Additional file 1 of Glioma-targeted oxaliplatin/ferritin clathrate reversing the immunosuppressive microenvironment through hijacking Fe2+ and boosting Fenton reaction
Creators: name: Li, Xue
name: Cheng, Ying
name: Yang, Zhifu
name: Ji, Qifeng
name: Huan, Menglei
name: Ye, Weiliang
name: Liu, Miao
name: Zhang, Bangle
name: Liu, Daozhou
name: Zhou, Siyuan
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2024
Subjects: subject: Biochemistry
subject: Space Science
subject: Medicine
subject: Cell Biology
subject: Biotechnology
subject: Immunology
subject: FOS: Clinical medicine
subject: Developmental Biology
subject: Cancer
subject: Hematology
subject: Infectious Diseases
subject: FOS: Health sciences
subject: Plant Biology
subject: FOS: Biological sciences

description: Additional file 1: Figure S1. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) image of OXA@Fn. (A) XPS image of carbon element in OXA@Fn. (B) XPS image of oxygen element in OXA@Fn. (C) XPS image of nitrogen element in OXA@Fn. (D) XPS image of iron element in OXA@Fn. (E) XPS image of platinum element in OXA@Fn. Figure S2. Uptake of OXA@Fn by GL261/TR cells in the presence of different uptake inhibitors. (A) Uptake of OXA@Fn by GL261/TR cells in the presence of different uptake inhibitors observed by CLSM. (B) The typical flow cytometer diagrams of the uptake of OXA@Fn by GL261/TR cells in the presence of different uptake inhibitors. (C) Statistical analysis of the effect of different uptake inhibitors and transferrin on uptake of Cy5 labeled OXA@Fn by GL261/TR cells detected by flow cytometer. (n = 3, mean ± SD, **P &lt; 0.01). Figure S3. The effect of OXA@Fn on the viability of GL261/TR cells. (A) The death ratio of GL261/TR cells. (B) The cloning formation rate of GL261/TR cells after cells were treated with OXA@Fn. (C) The typical flow cytometer diagram of LPO in GL261/TR cells. (D) Statistical analysis of the LPO in GL261/TR cells. (E) The typical flow cytometer diagram of ROS in GL261/TR cells. (F) Statistical analysis of the ROS in GL261/TR cells. (n = 3, mean ± SD, *P &lt; 0.05, **P &lt; 0.01). Figure S4. The resistance values between transwell donor chamber and recipient chamber before and after drug administration. (n = 3, mean ± SD, ns: no significant difference). Figure S5. The expression of TfR1 in bEnd 3 cells and HUVEC. Figure S6. The integrated brain targeting efficiency of OXA@Fn. Figure S7. The expression of invasion-related proteins in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue after the treatment of OXA@Fn. (A) The expression of invasion-related proteins in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue detected by western blot. (B) Semi-quantitative analysis of invasion-related proteins. (n = 3, mean ± SD, *P &lt; 0.05, **P &lt; 0.01). Figure S8. Semi-quantitative analysis of xCT and GPX4 expression in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (n = 3, mean ± SD, *P &lt; 0.05, **P &lt; 0.01). Figure S9. Effect of OXA@Fn on polarization of glioma-associated macrophages (GAM) in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (A) Statistic analysis of M1 type GAM (Iba-1 and CD86 co-positive cells) in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (B) Statistic analysis of M2 type GAM (Iba-1 and CD206 co-positive cells) in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (n = 3, mean ± SD, *P &lt; 0.05, **P &lt; 0.01). Figure S10. Semi-quantitative analysis of CRT and HMGB1 expression in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (n = 3, mean ± SD, *P &lt; 0.05, **P &lt; 0.01). Figure S11. Effect of OXA@Fn on immune microenvironment in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (A) The ratio of matured DC cell in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (B) The proportion of Teff cell in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (C) The proportion of Treg cell in orthotopic TMZ-resistant glioma tissue. (n = 3, mean ± SD, *P &lt; 0.05, **P &lt; 0.01).