Current approaches for improving intratumoral accumulation and distribution of nanomedicines

Theranostics

Volumn 5, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1007-1020

  Durymanov, Mikhail O ^a   Rosenkranz, Andrey A ^a,b   Sobolev, Alexander S ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE OF GENE BIOLOGY   (Russian Federation)

^b MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Macromolecules; Nanomedicines; Nanoparticles

Indexed keywords

GELATINASE A; GELATINASE B; NANOPARTICLE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

BLOOD VESSEL PERMEABILITY; BORDERLINE HYPERTENSION; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CHEMICAL MODIFICATION; CYTOTOXIC T LYMPHOCYTE; DRUG ACCUMULATION; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG ELIMINATION; DRUG PENETRATION; DRUG TUMOR LEVEL; ELECTROPHORETIC MOBILITY; ENZYME ACTIVITY; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; GAMMA IRRADIATION; HYDROPHILICITY; HYPERTHERMIA; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; IONIZING RADIATION; MACROPHAGE; MESENCHYMAL STEM CELL; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; MONOCYTE; NANOMEDICINE; PARTICLE SIZE; PEGYLATION; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PLASMA CLEARANCE; RENAL CLEARANCE; RETICULOENDOTHELIAL SYSTEM; REVIEW; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT; TUMOR VASCULARIZATION; ULTRASOUND; X IRRADIATION; ANIMAL; HUMAN; NEOPLASMS; PROCEDURES; THERANOSTIC NANOMEDICINE;

ANIMALS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; HUMANS; NANOPARTICLES; NEOPLASMS; THERANOSTIC NANOMEDICINE;

EID: 84945929584     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18387640     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7150/thno.11742     Document Type: Review

References (168)

1. Hashizume H, Baluk P, Morikawa S, et al. Openings between 1. defective endothelial cells explain tumor vessel leakiness. Am J Pathol. 2000; 156: 1363-80.
2. Sevick EM, Jain RK. Geometric resistance to blood flow in solid tumors perfused ex vivo: effects of tumor size and perfusion pressure. Cancer Res. 1989; 49: 3506-12.
3. Folkman J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med. 1995; 1: 27-31.
4. Matsumura Y, Maeda H. A new concept for macromolecular therapeutics in cancer chemotherapy: mechanism of tumoritropic accumulation of proteins and the antitumor agent SMANCS. Cancer Res. 1986; 46: 6387-92.
5. Malik N, Evagorou EG, Duncan R. Dendrimer-platinate: a novel approach to cancer chemotherapy. Anticancer Drugs. 1999; 10: 767-76.
6. Ambruosi A, Khalansky AS, Yamamoto H, et al. Biodistribution of polysorbate 80-coated doxorubicin-loaded [14C]-poly(butyl cyanoacrylate) nanoparticles after intravenous administration to glioblastoma-bearing rats. J Drug Target. 2006; 14: 97-105.
7. Okuda T, Kawakami S, Akimoto N, et al. PEGylated lysine dendrimers for tumor-selective targeting after intravenous injection in tumor-bearing mice. J Control Release. 2006; 116: 330-6.
8. Kim JH, Kim YS, Park K, et al. Antitumor efficacy of cisplatin-loaded glycol chitosan nanoparticles in tumor-bearing mice. J Control Release. 2008; 127: 41-9.
9. Morton JG, Day ES, Halas NJ, et al. Nanoshells for photothermal cancer therapy. Methods Mol Biol. 2010; 624: 101-17.
10. Durymanov MO, Slastnikova TA, Kuzmich AI, et al. Microdistribution of MC1R-targeted polyplexes in murine melanoma tumor tissue. Biomaterials. 2013; 34: 10209-16.
11. Chauhan VP, Stylianopoulos T, Boucher Y, et al. Delivery of molecular and nanoscale medicine to tumors: transport barriers and strategies. Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng. 2011; 2: 281-98.
12. Leu AJ, Berk DA, Lymboussaki A, et al. Absence of functional lymphatics within a murine sarcoma: a molecular and functional evaluation. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 4324-7.
13. Fukumura D, Jain RK. Tumor microenvironment abnormalities: causes, consequences, and strategies to normalize. J Cell Biochem. 2007; 101: 937-49.
14. Levental KR, Yu H, Kass L, et al. Matrix crosslinking forces tumor progression by enhancing integrin signaling. Cell. 2009; 193: 891-906.
15. Laurich C, Wheeler MA, Iida J, et al. Hyaluronan mediates adhesion of metastatic colon carcinoma cells. J Surg Res. 2004; 122: 70-4.
16. Payne SL, Hendrix MJ, Kirschmann DA. Paradoxical roles for lysyl oxidases in cancer - a prospect. J Cell Biochem. 2007; 101: 1338-54.
17. Alexandrakis G, Brown EB, Tong RT, et al. Two-photon fluorescence correlation microscopy reveals the two-phase nature of transport in tumors. Nat Med. 2004; 10: 203-7.
18. Torosean S, Flynn B, Axelsson J, et al. Nanoparticle uptake in tumors is mediated by the interplay of vascular and collagen density with interstitial pressure. Nanomedicine. 2013; 9: 151-8.
19. Rabanel JM, Aoun V, Elkin I, et al. Drug-loaded nanocarriers: passive targeting and crossing of biological barriers. Curr Med Chem. 2012; 19: 3070-102.
20. Anselmo AC, Mitragotri S. Cell-mediated delivery of nanoparticles: Taking advantage of circulatory cells to target nanoparticles. J Control. Release. 2014; 190: 531-41.
21. Bae YH, Park K. Targeted drug delivery to tumors: myths, reality and possibility. J Control Release. 2011; 153: 198-205.
22. Harrington KJ, Mohammadtaghi S, Uster PS, et al. Effective targeting of solid tumors in patients with locally advanced cancers by radiolabeled pegylated liposomes. Clin Cancer Res. 2001; 7: 243-54.
23. Bhadra D, Bhadra S, Jain P, et al. Pegnology: a review of PEG-ylated systems. Pharmazie. 2002; 57: 5-29.
24. Sankari SL, Babu NA, Masthan MK, et al. The mononuclear phagocyte system in health and disease. Indian J Dent Sci. 2013; 1: 126-128.
25. Nel AE, Mädler L, Velegol D, et al. Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano-bio interface. Nat Mater. 2009; 8: 543-57.
26. Wang B, He X, Zhang Z, et al. Metabolism of nanomaterials in vivo: blood circulation and organ clearance. Acc Chem Res. 2013; 46: 761-9.
27. Alexis F, Pridgen E, Molnar LK, et al. Factors affecting the clearance and biodistribution of polymeric nanoparticles. Mol Pharm. 2008; 5: 505-15.
28. Akiyama Y, Mori T, Katayama Y, et al. The effects of PEG grafting level and injection dose on gold nanorod biodistribution in the tumor-bearing mice. J Control Release. 2009; 139: 81-4.
29. Fang C, Shi B, Pei YY, et al. In vivo tumor targeting of tumor necrosis factor-alpha-loaded stealth nanoparticles: effect of MePEG molecular weight and particle size. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2006; 27: 27-36.
30. Kano A, Moriyama K, Yamano T, et al. Grafting of poly(ethylene glycol) to poly-lysine augments its lifetime in blood circulation and accumulation in tumors without loss of the ability to associate with siRNA. J Control Release. 2011; 149: 2-7.
31. Milla P., Dosio F, Cattel L. PEGylation of proteins and liposomes: a powerful and flexible strategy to improve the drug delivery. Curr Drug Metab. 2012; 13: 105-19.
32. Duan X, Li Y. Physicochemical characteristics of nanoparticles affect circulation, biodistribution, cellular internalization, and trafficking. Small. 2013; 9: 1521-32.
33. Hatakeyama H, Akita H, Harashima H. The polyethyleneglycol dilemma: advantage and disadvantage of PEGylation of liposomes for systemic genes and nucleic acids delivery to tumors. Biol Pharm Bull. 2013; 36: 892-9.
34. Abu Lila AS, Kiwada H, Ishida T. The accelerated blood clearance (ABC) phenomenon: clinical challenge and approaches to manage. J Control Release. 2013; 172: 38-47.
35. Shiraishi K, Yokoyama M. Polymeric micelles possessing polyethyleneglycol as outer shell and their unique behaviors in accelerated blood clearance phenomenon. Biol Pharm Bull. 2013; 36: 878-82.
36. Lu W, Wan J, She Z, et al. Brain delivery property and accelerated blood clearance of cationic albumin conjugated pegylated nanoparticle. J Control Release. 2007; 118: 38-53.
37. Romberg B, Oussoren C, Snel CJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of poly(hydroxyethyl-l-asparagine)-coated liposomes is superior over that of PEG-coated liposomes at low lipid dose and upon repeated administration. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2007; 1768: 737-43.
38. Ishihara T, Maeda T, Sakamoto H, et al. Evasion of the accelerated blood clearance phenomenon by coating of nanoparticles with various hydrophilic polymers. Biomacromolecules. 2010; 11: 2700-6.
39. Sarin H. Physiologic upper limits of pore size of different blood capillary types and another perspective on the dual pore theory of microvascular permeability. J Angiogenes Res. 2010; 2: 14.
40. Dreher MR, Liu W, Michelich CR, et al. Tumor vascular permeability, accumulation, and penetration of macromolecular drug carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98: 335-44.
41. Popovic Z, Liu W, Chauhan VP, et al. A nanoparticle size series for in vivo fluorescence imaging. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2010; 49: 8649-52.
42. Lee H, Fonge H, Hoang B, et al. The effects of particle size and molecular targeting on the intratumoral and subcellular distribution of polymeric nanoparticles. Mol Pharm. 2010; 7: 1195-208.
43. Cabral H, Matsumoto Y, Mizuno K, et al. Accumulation of sub-100nm polymeric micelles in poorly permeable tumours depends on size. Nat Nanotechnol. 2011; 6: 815-23.
44. Jiang W, Kim BY, Rutka JT, et al. Nanoparticle-mediated cellular response is size-dependent. Nat Nanotechnol. 2008; 3: 145-50.
45. Goodman CM, McCusker CD, Yilmaz T, et al. Toxicity of gold nanoparticles functionalized with cationic and anionic side chains. Bioconjug Chem. 2004; 15: 897-900.
46. Dellian M, Yuan F, Trubetskoy VS, et al. Vascular permeability in a human tumour xenograft: molecular charge dependence. Br J Cancer. 2000; 82: 1513-8.
47. Krasnici S, Werner A, Eichhorn ME, et al. Effect of the surface charge of liposomes on their uptake by angiogenic tumor vessels. Int J Cancer. 2003; 105: 561-7.
48. Campbell RB, Fukumura D, Brown EB, et al. Cationic charge determines the distribution of liposomes between the vascular and extravascular compartments of tumors. Cancer Res. 2002; 62: 6831-6.
49. He C, Hu Y, Yin L, et al. Effects of particle size and surface charge on cellular uptake and biodistribution of polymeric nanoparticles. Biomaterials. 2010; 31: 3657-66.
50. Xiao K, Li Y, Luo J, et al. The effect of surface charge on in vivo biodistribution of PEG-oligocholic acid based micellar nanoparticles. Biomaterials. 2011; 32: 3435-46.
51. Dair BJ, Tyner K, Sapsford KE. Techniques for the Characterization of Nanoparticle-Bioconjugates. In: Rege K, Medintz IL, eds. Methods in Bioengineering. Nanoscale Bioengineering and Nanomedicine, 1st ed. London: Artech House; 2009: 293-331.
52. Sahay G, Alakhova DY, Kabanov AV. Endocytosis of nanomedicines. J Control Release. 2010; 145: 182-95.
53. Geng Y, Dalhaimer P, Cai S, et al. Shape effects of filaments versus spherical particles in flow and drug delivery. Nat Nanotechnol. 2007; 2: 249-55.
54. Arnida, M.M. Janát-Amsbury, A. Ray, et al. Geometry and surface characteristics of gold nanoparticles influence their biodistribution and uptake by macrophages. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011; 77: 417-23.
55. Shah S, Liu Y, Hu W, et al. Modeling particle shape-dependent dynamics in nanomedicine. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2011; 11: 919-28.
56. Doshi N, Prabhakarpandian B, Rea-Ramsey A, et al. Flow and adhesion of drug carriers in blood vessels depend on their shape: a study using model synthetic microvascular networks. J Control Release. 2010; 146: 196-200.
57. Smith BR, Kempen P, Bouley D, et al. Shape matters: intravital microscopy reveals surprising geometrical dependence for nanoparticles in tumor models of extravasation. Nano Lett. 2012; 12: 3369-77.
58. Zhu L, Torchilin VP. Stimulus-responsive nanopreparations for tumor targeting. Integr Biol (Camb). 2013; 5: 96-107.
59. Mondalek FG, Zhang YY, Kropp B, et al. The permeability of SPION over an artificial three-layer membrane is enhanced by external magnetic field. J Nanobiotechnology. 2006; 4: 4.
60. Klostergaard J, Seeney CE. Magnetic nanovectors for drug delivery. Nanomedicine. 2012; 8 (Suppl 1): S37-50.
61. Plank C, Zelphati O, Mykhaylyk O. Magnetically enhanced nucleic acid delivery. Ten years of magnetofection - progress and prospects. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2011; 63: 1300-31.
62. De Las Heras Alarcon C, Pennadam S, Alexander C. Stimuli responsive polymers for biomedical applications. Chem Soc Rev. 2005; 34: 276-85.
63. Schwerdt A., Zintchenko A., Concia M., et al. Hyperthermia-induced targeting of thermosensitive gene carriers to tumors. Hum Gene Ther. 2008; 19: 1283-92.
64. Chilkoti A, Dreher MR, Meyer DE, et al. Targeted drug delivery by thermally responsive polymers. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2002; 54: 613-30.
65. Turpeenniemi-Hujanen T. Gelatinases (MMP-2 and -9) and their natural inhibitors as prognostic indicators in solid cancers. Biochimie. 2005; 87: 287-97.
66. Zhu L, Wang T, Perche F, et al. Enhanced anticancer activity of nanopreparation containing an MMP2-sensitive PEG-drug conjugate and cell-penetrating moiety. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013; 110: 17047-52.
67. Wong C, Stylianopoulos T, Cui J, et al. Multistage nanoparticle delivery system for deep penetration into tumor tissue. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108: 2426-31.
68. Liu J, Liu J, Xu H, et al. Novel tumor-targeting, self-assembling peptide nanofiber as a carrier for effective curcumin delivery. Int J Nanomedicine. 2014; 9: 197-207.
69. Gao H, Yang Z, Zhang S, et al. Ligand modified nanoparticles increases cell uptake, alters endocytosis and elevates glioma distribution and internalization. Sci Rep. 2013; 3: 2534.
70. Chen F, Hong H, Zhang Y, et al. In vivo tumor targeting and image-guided drug delivery with antibody-conjugated, radiolabeled mesoporous silica nanoparticles. ACS Nano. 2013; 7: 9027-39.
71. Choi CH, Alabi CA, Webster P, et al. Mechanism of active targeting in solid tumors with transferrin-containing gold nanoparticles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010; 107: 1235-40.
72. Kirpotin DB, Drummond DC, Shao Y, et al. Antibody targeting of long-circulating lipidic nanoparticles does not increase tumor localization but does increase internalization in animal models. Cancer Res. 2006; 66: 6732-40.
73. Toy R, Hayden E, Camann A, et al. Multimodal in vivo imaging exposes the voyage of nanoparticles in tumor microcirculation. ACS Nano. 2013; 7: 3118-29.
74. Lee H, Hoang B, Fonge H, et al. In vivo distribution of polymeric nanoparticles at the whole-body, tumor, and cellular levels. Pharm Res. 2010; 27: 2343-55.
75. Park JH, von Maltzahn G, Zhang L, et al. Systematic surface engineering of magnetic nanoworms for in vivo tumor targeting. Small. 2009; 5: 694-700.
76. Durymanov MO, Beletkaia EA, Ulasov AV, et al. Subcellular trafficking and transfection efficacy of polyethylenimine-polyethylene glycol polyplex nanoparticles with a ligand to melanocortin receptor-1. J Control Release. 2012; 163: 211-9.
77. von Gersdorff K, Ogris M, Wagner E. Cryoconserved shielded and EGF receptor targeted DNA polyplexes: cellular mechanisms. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2005; 60: 279-85.
78. Bartlett DW, Su H, Hildebrandt IJ, et al. Impact of tumor-specific targeting on the biodistribution and efficacy of siRNA nanoparticles measured by multimodality in vivo imaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104: 15549-54.
79. Salvati A, Pitek AS, Monopoli MP, et al. Transferrin-functionalized nanoparticles lose their targeting capabilities when a biomolecule corona adsorbs on the surface. Nat Nanotechnol. 2013; 8: 137-43.
80. Juweid M, Neumann R, Paik C, et al. Micropharmacology of monoclonal antibodies in solid tumors: direct experimental evidence for a binding site barrier. Cancer Res. 1992; 52: 5144-53.
81. Adams GP, Schier R, McCall AM, et al. High affinity restricts the localization and tumor penetration of single-chain Fv antibody molecules. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 4750-5.
82. Marcucci F, Corti A. How to improve exposure of tumor cells to drugs - Promoter drugs increase tumor uptake and penetration of effector drugs. Adv Drud Deliv Rev. 2012; 64: 53-68.
83. Chang E, Chalikonda S, Friedl J, et al. Targeting vaccinia to solid tumors with local hyperthermia. Hum Gene Ther. 2005; 16: 435-44.
84. Lammers T, Peschke P, Kühnlein R, et al. Effect of radiotherapy and hyperthermia on the tumor accumulation of HPMA copolymer-based drug delivery systems. J Control Release. 2007; 117: 333-41.
85. Hauck ML, Dewhirst MW, Bigner DD, et al. Local hyperthermia improves uptake of a chimeric monoclonal antibody in a subcutaneous xenograft model. Clin Cancer Res. 1997; 3: 63-70.
86. Kong G, Braun RD, Dewhirst MW. Characterization of the effect of hyperthermia on nanoparticle extravasation from tumor vasculature. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 3027-32.
87. Shen Y, Liu P, Zhang A, et al. Study on tumor microvasculature damage induced by alternate cooling and heating. Ann Biomed Eng. 2008; 36: 1409-19.
88. Dudar TE, Jain RK. Differential response of normal and tumor microcirculation to hyperthermia. Cancer Res. 1984; 44: 605-12.
89. Kong G, Braun RD, Dewhirst MW. Hyperthermia enables tumor-specific nanoparticle delivery: effect of particle size. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 4440-5.
90. Chen BG, Zhou MJ, Xu LX. Study of vascular endothelial cell morphology during hyperthermia. J Therm Biol. 2005; 30: 111-7.
91. Kobayashi H, Reijnders K, English S, et al. Application of a macromolecular contrast agent for detection of alterations of tumor vessel permeability induced by radiation. Clin Cancer Res. 2004; 10: 7712-20.
92. Davies C de L, Lundstrøm LM, Frengen J, et al. Radiation improves the distribution and uptake of liposomal doxorubicin (caelyx) in human osteosarcoma xenografts. Cancer Res. 2004; 64: 547-53.
93. Kalofonos H, Rowlinson G, Epenetos AA. Enhancement of monoclonal antibody uptake in human colon tumor xenografts following irradiation. Cancer Res. 1990; 50: 159-63.
94. Buchegger F, Rojas A, Delaloye AB, et al. Combined radioimmunotherapy and radiotherapy of human colon carcinoma grafted in nude mice. Cancer Res. 1995; 5: 83-9.
95. Ganss R, Ryschich E, Klar E, et al. Combination of T-cell therapy and trigger of inflammation induces remodeling of the vasculature and tumor eradication. Cancer Res. 2002; 62: 1462-70.
96. Goldblum SE, Ding X, Campbell-Washington J. TNF-alpha induces endothelial cell F-actin depolymerization, new actin synthesis, and barrier dysfunction. Am J Physiol. 1993; 264: 894-905.
97. Park JS, Qiao L, Su ZZ, et al. Ionizing radiation modulates vascular endothelial growth factor expression through multiple mitogen activated protein kinase dependent pathways. Oncogene. 2001; 25: 3266-80.
98. Claesson-Welsh L, Welsh M. VEGFA and tumour angiogenesis. J Intern Med. 2013; 273: 114-27.
99. Znati CA, Rosenstein M, Boucher Y, et al. Effect of radiation on interstitial fluid pressure and oxygenation in a human tumor xenograft. Cancer Res. 1996; 56: 964-68.
100. Mo S, Coussios CC, Seymour L, Carlisle R. Ultrasound-enhanced drug delivery for cancer. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2012; 9: 1525-38.
101. Ferrara KW. Driving delivery vehicles with ultrasound. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2008; 60: 1097-102.
102. Thakkar D, Gupta R, Monson K, et al. Effect of ultrasound on the permeability of vascular wall to nano-emulsion droplets. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013; 39: 1804-11.
103. Sirsi SR, Hernandez SL, Zielinski L, et al. Polyplex-microbubble hybrids for ultrasound-guided plasmid DNA delivery to solid tumors. J Control Release. 2012; 157: 224-34.
104. Wei H, Huang J, Yang J, et al. Ultrasound exposure improves the targeted therapy effects of galactosylated docetaxel nanoparticles on hepatocellular carcinoma xenografts. PLoS One. 2013; 8: e58133.
105. Arvanitis CD, Bazan-Peregrino M, Rifai B, et al. Cavitation-enhanced extravasation for drug delivery. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011; 37: 1838-52.
106. Seki T, Carroll F, Illingworth S, et al. Tumour necrosis factor-alpha increases extravasation of virus particles into tumour tissue by activating the RhoA/Rho kinase pathway. J Control Release. 2011; 156: 381-9.
107. Epstein AL, Mizokami MM, Li J, et al. Identification of a protein fragment of interleukin 2 responsible for vasopermeability. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003; 95: 741-9.
108. Tanaka S, Akaike T, Wu J, et al. Modulation of tumor-selective vascular blood flow and extravasation by the stable prostaglandin I2 analogue beraprost sodium. J Drug Target. 2003; 11: 45-52.
109. Monsky WL, Fukumura D, Gohongi T, et al. Augmentation of transvascular transport of macromolecules and nanoparticles in tumors using vascular endothelial growth factor. Cancer Res. 1999; 59: 4129-35.
110. Hennigan TW, Begent RH, Allen-Mersh TG. Histamine, leukotriene C4 and interleukin-2 increase antibody uptake into a human carcinoma xenograft model. Br J Cancer. 1991; 64: 872-4.
111. Seki T, Fang J, Maeda H. Enhanced delivery of macromolecular antitumor drugs to tumors by nitroglycerin application. Cancer Sci. 2009; 100: 2426-30.
112. Schiller JH, Storer BE, Witt PL, et al. Biological and clinical effects of intravenous tumor necrosis factor-alpha administered three times weekly. Cancer Res. 1991; 51: 1651-8.
113. van Laarhoven HW, Gambarota G, Heerschap A, et al. Effects of the tumor vasculature targeting agent NGR-TNF on the tumor microenvironment in murine lymphomas. Invest New Drugs. 2006; 24: 27-36.
114. Atsumi T. Singh R, Sabharwal L, et al. Inflammation amplifier, a new paradigm in cancer biology. Cancer Res. 2014; 74: 8-14.
115. Kano MR, Bae Y, Iwata C, et al. Improvement of cancer-targeting therapy, using nanocarriers for intractable solid tumors by inhibition of TGF-beta signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104: 3460-5.
116. Yingling JM, Blanchard KL, Sawyer JS. Development of TGF-beta signalling inhibitors for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004; 3: 1011-22.
117. Eikenes L, Tari M, Tufto I, et al. Hyaluronidase induces a transcapillary pressure gradient and improves the distribution and uptake of liposomal doxorubicin (Caelyx) in human osteosarcoma xenografts. Br J Cancer. 2005; 93: 81-8.
118. McKee TD, Grandi P, Mok W, et al. Degradation of fibrillar collagen in a human melanoma xenograft improves the efficacy of an oncolytic herpes simplex virus vector. Cancer Res. 2006; 66: 2509-13.
119. Brown E, McKee T, di Tomaso E, et al. Dynamic imaging of collagen and its modulation in tumors in vivo using second-harmonic generation. Nat Med. 2003; 9: 796-800.
120. Chauhan VP, Martin JD, Liu H, et al. Angiotensin inhibition enhances drug delivery and potentiates chemotherapy by decompressing tumour blood vessels. Nat Commun. 2013; 4: 2516.
121. Diop-Frimpong B, Chauhan VP, Krane S, et al. Losartan inhibits collagen I synthesis and improves the distribution and efficacy of nanotherapeutics in tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108: 2909-14.
122. Arnold SA, Rivera LB, Carbon JG, et al. Losartan slows pancreatic tumor progression and extends survival of SPARC-null mice by abrogating aberrant TGFβ activation. PLoS One. 2012; 7: e31384.
123. Chen X, Meng Q, Zhao Y, et al. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists inhibit cell proliferation and angiogenesis in breast cancer. Cancer Lett. 2013; 328: 318-24.
124. Otake AH, Mattar AL, Freitas HC, et al. Inhibition of angiotensin II receptor 1 limits tumor-associated angiogenesis and attenuates growth of murine melanoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2010; 66: 79-87.
125. Kinuya S, Yokoyama K, Konishi S, et al. Effect of induced hypertension with angiotensin II infusion on biodistribution of 111In-labeled monoclonal antibody. Nucl Med Biol. 1996; 23: 137-40.
126. Li CJ, Miyamoto Y, Kojima Y, et al. Augmentation of tumour delivery of macromolecular drugs with reduced bone marrow delivery by elevating blood pressure. Br J Cancer. 1993; 67: 975-80.
127. Hattori Y, Ubukata H, Kawano K, et al. Angiotensin II-induced hypertension enhanced therapeutic efficacy of liposomal doxorubicin in tumor-bearingmice. Int J Pharm. 2011; 403: 178-84.
128. Nagamitsu A, Greish K, Maeda H. Elevating blood pressure as a strategy to increase tumor-targeted delivery of macromolecular drug SMANCS: cases of advanced solid tumors. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2009; 39: 756-66.
129. Jain RK. Normalization of tumor vasculature: an emerging concept in antiangiogenic therapy. Science. 2005; 307: 58-62.
130. Goel S, Duda DG, Xu L, et al. Normalization of the vasculature for treatment of cancer and other diseases. Physiol Rev. 2011; 91: 1071-121.
131. Stylianopoulos T, Jain RK. Combining two strategies to improve perfusion and drug delivery in solid tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013; 110: 18632-7.
132. Chauhan VP, Stylianopoulos T, Martin JD, et al. Normalization of tumour blood vessels improves the delivery of nanomedicines in a size-dependent manner. Nat Nanotechnol. 2012; 7: 383-8.
133. Stephan MT, Irvine DJ. Enhancing cell therapies from the outside in: cell surface engineering using synthetic nanomaterials. Nano Today. 2011; 6: 309-25.
134. Cihova M, Altanerova V, Altaner C. Stem cell based cancer gene therapy. Mol Pharm. 2011; 8: 1480-7.
135. Salem HK, Thiemermann C. Mesenchymal stromal cells: current understanding and clinical status. Stem Cells. 2010; 28: 585-96.
136. Ringe J, Strassburg S, Neumann K, et al. Towards in situ tissue repair: human mesenchymal stem cells express chemokine receptors CXCR1, CXCR2 and CCR2, and migrate upon stimulation with CXCL8 but not CCL2. J Cell Biochem. 2007; 101: 135-46.
137. Gao Z, Zhang L, Hu J, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells: a potential targeted-delivery vehicle for anti-cancer drug, loaded nanoparticles. Nanomedicine. 2013; 9: 174-84.
138. Teo GS, Ankrum JA, Martinelli R, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells transmigrate between and directly through tumor necrosis factor-α-activated endothelial cells via both leukocyte-like and novel mechanisms. Stem Cells. 2012; 30: 2472-86.
139. Marquez-Curtis LA, Janowska-Wieczorek A. Enhancing the migration ability of mesenchymal stromal cells by targeting the SDF-1/CXCR4 axis. Biomed Res Int. 2013; 2013: 561098.
140. Ruan J, Ji J, Song H, et al. Fluorescent magnetic nanoparticle-labeled mesenchymal stem cells for targeted imaging and hyperthermia therapy of in vivo gastric cancer. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2012; 7: 309.
141. Albarenque SM, Zwacka RM, Mohr A. Both human and mouse mesenchymal stem cells promote breast cancer metastasis. Stem Cell Res. 2011; 7: 163-71.
142. Zhang YS, Wang Y, Wang L, et al. Labeling human mesenchymal stem cells with gold nanocages for in vitro and in vivo tracking by two-photon microscopy and photoacoustic microscopy. Theranostics. 2013; 3: 532-43.
143. Levy O, Zhao W, Mortensen LJ, et al. mRNA-engineered mesenchymal stem cells for targeted delivery of interleukin-10 to sites of inflammation. Blood. 2013; 122: e23-32.
144. Xu WT, Bian ZY, Fan QM, et al. Human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) target osteosarcoma and promote its growth and pulmonary metastasis. Cancer Lett. 2009; 281: 32-41.
145. Karnoub AE, Dash AB, Vo AP, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells within tumour stroma promote breast cancer metastasis. Nature. 2007; 449: 557-63.
146. Martinez-Quintanilla J, Bhere D, Heidari P, et al. Therapeutic efficacy and fate of bimodal engineered stem cells in malignant brain tumors. Stem Cells. 2013; 31: 1706-14.
147. Knoop K, Schwenk N, Dolp P, et al. Stromal targeting of sodium iodide symporter using mesenchymal stem cells allows enhanced imaging and therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hum Gene Ther. 2013; 24: 306-16.
148. Drake CG. Combination immunotherapy approaches. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23 (Suppl 8): S41-6.
149. Liu Z, Li Z. Molecular imaging in tracking tumor-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs). Theranostics. 2014; 4: 990-1001.
150. Charo J, Perez C, Buschow C, et al. Visualizing the dynamic of adoptively transferred T cells during the rejection of large established tumors. Eur J Immunol. 2011; 41: 3187-97.
151. Palmer DC, Balasubramaniam S, Hanada K, et al. Vaccine-stimulated, adoptively transferred CD8+ T cells traffic indiscriminately and ubiquitously while mediating specific tumor destruction. J Immunol. 2004; 173: 7209-16.
152. Cole C, Qiao J, Kottke T, et al. Tumor-targeted, systemic delivery of therapeutic viral vectors using hitchhiking on antigen-specific T cells. Nat Med. 2005; 11: 1073-81.
153. Stephan MT, Moon JJ, Um SH, et al. Therapeutic cell engineering with surface-conjugated synthetic nanoparticles. Nat Med. 2010; 16: 1035-41.
154. Kennedy LC, Bear AS, Young JK, et al. T cells enhance gold nanoparticle delivery to tumors in vivo. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2011; 6: 283.
155. Solinas G, Germano G, Mantovani A, et al. Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) as major players of the cancer-related inflammation. J Leukoc Biol. 2009; 86: 1065-73.
156. Tripathi C, Tewari BN, Kanchan RK, et al. Macrophages are recruited to hypoxic tumor areas and acquire a Pro-Angiogenic M2-Polarized phenotype via hypoxic cancer cell derived cytokines Oncostatin M and Eotaxin. Oncotarget. 2014; 14: 5350-68.
157. Lal S, Clare SE, Halas NJ. Nanoshell-enabled photothermal cancer therapy: impending clinical impact. Acc Chem Res. 2008; 41: 1842-51.
158. Choi MR, Bardhan R, Stanton-Maxey KJ, et al. Delivery of nanoparticles to brain metastases of breast cancer using a cellular Trojan horse. Cancer Nanotechnol. 2012; 3: 47-54.
159. Valable S, Barbier EL, Bernaudin M, et al. In vivo MRI tracking of exogenous monocytes/ macrophages targeting brain tumors in a rat model of glioma. Neuroimage. 2008; 40: 973-83.
160. Choi J, Kim HY, Ju EJ, et al. Use of macrophages to deliver therapeutic and imaging contrast agents to tumors. Biomaterials. 2012; 33: 4195-203.
161. Basel MT, Balivada S, Shrestha TB, et al. A cell-delivered and cell-activated SN38-dextran prodrug increases survival in a murine disseminated pancreatic cancer model. Small. 2012; 8: 913-20.
162. Lammers T, Kiessling F, Hennink WE, et al. Drug targeting to tumors: principles, pitfalls and (pre-) clinical progress. J Control Release. 2012; 161: 175-87.
163. Nichols JW, Bae YH. EPR: Evidence and fallacy. J Control Release. 2014; 190: 451-64.
164. Raju B, Haug SR, Ibrahim SO, et al. High interstitial fluid pressure in rat tongue cancer is related to increased lymph vessel area, tumor size, invasiveness and decreased body weight. J Oral Pathol Med. 2008; 37: 137-44.
165. Zätterström UK, Brun E, Willén R, et al. Tumor angiogenesis and prognosis in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Head Neck. 1995; 17: 312-18.
166. Eberhard A, Kahlert S, Goede V, et al. Heterogeneity of angiogenesis and blood vessel maturation in human tumors: implications for antiangiogenic tumor therapies. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 1388-93.
167. Line SR, Torloni H, Junqueira LC. Diversity of collagen expression in the pleomorphic adenoma of the parotid gland. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1989; 414: 477-83.
168. Guix M, Mayorga-Martinez CC, Merkoçi A. Nano/micromotors in (bio)chemical science applications. Chem Rev. 2014; 114: 6285-322.