Research Article

School for Radiological & Interdisciplinary Sciences (RAD-X), Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiation Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123, PR China

^‡Authors contributed equally

Xiaohu Ni^‡

^‡Authors contributed equally

Search for more papers by this author

Renfei Wu

Search for more papers by this author

Yu Chong

Search for more papers by this author

Xingfa Gao

College of Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang 330022, PR China

Search for more papers by this author

Cuicui Ge

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: ccge@suda.edu.cn

Search for more papers by this author

Jun-Jie Yin

Division of Bioanalytical Chemistry & Division of Analytical Chemistry, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition, US Food & Drug Administration, College Park, MD 20740, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:15 Mar 2018https://doi.org/10.2217/nnm-2017-0314

View article

Abstract

Aim: To develop the potential application of carbon nanomaterials as antioxidants calls for better understanding of how the specific structure affects their antioxidant activity. Materials & methods: Several typical carbon nanomaterials, including graphene quantum dots and fullerene derivatives were characterized and their radical scavenging activities were evaluated; in addition, the in vitro and in vivo radioprotection experiments were performed. Results: These carbon nanomaterials can efficiently scavenge free radicals in a structure-dependent manner. In vitro assays demonstrate that administration of these carbon nanomaterials markedly increases the surviving fraction of cells exposed to ionizing radiation. Moreover, in vivo experiments confirm that their administration can also increase the survival rates of mice exposed to radiation. Conclusion: All results confirm that large, buckyball-shaped fullerenes show the strongest antioxidant properties and the best radioprotective efficiency. Our work will be useful in guiding the design and optimization of nanomaterials for potential antioxidant and radioprotection bio-applications.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

1 Vassort G, Turan B. Protective role of antioxidants in diabetes-induced cardiac dysfunction. Cardiovasc. Toxicol. 10, 73–86 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
2 Lambeth JD. NOX enzymes and the biology of reactive oxygen. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 4(3), 181–189 (2004).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3 Winterbourn CC. Reconciling the chemistry and biology of reactive oxygen species. Nat. Chem. Biol. 4(5), 278–286 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4 Zeeshan HM, Lee GH, Kim HR, Chae HJ. Endoplasmic reticulum stress and associated ROS. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 17(3), 327–347 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5 Hernandes-Rios P, Pussinen PJ, Vernal R, Hernandez M. Oxidative Stress in the local and systemic events of apical periodontitis. Front. Physiol. 8, 869 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6 Strzelczyk JK, Wiczkowski A. Oxidative damage and carcinogenesis. Wspolczesna Onkol. 16(3), 230–233 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7 Ahmad SI. Ultraviolet light in human health, diseases and environment. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 996 (2017).
Google Scholar
8 Box HC, Dawidzik JB, Wallace JC et al. An overall perspective of x-ray damage to a DNA oligomer mediated by reactive oxygen species. Radiat. Res. 152(6), 575–582 (1999).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9 Bernier J, Hall EJ, Giaccia A. Radiation oncology: a century of achievements. Nat. Rev. Cancer 4(9), 737–747 (2004).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10 McColl N, Auvinen A, Kesminiene A et al. European Code against Cancer 4th Edition: ionising and non-ionising radiation and cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. 39, S93–S100 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
11 Robertson A, Allen J, Laney R, Curnow A. The cellular and molecular carcinogenic effects of radon exposure: a review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 14(7), 14024–14063 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12 Silver SR, Bertke SJ, Hein MJ et al. Mortality and ionising radiation exposures among workers employed at the Fernald Feed Materials Production Center (1951–1985). Occup. Environ. Med. 70(7), 453–463 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13 Tung D, Cheung PH, Wilson J, Tudor G, Booth C, Saha S. Differential effects of cyclosporin and etanercept treatment on various pathologic parameters in a murine model of irradiation-induced mucositis. Curr. Ther. Res. 73(4–5), 150–164 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14 Park CS, Kim EJ, Jeong KS et al. Assessment of cytogenetic damages on human peripheral lymphocytes following gamma rays local cutaneous exposures. Park. Vet. J. 34, 68–72 (2014).
Google Scholar
15 Harfouche G, Martin MT. Response of normal stem cells to ionizing radiation: a balance between homeostasis and genomic stability. Mutt. Res. 704(1–3), 167–174 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16 Valizadeh M, Shirazi A, Izadi P, Tavakkoly BJ, Rezaeejam H. Expression levels of two DNA repairrelated genes under 8 Gy ionizing radiation and 100 mg/kg melatonin delivery in rat peripheral blood. J. Biomed. Phys. Eng. 7(1), 27–36 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17 Nakagawa K, Kobukai K, Sato Y. ESR investigation of sucrose radicals produced by 0.25–4.5 Gy doses of x-ray irradiation. J. Radiat. Res. 55(4), 726–729 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18 Eriksson D, Stigbrand T. Radiation-induced cell death mechanisms. Tumor Biol. 31(4), 363–372 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
19 Kiang JG, Gorbunov NV, Fukumoto R. Lipid peroxidation after ionizing irradiation leads to apoptosis and autophagy. INTECH Open Access Publisher. doi:10.5772/48189 (2012) (Epub ahead of print).
Google Scholar
20 Citrin D, Cotrim AP, Hyodo F, Baum BJ, Krishna MC, Mitchell JB. Radioprotectors and mitigators of radiation-induced normal tissue injury. Oncologist 15(4), 360–371 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
21 Johnke RM, Sattler JA, Allison RR. Radioprotective agents for radiation therapy: future trends. Future Oncol. 10(15), 2345–2357 (2014). • A comprehensive review on the development of radioprotectors with emphasis on compounds with proven or potential usefulness in radiation therapy.
CASGoogle Scholar
22 Huang Y, Liu Z, Liu C et al. Self-assembly of multi-nanozymes to mimic an intracellular antioxidant defense system. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 55(23), 6646–6650 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23 Liu Q, Zheng J, Guan M, Fang X, Wang C, Shu C. Protective effect of C70-carboxyfullerene against oxidative-induced stress on postmitotic muscle cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 5(10), 4328–4333 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24 Qiao Y, Zhang P, Wang C, Ma L, Su M. Reducing x-ray induced oxidative damages in fibroblasts with graphene oxide. Nanomedicine 4(2), 522–534 (2014).
Google Scholar
25 Shieh YT, Wang WW. Radical scavenging efficiencies of modified and microwave-treated multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Carbon 79, 354–362 (2014).
CASGoogle Scholar
26 Huang Y, Liu C, Pu F, Liu Z, Ren J, Qu X. A GO-Se nanocomposite as an antioxidant nanozyme for cytoprotection. Chem. Commun. 53(21), 3082–3085 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27 Qiu Y, Wang Z, Owens AC et al. Antioxidant chemistry of graphene-based materials and its role in oxidation protection technology. Nanoscale 6(20), 11744–11755 (2014). • An important study on exploring the relative antioxidant activity of different members of the graphene material family.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28 Samuel EL, Marcano DC, Berka V et al. Highly efficient conversion of superoxide to oxygen using hydrophilic carbon clusters. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112(8), 2343–2348 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
29 Zhang C, Chen S, Alvarez PJ, Chen W. Reduced graphene oxide enhances horseradish peroxidase stability by serving as radical scavenger and redox mediator. Carbon 94, 531–538 (2015).
CASGoogle Scholar
30 Yin JJ, Lao F, Fu PP et al. The scavenging of reactive oxygen species and the potential for cell protection by functionalized fullerene materials. Biomaterials 30(4), 611–621 (2008). • An important study on exploring the antioxidant activity of fullerene nanomaterials.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31 Park J, Kim B, Han J et al. Graphene oxide flakes as a cellular adhesive: prevention of reactive oxygen species mediated death of implanted cells for cardiac repair. ACS Nano 9(5), 4987–4999 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32 He W, Liu Y, Wamer GW, Yin JJ. Electron spin resonance spectroscopy for the study of nanomaterial-mediated generation of reactive oxygen species. J. Food Drug Anal. 22(1), 49–63 (2014). • A significant report on the application of electron spin resonance spectroscopy to determine the reactive oxygen species.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33 Arslan NB, Ozdemir N. Direct and solvent-assisted keto-enol tautomerism and hydrogen-bonding interactions in 4-(m-chlorobenzylamino)-3-phenyl-4,5-dihydro-1H-1,2,4-triazol-5-one: a quantum-chemical study. J. Mol. Model. 21, 19–39 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34 Mohammad RK, Madlol RA, Umran NM, Sharrad FI. Structure and electronic properties of substitutionally doped cycloheptane molecule using DFT. Results Phys. 6, 1036–1043 (2016).
Google Scholar
35 Kinner A, Wu W, Staudt C, Iliakis G. γ-H2AX in recognition and signaling of DNA double-strand breaks in the context of chromatin. Nucleic Acids Res. 36(17), 5678–5694 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36 Nandhakumar S, Parasuraman S, Shanmugam M, Rao KR, Chand P, Bhat BV. Evaluation of DNA damage using single-cell gel electrophoresis (Comet Assay). J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother. 2(2), 107–111 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37 Kang M, So E, Simons A. DNA damage induces reactive oxygen species generation through the H2AX-Nox1/Rac1 pathway. Cell Death Dis. 3, e249 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38 Manda K, Glasow A, Paape D, Hildebrandt G. Effects of ionizing radiation on the immune system with special emphasis on the interaction of dendritic and T cells. Front. Oncol. 2(102), 1–9 (2012).
Google Scholar
39 Kusunoki Y, Hayashi T. Long-lasting alterations of the immune system by ionizing radiation exposure: implications for disease development among atomic bomb survivors. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 84(1), 1–14 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40 Zhao S, Yang Y, Liu W et al. Protective effect of hydrogen-rich saline against radiation-induced immune dysfunction. J. Cell Mol. Med. 18(5), 938–946 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41 Candeias SM, Testard I. Radiation-induced alterations in cytokine production by skin cells. Cancer Lett. 368, 173–178 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42 Kim YC, Barshishat-Kupper M, McCart EA, Mueller GP, Day RM. Bone marrow protein oxidation in response to ionizing radiation in C57BL/6J mice. Proteomes 2(3), 291–302 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
43 Guo CY, Luo L, Urata Y et al. Sensitivity and dose dependency of radiation-induced injury in hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells in mice. Sci. Rep. 5, 8055 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar

Vol. 13, No. 7

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 292 times

History

Received 10 October 2017

Accepted 1 February 2018

Published online 15 March 2018

Published in print April 2018

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/nnm-2017-0314.

Author's contributions

The study was planned and directed by C Ge, X Cheng and X Ni performed the experiments. Y Chong and R Wu contributed to the ESR experiments. X Gao carried out the theoretical calculations. The manuscript was prepared by C Ge and J Yin contributed to the improvement of the manuscript.

Disclaimer

This article is not an official US FDA guidance or policy statement. No official support or endorsement by the US FDA is intended or should be inferred.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

This work is partially supported by the National Basic Research Program of China (973 program grant number 2014CB931900), National Natural Science Foundation of China (11575123), Jiangsu Provincial Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, a project funded by the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD), and a regulatory science grant under the FDA Nanotechnology CORES Program. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

The authors thank LF Vélez for the editorial and scientific writing support.

Ethical conduct of research

All animal experiments were conducted with the approval of the Ethical Committee of Soochow University.

PDF download

Evaluation of the structure–activity relationship of carbon nanomaterials as antioxidants

Abstract

References