Introduction

Cancer is becoming to one of the most dreaded disease and still remains as a major threat to human life1. The rising burden is ascribed to population growth, aging and an adoption of cancer-associated lifestyle choices including smoking, physical inactivity, etc1, 2. Even worse, most patients were diagnosed at a later or advanced stage, which results in poor prognosis1, 3. Therefore, early diagnosis of cancer is crucial for timely therapy to prevent the potential risk of cancer metastasis and improve the long-term survival. Many non-invasive biomedical imaging techniques have been applied in the diagnosis of cancer including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)4,5,6,7,8,9, ultrasound imaging (US)10, 11, positron emission tomography (PET)12,13,14,15, and computed X-ray tomography (CT)16,17,18,19, etc. Among the clinically applied diagnostic modalities, MRI has a high potential to image the tissue pathological changes, as it could safely provide high spatial resolution information20. On the other hand, as a noninvasive real-time imaging modality, US has serveal advantages such as high safety, low cost, and easy accessed by the public. However, the sensitivity of conventional MRI and US strategies heavily rely on contrast agents (CAs), such as the widely used paramagnetic gadolinium ions (Gd-(DTPA)]−2 (Magnevist) and [Gd-(DOTA)]−1 (Dotarem)21,22,23, or gas-filled echogenic microbubbles24, 25, that are always “on”, emitting constant signals regardless of their proximity or interaction with target tissues, cells, or environmental markers. As a result, a large volume of nonspecific signal which might lead to a poor signal-to-noise ratio, makes the anatomical features of interested tissue difficult to distinguish. A more attractive contrast agent whose signal should be switched from OFF to ON in response to specific biological stimulus, which will further maximize the signals of targets and minimize the background signals, which in turn could improve the sensitivity and specificity26,27,28,29.

Several activatable CAs that respond to tumour-related factors, such as pH and redox potential, have been developed for tumour-specific MRI or US. For example, Mi et al. have reported a MRI contrast agent that rapidly amplify the magnetic resonance signals in response to pH via releasing confined Mn2+ ions from pH-sensitive calcium phosphate (CaP) nanoparticles to the aqueous environment30. Min et al. developed the calcium carbonate (CaCO3) nanopartciles which exhibited strong echogenic signals at tumoral acid pH by producing CO2 bubbles and showed excellent echo persistence10. Even so, some intrinsic drawbacks of US and MRI still cannot be avoided, for example, US has a poor tissue discrimination ability while MRI cannot provide real-time images and usually time consuming. Thus, developing a sensitive dual modal imaging (US and MRI) agent would not only make them as favorable tools for precisely visualizing biological and physiological changes with high signal-to-noise ratio, but also would render synergistic efficacy to overcome their own inherent limitations31.

As a MRI contrast agent, various size of NaGdF4 nanoparticles (NPs) with well-defined size distributions could be readily synthesized via pyrolysis methods32,33,34,35. Their MRI performances have been demonstrated to increase with the decreasing of the NPs’ size, attributed to the increased number of surface Gd3+ ions relative to the core ions. Therefore, it will be very useful to synthesize ultrasmall NaGdF4 NPs, e.g., smaller than 5 nm, to provide better MRI signals6. Furthermore, compared with the Gd-(DTPA) or Gd-(DOTA), the renal clearable Gd-based NPs would have better biosafty since it could not induce the excessive Gd3+ ion leakage to cause biological toxicity36, 37, therefore it might be a more promising candidate for disease diagnosis. As for a new type of US contrast agent, CaCO3 nanoparticles with rigid structure can penetrate into host tumoral environments for cancer imaging, while the frequently used gas-filled microbubbles suffer from inherent drawbacks, such as low stability, short half-life in blood and low penetration ability due to the large size, which is limited to the imaging of intravascular structures.

Herein, we designed a pH-responsive nanoparticle which could significantly enhance the contrast of MRI and US signals in tumor as illustrated in Fig. 1. The shell of CaCO3 was deposited onto the core surface of NaGdF4 nanoparticles through the microemulsion method; in addition, physicochemical properties of nanoscale systems, such as size, dispersibility, and toxicity were systematically analyzed; furthermore, the US and MRI imaging enhanced efficiency were both evaluated in vitro and in vivo, which clearly proved that our probe could be utilized for sensitive and specific tumor imaging with responding to extracellular acidic microenvironments.

Figure 1
figure 1

Schematic illustration of the synthesis of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticle and its bioimaging application.

Full size image

Results and Discussion

Characterization of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG

As shown in Fig. 1, monodispersed spherical NaGdF4 nanocrystals were chosen as the morphology-deciding template to obtain magnetic nanoparticles, which were fabricated by thermal decomposition method using rare earth perchlorate as the RE precursor. From TEM images (Fig. 2A), the synthesized NaGdF4 exhibit a very well particle size distribution around 8~10 nm, with a regular spherical morphology. A thin layer of dense CaCO3 was deposited onto the surface of NaGdF4 to form NaGdF4@CaCO3 core/shell nanoparticles by the well-known microemulsion method, which could further transfer the hydrophobic NaGdF4 nanoparticle into aqueous soltion. In detail, the CaCl2 aqueous solution was first added into the cyclohexane solution of hydrophobic NaGdF4, while triton X-100, 1-hexanol were used as nonionic surfactants to create a stable water-in-oil emulsion after vigorous stirring. At this stage, the hydrophobic NaGdF4 will transfer from oil phase to water droplets as the surfactants can self-assemble on these nanoparticles. Meanwhile, the hydrophilic groups (hydroxyl) of the surfactants has a well affinity with Ca2+ which could recruit these ions on the surfaces of the NaGdF4 nanoparticles. After adding Na2CO3 aqueous solution, the precipitation reaction between Ca2+ and CO3 2− therefore produces a layer of CaCO3 on the NaGdF4 nanoparticles. The obtained nanoparticles show a size of 10~12 nm, as well as with aspherical-like morphology. Then, PEG8000 was adsorbed on the surface of NaGdF4@CaCO3 nanoparticles through Van der Waals’ force, which could award good water dispersibility. Element mapping of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG with a thin or thick shell all shows the co-existence of Gd, F and Ca elements (Figure S1), which exhibit a much higher Ca signal compared to the core only NaGdF4 nanoparticles. However, the Ca signal on the surface of NaGdF4 is very weak on the outlayer of NaGdF4 core due to the very small size of NaGdF4 core (10 nm) and the very thin CaCO3 coating layer (2 nm). Nevertheless, we still ensure that the CaCO3 is on the shell because this layer is amorphous, while the NaGdF4 core is highly crystal with noticeable lattice, as shown in the enlarged image inserted in Fig. 2B. In addition, the average size of the NaGdF4 in cyclohexane was further determined to be 8 ± 2 nm by the DLS experiments (Figure S2), which is consistent with the TEM results. After depositon of CaCO3, the average hydrodynamic size of the NaGdF4@CaCO3 and NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG in water were increased to 100 ± 10 and 120 ± 15 nm, respectively, which may be due to the formation of a hydration layer on the surface of nanoparticles or the formation of small aggregations.

Figure 2
figure 2

Structural characterization of nanoparticles. NaGdF4 dispersed in cyclohexane (A); NaGdF4@CaCO3 (B) and NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (C) dispersed in H2O; and NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG dispersed in PBS (pH 5.0).

Full size image

Furthermore, the successful surface PEGlyation of NaGdF4@CaCO3 was also confirmed by FT-IR spectroscopy (Fig. 3). For analyzing the spectrum of PEG8000, the peaks at around 2917 cm−1 and 1108 cm−1 were observed corresponding to the CH2 stretching and vibration groups. These two peaks could be also observed in the spectra of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG, in addition to the typical peaks of NaGdF4@CaCO3 at 502 cm−1. These results suggest that the PEG8000 was successfully modified on the surface of NaGdF4@CaCO3. To make the CaCO3 coating more evident form the IR spectra, we re-fabricated another NaGdF4@CaCO3 with a thicker shell via increasing the feeding amount of CaCl2, and analysis their surface groups through FT-IR measurement. The characteristic IR absorption peaks of CaCO3 at 1430, 876, 712 cm−1 can be clearly presented in thick layered NaGdF4@CaCO3 (Figure S3).

Figure 3
figure 3

FT-IR spectra of NaGdF4@CaCO3 (a), PEG8000 (b) and NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (c).

Full size image

Before further bio-imaging applications, it is necessary to determine the cytotoxicity of these nanoparticles. To assess the in vitro cytotoxicity of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG, the standard Cell Counting Kit (CCK-8) assay and live/dead staining were conducted by using LN3 and NIH3T3 cell lines. As shown in Figure S4, cell viability is not affected by the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG in the concentration ranged from 0 to 400 μg∙mL−1, which suggested that the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG has low cytotoxicity so that it could be further applied for bio-imaging.

In Vitro Ultrasound Contrast Enhancement Ability of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG

First, the characteristics of CO2 gas generation by NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was studied through detecting the bubble generation from the particles in PBS buffer with different pH values (pH 7.4, 7.0, 6.8 and 5.0). As shown in Fig. 4, initially, NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles generate few bubbles at pH 7.4, 7.0 and 6.8, but significantly more bubble generation could be observed at pH 5.0. The degree of bubble generation continuously decreased at pH 5.0 over time, but the bubble generation was first increased and then decreased at pH 7.4, 7.0 and 6.8. The number of bubbles in pH 5.0 was counted to ca. 119, which was much higher than that in pH 7.4 (almost no bubbles), after 1 min incubation. However, with increasing the time, the number of bubbles was dramatically decreased at pH 5.0, and only 2 bubbles could be observed after 60 mins incubation (Figure S5). It is noteworthy that bubble generation at lower pH was higher than that at slightly stronger pH at all-time points. This result suggested that the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG might enhance US signal in the low pH environment by gas generation, since CaCO3 could generate more CO2 gas in an acidic environment by improved dissolution, which would be beneficial for imaging the tumor due to a little acidic microenvironment of the tumor micro-environment.

Figure 4
figure 4

Optical micrographs of CO2-generation profiles of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG incubated in PBS at different pH conditions (pH 5.0, pH 6.8, pH 7.0 and pH 7.4) for 60 min.

Full size image

Next, we measured the in vitro echogenic performance of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG as a function of pH using an aqueous dispersion test at 37 °C. As shown in Fig. 5, the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at pH 7.4 showed no significant contrast signals under a US field, most likely because the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG did not release sufficient CO2 bubbles for echogenic reflection. This result is well consistent with the results of the pH-dependent CO2 generation (Fig. 4). In contrast, US contrast images from the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG showed first increased and then decreased signal at all-time points at weakly acidic pH conditions (pH 7.0 and 6.8). This is a well understood phenomenon in which the enhanced echo intensity at weakly pH levels is ascribed to the relaxedly facilitated formation of CO2 bubbles. Due to faster dissolution of CaCO3 phases at pH 5.0, the echo improved immediately and faded away earlier than at higher pH. The excellent echo persistence at weak acidic pH can be ascribed to the relaxedly ionization of CaCO3 solid phases. The contrast enhancement that derives from the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at lower pH suggested that generation of CO2 bubbles was responsible for echogenic US resonation. US imaging results were further quantitatively analyzed using region-of-interest (ROI) gray value quantification (Figure S6A). The gray value in pH 5.0 and pH 7.4 was respectively determined to be 139.2 ± 10.7 and 14.2 ± 1.2, after 30 min incubation. This result is in accordance with the CO2 bubbles generation. Meanwhile, in order to further confirm that the US signal was derived from the dissolution of CaCO3 at acidic solution rather than the NaGdF4 itself, we tested US signal of the core-only (NaGdF4) nanoparticle at pH 5.0 and 7.4, and the results are shown in Figure S7. NaGdF4 nanoparticle showed no US signal at both pH 5.0 and 7.4, due to no CO2 gas generation from NaGdF4 nanoparticle. The feature of gas-generating at a broad range of weak acidic pH would be propitious to US imaging of tumors, which have tissue heterogeneity and diverse acidic pH levels.

Figure 5
figure 5

In vitro US images from NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at various pH (pH 5.0, pH 6.8, pH 7.0 and pH 7.4) conditions along with time.

Full size image

pH-Dependent In Vitro MRI Properties of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG

Since the doping of Gd3+-ions, NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG could act as a T1 MRI contrast agent as well. T1-weighted MR images of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG showed enhancing signal intensity when Gd3+ concentrations were increased. Firstly, the T1-weighted MR image of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was studied at different pH conditions. As shown in Fig. 6, the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at pH 7.4 showed no significant enhanced contrast signals under a MRI field, most likely because the shell of CaCO3 did not decompose so that water molecular could not access to NaGdF4 core. In contrast, MRI contrast images from the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG were slightly enhanced at weakly acidic pH conditions (pH 7.0, 6.8). It is noteworthy that we demonstrated strongest MRI contrast images at pH 5.0, which might due to the decomposition of the CaCO3 shell so that water molecular could access to the NaGdF4 core. To further demonstrate this mechanism, we compared the T1-MRI of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG to that of core-only (NaGdF4) nanoparticles at pH 7.4, and the results are shown in Figure S6. Of course, NaGdF4 showed a much brighter MR image than NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at pH 7.4. With the increasing of incubation time, the contrast of MRI images gradually enhanced at pH 7.2 and 6.8, but almost no change at pH 7.4. MRI imaging results were then quantitatively analyzed using region-of-interest (ROI) gray value quantification (Figure S6B). The gray value in pH 5.0 and pH 7.4 was respectively determined to be 182.2 ± 10.1 and 79.9 ± 3.1, after 20 min incubation. These data are very consistent with the theory that the contrast of T1 MRI imaging is closely related with water accessibility, and the enhancement of contrast associated with sufficient water contacting.

Figure 6
figure 6

In vitro MR images from NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at various pH (5.0, 6.8, 7.0 and 7.4) conditions along with the time.

Full size image

In addition, the T1 value of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was evaluated by using a 0.5 T MRI scanner to determine whether the pH can influence the T1-weighted MR imaging performance (Fig. 7). As shown in Fig. 7A, the longitudinal (T1) were measured at 0.5 T magnetic field based on the Gd concentration of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at pH 7.4 and 5.0, and the relaxivities were determined to be 0.42 mM−1 ∙s−1 and 1.64 mM−1 ·s−1, respectively. At pH 5.0, it showed about 4 folds higher relaxivity than that at pH 7.4, which further proofed that the T1-weighted MR imaging enhancement of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was influenced by pH levels. At the same time, Fig. 7B shows the magnetic resonance signal enhancing capability of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles as a function of Gd concentration ranging from 1.25 to 12.5 mM. Compared with water (Gd, 0 mM), the measured T1-weighted image contrast gradually increased with the increasing of Gd concentrations.

Figure 7
figure 7

T1-Weighted MR images of various Gd3+ concentrations of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (A); relaxation rate r1 (1/T1) against different Gd3+ concentrations of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (B).

Full size image

In Vivo US Imaging of Tumor with NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG

To verify the potential of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG for US imaging of tumor, we executed an intra-tumor injection of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG dispersion into LN3 tumor-xenograft-bearing nude mice and monitored the US images as a function of time (Fig. 8). After injection right away, we couldn’t acquire any contrast enhancment of the US signal. It is gratifying that enhancement of US signals was obtained after 1 h of injection, and this contrast enhancement maintained more than 2 h. In addition, this phenomenon is very consistent with the in vitro experiments. US imaging results were then quantitatively analyzed using region-of-interest (ROI) gray value quantification. As shown in Fig. 8B, the gray value of tumor site was increased from 32.5 ± 3.9 (0 h post-injection) to 53.1 ± 7.8 (1 h post-injection), and still maintained at 38.7 ± 1.35 after 2 h injection. Therefore, we can conclude that the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG could generate bubbles in tumor tissues then produce sufficient echogenic reflectivity under a US field.

Figure 8
figure 8

In vivo US imaging of the LN3 tumor (red dashed circles) by intratumoral injection of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (A); the gray values of mice tumor (region of interest as indicated in A), p values were calculated using GraphPad Prism 6 (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; n = 3).

Full size image

In Vivo MR Imaging of Tumor with using NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG

NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles which have the advantages of highly efficient of T1 contrast enhancement ability may hold great promise to serve as a novel MRI contrast enhancing agent. Therefore, we performed MRI study on tumor-xenograft-bearing nude mice at a 7.0 T clinical scanner by intratumor injection of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG with a dose of 200 μL of 2 mg∙mL−1. Right after the injection, the MRI contrast enhancement was not found at tumor site; however, after one hour of intratumor injection, we were delighted to find contrast enhancement of MRI signal and the signal strength remained unchanged over time up to 3 h (Fig. 9A). T1 imaging results were then quantitatively analyzed using region-of-interest (ROI) quantification. As shown in Fig. 9B, the gray value of tumor site was increased from 102 (0 h post-injection) to 153 (3 h post-injection). Overall, these results suggested that the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG could act as a potential MRI contrast enhancing agent for tumor imaging.

Figure 9
figure 9

In vivo MR imaging of the LN3 tumor (red dashed circles) by intratumoral injection of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (A); the gray values of mice tumor (region of interest as indicated in A), p values were calculated using GraphPad Prism 6 (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; n = 3).

Full size image

Conclusions

In this work, a core-shell nanoparticle of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was designed as an activatable MR/US dual-modal imaging contrast for cancer diagnosis, which is triggered by the acidic environment. The general idea behind this OFF/ON responsive MR imaging behavior consists of quenching the sphere Gd3+ relaxation effects by coating NaGdF4 with a layer of hydrophobic CaCO3 to limit water availability. At acidic aqueous solution, CaCO3 was dissolved to generate CO2 bubbles which is used to obtain US signal. Meanwhile, a strong MRI enhancement can be activated upon dissolution of CaCO3 and release of the previously silenced NaGdF4 into the aqueous solution. In vivo results demonstrated the strong dual-modal magnetic resonance/ultrasonic imaging abilities of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG at the tumor site with an acidic environment. We expect that this work may provide a new insight for strategies to design nanomaterials with responsive dual-modal imaging abilities.

Methods

Materials

Gd(CH3CO2)3 and PEG8000 were purchased from Sigma Aldrich Co., Ltd. Acetone and cyclohexane were obtained from Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd. 1-Octadecene and Methanol was purchased from Alladin Company. Oleic acid was purchased from Alfa Aesar. Cell Counting Kit (CCK-8) was obtained from Dojindo laboratories. Penicillin-streptomycin, fetal bovine serum (FBS), and Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM) were purchased from Gibco BRL. All of these materials were used as received without further purification. Ultrapure water was used throughout.

Synthesis of NaGdF4 nanoparticles

The synthesis of NaGdF4 nanoparticles is similar to a previous publication about rare-earth up-conversion nanoparticles34, 38. In brief, 24 mL of Gd(CH3CO2)3 (0.2 M) was added to a 500 mL of two-necked round-bottomed flask containing 36 mL of oleic acid. When the mixture was heated to 150 °C for 30 min, 84 mL of 1-octadecene was added and then heated to 150 °C to form the Gd-oleate precursor solution. Then, the reaction system was cooled down to 60 °C naturally and a mixture of 8 mL NaOH (1 M) and 16 mL NH4F (0.4 M) in methanol was added and stirred for 30 min. The resultant solution was heated at 110 °C for 30 min to remove the methanol, oxygen and water under argon atmosphere. Thereafter, the solution was heated to 300 °C and kept for 1.5 h before cooling down to room temperature. The as-prepared nanoparticles were precipitated by additional of ethanol, collected by centrifugation at 6000 rpm for 3 min, and washed with ethanol for several times. The NaGdF4 nanoparticles are re-dispersed in 50 mL of cyclohexane for further application.

Synthesis of the core-shell NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles

The core-shell NaGdF4@CaCO3 nanoparticles were prepared through a facile microemulsion method with using NaGdF4 nanoparticles as templates39. Briefly, 5 mL NaGdF4 nanoparticles, 10 mL cyclohexane, 3.45 mL Triton X-100, and 3.2 mL 1-hexanol were added to a flask and mixed thoroughly, followed by the addition of a 30 mM solution of calcium chloride (800 μL) to form a well-dispersed water-in-oil emulsion. Then, the solution of sodium carbonate (40 μL, 2.92 M) was added. After keeping moderate stirring for 8 h of the mixture, the as-prepared NaGdF4@CaCO3 nanoparticles were collected by centrifugation and then re-dispersed in 10 mL of ultrapure water. Thereafter, 2 mL PEG8000 (0.2 M) aqueous solution was added and stirred for another 8 h, then the as-prepared nanoparticles were collected by centrifugation at 10000 rpm for 15 min, and re-dispersed in 20 mL of ultrapure water for further application.

Characterization of the NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles

The morphology and the size of the obtained NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles were performed on a Tecnai F20 transmission electron microscope (TEM, FEI Company, Hillsboro, OR) with an accelerating voltage of 200 kV40. For the TEM experiment, the suspension of nanoparticles was dropped onto a carbon-coated copper grid, followed by drying naturally. Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) was obtained using a JEM-2010 electron microscope (JEOL, Japan) to characterize the chemical composition of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles40. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) experiments were recorded at 25 °C on a NanoZS (Malvern Instruments, UK) with a detection angle of 173°, and a 3 mW He–Ne laser operating at a wavelength of 633 nm. FT-IR spectra were performed on a Fourier transform infrared spectrometer (Perkin-Elmer, Spectrum-2000) over the spectral region of 4000 cm−1 to 400 cm−1  41.

Statistical analysis

All quantitative data were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). Graph Pad Prism version 6.0 was used for statistics analysis. Statistical analysis among different groups was performed using student T-Test. The P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

Animals

All mice (4–5 weeks old; weighing: 18–22 g) were obtained from the Center for Animal Experiment of Fujian Medical University (License No: SCXKmin2012–0002), and housed at constant temperature (22 ± 2 °C) and 60% relative humidity, with a light/dark (hours) cycles of 12/12. All animal procedures were conducted in accordance with the approved guidelines of Animal Ethics Committee of Fujian Medical University.

Cytotoxicity assay

The LN3 and NIH3T3 were cultured in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM) containing 10% fetal bovine serum and 1% penicillin streptomycin at 37 °C in a humidified atmosphere (5% CO2). The in vitro cytotoxicity was investigated by the Cell Counting Kit (cck-8) assay. In detail, LN3 and NIH3T3 cells were cultured in a 96-well cell-culture plate at a density of 104 (100 μL) cells per well for 24 or 48 h, respectively. Then, the medium was replaced with 100 μL fresh medium containing various concentrations of NPs. After 24 or 48 h incubation, the medium was removed. Then, 100 μL of fresh medium and 10 μL of CCK-8 were added and incubated for another 2 h. The absorbance was measured by a Bio-Rad Model-680 microplate reader at the wavelength of 450 nm. The cell viability (%) relative to control cells was calculated from following equation: ([Abs]sample − [Abs]blank)/([Abs]control − [Abs]blank) × 100%, where [Abs]sample and [Abs]control are the absorbance values of the cells with and without the treatment of nanocomplexes, respectively. The [Abs]blank are the absorbance of CCK-8 itself at 450 nm. All experiments were investigated in sextuplicate. Results were presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD).

Visualization of CO2 Bubble Generation from NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticles

To observe the bubble generation characteristic of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG, the aqueous dispersion was dropped on a glass slide, followed by drying naturally. Then, PBS buffer with various pH values from 5.0 to 7.4 was dropped on the samples, and the CO2 bubble image from NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was obtained by an optical microscope at room temperature10, 11.

In Vitro US Imaging at Various pH

In vitro US imaging of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was performed in phosphate buffer solutions at various pH conditions (7.4, 7.0, 6.8, and 5.0)41. An optically transparent phantom gel plate, which was made by embedding a 500 μL Eppendorf tube in the agarose gel (3%, w/v) and then removing the tube after the phantom gel had cooled, was used for the in vitro experiments. Aqueous nanoparticle solutions (10 mg∙mL−1) were prepared at various pH. US images were obtained using Vevo 2100 imaging system operated at 21 MHz of a static state using a contrast mode. The change of US intensity for each sample was measured up to 180 min, and the US intensity of the water as control was subtracted from the sample intensity for the normalization.

In Vitro MR Imaging at Various pH

In vitro MR imaging of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG was performed in phosphate buffer solutions at various pH conditions (7.4, 7.0, 6.8, and 5.0) using T1 -weighted MRI on a 0.5 T NMI20-Analyst NMR system (Niumag Corporation, Shanghai, China) to evaluate the contrast-enhancement effect42.

Relaxivity and MRI phantom studies at 0.5 T magnetic field

A series of NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG nanoparticle aqueous solutions with different Gd concentrations (12.5, 10, 7.5, 5.0, 2.5, and 1.25 mM) were prepared for MRI phantom and relaxivity studies. All experiments were performed on a 0.5 T NMI20-Analyst NMR system (Niumag Corporation, Shanghai, China)42,43,44. The longitudinal relaxation times (T1) were measured using an inversion recovery (IR) sequence. The longitudinal (r1) was determined from the slope of the plot of 1/T1 against the Gd concentration (mM).

In vivo US imaging of Xenograft Tumor

To form a solid tumor in nude mice, the LN3 xenograft tumor was estabilished in 4-week-old male nude mice by injecting 106 LN3 cells into the right thigh of mice. After injection, tumor-bearing nude mice were kept for 10~14 days to achieve a tumor size around 80 mm3. Then, 200 μL of normal saline (NS) containing NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG (2 mg∙mL−1) was injected by an intratumoral injection. After injection, the tumor was imaged with the Vevo 2100 imaging system.

In Vivo MR Imaging of Xenograft Tumor

For in vivo MRI measurements, LN3 tumor-bearing mice were intra-tumour injected with 200 μL of 2 mg∙mL−1 NaGdF4@CaCO3-PEG. At different intervals (0–3 h), T1-weighted MR images were observed using the rapid acquisition with relaxation enhancement sequence on 7.0 T small animal MRI scanner (Bruker Avance II 500WB spectrometer)43. Imaging parameters are as follows: repetition time, 2500 ms; echo time, 35 ms; rare factor, 8; field of view = 30 × 30mm2; image size, 256 × 256; slice thickness,0.7mm; and number of average, 2.