Retracted Article: Radio frequency triggered curcumin delivery from thermo and pH responsive nanoparticles containing gold nanoparticles and its in vivo localization studies in an orthotopic breast tumor model
Authors: N. Sanoj Rejinold
Reju George Thomas
Muthunarayanan Muthiah
K. P. Chennazhi
In-Kyu Park
Yong Yeon Jeong
K. Manzoor
R. Jayakumar
Journal: RSC Advances (2014)
Discipline: CHEMISTRY
Keywords: Non-invasive; radiofrequency; nanoparticles; cancer cells; drug delivery
Affiliations: Amrita Centre for Nanosciences and Molecular Medicine, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research centre, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi-682041, India, Department of Radiology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju 501-746, South Korea, Department of Biomedical Science and BK21 PLUS Center for Creative Biomedical Scientists

Abstract: Non-invasive radiofrequency (RF) electric fields as an energy source for thermal activation of nanoparticles and thereby delivering drugs within cancer cells could be a valuable addition to nano-mediated RF based cancer therapies. Utilizing the high penetration of RF waves would be useful for the controlled release of encapsulated drug molecules from smart thermo and pH responsive nanoparticles. Herein, we demonstrate that breast cancer cells could selectively internalize hemocompatible, 170 ¬± 20 nm sized curcumin encapsulated chitosan-graft-poly(N-vinyl caprolactam) nanoparticles containing gold nanoparticles (Au-CRC-TRC-NPs). Au-CRC-TRC-NPs were predominantly accumulated within the cytoplasm. After ‚Äúoptimum RF exposure‚Ä?at 40 watts for 5 minutes, Au-CRC-TRC-NPs absorbed and dissipated energy as heat in the range of 42 ¬∞C, which is the lower critical solution temperature (LCST) of chitosan-graft-poly(N-vinyl caprolactam), causing controlled curcumin release and inducing apoptosis to 4T1 breast cancer cells. Further, the tumor localization studies on orthotopic breast cancer models revealed that Au-CRC-TRC-NPs could selectively accumulate at primary and secondary tumors as confirmed by in vivo live imaging followed by ex vivo tissue imaging and HPLC studies. These preclinical results throw light on their feasibility as a better tumor targetable nanomedicine for RF-assisted breast treatment modalities.

Retracted: Yes

PubPeer comments:
 Figure 12:  SEM images of (H) Au-NPs; (I) Au-CRC-TRCNPs treated platelets portraying discrete platelets exhibiting normal morphology  I believe that (H) and (I) are the same. Figure 9(D): Two different varieties of nanoparticle seem to have overlapping effects on IEC6 cells.  , 
 Fig 18,  NIR imaging. (A) 5 min; (B) 30 min; (C) 1h; (D) 6h; **(E)12h; (F) 18h** ; (G)24h; (H)48h; (I)96h; (J) 168h imaging after IV administration of Au-TRC-NPs. One mouse has maintained its pose very well for 6 hours. Is it possible that the same scan was reused by mistake?  Figure 19. Versatile mice.  Update to Fig 19... I ran out of colours.  , 
 Fig 18 again. The mice were more inbred than I realised.  I m just speculating that if a mouse has really held an identical pose for 5 days (from 48 to 168 hours), it is probably not alive, which obviates the whole in-vivo part of the experiment. , 
 Here is my interpretation of Figure 19. , 
 Here is my interpretation of Figure 19.  , 
 Figure 15 appears to have some similarities as well.  , 
 Figure 9 also has some areas that are similar. I see what Hoya commented on - and more.  , 
 Figure 10 and 11 appear to have 2 sets of panels that look similar but represent different cell lines. Could the authors explain why such similar looking FACS plots have different gating percentages, please?  , 
 #8  , 
 Figure 12B from this paper looks also unexpectedly similar to Figure 15 from another paper, that we will call paper D. * Paper D: ACS applied materials interfaces 3, no. 9 (2011): 3654-3665. DOI: 10.1021 am200844m * Paper G: Rsc Advances 4, no. 74 (2014): 39408-39427. DOI: 10.1039 C4RA05727A (this paper)  , 
 Retraction We, the named authors, hereby wholly retract this RSC Advances article due to duplication of images in Fig. 9u201312, 15, 18 and 19, which affect the reliability of the data and the overall conclusions presented in the published article. Signed: N. Sanoj Rejinold, Reju George Thomas, Muthunarayanan Muthiah, K. P. Chennazhi, In-Kyu Park, K. Manzoor and R. Jayakumar, 24th July 2020. Yong Yeon Jeong was contacted but did not respond. Retraction endorsed by Laura Fisher, Executive Editor, RSC Advances. ,