Fig. 5: In vitro neuroprotective effect of Ang-NCs.
From: A one-two punch targeting reactive oxygen species and fibril for rescuing Alzheimer’s disease

a Cell viability of various cell lines treated with NCs and Ang-NCs (n = 3 biologically independent samples). b The confocal images and quantification in the 96-well plates for the uptake of NCs and Ang-NCs in PC12 cells (n = 3). c Confocal images of in vitro BBB penetration of two NCs by PC12 and HT-22 cells via Transwell model. d Confocal images of Aβ fibril degradation in PC12 cells with different treatments and ThT staining (green). e Cellular ROS in PC12 cells with various treatments for 48 h and stained with DCFH-DA (green). f, g Confocal images of the superoxide generation and mitochondrial membrane potential in HT-22 cells with various treatments for 48 h and staining by MitoSOX (f) and JC-1 probes (g). The confocal images were representative data of three independent experiments in c–g. h The relative expression of mRNA (TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6) in HT-22 cells tested by RT-PCR (n = 3). The P values (****) were the comparison of three parameters between the Aβ fibril group and the other two groups, respectively. i IL-1β level in HT-22 cells tested by ELISA kit (n = 3). j The expression of IL-1β and NLRP3 in HT-22 cells, and GPX4 in PC12 cells by Western blot analyses. k Cell viability of PC12 cells treated with various concentrations of Ang-NCs (n = 3). l Cell viability of PC12 cells treated with Aβ fibril, Aβ fibril with 6 (100 μg/mL), and Aβ fibril with 3 (100 μg/mL) for 48 h (n = 3). m Cell viability (n = 3) of PC12 and HT-22 cells incubated with Aβ oligomer (10 μM), Aβ fibril, and degraded Aβ fragment (10 μM). n Representative crystal violet staining images of HT-22 cells after various treatments for 48 h. o The corresponding biological transmission electron microscopy (Bio-TEM) images of mitochondria in HT-22 cells with various treatments. Unless otherwise stated, all concentrations of Aβ fibril and Ang-NCs were respectively 10 μM and 100 μg/mL. All data were presented as mean ± SD. NS, no significance, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001. All assays (n = 3) were biologically independent samples. All statistical analyses were compared by analyses of one-way ANOVA except the two-tailed Student’s t-test in a and b. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.