Page - 54 - in Cancer Nanotheranostics - What Have We Learnd So Far?
Image of the Page - 54 -
Text of the Page - 54 -
Cooperet al. Nanoparticles for radiation therapy
fromLuBO3:Ce nanocrystals has been reported, with a consid-
erable dependence on theNCdimensions (Klassen et al., 2008,
2009). NC grain sizes were controlled by altering annealing
temperatures, and scintillation yields were found to increase
dramatically for NCs ∼95nm in diameter, with roughly three
times the intensity of NCs either 25nm larger or smaller. This
is in contrast to LuF3:Ce NPs in the same size range, which
exhibitedamonotonic sizedependence.
Synthesis techniques and post-synthesis processing affect the
size, crystallinity, anddopantdistributionofnanostructures.The
role of post-synthesis annealing on NCs was recently investi-
gatedwith LaPO4:Eu andLaPO4:Pr (Malyy et al., 2013), aswell
as LuPO4:Ce (Vistovskyy et al., 2014). In the case of LaPO4:Ln,
annealingwasused to increase the sizeof theNCs, also resulting
in a change of lattice symmetry above∼500◦C.The subsequent
effects on excitation processes over the range of 4–40eV are
described in some detail. Across the energy range investigated,
the distinct mechanisms include intracenter excitation, charge
transfer excitation, exciton or e-h pair creation, electronic exci-
tation multiplication (E > 2 Eg), or combinations (Figure4),
and different sensitivities were shown for the two activators—
thefirst stageofEu3+ recombination involving electroncapture,
in contrast to hole capture byPr3+.WithLuPO4:Ce, substantial
differences in the low energy (4–25eV) VUV excitation spec-
trum and PL and RL decay kinetics were observed after the
NCs were annealed for 2h at 1200â—¦C (vs. at 800â—¦C, 300â—¦C, or
unannealed), corresponding to an increase in the crystallite size
from3nm to 35nm.The increased size resulted inwell-defined
PL emission components, dramatically enhanced band-to-band
excitations above∼8.7eV, and the elimination of the slow RL
decaycomponentascribedtosurfacedefects. Importantly, theRL
intensityfor35nmNCswasfoundtobe∼100×strongerthanfor smaller(<12nm)NCs,whereasthePLintensityofbothtypeswas
comparable.
The synthesis and characterization of a number of Pr3+
and Ce3+-activated garnet, silicate and oxide nanoscintillators
have recently been reported, with an emphasis on their use
for combined XRT/PDT, in particular their emission in the
300–400nm range (Jung et al., 2014). The RL properties of
powdered nanocrystalline samples prepared through combus-
tion synthesis and annealing at 1200â—¦C were compared with
single/microcrystallinesamplesofsimilarcompositions.Thegen-
eral composition (Y1−xPrx)3Al5O12 [or yttrium aluminumgar-
net (YAG):Pr, with an average diameter of 80nm] was found
to have the highest scintillation yield of the nanoscintilla-
tors tested under 50keV excitation, though with a different
activator concentration dependence than single crystal sam-
ples: quenching was observed for x > 1%, compared to x=
0.16–0.65% reported for single crystals. Somewhat surprisingly,
only YAG:Pr NCs with x=0.75, 1, and 1.5% had greater
emission intensity than Bi4Ge3O12 (BGO) NCs, in stark con-
trast to single crystals, where BGO had the lowest relative
intensity of the compositions investigated. Indeed, because the
RL behavior of NCs is dependent on activator concentration
quenching, which is in turn dependent on the NC compo-
sition, size and crystallinity, it was suggested that the prop-
erties of different preparations will likely have to be evalu-
ated individually rather than predicted by bulk trends. The
introduction of the article also provides an inclusive overview
of recent progress in nanoscintillator research for biomedical
applications.
Nanoscintillators that do not emit through specific activa-
tor ions are referred to as self-activated (SA), with lumines-
cencearisingfromcore-valencetransitions, self-trappedexcitons,
FIGURE4 |Mechanismsofscintillation inPr3+orEu3+-dopedLaPO4,
dependingonexcitationenergy. (A) Intracenter (direct) excitationofLn
activators. (B)Excitationbycharge transfer fromO2− toEu3+. (C)Direct
exciton formation. (D)Creationofe-hpairs. (E)Excitationmultiplication,with
secondaryexcitationas in (B). (F)Excitationmultiplication,withsecondary excitationas in (C). (G)PhotonswithE>Eg can result inexcitation
multiplication involving thecreationofsecondarye-hpairs.Arrows: (1)
Transitiondue tophotonabsorption. (2)Energyexchangedue to inelastic
scatteringonvalencebandelectrons, and (3) relaxationofprimaryelectrons.
(Reprintedwithpermission fromMalyyet al., 2013).
www.frontiersin.org October2014 |Volume2 |Article86 | 54
Cancer Nanotheranostics
What Have We Learnd So Far?
- Title
- Cancer Nanotheranostics
- Subtitle
- What Have We Learnd So Far?
- Authors
- João Conde
- Pedro Viana Baptista
- Jesús M. De La Fuente
- Furong Tian
- Editor
- Frontiers in Chemistry
- Date
- 2016
- Language
- English
- License
- CC BY 4.0
- ISBN
- 978-2-88919-776-7
- Size
- 21.0 x 27.7 cm
- Pages
- 132
- Keywords
- Nanomedicine, Nanoparticles, nanomaterials, Cancer, heranostics, Immunotherapy, bioimaging, Drug delivery, Gene Therapy, Phototherapy
- Categories
- Naturwissenschaften Chemie