The EPR effect in cancer therapy

Cancer Targeted Drug Delivery: An Elusive Dream

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 621-632

  Yhee, Ji Young ^a   Son, Sejin ^a   Son, Sohee ^a   Joo, Min Kyung ^a   Kwon, Ick Chan ^a  

^a Korea Institute of Science and Technology   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISEASES; DRUG DELIVERY; ONCOLOGY; PORE SIZE; TUMORS;

ANTICANCER DRUG; BIODISTRIBUTIONS; CANCER THERAPY; ENHANCED PERMEABILITY AND RETENTION EFFECT; LARGE PORE SIZE; MACROMOLECULAR DRUGS; NORMAL TISSUE; PROPERTY; SMALL MOLECULES; VASCULATURE;

NANOPARTICLES;

EID: 84929698312     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-7876-8_23     Document Type: Chapter

References (60)

1. Douglas SJ, Davis SS, Illum L (1987) Nanoparticles in drug delivery. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 3(3):233-261
2. Matsumura Y, Maeda H (1986) A new concept for macromolecular therapeutics in cancer chemotherapy: mechanism of tumoritropic accumulation of proteins and the antitumor agent smancs. Cancer Res 46(12 Pt 1):6387-6392
3. Iyer AK et al (2006) Exploiting the enhanced permeability and retention effect for tumor targeting. Drug Discov Today 11(17-18):812-818
4. Aird WC (2007) Phenotypic heterogeneity of the endothelium: I. Structure, function, and mechanisms. Circ Res 100(2):158-173
5. Acharya S, Sahoo SK (2011) PLGA nanoparticles containing various anticancer agents and tumour delivery by EPR effect. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 63(3):170-183
6. Perrault SD et al (2009) Mediating tumor targeting efficiency of nanoparticles through design. Nano Lett 9(5):1909-1915
7. Na JH et al (2012) Effect of the stability and deformability of self-assembled glycol chitosan nanoparticles on tumor-targeting efficiency. J Control Release 163(1):2-9
8. Dreher MR et al (2006) Tumor vascular permeability, accumulation, and penetration of macromolecular drug carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(5):335-344
9. Park K et al (2007) Effect of polymer molecular weight on the tumor targeting characteristics of self-assembled glycol chitosan nanoparticles. J Control Release 122(3):305-314
10. Maeda H (2012) Macromolecular therapeutics in cancer treatment: the EPR effect and beyond. J Control Release 164(2):138-144
11. Albanese A, Tang PS, Chan WC (2012) The effect of nanoparticle size, shape, and surface chemistry on biological systems. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 14:1-16
12. Kim K et al (2010) Tumor-homing multifunctional nanoparticles for cancer theragnosis: simultaneous diagnosis, drug delivery, and therapeutic monitoring. J Control Release 146(2):219-227
13. Kim JH et al (2006) Hydrophobically modified glycol chitosan nanoparticles as carriers for paclitaxel (Reprinted from Journal of Controlled Release, vol 109, pg 1, 2005). J Control Release 111(1-2):228-234
14. Choi HS, Frangioni JV (2010) Nanoparticles for biomedical imaging: fundamentals of clinical translation. Mol Imaging 9(6):291-310
15. Wood LD et al (2007) The genomic landscapes of human breast and colorectal cancers. Science 318(5853):1108-1113
16. Fang J, Nakamura H, Maeda H (2011) The EPR effect: unique features of tumor blood vessels for drug delivery, factors involved, and limitations and augmentation of the effect. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 63(3):136-151
17. Torchilin V (2011) Tumor delivery of macromolecular drugs based on the EPR effect. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 63(3):131-135
18. Maeda H (2001) The enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect in tumor vasculature: the key role of tumor-selective macromolecular drug targeting. Adv Enzyme Regul 41: 189-207
19. Yhee JY et al (2011) Multifunctional chitosan nanoparticles for tumor imaging and therapy. Chitosan for biomaterials I. Adv Polymer Sci 243:139-161
20. Koo H et al (2011) In vivo targeted delivery of nanoparticles for theranosis. Acc Chem Res 44(10):1018-1028
21. Lipinski CA et al (2001) Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 46(1-3):3-26
22. Maeda H, Bharate GY, Daruwalla J (2009) Polymeric drugs for efficient tumor-targeted drug delivery based on EPR-effect. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 71(3):409-419
23. Maeda H et al (2000) Tumor vascular permeability and the EPR effect in macromolecular therapeutics: a review. J Control Release 65(1-2):271-284
24. Maeda H, Sawa T, Konno T (2001) Mechanism of tumor-targeted delivery of macromolecular drugs, including the EPR effect in solid tumor and clinical overview of the prototype polymeric drug SMANCS. J Control Release 74(1-3):47-61
25. Maeda H (2001) SMANCS and polymer-conjugated macromolecular drugs: advantages in cancer chemotherapy. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 46(1-3):169-185
26. Kunath K et al (2000) HPMA copolymer-anticancer drug-OV-TL16 antibody conjugates. 3. The effect of free and polymer-bound Adriamycin on the expression of some genes in the OVCAR-3 human ovarian carcinoma cell line. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 49(1):11-15
27. Peterson CM et al (2003) HPMA copolymer delivery of chemotherapy and photodynamic therapy in ovarian cancer. Adv Exp Med Biol 519:101-123
28. Torchilin VP (2001) Structure and design of polymeric surfactant-based drug delivery systems. J Control Release 73(2-3):137-172
29. Hamaguchi T et al (2005) NK105, a paclitaxel-incorporating micellar nanoparticle formulation, can extend in vivo antitumour activity and reduce the neurotoxicity of paclitaxel. Br J Cancer 92(7):1240-1246
30. Kim TY et al (2004) Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of Genexol-PM, a cremophor-free, polymeric micelle-formulated paclitaxel, in patients with advanced malignancies. Clin Cancer Res 10(11):3708-3716
31. Matsumura Y (2011) Preclinical and clinical studies of NK012, an SN-38-incorporating polymeric micelles, which is designed based on EPR effect. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 63(3):184-192
32. Frokjaer S, Otzen DE (2005) Protein drug stability: a formulation challenge. Nat Rev Drug Discov 4(4):298-306
33. Sinha VR, Trehan A (2003) Biodegradable microspheres for protein delivery. J Control Release 90(3):261-280
34. Morishita M, Peppas NA (2006) Is the oral route possible for peptide and protein drug delivery? Drug Discov Today 11(19-20):905-910
35. Harris JM, Chess RB (2003) Effect of pegylation on pharmaceuticals. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2(3):214-221
36. Bersani C et al (2005) PEG-metronidazole conjugates: synthesis, in vitro and in vivo properties. Farmaco 60(9):783-788
37. Veronese FM, Pasut G (2005) PEGylation, successful approach to drug delivery. Drug Discov Today 10(21):1451-1458
38. Hershfield MS (1995) PEG-ADA replacement therapy for adenosine deaminase deficiency: an update after 8.5 years. Clin Immunol Immunopathol 76(3 Pt 2):S228-S232
39. Asselin BL (1999) The three asparaginases. Comparative pharmacology and optimal use in childhood leukemia. Adv Exp Med Biol 457:621-629
40. Bailon P et al (2001) Rational design of a potent, long-lasting form of interferon: a 40 kDa branched polyethylene glycol-conjugated interferon alpha-2a for the treatment of hepatitis C. Bioconjug Chem 12(2):195-202
41. Wang YS et al (2002) Structural and biological characterization of pegylated recombinant interferon alpha-2b and its therapeutic implications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54(4):547-570
42. Graham ML (2003) Pegaspargase: a review of clinical studies. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 55(10):1293-1302
43. Bonanno G et al (2010) Effects of pegylated G-CSF on immune cell number and function in patients with gynecological malignancies. J Transl Med 8:114
44. Hermeling S et al (2004) Structure-immunogenicity relationships of therapeutic proteins. Pharm Res 21(6):897-903
45. Mundargi RC et al (2008) Nano/micro technologies for delivering macromolecular therapeutics using poly(D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) and its derivatives. J Control Release 125(3):193-209
46. Pisal DS, Kosloski MP, Balu-Iyer SV (2010) Delivery of therapeutic proteins. J Pharm Sci 99(6):2557-2575
47. Carrasquillo KG et al (2001) Non-aqueous encapsulation of excipient-stabilized spray-freeze dried BSA into poly(lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres results in release of native protein. J Control Release 76(3):199-208
48. Lee SJ et al. (2013) Structural modification of siRNA for efficient gene silencing. Biotechnol Adv 31(5):491-503
49. Lemkine GF, Demeneix BA (2001) Polyethylenimines for in vivo gene delivery. Curr Opin Mol Ther 3(2):178-182
50. Zou SM et al (2000) Systemic linear polyethylenimine (L-PEI)-mediated gene delivery in the mouse. J Gene Med 2(2):128-134
51. Saranya N et al (2011) Chitosan and its derivatives for gene delivery. Int J Biol Macromol 48(2):234-238
52. Lin C et al (2006) Linear poly(amido amine)s with secondary and tertiary amino groups and variable amounts of disulfide linkages: synthesis and in vitro gene transfer properties. J Control Release 116(2):130-137
53. Son S, Singha K, Kim WJ (2010) Bioreducible BPEI-SS-PEG-cNGR polymer as a tumor targeted nonviral gene carrier. Biomaterials 31(24):6344-6354
54. Liu XD et al (2007) The influence of polymeric properties on chitosan/siRNA nanoparticle formulation and gene silencing. Biomaterials 28(6):1280-1288
55. Zhang YQ et al (2007) A novel PEGylation of chitosan nanoparticles for gene delivery. Biotechnol Appl Biochem 46:197-204
56. Lee D et al (2007) Thiolated chitosan/DNA nanocomplexes exhibit enhanced and sustained gene delivery. Pharm Res 24(1):157-167
57. Saravanakumar G et al (2009) Hydrotropic oligomer-conjugated glycol chitosan as a carrier of paclitaxel: synthesis, characterization, and in vivo biodistribution. J Control Release 140(3):210-217
58. Lee SJ et al (2012) Tumor-homing poly-siRNA/glycol chitosan self-cross-linked nanoparticles for systemic siRNA delivery in cancer treatment. Angew Chem Int Ed 51(29):7203-7207
59. Huh MS et al (2010) Tumor-homing glycol chitosan/polyethylenimine nanoparticles for the systemic delivery of siRNA in tumor-bearing mice. J Control Release 144(2):134-143
60. Hatakeyama H, Akita H, Harashima H (2011) A multifunctional envelope type nano device (MEND) for gene delivery to tumours based on the EPR effect: a strategy for overcoming the PEG dilemma. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 63(3):152-160