Journal: International Journal of Pharmaceutics: X

Article Title: Biomineralized outer membrane vesicles for synergistic immuno-photodynamic therapy of oral squamous cell carcinoma

doi: 10.1016/j.ijpx.2026.100537

Figure Lengend Snippet: In vitro assessment. Conditions for cellular binding under various conditions by CLSM and flow cytometry. (A) SCC7 cells were incubated to OCC at equivalent Ce6 concentrations of 1.0–2.5 μg/mL for 8 h at pH 6.4; an additional group treated with 2.5 μg/mL OCC (equivalent Ce6) was established at pH 7.4 as a control. (B) SCC7 cells were incubated with OCC (2.5 μg/mL Ce6) at pH 6.4 for periods ranging from 1 to 8 h.

Article Snippet: Chlorin e6 (Ce6) was purchased from MedChem Express (China); DMEM/F-12 medium, fetal bovine serum (FBS), phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and penicillin/streptomycin were all purchased from Gibco (USA); LB broth was purchased from Guangdong Huankai Microbial Science and Technology Co., Ltd.

Techniques: In Vitro, Binding Assay, Flow Cytometry, Incubation, Control

Journal: International Journal of Pharmaceutics: X

Article Title: Biomineralized outer membrane vesicles for synergistic immuno-photodynamic therapy of oral squamous cell carcinoma

doi: 10.1016/j.ijpx.2026.100537

Figure Lengend Snippet: In vitro evaluation of the biological effects induced by OCC. ROS level detection, Live/Dead staining, apoptosis, and in vitro activation of immature dendritic cells. SCC7 cells were treated with PBS, OMV, Ce6, OC, OCC for 8 h, with an additional OCC group at pH 7.4; all groups were set with 660 nm laser irradiation and non-irradiation controls. (A) Cellular ROS level determination by DCFH-DA method. (B) Fluorescence microscopy images of SCC7 cells stained with Calcein-AM/PI. (C) Apoptosis detection of SCC7 cells. (D) In vitro activation of dendritic cells.

Article Snippet: Chlorin e6 (Ce6) was purchased from MedChem Express (China); DMEM/F-12 medium, fetal bovine serum (FBS), phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and penicillin/streptomycin were all purchased from Gibco (USA); LB broth was purchased from Guangdong Huankai Microbial Science and Technology Co., Ltd.

Techniques: In Vitro, Staining, Activation Assay, Irradiation, Fluorescence, Microscopy

Journal: International Journal of Pharmaceutics: X

Article Title: Biomineralized outer membrane vesicles for synergistic immuno-photodynamic therapy of oral squamous cell carcinoma

doi: 10.1016/j.ijpx.2026.100537

Figure Lengend Snippet: In vivo biodistribution and homotypic targeting evaluation in BALB/c mice ( n = 3) administered with Ce6 and OCC. BALB/c mice ( n = 3 per group) were administered with Ce6 or OCC to evaluate in vivo biodistribution and homotypic targeting of the formulations. (A) Analysis of in vivo biodistribution of fluorescent nanoparticles. (B, C) Ex vivo imaging of major organs and corresponding quantitative evaluation. All data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. * P < 0.05 between two groups.

Article Snippet: Chlorin e6 (Ce6) was purchased from MedChem Express (China); DMEM/F-12 medium, fetal bovine serum (FBS), phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and penicillin/streptomycin were all purchased from Gibco (USA); LB broth was purchased from Guangdong Huankai Microbial Science and Technology Co., Ltd.

Techniques: In Vivo, Ex Vivo, Imaging, Standard Deviation

Journal: International Journal of Pharmaceutics: X

Article Title: Biomineralized outer membrane vesicles for synergistic immuno-photodynamic therapy of oral squamous cell carcinoma

doi: 10.1016/j.ijpx.2026.100537

Figure Lengend Snippet: Antitumor efficacy in SCC7 tumor-bearing BALB/c mice ( n = 5) after tail vein injection of different formulations. SCC7 tumor-bearing BALB/c mice were randomly divided into 8 groups and treated via tail vein injection: PBS group, PBS + Laser group, Ce6 group, Ce6 + Laser group, OMV group, OC group, OCC group, and OCC + Laser group. The administration dosage of Ce6, OC, and OCC was equivalent to Ce6 at 2.5 mg/kg, while the dosage of OMV was 30 μg per mouse. (A) Photographs of excised tumors after different treatments. (B) Dynamic changes in tumor volume. (C) Tumor weights recorded on Day 11 at the end of treatment. (D) Body weight changes of mice in different treatment groups. (E) Representative pathological sections of tumor tissues stained with H&E, Ki-67, and TUNEL. (F) H& E -stained sections of major organs. All data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. ns indicates no significant difference; inter-group comparisons: * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, and **** P < 0.0001.

Article Snippet: Chlorin e6 (Ce6) was purchased from MedChem Express (China); DMEM/F-12 medium, fetal bovine serum (FBS), phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and penicillin/streptomycin were all purchased from Gibco (USA); LB broth was purchased from Guangdong Huankai Microbial Science and Technology Co., Ltd.

Techniques: Injection, Staining, TUNEL Assay, Standard Deviation

Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

Article Title: A harmless-to-harmful switchable and spatiotemporally activated nano-CRISPR hierarchically amplifies ferroptosis in melanoma

doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102718

Figure Lengend Snippet: The performance and distribution of ARCHER in vitro on B16-F10 (A) Pseudo color plots gated on single cells showing YOYO-1-positive cells 2 h after different nanoparticle administrations. (B and C) Quantitative analysis of cellular uptake efficiency and the MFI of YOYO-1 in all single cells after incubating cells with different nanoparticles for 2 h by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 3; mean ± SD). (D) Imaging of intracellular tracking of ARCHER after 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 h of co-incubation of ARCHER with B16-F10 cells, endo/lysosomes, pX330, and nuclei was respectively labeled by LysoTracker (red), YOYO-1 (green), and DAPI (blue). Scale bars represent 10 μm. (E) Imaging of GFP fluorescence in the B16-F10 cells treated with PBS or different nanoparticles for 24 h. Scale bars represent 500 μm. (F–H) The transfection efficiency analysis of different nanoparticles by FCM. The histogram for GFP in single cells (F), quantitative analysis of the transfection efficiency (G), and the MFI of GFP (H) of different nanoparticles on B16-F10 cells by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 3; mean ± SD). 1–7 refer to the treatment with PBS, PEI 25K/pX459, PEI 1.8K/pX459, PF33/pX439, HA/PF33/pX459, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/pX459, and RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl/PF33/pX459. (I) Illustration of the construction of CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 system.

Article Snippet: Ce6 , Macklin , Cat#829662.

Techniques: In Vitro, Imaging, Incubation, Labeling, Fluorescence, Transfection, CRISPR

Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

Article Title: A harmless-to-harmful switchable and spatiotemporally activated nano-CRISPR hierarchically amplifies ferroptosis in melanoma

doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102718

Figure Lengend Snippet: The killing efficacy and ferroptosis efficacy of ARCHER in vitro (A) The Sanger sequencing result of the PCR amplicon of the targeted locus after treatment with CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 by ARCHER. (B) The image of the PCR amplicon of the targeted locus by T7E1 assay. From top to bottom, the first gel strip is 549 bp in length. (C) Images of fluorescence of Calcein AM/PI in B16-F10 cells after different treatments. Scale bars represent 500 μm. (D) The fluorescence images of ROS generation in B16-F10 cells with different treatments. Scale bars represent 200 μm. (E) The representative images of FITC of positive cells percent and statistics by FCM, in which B16-F10 cells received different treatments and were stained with JC-1 by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗∗ p < 0.01; ns, not significant; n = 3; mean ± SD). (F) Statistics of mitochondrial membrane potential change of B16-F10 cells treated with different preparations by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 3; mean ± SD). (G) The images of Bio-TEM of B16-F10 cells treated with ARCHER with/without laser. Scale bars represent 1 μm. (H) The confocal images of LPO in cells treated with different modalities and stained with C11 BOIDIPY. Scale bars represent 20 μm. (I–K) The analysis of LPO accumulation in B16-F10 cells receiving different nanoparticles treatment. The histogram for LPO (I) in single cells, quantitative analysis of FITC positive efficiency (J), and the MFI of FITC (K) of different nanoparticles on B16-F10 cells by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 3; mean ± SD). 1–7 refer to the treatment with PBS, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl/PF33/CRISPR-Null, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl/PF33/CRISPR-Null + laser, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 + laser, ARCHER, and ARCHER + laser.

Article Snippet: Ce6 , Macklin , Cat#829662.

Techniques: In Vitro, Sequencing, Amplification, CRISPR, Stripping Membranes, Fluorescence, Staining, Membrane

Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

Article Title: A harmless-to-harmful switchable and spatiotemporally activated nano-CRISPR hierarchically amplifies ferroptosis in melanoma

doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102718

Figure Lengend Snippet: Biodistribution and in vivo anticancer efficiency of ARCHER (A) In vivo , fluorescence images of ARCHER in A375-cell-bearing nude mice at 0, 2, 6, and 24 h after i.v. injection. (B) The statistics of fluorescence at cancer sites at different time points by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 3; mean ± SD). (C) Schematic illustration of anticancer treatment protocols in vivo . (D) The mean cancer growth curves of each group after different treatments in B16-F10-cell-bearing C57BL/6 mice by two-way repeated measures ANOVA with a between-subjects factor (∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; n = 5; mean ± SD). (E) The individual cancer growth curves of each group after different treatments in B16-F10-cell-bearing C57BL/6 mice. (F) The photographs of cancer were obtained at the end of treatments. (G) Weight of cancer was obtained at the end of treatments by ordinary one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 5; mean ± SD). (H) The survival rate of B16-F10-cell-bearing mice treated with different modalities by log rank test (∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001; ns, not significant; n = 7; mean ± SD). 1–9 refer to the treatment with NS, CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 plasmid, CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 plasmid + laser, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl + laser, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 + laser, ARCHER, and ARCHER + laser.

Article Snippet: Ce6 , Macklin , Cat#829662.

Techniques: In Vivo, Fluorescence, Injection, CRISPR, Plasmid Preparation

Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

Article Title: A harmless-to-harmful switchable and spatiotemporally activated nano-CRISPR hierarchically amplifies ferroptosis in melanoma

doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102718

Figure Lengend Snippet: Histological analysis of cancer tissues in different treatment groups (A) H&E, GPX4, and Ki-67 staining of cancer in each group. Scale bars represent 20 μm. (B) TUNEL staining of cancer in each group. Scale bars represent 50 μm. 1–9 refer to the treatment with NS, CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 plasmid, CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 plasmid + laser, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6Fe(III)Cl + laser, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4, RGD-R8-PEG-HA-ADH-Ce6/PF33/CRISPR/Cas9-GPX4 + laser, ARCHER, and ARCHER + laser.

Article Snippet: Ce6 , Macklin , Cat#829662.

Techniques: Staining, TUNEL Assay, CRISPR, Plasmid Preparation

Journal: Materials Today Bio

Article Title: Brain-targeting nanoplatform repurposing silymarin for enhanced GBM immunotherapy via synergistic mitochondrial suppression

doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2026.102951

Figure Lengend Snippet: Preparation and characterization of L-S-TCe6/NPs. A) Tyndall effect of S-TCe6/NPs and L-S-TCe6/NPs. B,C) TEM image of S-TCe6/NPs (B) and L-S-TCe6/NPs (C). Scale bar: 200 nm. D) Size distribution of L-S-TCe6/NPs after preservation for 5 days. E,F) Size distribution of L-S-TCe6/NPs (E) and S-TCe6/NPs (F). G) Zeta potential of S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs. H) UV–vis absorption spectra of silymarin, LF, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs. I) UV–vis absorption spectrum of DPBF at different time points after 660 nm NIR laser irradiation in Ce6, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, L-S-TCe6/NPs water solution, and pure water with DPBF as well (All corresponding solute molar concentration was 1 mM). J) Infrared thermal images of Ce6, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs in water after laser irradiation (660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 5 min). K,L) Temperature changes of differing concentrations of L-S-TCe6/NPs (K) and comparison between Ce6 and L-S-TCe6/NPs (L) upon laser irradiation (660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 5 min).

Article Snippet: The chemical reagents used in this study included Ce6 (C302676), silymarin (S304299) and ganister sand obtained from Aladdin Industrial Corporation (Shanghai, China).

Techniques: Preserving, Zeta Potential Analyzer, Irradiation, Concentration Assay, Comparison

Journal: Materials Today Bio

Article Title: Brain-targeting nanoplatform repurposing silymarin for enhanced GBM immunotherapy via synergistic mitochondrial suppression

doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2026.102951

Figure Lengend Snippet: Functional validation of L-S-TCe6/NPs in vitro . A,B) Fluorescence microscopy images (A) and flow cytometry results (B) of the cellular uptake of L-S-TCe6/NPs in GL261 cells at different times (n = 3). Scale bar: 250 μm. C,D) Fluorescence microscopy images (C) and flow cytometry results (D) of the cellular uptake of Ce6, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs in GL261 cells following 6 h of incubation (n = 3). Scale bar: 250 μm. E,F,G) Cell viability of U251 (E), U87 (F) and GL261 (G) cells treated with Ctrl, Ce6, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs with NIR laser irradiation (n = 6, 660 nm, 1.0 W cm−2, 1 min). H,I,J) IC50 values calculated from MTT assays of U251, U87 and GL261 cells after 6 h treatment with Silymarin, L-S-TCe6/NPs and L-S-TCe6/NPs + Laser at the indicated concentrations for the indicated times (n = 6, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). K,L) Fluorescence imaging (K) and quantitative analysis (L) of the Calcein-AM/PI staining assay in GL261 cells with different treatments with NIR laser irradiation (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). Scale bar: 200 μm. M,N) Flow cytometry results of apoptosis in GL261 cells under different treatments with NIR laser irradiation (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). All data are shown as the mean ± SD and are representative of three or six independent experiments. (∗p < 0.05; ∗∗p < 0.01; ∗∗∗p < 0.005; ∗∗∗∗p < 0.001; NS, not significant.)

Article Snippet: The chemical reagents used in this study included Ce6 (C302676), silymarin (S304299) and ganister sand obtained from Aladdin Industrial Corporation (Shanghai, China).

Techniques: Functional Assay, Biomarker Discovery, In Vitro, Fluorescence, Microscopy, Flow Cytometry, Incubation, Irradiation, Imaging, Staining

Journal: Materials Today Bio

Article Title: Brain-targeting nanoplatform repurposing silymarin for enhanced GBM immunotherapy via synergistic mitochondrial suppression

doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2026.102951

Figure Lengend Snippet: L-S-TCe6/NPs induce efficient immunocide in GBM by inhibiting regulatory T cells (Tregs) and activating effector T cells in vivo . A) Living fluorescence images of orthotopic GBM tumor-bearing c57 mice treated by tail intravenous injection with free Ce6, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs for different time points. (n = 3). B) Analysis of radiance intensity of major organs and tumor tissues in various groups (n = 3). C) Schematic illustration of L-S-TCe6/NPs treating GBM and time nodes of taking living fluorescence images. D) Bioluminescence images of GL261-Luc cell-bearing c57 mice collected at days 0, 2, 4, 8, and 12 after treatment with PBS, Silymarin, TCe6, S-TCe6/NPs, and L-S-TCe6/NPs with NIR laser irradiation (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). E) Body weight of mice in different groups (NC, Silymarin + L, TCe6+L, S-TCe6/NPs + L and L-S-TCe6/NPs + L) on days 0-12 (n = 3). F) Photographs of HE-stained brain slices after the indicated treatments with NIR laser irradiation on day 13 (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). Scale bar: 40 μm. G) Immunohistochemical analysis of PD-L1 levels in brain tumor tissues of each group after indicated treatments with NIR laser irradiation on day 13 (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). Scale bar: 20 μm. H) Immunofluorescence analysis of FoxP3 levels in brain tumor tissues of each group after indicated treatments with NIR laser irradiation on day 13 (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). Scale bar: 40 μm. I) Immunofluorescence analysis of CD8 levels in brain tumor tissues of each group after indicated treatments with NIR laser irradiation on day 13 (n = 3, 660 nm, 1.0 W/cm2, 1 min). Scale bar: 20 μm. All data are shown as the mean ± SD and are representative of three independent experiments.

Article Snippet: The chemical reagents used in this study included Ce6 (C302676), silymarin (S304299) and ganister sand obtained from Aladdin Industrial Corporation (Shanghai, China).

Techniques: In Vivo, Fluorescence, Injection, Irradiation, Staining, Immunohistochemical staining, Immunofluorescence