Additional file 1 of Ultrasmall Fe3O4 and Gd2O3 hybrid nanoparticles for T1-weighted MR imaging of cancer
Creators: name: Sarikhani, Abolfazl
name: Alamzadeh, Zahra
name: Beik, Jaber
name: Irajirad, Rasoul
name: Mirrahimi, Mehri
name: Pirhajati Mahabadi, Vahid
name: Kamrava, S. Kamran
name: Ghaznavi, Habib
name: Khoei, Samideh
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2023
Subjects: subject: Space Science
subject: Medicine
subject: Cell Biology
subject: Physiology
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: Biotechnology
subject: 39999 Chemical Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Chemical sciences
subject: Immunology
subject: FOS: Clinical medicine
subject: Cancer

description: Additional file 1: Fig. S1. Size distributions of (a): US-IO and (b): FG-HNPs2 measured from the TEM images. Fig. S2. XRD patterns of (a): Gd2O3, (b): US-IO, (c): Gd2O3 @CMD, (d): FG-HNPs2. FG-HNPs2 was heated in furnace to remove dextran coating (The dextran coating prevented to see the XRD pattern. To remove it, under nitrogen gas, 10 ˚C was added to the temperature every 1 minute to reach 900 ˚C). The peaks related to Gd2O3 and Fe3O4 are indicated by asterisks * and double asterisks **, respectively. Fig. S3. (a) T1-weighted MR images of FG-HNPs with 0.25-3 Gd/Fe molar ratios at varying Gd concentrations (TE = 12 ms, TR = 600 ms). (b) T1 and (c) T2 relaxation rates plotted as a function of CGd for FG-HNPs1-5. T1 relaxation rate: TE = 12 ms, TR = 100 ~ 5000 ms. T2 relaxation rate: TE = 12 ~168 ms, TR = 2000 ms. (d) r1 value or r2/r1 ratio plotted as a function of Gd/Fe molar ratio. (e) ΔSNR of the MR images for FG-HNPs1-5 at various Gd concentrations measured by ImageJ software compared to pure water (CGd=0). The magnetic field was 1.5 T. Fig. S4. (a, b): T1 relaxation rate (1/T1, s-1) or T2 relaxation rate (1/T2, s-1) plotted as a function of CGd for FG-HNPs2 prepared from 3 batches (i.e., FG-HNPs2-1, FG-HNPs2-2, FG-HNPs2-3) were synthesized from 3 different batches at same conditions. (c, d): T1 or T2 relaxation rate plotted as a function of CGd for commercial Dotarem® prepared from 3 batches (i.e., Dotarem-1, Dotarem-2, Dotarem-3). For T1 relaxation rates: TE = 12 ms, TR = 100 ~ 4000 ms. For T2 relaxation rates: TE = 12 ~168 ms, TR = 2000 ms. The magnetic field was 1.5 T. Fig. S5. (a, b): T1 relaxation rate (1/T1, s-1) or T2 relaxation rate (1/T2, s-1) plotted as a function of CGd for FG-HNPs2 prepared from 3 batches (i.e., FG-HNPs2-1, FG-HNPs2-2, FG-HNPs2-3) were synthesized from 3 different batches at same conditions. (c, d): T1 or T2 relaxation rate plotted as a function of CGd for commercial Dotarem® prepared from 3 batches (i.e., Dotarem-1, Dotarem-2, Dotarem-3). For T1 relaxation rates: TE = 12 ms, TR = 100 ~ 4000 ms. For T2 relaxation rates: TE = 12 ~168 ms, TR = 2000 ms. The magnetic field was 3.0 T. Fig. S6. (a-c) T1 signal intensity versus TR values for three different batches of FG-HNPs2 at varying Gd concentrations. Fig. S7. (a) T1-weighted MR images of CT26 cells exposed with US-IO, Dotarem® and FG-HNPs2 at varying Fe or Gd concentrations. TR = 800 ms, TE = 14 ms. (b) ΔSNR of MR images of cancer cells for US-IO, Dotarem® and FG-HNPs2 groups compared to the control (CFe or CGd = 0). Mean ± SD, n = 3. The magnetic field was 1.5 T.