Chitosan−Cholesterol-Based Cellular Delivery of Anionic

Dec 14, 2010 - Derfus , A. M.; Chan , W. C. W.; Bhatia , S. N. Adv. Mater. ..... Yang , S. J.; Lin , F. H.; Tsai , K. C.; Wei , M. F.; Tsai , H. M.; W...
0 downloads 0 Views 4MB Size
J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 137–144

137

Chitosan-Cholesterol-Based Cellular Delivery of Anionic Nanoparticles Amit Ranjan Maity and Nikhil R. Jana* Centre for AdVanced Materials, Indian Association for the CultiVation of Science, Kolkata-700032, India ReceiVed: September 16, 2010; ReVised Manuscript ReceiVed: NoVember 24, 2010

Nanoparticle-based cellular probes are emerging as an alternative for molecular probes. However, cellular interaction and uptake of nanoprobes strongly depends on their surface chemistry, and the delivery of anionic nanoparticles is relatively difficult. Herein, we report cholesterol-modified chitosan oligosaccharide as a nontoxic reagent that is able to deliver different anionic nanoparticles into the cell. The cationic chitosan backbone of the reagent assists their electrostatic binding with the anionic nanoparticle, and the hydrophobic cholesterol component induces cellular interaction/uptake. The optimum amount of cholesterol is decisive as an effective reagentshigh cholesterol per chitosan reduces their water solubility, while low cholesterol per chitosan provides poor performance, similar to chitosan. Different anionic nanoparticles of hydrodynamic diameter 20-50 nm such as polyacrylate coated anionic quantum dot (QD) and iron oxide nanoparticle are effectively delivered into cells. The developed chitosan-cholesterol reagent is easy to prepare, is nontoxic, requires a low dose for nanoparticle delivery, and can be used for the cellular delivery of other anionic nanoparticles. Introduction Delivering nanoparticles into the cell is often necessary for their application in cellular and subcellular targeting, labeling, and imaging.1-5 Although varieties of nanoparticle-based cellular probes are reported, their delivery into cell and subcellular targeting is challenging.1-5 This is particularly because of the larger nanoprobe size compared to conventional molecular probes (∼5-1000 nm vs