Transcript
Page 1: Investigation of the cytotoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions in Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cells

Food Chemistry 141 (2013) 29–33

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Food Chemistry

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate / foodchem

Investigation of the cytotoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions in Caco-2cell monolayers and HepG2 cells

0308-8146/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.03.009

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 732 932 7193; fax: +1 732 932 6776.E-mail address: [email protected] (Q. Huang).

1 Current address: CP Kelco, 8225 Aero Drive, San Diego, CA 92123 USA.

Hailong Yu 1, Qingrong Huang ⇑Department of Food Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 65 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 14 September 2012Received in revised form 15 January 2013Accepted 4 March 2013Available online 14 March 2013

Keywords:NanoemulsionCytotoxicityCaco-2 cell monolayersHepG2 cells

a b s t r a c t

Nanoemulsions represent one of the emerging formulations for nutraceutical delivery. However, the pos-sible toxicity associated with the small droplet size (diameter <200 nm) is still unknown. In this study,three nanoemulsions emulsified by modified starch, Tween 20 and whey protein isolate, respectively,were prepared and their cytotoxicity was examined by comparing with the corresponding micron-sizedemulsions. Caco-2 cell monolayers were used to mimic the small intestine epithelium. Integrity of the cellmembrane and tight junctions was tested by measuring the lactate dehydrogenase leakage and transepi-thelial electrical resistance, respectively. All three nanoemulsions did not reveal significant differencefrom their micron-sized counterparts, suggesting no apparent toxicity of the nanoemulsions on the smallintestine. Meanwhile, the possible hepatic toxicity was investigated using MTT assay on HepG2 cells. Itwas found that nanoemulsions made with modified starch and whey protein isolate, but not Tween20, affected the cell viability/proliferation more than did the micron-sized emulsions. Further in vivoinvestigation is required to examine the possible hepatic toxicity of nanoemulsions.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Generally speaking, food-grade nanoemulsions are oil-in-wateremulsions with an oil droplet size (diameter) less than 200 nm.Because of this feature, they have better stability, optical transpar-ency and larger surface area. As an emerging delivery system,nanoemulsions have been shown to improve the oral bioavailabil-ity of hydrophobic bioactives (Hatanaka et al., 2010; Wang et al.,2008). As an important application of nanotechnology in foodscience, nanoemulsions attract much attention and are expectedto have broader application in food science.

On the other hand, the toxicity associated with nanoparticlesrepresents one of the major concerns for nanotechnology. Manynanoparticles, such as carbon nanotubes and metal oxide nanopar-ticles, have been found toxic in vivo (Bai et al., 2010; Bhabra et al.,2009; Yamashita et al., 2011). However, to our best knowledge,there are so far no studies addressing the toxicity of food-gradenanoemulsions.

Compared with other types of nanoparticles, food-gradenanoemulsions have many unique features, such as safety of thecomponents, digestibility, and exclusively oral administration. Allthe components in the nanoemulsions are either generallyrecognised as safe (GRAS) or food additives. The common oil phase,

triacylglycerols, and many emulsifiers, such as lecithin, modifiedstarch and proteins, undergo digestion in the gastrointestinal tract.Accordingly, the size, aggregation states and interfacialcomposition and properties of the oil droplets may change as well(McClements & Rao, 2011; McClements & Xiao, 2012).The exposureorgans for food-grade nanoemulsions may be limited to thedigestive system. Meanwhile, micron-sized emulsions are widelyused in the food industry and accepted by regulatory agenciesand consumers.

The small intestine and the liver are two very important organs inthe digestive system. During digestion and absorption, nanoemul-sions could directly interact with the small intestine epithelium.After absorption in the small intestine, it is possible that intact nano-emulsions could be transported to the liver via the portal vein.Therefore, the possible toxicity of nanoemulsions needs to beexamined in these two organs.

Human cancer-derived cell lines can be used to examine thein vitro toxicity (cytotoxicity). Caco-2 cells are derived from humancolon cancers. After about a 3-week culture, they differentiate topolarise, generate microvilli on the apical side of the cellmembrane and form tight junctions between adjacent cells(Hidalgo, Raub, & Borchardt, 1989). Because of these characteris-tics, Caco-2 cell monolayers are usually used to mimic the smallintestine epithelium, and the permeability of bioactives acrossCaco-2 cell monolayers is used to predict the absorption in vivo(Hubatsch, Ragnarsson, & Artursson, 2007). Meanwhile, HepG2cells are derived from human liver cancer and are commonly used

Page 2: Investigation of the cytotoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions in Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cells

30 H. Yu, Q. Huang / Food Chemistry 141 (2013) 29–33

for in vitro assessment of hepatic toxicity (Bort, Ponsoda, Jover,Gomez-Lechon, & Castell, 1999; Lu & Cederbaum, 2006).

In the present study, the possible cytotoxicity of food-gradenanoemulsions was investigated by using two in vitro cell culturesystems and comparing with micron-sized emulsions with thesame composition. To mimic the exposure of the small intestineto the nanoemulsions, Caco-2 cell monolayers were treated withnanoemulsions and the cell membrane leakage and tight junctionintegrity were examined. To investigate the toxicity on the liver,HepG2 cells were treated with nanoemulsions and micron-sizedemulsions and the cell proliferation/viability rate were compared.These studies may provide the first set of evidence for the possibletoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Materials

Medium chain triacylglycerol (MCT) was provided by StepanCompany (NEOBEE 1053). Modified starch was obtained from Na-tional Starch (HiCap 100). Tween 20 was purchased from FisherScientific. Whey protein isolate (WPI) was from Davisco FoodsInternationals (BiPro).

Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM), Minimum Essen-tial Medium Eagle (MEM), Hank’s Buffered Salt Solution (HBSS),foetal bovine serum (FBS), 100� non-essential amino acids, 100�penicillin and streptomycin and bovine serum albumin (BSA) wereall purchased from Fisher Scientific. Transwell permeable polycar-bonate inserts (0.4 lm) were obtained from Corning.

2.2. Preparation of micron-sized and nanoemulsions

Ten grammes of emulsions, consisting of 8.5 g dH2O, 1.0 g MCTand 0.5 g emulsifiers (modified starch, Tween 20 or WPI), werebriefly mixed by magnetic stirring. To prepare micron-sized emul-sions, the mixture was homogenised at 6500 rpm for 5 min with ahigh speed homogenizer (ULTRA–TURRAX T-25 basic, IKA Works).Nanoemulsions with the same composition were generated byultrasonication at about 175 W for (accumulatively) 5 min. ThepH of modified starch-emulsion was acidic (between 4 and 5),and that of WPI and Tween 20 emulsions was nearly neutral. Sincethe emulsions were greatly diluted in a buffer system during celltreatment, the pH of emulsion did not affect the pH of the cell cul-ture system.

2.3. Measurement of the oil droplet size of emulsions

Photographs of diluted micron-sized emulsions and nanoemul-sion were taken with a Nikon TE-2000U inverted microscope. Thesurface-averaged diameters of micron-sized emulsions were deter-mined by using ImageJ software, to analyse nine photographs. Par-ticle size of nanoemulsions was measured with a DLS-based BIC90plus particle size analyzer equipped with a Brookhaven BI-9000ATdigital correlator (Brookhaven Instrument) at a fixed scattering an-gle of 90� at ambient temperature.

2.4. Maintenance of Caco-2 and HepG2 cell cultures

Caco-2 cells (passage 35–45) were maintained in DMEM with10% FBS, 1� non-essential amino acids and 1� penicillin and strep-tomycin. HepG2 cells (passage 7–17) were cultured in MEM with10% FBS, 1� penicillin and streptomycin. Cells were incubated at37 �C with 5% CO2.

2.5. Generation and treatment of Caco-2 cell monolayers

To generate Caco-2 cell monolayers, 0.5 ml of 6 � 105 cell/mlCaco-2 cells was plated onto the inserts (apical compartment) of12-well plates. Subsequently, 1.5 ml of culture media were addedto the lower compartment of each well. Media were changed everytwo days. Cytotoxicity experiments were performed after21–29 days of plating.

Before the experiments, Caco-2 cell monolayers were washedwith and kept in HBSS (0.5 ml in apical compartment and 1.5 mlin basolateral compartment) for 20–30 min at 37 �C before thetreatment.

Five microlitres of micron-sized emulsions or nanoemulsionswere directly added in the apical compartment to make 1–100dilution. Then the Caco-2 cell monolayers were kept in a platformshaker set at 100 rpm at 37 �C for 2 h.

2.6. Lactate dehydrogenase leakage assay

After treatment of Caco-2 cell monolayers with nano- and mi-cron-sized emulsions, 50 ll of media from the apical chamber wereremoved and the lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) leakage was deter-mined using a CytoTox-ONE™ Homogeneous Membrane IntegrityAssay kit (Promega). One-hundred-time diluted emulsions in HBSSwere used as the negative control. Cell lysates of the Caco-2 cellmonolayers were used as the positive control. Percentage of rela-tive LDH leakage was calculated as:

% relative LDH leakage ¼ FIðtreatmentÞ � FIðnegative controlÞFIðpositive controlÞ � FIðnegative controlÞ� 100%

ð1Þ

where FI stands for fluorescence intensity with excitation wave-length at 560 nm and emission wavelength at 590 nm, as describedin the kit.

2.7. Measurement of transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER)

Immediately before the emulsion treatment, the TEER acrossCaco-2 cell monolayers was measured, using the Evom2 epithelialvoltmeter (World Precision Instrument). After treatment, Caco-2cell monolayers were washed with and incubated in HBSS for20–30 min, before the post-treatment TEER measurement.

Changes in TEER were expressed as % relative TEER.

% relative TEER ¼ post-treatment TEERpre-treatment TEER

� 100% ð2Þ

2.8. MTT assay on HepG2 cells

The MTT assays on HepG2 cells were performed using the pre-viously published procedures (Yu & Huang, 2010). Briefly, cellswere plated at the density of 1000 cell/well and treated with differ-ent dilutions of nanoemulsion or micron-sized emulsions (from1:100 to 1:1600) for about 24 h, followed by incubation withMTT and UV–Vis absorption measurements.

2.9. Statistics analysis

One-way and two-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were per-formed, using SigmaPlot 10.0 with SigmaStat integration (Systatsoftware).

Page 3: Investigation of the cytotoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions in Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cells

Table 1Summary of the particle size of prepared nanoemulsions and micron-sized emulsions.

Micron-sized emulsion Nanoemulsion

D2,0 (lm) Diameter (nm) Polydispersity

Modified starch 10.3 ± 1.0 155 ± 1.4 0.272 ± 0.002Tween 20 5.7 ± 0.8 168.2 ± 0.7 0.303 ± 0.014WPI 8.7 ± 0.9 172.7 ± 1.8 0.271 ± 0.009

Data for micron-sized emulsion are presented as means ± standard deviation, n = 9.Data for nanoemulsion are shown as means ± standard error, n = 3.

H. Yu, Q. Huang / Food Chemistry 141 (2013) 29–33 31

3. Results

3.1. General

In this work, the possible cytotoxicity of nanoemulsions wasexamined by comparing the cellular response to the treatment ofnanoemulsions and micron-sized emulsions, assuming that mi-cron-sized emulsions are not toxic.

3.2. Generation of micron-sized emulsions and nanoemulsions

To investigate the size effect of food-grade emulsions on thecytotoxicity, three micron-sized emulsions and nanoemulsionswith the same compositions were prepared by high speed homog-enisation and ultrasonication, respectively. Modified starch, Tween20 and whey protein isolates (WPI) were chosen to representdifferent types of emulsifiers. As shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1, forall the micron-sized emulsions, the particle size (diameter) of theoil droplets was between 5 and 10 lm. In comparison, the averageoil droplet size in the nanoemulsions was less than 200 nm, repre-senting about 50-fold reduction. In Fig. 1, the photographs for thenanoemulsions only show the oil droplets in the ‘‘tail’’ region of theparticle size distribution, and the majority of nano-sized oil drop-lets were not possible to visualise with optical microscopy.

3.3. Examination of the cell membrane integrity on Caco-2 cellmonolayers

Caco-2 cell monolayers were treated with micron-sized emul-sions and nanoemulsions to mimic the exposure of the small intes-

Fig. 1. Micrographs of micron-sized emulsions and nanoemulsions

tine epithelium to the emulsions. After treatment, the cellmembrane integrity was examined by detecting LDH leakage(Fig. 2). For untreated Caco-2 cell monolayers, less than 3% of cellshad cell membrane rupture throughout the experimental proce-dures. For the monolayers treated with nanoemulsions andmicron-sized emulsions, there were about 3–6% of cells with LDHleakage. From one-way ANOVA, it was revealed that there wasno significant difference in the LDH leakage between untreatedcells and most of the emulsion treatment, except for the nano-emulsion made with modified starch. More importantly, no signif-icant difference was detected between all three pairs of themicron-sized emulsions and nanoemulsions, suggesting that nano-emulsions did not possess more cytotoxicity on the Caco-2 cellmonolayers than did regular micron-sized emulsions.

3.4. Investigation of the tight junction integrity in the Caco-2 cellmonolayers

After well differentiation, tight junctions form between adja-cent Caco-2 cells, similar to those in the small intestine epithelium.

made with modified starch, Tween 20 and WPI, respectively.

Page 4: Investigation of the cytotoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions in Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cells

1:100a 1:200a 1:4 00a 1:8 00a 1:16 00a

% re

lativ

e ce

ll vi

abili

ty

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140micron-sized emulsionA

nanoemulsionB modified starch

ll vi

abili

ty

100

120

140micron-sized emulsionA

nanoemulsionA tween-20

untreated Modified starch Tween 20 WPI

% r

elat

ive

LD

H le

akag

e

0

2

4

6micron-sized emulsionnanoemulsion

a,a',a"

a,b

b

a'

a'

a"

a"

Fig. 2. LHD leakage of Caco-2 cell monolayers untreated, or treated with differentmicron-sized emulsions or nanoemulsions. Data are presented as means ± standarddeviation (n = 3). Different letters indicate significant difference (p < 0.05).

32 H. Yu, Q. Huang / Food Chemistry 141 (2013) 29–33

Disruption of the tight junction may make the cell monolayer morepermeable to water-soluble (toxic) compounds, which should beavoided in the normal physiological condition. In this study, theTEER values of Caco-2 cell monolayers treated with nanoemulsionswere compared to that with micron-sized emulsions and un-treated. As shown in Fig. 3, one-way ANOVA revealed that, com-pared with no treatment, modified starch and WPI emulsionscaused TEER decrease, and that Tween 20 emulsion had no appar-ent effect on the tight junction integrity. These observations areconsistent with other groups’ finding that some types of emulsifi-ers and surfactants may interrupt the tight junctions (Ohno, Naga-numa, Ogawa, & Muramoto, 2006; Yamashita et al., 2000). Moreimportantly, comparing the three nanoemulsions with the corre-sponding micron-sized emulsions, respectively, there was no sig-nificant difference in terms of the TEER change. With theassumption that regular micron-emulsions are considered safe,nanoemulsions did not display additional disruption of the tightjunctions.

Together with the results of the LDH leakage in the previoussection, it was illustrated that, compared with micron-sized emul-sions, no elevated toxicity was detected for nanoemulsions onCaco-2 cell monolayers, suggesting that nanoemulsions may notbe toxic to the small intestine epithelium.

untreated

Modified starch

Tween 20WPI

% r

elat

ive

TE

ER

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140micron-sized emulsionnanoemulsion

a,a',a"

b b

a'a' b" b"

Fig. 3. Relative TEER of Caco-2 cell monolayers untreated, or treated with differentmicron-sized emulsions or nanoemulsions. Data are presented as means ± standarddeviation (n = 3). Different letters indicate significant difference (p < 0.05).

3.5. Examination of the cytotoxicity on HepG2 cells

To examine the possible toxicity of the nanoemulsions on theliver, HepG2 cells were used as a model and treated with mi-cron-sized emulsions and nanoemulsions of different dilutions(Fig. 4). From two-way ANOVA, it was revealed that nanoemulsionsmade with modified starch and WPI caused less cell proliferation/viability than did the corresponding micron-sized emulsions(p = 0.0105 and p = 3.21 � 10�5, respectively). On the other hand,Tween 20 nanoemulsion did not affect the cell proliferation/viabil-ity more than did its micron-sized counterpart (p = 0.231). Theseresults suggested that the toxicity of nanoemulsions may bedependent on the emulsifiers, and more in vivo studies arerequired to examine the hepatotoxicity of nanoemulsions.

4. Discussion

In this work, three nanoemulsions were prepared and theirpossible toxicity was examined in vitro. It was found that, com-pared with micron-sized emulsions, nanoemulsions did not affectthe cell membrane and tight junction integrity of Caco-2 cell mon-olayers. However, nanoemulsions formed by modified starch andWPI were found to affect the proliferation/viability of HepG2 cells.

1:100a 1:200a 1:4 00a 1:8 00a 1:16 00a

% re

lativ

e ce

0

20

40

60

80

dilution1:100a 1:200a,b

% re

lativ

e ce

ll vi

abili

ty

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140micron-sized emulsionA

nanoemulsionBWPI

1:4 00a,b 1:8 00b 1:16 00b

Fig. 4. Cytotoxicity of nanoemulsions on HepG2 cells. Data are presented asmeans ± standard deviation (n = 4). Different letters indicate significant difference(p < 0.05).

Page 5: Investigation of the cytotoxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions in Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cells

H. Yu, Q. Huang / Food Chemistry 141 (2013) 29–33 33

The aim of this work was focussed on food-grade nanoemul-sions. The exposure routes of the nanoemulsions were thus limitedto the digestive tract, especially the small intestine, considering itslarge surface area, and possibly the liver, to where digested and ab-sorbed food are carried for possible metabolism and storage. Basedon these considerations, Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cellswere chosen to mimic the small intestine epithelium and the liverhepatocytes, respectively. Meanwhile, micron-sized emulsionswere prepared in parallel and served as the control, since it is gen-erally accepted that regular (micron-sized) emulsions do not bearany toxicity to the human body.

In the two experiments on Caco-2 cell monolayers, compared tomicron-sized emulsions, nanoemulsions did not reveal apparenttoxicity on Caco-2 cell monolayers, suggesting that nanoemulsionsmay not bear significant toxicity to the small intestine. Actually, itis expected that food-grade nanoemulsions undergo digestion(once ingested) along with other food components and, becauseof their very large surface areas, nanoemulsions are digested muchfaster than regular micron-sized emulsions (Li & McClements,2010; Yu & Huang, 2012). In the in vivo scenario, only a small por-tion of intact nanoemulsions may have the chance to interact withthe small intestine epithelium directly. This interaction, in themimicked in vitro environment as shown in this study, did notreveal apparent toxicity.

In terms of the hepatic toxicity, it was shown here that modifiedstarch- and WPI-stabilized nanoemulsions affected the prolifera-tion/viability of HepG2 cells, while Tween 20 stabilized nanoemul-sions did not reveal significant difference from micron-sizedemulsions. The reason for this difference in the emulsifiers is stillunknown. One hypothesis is that modified starch and WPI are both(modified) biological molecules and may interact with cell mem-brane through specific receptors while Tween 20 is synthetic andcontains multiple polyethylene glycol (PEG) moieties which mayprevent/decrease the interaction with cells, as shown in the caseof PEGylated proteins and PEGylated quantum dots nanoparticles(Clift et al., 2008; Tsutsumi et al., 2000). On the other hand,although nanoemulsions formed with modified starch and WPIshowed increased cytotoxicity on HepG2 cells, the in vivo implica-tion is still unclear, since there is, so far, no evidence showing thatintact food-grade nanoemulsions are able to permeate through theepithelium layers lining the digestive tract and be transported tothe liver.

Although in real practice, nanoemulsions are usually used asdelivery vehicles for lipophilic compounds, only empty nanoemul-sions were used here, considering the possibility that bioactivesmay act on cells and thus make it hard to interpret the results.To really address the toxicity issue of the nanoemulsion-encapsu-lated bioactives, in vivo experiments are required and the adverseeffect caused by increased oral bioavailability of the bioactivesshould be carefully examined (Huang, Yu, & Ru, 2010; McClements& Rao, 2011).

5. Conclusions

The possible toxicity of food-grade nanoemulsions was exam-ined in vitro, using Caco-2 cell monolayers and HepG2 cells tomimic the response of the small intestine epithelium and the liver,respectively. It was found that, compared with micron-sized emul-sions with the same compositions, nanoemulsions did not revealsignificantly more toxicity on Caco-2 cell monolayers and that

nanoemulsions made with modified starch and whey protein iso-late affected the proliferation/viability of HepG2 cells. These re-sults suggested that nanoemulsions may not affect the smallintestine epithelium and that the hepatic toxicity of nanoemul-sions may need further investigation in vivo.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Agricultureunder Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (USDA-AFRI) Grant2009-65503-05793.

References

Bai, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, J., Mu, Q., Zhang, W., Butch, E. R., et al. (2010). Repeatedadministrations of carbon nanotubes in male mice cause reversible testisdamage without affecting fertility. Nature Nanotechnology, 5, 683–689.

Bhabra, G., Sood, A., Fisher, B., Cartwright, L., Saunders, M., Evans, W. H., et al.(2009). Nanoparticles can cause DNA damage across a cellular barrier. NatureNanotechnology, 4, 876–883.

Bort, R., Ponsoda, X., Jover, R., Gomez-Lechon, M. J., & Castell, J. V. (1999). Diclofenactoxicity to hepatocytes: A role for drug metabolism in cell toxicity. Journal ofPharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 288, 65–72.

Clift, M. J. D., Rothen-Rutishauser, B., Brown, D. M., Duffin, R., Donaldson, K.,Proudfoot, L., et al. (2008). The impact of different nanoparticle surfacechemistry and size on uptake and toxicity in a murine macrophage cell line.Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 232(3), 418–427.

Hatanaka, J., Chikamori, H., Sato, H., Uchida, S., Debari, K., Onoue, S., et al. (2010).Physicochemical and pharmacological characterization of [alpha]-tocopherol-loaded nano-emulsion system. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 396(1–2),188–193.

Hidalgo, I. J., Raub, T. J., & Borchardt, R. T. (1989). Characterization of the humancolon carcinoma cell line (Caco-2) as a model system for intestinal epithelialpermeability. Gastroenterology, 96, 736–749.

Huang, Q., Yu, H., & Ru, Q. (2010). Bioavailability and delivery of nutraceuticalsusing nanotechnology. Journal of Food Science, 75(1), R50–R57.

Hubatsch, I., Ragnarsson, E. G. E., & Artursson, P. (2007). Determination of drugpermeability and prediction of drug absorption in Caco-2 monolayers. NatureProtocols, 2, 2111–2119.

Li, Y., & McClements, D. J. (2010). New mathematical model for interpreting pH-statdigestion profiles: Impact of lipid droplet characteristics on in vitrodigestibility. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 58, 8085–8092.

Lu, Y. K., & Cederbaum, A. I. (2006). Cisplatin-induced hepatotoxicity is enhanced byelevated expression of cytochrome P450 2E1. Toxicological Sciences, 89,515–523.

McClements, D. J., & Rao, J. (2011). Food-grade nanoemulsions: Formulation,fabrication, properties, performance, biological fate, and potential toxicity.Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 51, 285–330.

McClements, D. J., & Xiao, H. (2012). Potential biological fate of ingestednanoemulsions: Influence of particle characteristics. Food and Function, 3,202–220.

Ohno, Y., Naganuma, T., Ogawa, T., & Muramoto, K. (2006). Effect of lectins on thetransport of food factors in Caco-2 cell monolayers. Journal of Agriculture andFood Chemistry, 54, 548–553.

Tsutsumi, Y., Onda, M., Nagata, S., Lee, B., Kreitman, R. J., & Pastan, I. (2000). Site-specific chemical modification with polyethylene glycol of recombinantimmunotoxin anti-Tac(Fv)-PE38 (LMB-2) improves antitumor activity andreduces animal toxicity and immunogenicity. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences, 97, 8548–8553.

Wang, X. Y., Jiang, Y., Wang, Y. W., Huang, M. T., Ho, C. T., & Huang, Q. R. (2008).Enhancing anti-inflammation activity of curcumin through O/Wnanoemulsions. Food Chemistry, 108, 419–424.

Yamashita, S., Furubayashi, T., Kataoka, M., Sakane, T., Sezaki, H., & Tokuda, H.(2000). Optimized conditions for prediction of intestinal drug permeabilityusing Caco-2 cells. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 10, 195–204.

Yamashita, K., Yoshioka, Y., Higashisaka, K., Mimura, K., Morishita, Y., Nozaki, M.,et al. (2011). Silica and titanium dioxide nanoparticles cause pregnancycomplications in mice. Nature Nanotechnology, 6, 321–328.

Yu, H., & Huang, Q. (2010). Enhanced in vitro anti-cancer activity of curcuminencapsulated in hydrophobically modified starch. Food Chemistry, 119, 669–674.

Yu, H., & Huang, Q. (2012). Improving the oral bioavailability of curcumin usingnovel organogel-based nanoemulsions. Journal of Agriculture and FoodChemistry, 60, 5373–5379.


Top Related