Drug- not carrier-dependent haematological and biochemical changes in a repeated dose study of cyclosporine encapsulated polyester nano- and micro-particles: Size does not matter

Toxicology

Volumn 330, Issue , 2015, Pages 9-18

  Venkatpurwar, V P ^a   Rhodes, S ^b   Oien, K A ^b   Elliott, M A ^a   Tekwe, C D ^c   Jorgensen H G ^b   Kumar, M N V Ravi ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^c TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biodegradable; Cyclosporine; Microparticles; Nanoparticles; Nanotoxicology; Oral; Polyester; Toxicity

Indexed keywords

CERULOPLASMIN; CREATININE; CYCLOSPORIN; DRUG CARRIER; NANOPARTICLE; POLYESTER; POLYGLACTIN; MICROSPHERE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG MEGADOSE; EYE EXAMINATION; FOOD INTAKE; FREEZE DRYING; HAIR LOSS; HEMATOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; HIGH PERFORMANCE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY; IN VIVO STUDY; LOCOMOTION; LYMPHOCYTE COUNT; MALE; MICROEMULSION; MICROENCAPSULATION; NANOEMULSION; NANOENCAPSULATION; NONHUMAN; OXIDATIVE STRESS; PARTICLE SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RAT; REPEATED DRUG DOSE; UREA NITROGEN BLOOD LEVEL; WEIGHT GAIN; WEIGHT REDUCTION; ANIMAL; BLOOD; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECTS; HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; SPRAGUE DAWLEY RAT;

RATTUS;

ANIMALS; BODY WEIGHT; CYCLOSPORINE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG CARRIERS; HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELLS; MALE; MICROSPHERES; NANOPARTICLES; PARTICLE SIZE; POLYESTERS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY;

EID: 84922389684     PISSN: 0300483X     EISSN: 18793185     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tox.2015.01.017     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Ankola D.D., et al. Nanoparticles made of multi-block copolymer of lactic acid and ethylene glycol containing periodic side-chain carboxyl groups for oral delivery of cyclosporine A. J. Roy. Soc. Interface 2010, 7:S475-S481.
2. Ankola D.D., et al. Nanoparticulate delivery can improve peroral bioavailability of cyclosporine and match Neoral Cmax sparing the kidney from damage. J. Biomed. Nanotechnol. 2011, 7:300-307.
3. Azzi J., et al. Polylactide-cyclosporin A nanoparticles for targeted immunosuppression. FASEB J. 2010, 24:3927-3938.
4. Barbier L., et al. Assessment of chronic rejection in liver graft recipients receiving immunosuppression with low-dose calcineurin inhibitors. J. Hepatol. 2013, 59:1223-1230.
5. Choi J.Y., Kwon O.J. Post-transplant diabetes mellitus: is it associated with poor allograft outcomes in renal transplants?. Transplant Proc. 2013, 45:2892-2898.
6. Colombo M.D., et al. Cyclosporine regimens in plaque psoriasis: an overview with special emphasis on dose, duration, and old and new treatment approaches. Sci. World J. 2013, 805(705):1-11.
7. Desai M.P., et al. Gastrointestinal uptake of biodegradable microparticles: effect of particle size. Pharma. Res. 1996, 13:1838-1845.
8. Devadasu V.R., et al. Can controversial nanotechnology promise drug delivery?. Chem. Rev. 2013, 113:1686-1735.
9. Farthing M.J.G., et al. Nature of the toxicity of cyclosporin A in the rat. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1981, 30:3311-3316.
10. Flechner S.M., et al. A randomized, open-label study of sirolimus versus cyclosporine in primary de novo renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 2013, 10:1233-1241.
11. Frassetto L.A., et al. Best single time point correlations with AUC for cyclosporine and tacrolimus in HIV-infected kidney and liver transplant recipients. Transplantation 2014, 97:702-707.
12. Gremese E., Ferraccioli G.F. Benefit/risk of cyclosporine in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin. Exp. Rheumatol. 2004, 22:S101-S107.
13. Hall R.L., Everds N.E. Principles of clinical pathology for toxicology studies. In Principles and Methods of Toxicology 2008, 1317-1358. CRC Press, Boca Raton FL. 5th ed. A.W. Hayes (Ed.).
14. Italia J.L., Bhardwaj V., Kumar M.N.V.R. Disease, destination, dose and delivery aspects of ciclosporin: the state of the art. Drug Discov. Today 2006, 11:846-854.
15. Italia J.L., et al. PLGA nanoparticles for oral delivery of cyclosporine: nephrotoxicity and pharmacokinetic studies in comparison to Sandimmune Neoral. J. Control. Release 2007, 119:197-206.
16. Iyengar A. Cyclosporine/ketoconazole reduces treatment costs for nephrotic syndrome. Indian J. Nephrol. 2013, 6:419-423.
17. Jiang M., et al. Cyclosporin A attenuates weight gain and improves glucose tolerance in diet-induced obese mice. Mol. Cell Endocrinol. 2013, 370:96-102.
18. Kadam R.S., et al. Nano-advantage in enhanced drug delivery with biodegradable nanoparticles: contribution of reduced clearance. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2012, 40:1380-1388.
19. Lamprou D.A., et al. Atomic force microscopy images label-free, drug encapsulated nanoparticles in vivo and detects difference in tissue mechanical properties of treated and untreated: a tip for nanotoxicology. PLoS One 2013, 8:e64490.
20. Lukas J.C., et al. Time-dependent pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine (Neoral) in de novo renal transplant patients. J. Clin. Pharma. Ther. 2005, 30:549-557.
21. Lv M., et al. Ceruloplasmin is a potential biomarker for aGvHD following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. PLoS One 2013, 8:e58735.
22. Mathiowitz E., et al. Biologically erodible microspheres as potential oral drug delivery systems. Nature 1997, 27:410-414.
23. Mittal G., et al. Estradiol loaded PLGA nanoparticles for oral administration: effect of polymer molecular weight and copolymer composition on release behavior in vitro and in vivo. J. Control. Release 2007, 119:77-85.
24. Moss D.M., Siccardi M. Optimising nanomedicine pharmacokinetics using PBPK modelling. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2014, 171:3963-3979.
25. Mrowietz U. Cyclosporine as maintenance therapy in patients with severe psoriasis. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2013, 69:308-309.
26. Origlia N., et al. Protective effect of l-propionylcarnitine in chronic cyclosporine-a induced nephrotoxicity. Biomed. Pharmacotherap. 2006, 60:77-81.
27. Park M.J., et al. Polymeric nanocapsules with SEDDS oil-core for the controlled and enhanced oral absorption of cyclosporine. Int. J. Pharm. 2013, 441:757-764.
28. Qazi Y.A., et al. The clinical impact of 1:1 conversion from Neoral to a generic cyclosporine (Gengraf) in renal transplant recipients with stable graft function. Clin. Transplant. 2006, 3:313-317.
29. Ready A. Experience with cyclosporine. Transplant Proc. 2004, 36:135S-138S.
30. Reineke J.J., et al. Unique insights into the intestinal absorption, transit, and subsequent biodistribution of polymer-derived microspheres. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2013, 110:13803-13808.
31. Reis F., et al. Platelet activation is increased in cyclosporine A-induced hypertensive rats. J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. 2000, 36:56-64.
32. Sullivan P.G., et al. Therapeutic window analysis of the neuroprotective effects of cyclosporine A after traumatic brain injury. J. Neurotrauma 2011, 28:311-318.
33. Wissing K.M., Pipeleers L. Obesity, metabolic syndrome and diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation: Prevention and treatment. Transplant Rev. (Orlando) 2013, 28:37-46.