Polyglycerol Grafting Shields Nanoparticles from Protein Corona Formation to Avoid Macrophage Uptake

Abstract

Upon contact with biofluids, proteins are quickly adsorbed onto the nanoparticle (NP) surface to form a protein corona, which initiates the opsonization and facilitates the rapid clearance of the NP by macrophage uptake. Although polyethylene glycol (PEG) functionalization has been the standard approach to evade macrophage uptake by reducing protein adsorption, it cannot fully eliminate nonspecific uptake. Herein, polyglycerol (PG) grafting is demonstrated as a better alternative to PEG. NPs of various size and material were grafted with PG and PEG at 30, 20, and 10 wt % contents by controlling the reaction conditions, and the resulting NP-PG and NP-PEG were characterized qualitatively by IR spectroscopy and quantitatively by thermogravimetric analysis. Their resistivity to adsorption of the proteins in fetal bovine serum and human plasma were compared by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, bicinchoninic acid assay, and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, giving a consistent conclusion that PG shields protein adsorption more efficiently than does PEG. The macrophage uptake was assayed by transmission electron microscopy and by extinction spectroscopy or inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, revealing that PG avoids macrophage uptake more efficiently than does PEG. In particular, a NP coated with PG at 30 wt % (NP-PG-h) prevents corona formation almost completely, regardless of NP size and core material, leading to the complete evasion of macrophage uptake. Our findings demonstrate that PG grafting is a promising strategy in nanomedicine to improve anti-biofouling property and stealth efficiency in nanoformulations.

Effects of polyethylene glycol on the surface of nanoparticles for targeted drug delivery

“…(3) Looking for non-toxic, biocompatible polymers to replace PEG [183][184][185][186][187][188] ; (4) Further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the clinical application of invisible NPs; (5) there is no doubt about the benefits of PEGylation of NPs but how to control PEGylation 189 . Finally, the effects of ligand conjugation on the PEG status of active targeting NPs surface are still not clear.…”

Nanoparticles: A New Approach to Upgrade Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

“…In order to avoid being uptaken by MPS, various polymer coatings such as forpolyether, polybetaine (PB) and polyolhave were investigated to cover NPs. For example, polyglycerol-grafting NPs are able to evade macrophage uptake by reducing protein adsorption [ 130 ]. In addition, there are two types of tumor-associated macrophages (TAM), M1 and M2.…”

Complement-Opsonized Nano-Carriers Are Bound by Dendritic Cells (DC) via Complement Receptor (CR)3, and by B Cell Subpopulations via CR-1/2, and Affect the Activation of DC and B-1 Cells

“…Since we observed no involvement of SR-A in this regard, and due to the fact that most types of NC after systemic application strongly accumulate in the liver, further studies are paramount to identify the contributing receptors. By now, a number of strategies have been developed to minimize unwanted cellular interaction of NC, including the use of PEG [70] and dysopsonic proteins [4] to minimize protein adsorption [4,70], and conjugation with CD47 serving as a "do not eat me" signal to reduce uptake by myeloid cell types [71].…”