Figures & data
Figure 1 Schematic illustration of the assembly method, synthesizing process and theranostic procedures of the acoustic-responsive DPP-R, including double emulsion and carbodiimide method for synthesizing, active and passive targeting effect induced by receptor/ligand, and EPR effect and LIFU-mediated phase-transition and accurate drug release for theranostics.
![Figure 1 Schematic illustration of the assembly method, synthesizing process and theranostic procedures of the acoustic-responsive DPP-R, including double emulsion and carbodiimide method for synthesizing, active and passive targeting effect induced by receptor/ligand, and EPR effect and LIFU-mediated phase-transition and accurate drug release for theranostics.](/cms/asset/3b3b941a-6b31-450f-8ff8-42a403a7d342/dijn_a_212888_f0001_c.jpg)
Figure 2 (A) Optical microscope image (×600). (B) TEM image. (C) Average size of DPP-R. (D) Zeta potential of PP, DPP, and DPP-R. (E) Size of PP, DPP, and DPP-R. (F) Size of DPP-R in PBS, FBS, and high glucose DMEM in 7 days. (G) The UV-Vis-NIR absorption curve of PP, DOX, and DPP. (H) The UV-Vis-NIR absorption curve of DOX in different concentrations. (I) Standard curve of DOX related to concentration and absorbance intensity. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3).
![Figure 2 (A) Optical microscope image (×600). (B) TEM image. (C) Average size of DPP-R. (D) Zeta potential of PP, DPP, and DPP-R. (E) Size of PP, DPP, and DPP-R. (F) Size of DPP-R in PBS, FBS, and high glucose DMEM in 7 days. (G) The UV-Vis-NIR absorption curve of PP, DOX, and DPP. (H) The UV-Vis-NIR absorption curve of DOX in different concentrations. (I) Standard curve of DOX related to concentration and absorbance intensity. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3).](/cms/asset/f86ac647-5b84-481c-ad0f-ef89dd20ea41/dijn_a_212888_f0002_c.jpg)
Figure 3 (A) Drug cumulative release of DPP-R in PBS (pH=5.2/7.4) at 37°C with or without LIFU irradiation at 6 h. (B) CLSM images of facilitated DOX release triggered by LIFU. The red fluorescence represented released DOX; the blue fluorescence marked cell nucleus (×400). (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3).
![Figure 3 (A) Drug cumulative release of DPP-R in PBS (pH=5.2/7.4) at 37°C with or without LIFU irradiation at 6 h. (B) CLSM images of facilitated DOX release triggered by LIFU. The red fluorescence represented released DOX; the blue fluorescence marked cell nucleus (×400). (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3).](/cms/asset/d1318edb-ed63-431a-b0ef-f837f9f97ab6/dijn_a_212888_f0003_c.jpg)
Figure 4 Bio-compatibility and bio-safety of original materials. (A) Cell viability of MGC-803 after incubated with NPs for 24 h and tested by CCK-8 assay. (B) H&E staining of major organs of control group and PP-R group at 1 day, 7 days, and 14 days after being intravenously injected with PP-R (×400). (C) Major indicators of routine blood and blood biochemistry examination of control, PP, and PP-R groups at 1 day, 7 das, and 14 days. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3).
![Figure 4 Bio-compatibility and bio-safety of original materials. (A) Cell viability of MGC-803 after incubated with NPs for 24 h and tested by CCK-8 assay. (B) H&E staining of major organs of control group and PP-R group at 1 day, 7 days, and 14 days after being intravenously injected with PP-R (×400). (C) Major indicators of routine blood and blood biochemistry examination of control, PP, and PP-R groups at 1 day, 7 das, and 14 days. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3).](/cms/asset/2bc1c6d5-663a-40e3-aa62-6489f43b8deb/dijn_a_212888_f0004_c.jpg)
Figure 5 Targeting ability of DPP-R in vitro. (A) CLSM images of DPP-R. The red fluorescence represented encapsulated DOX; the green fluorescence represented RGD-FITC; the red and green fluorescence overlapped almost indicating that RGD successfully bound with DPP (×1000). (B) Binding efficiency between RGD and DPP measured by FCM. (C) CLSM images of MGC-803 incubated with DPP-R and DPP respectively for 3 h. The red fluorescence represented encapsulated DOX; the green fluorescence of DiO marked cell membranes and the blue fluorescence of DAPI marked cell nucleus (×400). (D) Binding efficiency between NPs and cells measured by FCM. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).
![Figure 5 Targeting ability of DPP-R in vitro. (A) CLSM images of DPP-R. The red fluorescence represented encapsulated DOX; the green fluorescence represented RGD-FITC; the red and green fluorescence overlapped almost indicating that RGD successfully bound with DPP (×1000). (B) Binding efficiency between RGD and DPP measured by FCM. (C) CLSM images of MGC-803 incubated with DPP-R and DPP respectively for 3 h. The red fluorescence represented encapsulated DOX; the green fluorescence of DiO marked cell membranes and the blue fluorescence of DAPI marked cell nucleus (×400). (D) Binding efficiency between NPs and cells measured by FCM. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).](/cms/asset/057a5f2d-f5a7-4174-ace3-77b1515db230/dijn_a_212888_f0005_c.jpg)
Figure 6 Targeting ability of DPP-R in vivo. (A) FLI images of nude mice after being intravenously injected with DPP-R and DPP respectively for 1 h, 6 h, and 24 h. (B) FLI images and the average fluorescence intensity (C) of major organs ex-vivo. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).
![Figure 6 Targeting ability of DPP-R in vivo. (A) FLI images of nude mice after being intravenously injected with DPP-R and DPP respectively for 1 h, 6 h, and 24 h. (B) FLI images and the average fluorescence intensity (C) of major organs ex-vivo. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).](/cms/asset/30dda969-ef09-48f6-a850-6e42c0444df3/dijn_a_212888_f0006_c.jpg)
Figure 7 ADV imaging in vitro. (A) B-mode and CEUS images of DPP-R at different duration and power of LIFU. (B) Optical microscope images of phase-transition of DPP-R triggered by LIFU at a power of 8 W from 3 min to 6 min.
![Figure 7 ADV imaging in vitro. (A) B-mode and CEUS images of DPP-R at different duration and power of LIFU. (B) Optical microscope images of phase-transition of DPP-R triggered by LIFU at a power of 8 W from 3 min to 6 min.](/cms/asset/b35eec12-68f7-4d45-9361-ac32914c5f04/dijn_a_212888_f0007_c.jpg)
Figure 8 ADV imaging in vivo. (A) B-mode and CEUS images of orthotopic tumor-bearing mice at tumor site before and after LIFU irradiation. (B) The variation trend of the quantized mean grayscale values of B-mode and CEUS mode for different duration and power of LIFU in vitro. (C) The quantized mean grayscale values of B-mode and CEUS mode of tumor site (The data was exhibited as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).
![Figure 8 ADV imaging in vivo. (A) B-mode and CEUS images of orthotopic tumor-bearing mice at tumor site before and after LIFU irradiation. (B) The variation trend of the quantized mean grayscale values of B-mode and CEUS mode for different duration and power of LIFU in vitro. (C) The quantized mean grayscale values of B-mode and CEUS mode of tumor site (The data was exhibited as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).](/cms/asset/2a815566-64a5-403e-9e9e-48e0cb061750/dijn_a_212888_f0008_c.jpg)
Figure 9 (A) Cell vitality of MGC-803 incubated with different formulations of different agents. (B) Body weight of orthotopic tumor-bearing nude mice in different groups during therapy period. (C) Posttreatment tumor weight and (D) tumor inhibition rate of orthotopic tumor-bearing nude mice in different groups. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).
![Figure 9 (A) Cell vitality of MGC-803 incubated with different formulations of different agents. (B) Body weight of orthotopic tumor-bearing nude mice in different groups during therapy period. (C) Posttreatment tumor weight and (D) tumor inhibition rate of orthotopic tumor-bearing nude mice in different groups. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).](/cms/asset/67003094-d7de-4c79-9412-b9e4bd4ac53f/dijn_a_212888_f0009_c.jpg)
Figure 10 (A) Tumor images of orthotopic tumor-bearing nude mice in different groups after treatment. (B) H&E and TUNEL staining of tumors in different groups (×400).
![Figure 10 (A) Tumor images of orthotopic tumor-bearing nude mice in different groups after treatment. (B) H&E and TUNEL staining of tumors in different groups (×400).](/cms/asset/75711c12-f5a9-43f7-af84-8ce5a5d5e79c/dijn_a_212888_f0010_c.jpg)
Figure 11 (A) H&E staining of major organs of nude mice in different groups after therapy. Myocardial interstitium existed vacuolar degeneration, hepatocyte swelled, hepatic cord arranged mussily and glomeruli atrophied in DOX and DPP+LIFU groups. (B) Blood indicators of different groups including hematopoietic, cardiac, hepatic and nephric function. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).
![Figure 11 (A) H&E staining of major organs of nude mice in different groups after therapy. Myocardial interstitium existed vacuolar degeneration, hepatocyte swelled, hepatic cord arranged mussily and glomeruli atrophied in DOX and DPP+LIFU groups. (B) Blood indicators of different groups including hematopoietic, cardiac, hepatic and nephric function. (The data were shown as mean±SD, n=3, *p<0.05).](/cms/asset/15d98fd3-38d8-4f84-aa18-8b79c85729f7/dijn_a_212888_f0011_c.jpg)