Additional file 3 of Quantitative hypoxia mapping using a self-calibrated activatable nanoprobe

Additional file 3: Figure S3. Cytotoxicity of (a) Cy7-1/PG5-Cy5@LWHA and (b) Cy7-1/PG5-Cy5

Additional file 1 of Quantitative hypoxia mapping using a self-calibrated activatable nanoprobe

Additional file 1: Figure S1. FTIR spectrum of Cy7/PG5-Cy5@LWHA

Additional file 2 of Quantitative hypoxia mapping using a self-calibrated activatable nanoprobe

Additional file 2: Figure S2. NTR response of free Cy7-1

Additional file 1 of Novel multifunctional NIR-II aggregation-induced emission nanoparticles-assisted intraoperative identification and elimination of residual tumor

Additional file 1.Scheme S1. The synthetic route toward A1. Fig S1. 1H NMR spectroscopy of compound 1. Fig S2. 13C NMR spectroscopy of compound 1. Fig S3. 1H NMR spectroscopy of compound 2. Fig S4. 13C NMR spectroscopy of compound 2. Fig S5. MALDI-TOF-MS measurement of compound 2. Fig S6. 1H NMR spectroscopy of compound 3. Fig S7. MS spectroscopy of compound 3. Fig S8. 1H NMR spectroscopy of compound 5. Fig S9. MALDI-TOF-MS measurement of compound 5. Fig S10. 1H NMR spectroscopy of compound A1. Fig S11. MALDI-TOF-MS measurement of compound A1. Fig S12. a) The hydrodynamic particle diameter and b) the fluorescence intensity of A1 NPs in PBS during 14days (0h, 1d, 3d, 7d and 14d). Fig S13. NIR-II fluorescence images of 4T1 tumor-bearing mice at various time points after tail-vein administration of the A1 NPs. Fig S14. NIR-II fluorescence images of tumor frozen sections. Fig S15. a, d) NIR-II images of orthotopic 4T1 breast tumor resection procedure. b, c, e, f) H&E staining images of excised tumor and residual lesion. Fig S16. BLI images detected two positive sciatic lymph nodes in orthotopic breast cancer mouse. A clear fluorescent signal matched well with that of the bioluminescence imaging (BLI). Positive lymph nodes were resected under the NIR-II fluorescence imaging. Metastatic lymph nodes were confirmed by H&E staining. Fig S17. H&E staining of remaining enlarged lymph nodes in sciatic lymph node metastasis mice. Fig S18. H&E staining of remaining enlarged lymph nodes in axillary lymph node metastasis mice. Fig S19. Representative H&E staining and CLSM images of tumors after TUNEL staining. Fig S20. a) Cytotoxicity assays of different concentrations A1 NPs in the dark (incubation for 24 h) or under laser exposure for 5 min (808 nm, 1 W/cm2). b) ROS generation detection from 4T1-luc cells with different treatment using DCFH-DA. c) Immunofluorescence staining of CRT, HMGB1 and HSP 70 after 4T1-luc cells treated with PBS. d) Immunofluorescence staining of CRT, HMGB1 and HSP 70 after 4T1-luc cells treated with A1+Laser. Fig S21. (a) Representative merge images include DAPI staining (blue) and ROS staining (red) of tumor tissue after the different treatments; (b) Fluorescence intensity analysis of ROS in different groups. (**P < 0.01, ***P <0.001). Fig S22. a) H&E staining of the main organs from the mice in different groups. b) Blood biochemistry analysis of the mice receiving different treatments

Additional file 1 of Biomimetic manganese-eumelanin nanocomposites for combined hyperthermia-immunotherapy against prostate cancer

Additional file 1: Figure S1. EDX analysis of RMnMels. Figure S2. (a)XPS survey spectra. XPS spectra of (b) C1s, (c) N1s and (d) O1s for RMnMels. Figure S3. (a) Hydrodynamicsizes of nanocomposites. (b) Zeta potential of nanocomposites. Figure S4. The linear relationship for the r1relaxivity of RMnMels versus Mnconcentrations. The insets show corresponding T1-weighted MRimages. Figure S5. (a) T1-weightedMR images of mice kidneys and liver prior to and at various time points postintravenous injection of RMnMels at 12 mg/kg body weight. The images wereacquired at 1.5 T.Normalized signal intensities determined from mice (b) kidneys and (c) liver. Figure S6. UV–vis absorption profile ofRMnMels with various mass concentrations. Figure S7. Invitro photoacoustic signal intensities of RMnMels versus solution mass concentrations.The insets show corresponding photoacoustic images. Figure S8. The amount of manganese (Mn) elements per gramof tissue. Figure S9. Cell viability ofPC3 and RAW 264.7 cells after co-incubation with various concentrations ofRMnMels. Figure S10. (a) Optical microscope images of RAW 264.7cells after co-incubation with various concentrations of RMnMels for 12 h. Scale bars, 100 µm. (b) Opticalmicroscope images of PC3 cells after incubation without (upper) or with (lower)50 µg/mL RMnMels for 12 h. Scale bars, 100 µm. FigureS11. (a) Cellular TEM images ofPC3 cells after incubation without (upper) or with (lower) RMnMels at 50 µg/mLfor 12 h. (b) Tissue TEM images of PC3 tumor tissue slices after intravenous injection of PBS(upper) or RMnMels (lower) for 48 h. Figure S12. Cellular TEM imagesof lipopolysaccharide induced M1-like macrophage after incubation withRMnMels at 50 µg/mL for 12 h. Figure S13. (a) TEM images ofRMnMels with/without 2.5 mM H2O2 for 72 h. Scale bar, 200 nm.The insets show corresponding digital photographs. (b) UV–vis absorption spectra of RMnMels co-incubation with 2.5 mM H2O2 atdifferent time points. Figure S14. (a) Infrared thermalimages and (b) temperaturevariations of 200 μg/mL RMnMels aqueous solution during exposure to a 690 nm laser with different powerdensities for 300 s. (c) Infrared thermal images and (d) temperature variations of RMnMels aqueous solution with differentconcentrations during exposure to a 690 nm laser at 500 mW/cm2for 300 s. Figure S15. Photothermal heating curvesof RMnMels (100 μg/mL) irradiated by 690 nm laser at 500 mW/cm2 over three laser ON/OFF cycles. FigureS16. (a) TEM images of RMnMels solution before and after 690 nm laserirradiation (500 mW/cm2, 30 min). Scale bar, 200 nm. The insets showcorresponding digital photographs. (b) UV–vis absorption spectra of RMnMels aqueoussolutions prior to and after exposure to 690 nm laser irradiation. FigureS17. Flow cytometric assay of the polarization ofRAW 264.7 cells toward M1 phenotype. Figure S18. Body weight curves of PC3 tumor-bearing mice during a periodof 19 days after different treatments. FigureS19. Flow cytometry analysis of tumor immune cells. Gating strategy showingdelineation of (a) singlets cells. (b) numbers indicate the percentages of thecells within the gates. (c) live cells. (d) CD45+ leukocytes. (e) tumor-associatedmacrophages. Figure S20. H&Estained images of mice major organ sections on day 19 after differenttreatments. Scale bar, 100 µm. FigureS21. Serum biochemical indexes of healthy mice obtained on different timepoint. Table S1. Primer sequences for different genes