Hansson P, Edwards K. Spherical micelles and other self-assembled structures in dilute aqueous mixtures of poly(ethylene glycol) lipids. J Phys Chem B, 2001, 105: 8420–8430Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Turro N J, Yekta A. Luminescent probes for detergent solutions—simple procedure for determination of mean aggregation number of micelles. J Am Chem Soc, 1978, 100: 5951–5952Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Tong S, Hou S, Ren B, et al. Self-assembly of phospholipid-PEG coating on nanoparticles through dual solvent exchange. Nano Lett, 2011, 11: 3720–3726PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Zhu M T, Wang B, Wang Y, et al. Endothelial dysfunction and inflammation induced by iron oxide nanoparticle exposure: Risk factors for early atherosclerosis. Toxicol Lett, 2011, 203: 162–171PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Hyafil F, Cornily J C, Feig J E, et al. Noninvasive detection of macrophages using a nanoparticulate contrast agent for computed tomography. Nat Med, 2007, 13: 636–641PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Haller C, Hizoh I. The cytotoxicity of iodinated radiocontrast agents on renal cells in vitro. Invest Radiol, 2004, 39: 149–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Kong W H, Lee W J, Cui Z Y, et al. Nanoparticulate carrier containing water-insoluble iodinated oil as a multifunctional contrast agent for computed tomography imaging. Biomaterials, 2007, 28: 5555–5561PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Badea C T, Athreya K K, Espinosa G, et al. Computed tomography imaging of primary lung cancer in mice using a liposomal-iodinated contrast agent. PLoS ONE, 2012, 7: e34496PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Hoglund P, Leander P, Hustvedt S O, et al. Human pharmacokinetics and modeling of the concentration-attenuation relationship of a new liposomal liver-specific contrast agent for CT. Acad Radiol, 1998, 5: S47–S48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Kim D, Park S, Lee J H, et al. Antibiofouling polymer-coated gold nanoparticles as a contrast agent for in vivo x-ray computed tomography imaging. J Am Chem Soc, 2007, 129: 7661–7665PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Wang H, Zheng L F, Guo R, et al. Dendrimer-entrapped gold nanoparticles as potential CT contrast agents for blood pool imaging. Nanoscale Res Lett, 2012, 7: 190–197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Liu H, Wang H, Guo R, et al. Size-controlled synthesis of dendrimer-stabilized silver nanoparticles for X-ray computed tomography imaging applications. Polym Chem-UK, 2010, 1: 1677–1683Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Rabin O, Perez J M, Grimm J, et al. An X-ray computed tomography imaging agent based on long-circulating bismuth sulphide nanoparticles. Nat Mater, 2006, 5: 118–122PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Ai K L, Liu Y L, Liu J H, et al. Large-scale synthesis of Bi2S3 nanodots as a contrast agent for in vivo X-ray computed tomography imaging. Adv Mater, 2011, 23: 4886–4891PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Kinsella J M, Jimenez R E, Karmali P P, et al. X-Ray computed tomography imaging of breast cancer by using targeted peptide-labeled bismuth sulfide nanoparticles. Angew Chem Int Edit, 2011, 50: 12308–12311Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Oh M H, Lee N, Kim H, et al. Large-scale synthesis of bioinert tantalum oxide nanoparticles for X-ray computed tomography imaging and bimodal image-guided sentinel lymph node mapping. J Am Chem Soc, 2011, 133: 5508–5515PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Lee N, Cho H R, Oh M H, et al. Multifunctional Fe3O4/TaOx core/shell nanoparticles for simultaneous magnetic resonance imaging and X-ray computed tomography. J Am Chem Soc, 2012, 134: 10309–10312PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Jain R K. Delivery of molecular and cellular medicine to solid tumors. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2001, 46: 149–168PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    von Maltzahn G, Park J H, Lin K Y, et al. Nanoparticles that communicate in vivo to amplify tumour targeting. Nat Mater, 2011, 10: 545–552Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Weissleder R, Stark D D, Engelstad B L, et al. Superparamagnetic iron oxide: pharmacokinetics and toxicity. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1989, 152: 167–173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Namiki Y, Namiki T, Yoshida H, et al. A novel magnetic crystal-lipid nanostructure for magnetically guided in vivo gene delivery. Nat Nanotechnol, 2009, 4: 598–606PubMedGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Fortin J P, Wilhelm C, Servais J, et al. Size-sorted anionic iron oxide nanomagnets as colloidal mediators for magnetic hyperthermia. J Am Chem Soc, 2007, 129: 2628–2635PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Alexiou C, Arnold W, Klein R J, et al. Locoregional cancer treatment with magnetic drug targeting. Cancer Res, 2000, 60: 6641–6648PubMedGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Park J H, von Maltzahn G, Ruoslahti E, et al. Micellar hybrid nanoparticles for simultaneous magnetofluorescent imaging and drug delivery. Angew Chem Int Edit, 2008, 47: 7284–7288Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Jain T K, Richey J, Strand M, et al. Magnetic nanoparticles with dual functional properties: drug delivery and magnetic resonance imaging. Biomaterials, 2008, 29: 4012–4021PubMedGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Guthi J S, Yang S G, Huang G, et al. MRI-visible micellar nanomedicine for targeted drug delivery to lung cancer cells. Mol Pharm, 2010, 7: 32–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Liong M, Lu J, Kovochich M, et al. Multifunctional inorganic nanoparticles for imaging, targeting, and drug delivery. ACS Nano, 2008, 2: 889–896PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Dilnawaz F, Singh A, Mohanty C, et al. Dual drug loaded superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for targeted cancer therapy. Biomaterials, 2010, 31: 3694–3706PubMedGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Santra S, Kaittanis C, Grimm J, et al. Drug/dye-loaded, multifunctional iron oxide nanoparticles for combined targeted cancer therapy and dual optical/magnetic resonance imaging. Small, 2009, 5: 1862–1868PubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Kim J, Kim H S, Lee N, et al. Multifunctional uniform nanoparticles composed of a magnetite nanocrystal core and a mesoporous silica shell for magnetic resonance and fluorescence imaging and for drug delivery. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl, 2008, 47: 8438–8441PubMedGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Nobuto H, Sugita T, Kubo T, et al. Evaluation of systemic chemotherapy with magnetic liposomal doxorubicin and a dipole external electromagnet. Int J Cancer, 2004, 109: 627–635PubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Medarova Z, Pham W, Farrar C, et al. In vivo imaging of siRNA delivery and silencing in tumors. Nat Med, 2007, 13: 372–377PubMedGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Lee J H, Lee K, Moon S H, et al. All-in-one target-cell-specific magnetic nanoparticles for simultaneous molecular imaging and siRNA delivery. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl, 2009, 48: 4174–4179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Shin J M, Anisur R M, Ko M K, et al. Hollow manganese oxide nanoparticles as multifunctional agents for magnetic resonance imaging and drug delivery. Angew Chem Int Edit, 2009, 48: 321–324Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Choi J S, Lee J H, Shin T H, et al. Self-confirming “AND” logic nanoparticles for fault-free MRI. J Am Chem Soc, 2010, 132: 11015–11017PubMedGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Bartlett D W, Su H, Hildebrandt I J, et al. Impact of tumor-specific targeting on the biodistribution and efficacy of siRNA nanoparticles measured by multimodality in vivo imaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2007, 104: 15549–15554PubMedGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Chen W, Xu N, Xu L, et al. Multifunctional magnetoplasmonic nanoparticle assemblies for cancer therapy and diagnostics (theranostics). Macromol Rapid Commun, 2010, 31: 228–236PubMedGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Hu J, Qian Y, Wang X, et al. Drug-loaded and superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticle surface-embedded amphiphilic block copolymer micelles for integrated chemotherapeutic drug delivery and MR imaging. Langmuir, 2012, 28: 2073–2082PubMedGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Kopelman R, Koo Y E L, Philbert M, et al. Multifunctional nanoparticle platforms for in vivo MRI enhancement and photodynamic therapy of a rat brain cancer. J Magn Magn Mater, 2005, 293: 404–410Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    Zheng J, Allen C, Serra S, et al. Liposome contrast agent for CT-based detection and localization of neoplastic and inflammatory lesions in rabbits: validation with FDG-PET and histology. Contrast Media Mol Imag, 2010, 5: 147–154Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    Barth B M, Sharma R, Altinoglu E I, et al. Bioconjugation of calcium phosphosilicate composite nanoparticles for selective targeting of human breast and pancreatic cancers in vivo. ACS Nano, 2010, 4: 1279–1287PubMedGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Guo R, Zhang L, Qian H, et al. Multifunctional nanocarriers for cell imaging, drug delivery, and near-IR photothermal therapy. Langmuir, 2010, 26: 5428–5434PubMedGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Lin X, Xie J, Niu G, et al. Chimeric ferritin nanocages for multiple function loading and multimodal imaging. Nano Lett, 2011, 11: 814–819PubMedGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Jain T K, Morales M A, Sahoo S K, et al. Iron oxide nanoparticles for sustained delivery of anticancer agents. Mol Pharm, 2005, 2: 194–205PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Dames P, Gleich B, Flemmer A, et al. Targeted delivery of magnetic aerosol droplets to the lung. Nat Nanotechnol, 2007, 2: 495–499PubMedGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Wood A J, Lo T W, Zeitler B, et al. Targeted genome editing across species using ZFNs and TALENs. Science, 2011, 333: 307PubMedGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Boch J, Scholze H, Schornack S, et al. Breaking the code of DNA binding specificity of TAL-type III effectors. Science, 2009, 326: 1509–1512PubMedGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Porteus M H, Baltimore D. Chimeric nucleases stimulate gene targeting in human cells. Science, 2003, 300: 763PubMedGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Rouet P, Smih F, Jasin M. Expression of a site-specific endonuclease stimulates homologous recombination in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1994, 91: 6064–6068PubMedGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Bitinaite J, Wah D A, Aggarwal A K, et al. Fok I dimerization is required for DNA cleavage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1998, 95: 10570–10575PubMedGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Smith J, Bibikova M, Whitby F G, et al. Requirements for double-strand cleavage by chimeric restriction enzymes with zinc finger DNA-recognition domains. Nucleic Acids Res, 2000, 28: 3361–3369PubMedGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Moscou M J, Bogdanove A J. A simple cipher governs DNA recognition by TAL effectors. Science, 2009, 326: 1501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Cradick T J, Ambrosini G, Iseli C, et al. ZFN-site searches genomes for zinc finger nuclease target sites and off-target sites. BMC Bioinformatics, 2011, 12: 152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  177. 177.
    Miller J C, Holmes M C, Wang J, et al. An improved zinc-finger nuclease architecture for highly specific genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2007, 25: 778–785PubMedGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Ramirez C L, Certo M T, Mussolino C, et al. Engineered zinc finger nickases induce homology-directed repair with reduced mutagenic effects. Nucleic Acids Res, 2012, 40: 5560–5568PubMedGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Perez E E, Wang J, Miller J C, et al. Establishment of HIV-1 resistance in CD4+ T cells by genome editing using zinc-finger nucleases. Nat Biotechnol, 2008, 26: 808–816PubMedGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Platt O S, Brambilla D J, Rosse W F, et al. Mortality in sickle cell disease. Life expectancy and risk factors for early death. N Engl J Med, 1994, 330: 1639–1644PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheng Tong
    • 1
  • Thomas J. Cradick
    • 1
  • Yan Ma
    • 2
  • ZhiFei Dai
    • 2
  • Gang Bao
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of Technology and Emory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of EngineeringPeking UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations