Biomaterials and emerging anticancer therapeutics: Engineering the microenvironment

Nature Reviews Cancer

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 56-66

  Gu, Luo ^a   Mooney, David J ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMATERIAL; CANCER VACCINE;

ADOPTIVE TRANSFER; ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; BIOENGINEERING; CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY; CANCER MODEL; CANCER RESEARCH; CELL TRANSFER; ENDOTHELIUM CELL; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; HUMAN; IMMUNOCOMPETENT CELL; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY; TISSUE ENGINEERING;

BIOCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; TISSUE ENGINEERING; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT;

EID: 84951310768     PISSN: 1474175X     EISSN: 14741768     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrc.2015.3     Document Type: Review

References (183)

1. Hanahan, D., Weinberg, R. A. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 144, 646-674 (2011).
2. Whiteside, T. L. The tumor microenvironment and its role in promoting tumor growth. Oncogene 27, 5904-5912 (2008).
3. Schreiber, R. D., Old, L. J., Smyth, M. J. Cancer immunoediting: integrating immunity's roles in cancer suppression and promotion. Science 331, 1565-1570 (2011).
4. Gerlinger, M. et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 883-892 (2012).
5. Yachida, S. et al. Distant metastasis occurs late during the genetic evolution of pancreatic cancer. Nature 467, 1114-1117 (2010).
6. Vogelstein, B. et al. Cancer genome landscapes. Science 339, 1546-1558 (2013).
7. Gerlowski, L. E., Jain, R. K. Microvascular permeability of normal and neoplastic tissues. Microvasc. Res. 31, 288-305 (1986).
8. Iyer, A. K., Khaled, G., Fang, J., Maeda, H. Exploiting the enhanced permeability and retention effect for tumor targeting. Drug Discov. Today 11, 812-818 (2006).
9. Heldin, C.-H., Rubin, K., Pietras, K., Östman, A. High interstitial fluid pressure-an obstacle in cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 4, 806-813 (2004).
10. Goel, S. et al. Normalization of the vasculature for treatment of cancer and other diseases. Physiol. Rev. 91, 1071-1121 (2011).
11. Holohan, C., Van Schaeybroeck, S., Longley, D. B., Johnston, P. G. Cancer drug resistance: an evolving paradigm. Nat. Rev. Cancer 13, 714-726 (2013).
12. Howell, S. B., Safaei, R., Larson, C. A., Sailor, M. J. Copper transporters and the cellular pharmacology of the platinum-containing cancer drugs. Mol. Pharmacol. 77, 887-894 (2010).
13. Nguyen, Q. T., Tsien, R. Y. Fluorescence-guided surgery with live molecular navigation-a new cutting edge. Nat. Rev. Cancer 13, 653-662 (2013).
14. Weissleder, R., Pittet, M. J. Imaging in the era of molecular oncology. Nature 452, 580-589 (2008).
15. Zhang, L. et al. Nanoparticles in medicine: therapeutic applications and developments. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 83, 761-769 (2008).
16. Zamboni, W. C. et al. Best practices in cancer nanotechnology: perspective from NCI Nanotechnology Alliance. Clin. Cancer Res. 18, 3229-3241 (2012).
17. Peer, D. et al. Nanocarriers as an emerging platform for cancer therapy. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2, 751-760 (2007).
18. Davis, M. E., Chen, Z. (G.) & Shin, D. M. Nanoparticle therapeutics: an emerging treatment modality for cancer. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 7, 771-782 (2008).
19. Kanasty, R., Dorkin, J. R., Vegas, A., Anderson, D. Delivery materials for siRNA therapeutics. Nat. Mater. 12, 967-977 (2013).
20. Kamaly, N., Xiao, Z., Valencia, P. M., Radovic-Moreno, A. F., Farokhzad, O. C. Targeted polymeric therapeutic nanoparticles: design, development and clinical translation. Chem. Soc. Rev. 41, 2971 (2012).
21. Huebsch, N., Mooney, D. J. Inspiration and application in the evolution of biomaterials. Nature 462, 426-432 (2009).
22. Binnig, G., Rohrer, H. Scanning tunneling microscopy. IBM J. Res. Dev. 30, 355-369 (1986).
23. Yu, G., Yan, X., Han, C., Huang, F. Characterization of supramolecular gels. Chem. Soc. Rev. 42, 6697-6722 (2013).
24. Nel, A. E. et al. Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano-bio interface. Nat. Mater. 8, 543-557 (2009).
25. Whitesides, G. M., Grzybowski, B. Self-assembly at all scales. Science 295, 2418-2421 (2002).
26. Lee, K. Y., Mooney, D. J. Hydrogels for tissue engineering. Chem. Rev. 101, 1869-1880 (2001).
27. Suggitt, M., Bibby, M. C. 50 years of preclinical anticancer drug screening: empirical to target-driven approaches. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 971-981 (2005).
28. Pampaloni, F., Reynaud, E. G., Stelzer, E. H. K. The third dimension bridges the gap between cell culture and live tissue. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8, 839-845 (2007).
29. Gill, B. J., West, J. L. Modeling the tumor extracellular matrix: tissue engineering tools repurposed towards new frontiers in cancer biology. J. Biomech. 47, 1969-1978 (2014).
30. Infanger, D. W., Lynch, M. E., Fischbach, C. Engineered culture models for studies of tumor-microenvironment interactions. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 15, 29-53 (2013).
31. Song, H.-H. G., Park, K. M., Gerecht, S. Hydrogels to model 3D in vitro microenvironment of tumor vascularization. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 79-80, 19-29 (2014).
32. Lu, P., Weaver, V. M., Werb, Z. The extracellular matrix: a dynamic niche in cancer progression. J. Cell Biol. 196, 395-406 (2012).
33. Schmeichel, K. L., Bissell, M. J. Modeling tissue-specific signaling and organ function in three dimensions. J. Cell Sci. 116, 2377-2388 (2003).
34. Hauptmann, S. et al. Integrin expression on colorectal tumor cells growing as monolayers, as multicellular tumor spheroids, or in nude mice. Int. J. Cancer 61, 819-825 (1995).
35. Wang, F. et al. Reciprocal interactions between 1-integrin and epidermal growth factor receptor in three-dimensional basement membrane breast cultures: a different perspective in epithelial biology. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 14821-14826 (1998).
36. Elsdale, T., Bard, J. Collagen substrata for studies on cell behavior. J. Cell Biol. 54, 626-637 (1972).
37. Gill, B. J. et al. A synthetic matrix with independently tunable biochemistry and mechanical properties to study epithelial morphogenesis and EMT in a lung adenocarcinoma model. Cancer Res. 72, 6013-6023 (2012).
38. Cross, V. L. et al. Dense type I collagen matrices that support cellular remodeling and microfabrication for studies of tumor angiogenesis and vasculogenesis in vitro. Biomaterials 31, 8596-8607 (2010).
39. Seano, G. et al. Modeling human tumor angiogenesis in a three-dimensional culture system. Blood 121, e129-e137 (2013).
40. Dolznig, H. et al. Modeling colon adenocarcinomas in vitro. Am. J. Pathol. 179, 487-501 (2011).
41. Sung, K. E. et al. Understanding the impact of 2D and 3D fibroblast cultures on in vitro breast cancer models. PLoS ONE 8, e76373 (2013).
42. Sieh, S. et al. Paracrine interactions between LNCaP prostate cancer cells and bioengineered bone in 3D in vitro culture reflect molecular changes during bone metastasis. Bone 63, 121-131 (2014).
43. Feder-Mengus, C. et al. Multiple mechanisms underlie defective recognition of melanoma cells cultured in three-dimensional architectures by antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Br. J. Cancer 96, 1072-1082 (2007).
44. Hirt, C. et al. 'In vitro' 3D models of tumor-immune system interaction. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 79-80, 145-154 (2014).
45. Dangles-Marie, V. et al. A three-dimensional tumor cell defect in activating autologous ctls is associated with inefficient antigen presentation correlated with heat shock protein-70 down-regulation. Cancer Res. 63, 3682-3687 (2003).
46. He, W. et al. Proteomic comparison of 3D and 2D glioma models reveals increased HLA-E expression in 3D models is associated with resistance to NK cell-mediated cytotoxicity. J. Proteome Res. 13, 2272-2281 (2014).
47. Florczyk, S. J. et al. 3D porous chitosan-alginate scaffolds: a new matrix for studying prostate cancer cell-lymphocyte interactions in vitro. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 1, 590-599 (2012).
48. Miller, J. S. et al. Rapid casting of patterned vascular networks for perfusable engineered three-dimensional tissues. Nat. Mater. 11, 768-774 (2012).
49. Kolesky, D. B. et al. 3D bioprinting of vascularized, heterogeneous cell-laden tissue constructs. Adv. Mater. 26, 3124-3130 (2014).
50. DeForest, C. A., Anseth, K. S. Cytocompatible click-based hydrogels with dynamically tunable properties through orthogonal photoconjugation and photocleavage reactions. Nat. Chem. 3, 925-931 (2011).
51. Nichol, J. W. et al. Cell-laden microengineered gelatin methacrylate hydrogels. Biomaterials 31, 5536-5544 (2010).
52. Stevens, K. R. et al. InVERT molding for scalable control of tissue microarchitecture. Nat. Commun. 4, 1847 (2013).
53. DuFort, C. C., Paszek, M. J., Weaver, V. M. Balancing forces: architectural control of mechanotransduction. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 12, 308-319 (2011).
54. Wang, N., Tytell, J. D., Ingber, D. E. Mechanotransduction at a distance: mechanically coupling the extracellular matrix with the nucleus. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 10, 75-82 (2009).
55. Engler, A. J., Sen, S., Sweeney, H. L., Discher, D. E. Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 126, 677-689 (2006).
56. Paszek, M. J. et al. Tensional homeostasis and the malignant phenotype. Cancer Cell 8, 241-254 (2005).
57. Levental, K. R. et al. Matrix crosslinking forces tumor progression by enhancing integrin signaling. Cell 139, 891-906 (2009).
58. Chaudhuri, O. et al. Extracellular matrix stiffness and composition jointly regulate the induction of malignant phenotypes in mammary epithelium. Nat. Mater. 13, 970-978 (2014).
59. Ananthanarayanan, B., Kim, Y., Kumar, S. Elucidating the mechanobiology of malignant brain tumors using a brain matrix-mimetic hyaluronic acid hydrogel platform. Biomaterials 32, 7913-7923 (2011).
60. Chaudhuri, O. et al. Substrate stress relaxation regulates cell spreading. Nat. Commun. 6, 6365 (2015).
61. Derda, R. et al. Paper-supported 3D cell culture for tissue-based bioassays. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 18457-18462 (2009).
62. Verbridge, S. S. et al. Oxygen-controlled three-dimensional cultures to analyze tumor angiogenesis. Tissue Eng. Part A 16, 2133-2141 (2010).
63. Fischbach, C. et al. Cancer cell angiogenic capability is regulated by 3D culture and integrin engagement. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 399-404 (2009).
64. Xu, X. et al. Recreating the tumor microenvironment in a bilayer, hyaluronic acid hydrogel construct for the growth of prostate cancer spheroids. Biomaterials 33, 9049-9060 (2012).
65. Buchanan, C. F. et al. Three-dimensional microfluidic collagen hydrogels for investigating flow-mediated tumor-endothelial signaling and vascular organization. Tissue Eng. Part C Methods 20, 64-75 (2014).
66. DeForest, C. A., Anseth, K. S. Photoreversible patterning of biomolecules within click-based hydrogels. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 51, 1816-1819 (2012).
67. Breslin, S., O'Driscoll, L. Three-dimensional cell culture: the missing link in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 18, 240-249 (2013).
68. Mehta, G., Hsiao, A. Y., Ingram, M., Luker, G. D., Takayama, S. Opportunities and challenges for use of tumor spheroids as models to test drug delivery and efficacy. J. Control. Release 164, 192-204 (2012).
69. Vinci, M. et al. Advances in establishment and analysis of three-dimensional tumor spheroid-based functional assays for target validation and drug evaluation. BMC Biol. 10, 29 (2012).
70. Myungjin Lee, J. et al. A three-dimensional microenvironment alters protein expression and chemosensitivity of epithelial ovarian cancer cells in vitro. Lab. Invest. 93, 528-542 (2013).
71. Yip, D., Cho, C. H. A multicellular 3D heterospheroid model of liver tumor and stromal cells in collagen gel for anti-cancer drug testing. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 433, 327-332 (2013).
72. Fong, E. L. S. et al. Modeling Ewing sarcoma tumors in vitro with 3D scaffolds. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 6500-6505 (2013).
73. Tentler, J. J. et al. Patient-derived tumour xenografts as models for oncology drug development. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 9, 338-350 (2012).
74. Fong, E. L. S. et al. Hydrogel-based 3D model of patient-derived prostate xenograft tumors suitable for drug screening. Mol. Pharmacol. 11, 2040-2050 (2014).
75. Phan-Lai, V. et al. Three-dimensional scaffolds to evaluate tumor associated fibroblast-mediated suppression of breast tumor specific T cells. Biomacromolecules 14, 1330-1337 (2013).
76. Grolman, J. M., Zhang, D., Smith, A. M., Moore, J. S., Kilian, K. A. Rapid 3D extrusion of synthetic tumor microenvironments. Adv. Mater. 27, 5512-5517 (2015).
77. Li, C. Y., Wood, D. K., Huang, J. H., Bhatia, S. N. Flow-based pipeline for systematic modulation and analysis of 3D tumor microenvironments. Lab. Chip 13, 1969-1978 (2013).
78. Kenny, P. A. et al. The morphologies of breast cancer cell lines in three-dimensional assays correlate with their profiles of gene expression. Mol. Oncol. 1, 84-96 (2007).
79. Yang, C., Tibbitt, M. W., Basta, L., Anseth, K. S. Mechanical memory and dosing influence stem cell fate. Nat. Mater. 13, 645-652 (2014).
80. Gilbert, P. M. et al. Substrate elasticity regulates skeletal muscle stem cell self-renewal in culture. Science 329, 1078-1081 (2010).
81. Liu, J. et al. Soft fibrin gels promote selection and growth of tumorigenic cells. Nat. Mater. 11, 734-741 (2012).
82. Fischbach, C. et al. Engineering tumors with 3D scaffolds. Nat. Methods 4, 855-860 (2007).
83. Leung, M. et al. Chitosan-alginate scaffold culture system for hepatocellular carcinoma increases malignancy and drug resistance. Pharm. Res. 27, 1939-1948 (2010).
84. Huh, D. et al. A human disease model of drug toxicity-induced pulmonary edema in a lung-on-a-chip microdevice. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 159-147 (2012).
85. Bhatia, S. N., Ingber, D. E. Microfluidic organs-on-chips. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 760-772 (2014).
86. Xu, Z. et al. Application of a microfluidic chip-based 3D co-culture to test drug sensitivity for individualized treatment of lung cancer. Biomaterials 34, 4109-4117 (2013).
87. Mellman, I., Coukos, G., Dranoff, G. Cancer immunotherapy comes of age. Nature 480, 480-489 (2011).
88. Waldmann, T. A. Immunotherapy: past, present and future. Nat. Med. 9, 269-277 (2003).
89. Kantoff, P. W. et al. Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 411-422 (2010).
90. Hodi, F. S. et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 711-723 (2010).
91. Hamid, O. et al. Safety and tumor responses with lambrolizumab (anti-PD-1) in melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 134-144 (2013).
92. Postow, M. A. et al. Nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab in untreated melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 2006-2017 (2015).
93. Rosenberg, S. A. et al. Durable complete responses in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic melanoma using T-cell transfer immunotherapy. Clin. Cancer Res. 17, 4550-4557 (2011).
94. Maude, S. L. et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells for sustained remissions in leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 1507-1517 (2014).
95. Lichty, B. D., Breitbach, C. J., Stojdl, D. F., Bell, J. C. Going viral with cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 14, 559-567 (2014).
96. Dendreon bankrupt [News]. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 1176-1176 (2014).
97. Rosenberg, S. A., Yang, J. C., Restifo, N. P. Cancer immunotherapy: moving beyond current vaccines. Nat. Med. 10, 909-915 (2004).
98. Klebanoff, C. A., Acquavella, N., Yu, Z., Restifo, N. P. Therapeutic cancer vaccines: are we there yet Immunol. Rev. 239, 27-44 (2011).
99. Hawiger, D. et al. Dendritic cells induce peripheral T cell unresponsiveness under steady state conditions in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 194, 769-780 (2001).
100. Palucka, K., Banchereau, J. Cancer immunotherapy via dendritic cells. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12, 265-277 (2012).
101. Bachmann, M. F., Jennings, G. T. Vaccine delivery: a matter of size, geometry, kinetics and molecular patterns. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 10, 787-796 (2010).
102. Irvine, D. J., Swartz, M. A., Szeto, G. L. Engineering synthetic vaccines using cues from natural immunity. Nat. Mater. 12, 978-990 (2013).
103. Johansen, P. et al. Antigen kinetics determines immune reactivity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 5189-5194 (2008).
104. Wherry, E. J. T cell exhaustion. Nat. Immunol. 12, 492-499 (2011).
105. Ali, O. A., Huebsch, N., Cao, L., Dranoff, G., Mooney, D. J. Infection-mimicking materials to program dendritic cells in situ. Nat. Mater. 8, 151-158 (2009).
106. Ali, O. A., Emerich, D., Dranoff, G., Mooney, D. J. In situ regulation of DC subsets and T cells mediates tumor regression in mice. Sci. Transl. Med. 1, 8-19 (2009).
107. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov [online], https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01753089.
108. Ali, O. A., Tayalia, P., Shvartsman, D., Lewin, S., Mooney, D. J. Inflammatory cytokines presented from polymer matrices differentially generate and activate DCs in situ. Adv. Funct. Mater. 23, 4621-4628 (2013).
109. Ali, O. A. et al. Identification of immune factors regulating antitumor immunity using polymeric vaccines with multiple adjuvants. Cancer Res. 74, 1670-1681 (2014).
110. Ali, O. A. et al. The efficacy of intracranial PLG-based vaccines is dependent on direct implantation into brain tissue. J. Control. Release 154, 249-257 (2011).
111. Hori, Y., Winans, A. M., Huang, C. C., Horrigan, E. M., Irvine, D. J. Injectable dendritic cell-carrying alginate gels for immunization and immunotherapy. Biomaterials 29, 3671-3682 (2008).
112. Koshy, S. T., Ferrante, T. C., Lewin, S. A., Mooney, D. J. Injectable, porous, and cell-responsive gelatin cryogels. Biomaterials 35, 2477-2487 (2014).
113. Kim, J. et al. Injectable, spontaneously assembling, inorganic scaffolds modulate immune cells in vivo and increase vaccine efficacy. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 64-72 (2014).
114. Bencherif, S. A. et al. Injectable cryogel-based whole-cell cancer vaccines. Nat. Commun. 6, 7556 (2015).
115. Schumacher, T. N., Schreiber, R. D. Neoantigens in cancer immunotherapy. Science 348, 69-74 (2015).
116. Reddy, S. T. et al. Exploiting lymphatic transport and complement activation in nanoparticle vaccines. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 1159-1164 (2007).
117. Manolova, V. et al. Nanoparticles target distinct dendritic cell populations according to their size. Eur. J. Immunol. 38, 1404-1413 (2008).
118. Fifis, T. et al. Size-dependent immunogenicity: therapeutic and protective properties of nano-vaccines against tumors. J. Immunol. 173, 3148-3154 (2004).
119. Gu, L. et al. Multivalent porous silicon nanoparticles enhance the immune activation potency of agonistic CD40 antibody. Adv. Mater. 24, 3981-3987 (2012).
120. Raghuwanshi, D., Mishra, V., Suresh, M. R., Kaur, K. A simple approach for enhanced immune response using engineered dendritic cell targeted nanoparticles. Vaccine 30, 7292-7299 (2012).
121. Cruz, L. J. et al. Targeting nanoparticles to CD40, DEC-205 or CD11c molecules on dendritic cells for efficient CD8+ T cell response: a comparative study. J. Control. Release 192, 209-218 (2014).
122. Tacken, P. J. et al. Targeted delivery of TLR ligands to human and mouse dendritic cells strongly enhances adjuvanticity. Blood 118, 6836-6844 (2011).
123. Liu, H. et al. Structure-based programming of lymph-node targeting in molecular vaccines. Nature 507, 519-522 (2014).
124. Tsopelas, C., Sutton, R. Why certain dyes are useful for localizing the sentinel lymph node. J. Nucl. Med. 43, 1377-1382 (2002).
125. Faries, M. B. et al. Active macromolecule uptake by lymph node antigen-presenting cells: a novel mechanism in determining sentinel lymph node status. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 7, 98-105 (2000).
126. Thomas, S. N., Vokali, E., Lund, A. W., Hubbell, J. A., Swartz, M. A. Targeting the tumor-draining lymph node with adjuvanted nanoparticles reshapes the anti-tumor immune response. Biomaterials 35, 814-824 (2014).
127. Jeanbart, L. et al. Enhancing efficacy of anti-cancer vaccines by targeted delivery to tumor-draining lymph nodes. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2, 436-447 (2014).
128. Gerner, M. Y., Torabi-Parizi, P., Germain, R. N. Strategically localized dendritic cells promote rapid T cell responses to lymph-borne particulate antigens. Immunity 42, 172-185 (2015).
129. Kovacsovics-Bankowski, M., Rock, K. L. A phagosome-to-cytosol pathway for exogenous antigens presented on MHC class I molecules. Science 267, 243-246 (1995).
130. Murthy, N. et al. A macromolecular delivery vehicle for protein-based vaccines: acid-degradable protein-loaded microgels. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 4995-5000 (2003).
131. Scott, E. A. et al. Dendritic cell activation and T cell priming with adjuvant-and antigen-loaded oxidation-sensitive polymersomes. Biomaterials 33, 6211-6219 (2012).
132. Li, W. A., Mooney, D. J. Materials based tumor immunotherapy vaccines. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 25, 238-245 (2013).
133. Varkouhi, A. K., Scholte, M., Storm, G., Haisma, H. J. Endosomal escape pathways for delivery of biologicals. J. Control. Release 151, 220-228 (2011).
134. Moon, J. J. et al. Interbilayer-crosslinked multilamellar vesicles as synthetic vaccines for potent humoral and cellular immune responses. Nat. Mater. 10, 243-251 (2011).
135. Hamdy, S. et al. Co-delivery of cancer-associated antigen and Toll-like receptor 4 ligand in PLGA nanoparticles induces potent CD8+ T cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity. Vaccine 26, 5046-5057 (2008).
136. Xu, Z. et al. Multifunctional nanoparticles co-delivering Trp2 peptide and CpG adjuvant induce potent cytotoxic T-lymphocyte response against melanoma and its lung metastasis. J. Control. Release 172, 259-265 (2013).
137. Kasturi, S. P. et al. Programming the magnitude and persistence of antibody responses with innate immunity. Nature 470, 543-547 (2011).
138. Garaude, J., Kent, A., Rooijen, N., van Blander, J. M. Simultaneous targeting of Toll-and Nod-like receptors induces effective tumor-specific immune responses. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 120ra16 (2012).
139. Li, A. V. et al. Generation of effector memory T cell-based mucosal and systemic immunity with pulmonary nanoparticle vaccination. Sci. Transl. Med. 5, 204ra130 (2013).
140. Goldinger, S. M. et al. Nano-particle vaccination combined with TLR-7 and-9 ligands triggers memory and effector CD8+T-cell responses in melanoma patients. Eur. J. Immunol. 42, 3049-3061 (2012).
141. Flach, T. L. et al. Alum interaction with dendritic cell membrane lipids is essential for its adjuvanticity. Nat. Med. 17, 479-487 (2011).
142. Zhang, H. et al. Processing pathway dependence of amorphous silica nanoparticle toxicity: colloidal versus pyrolytic. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 15790-15804 (2012).
143. Wilson, N. S. et al. Inflammasome-dependent and-independent IL-18 production mediates immunity to the ISCOMATRIX adjuvant. J. Immunol. 192, 3259-3268 (2014).
144. Frazer, I. H. et al. Phase 1 study of HPV16-specific immunotherapy with E6E7 fusion protein and ISCOMATRIXTM adjuvant in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Vaccine 23, 172-181 (2004).
145. Thomas, S. N. et al. Engineering complement activation on polypropylene sulfide vaccine nanoparticles. Biomaterials 32, 2194-2203 (2011).
146. Restifo, N. P., Dudley, M. E., Rosenberg, S. A. Adoptive immunotherapy for cancer: harnessing the T cell response. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 12, 269-281 (2012).
147. Baitsch, L., Fuertes-Marraco, S. A., Legat, A., Meyer, C., Speiser, D. E. The three main stumbling blocks for anticancer T cells. Trends Immunol. 33, 364-372 (2012).
148. Milone, M. C. et al. Chimeric receptors containing CD137 signal transduction domains mediate enhanced survival of T cells and increased antileukemic efficacy in vivo. Mol. Ther. 17, 1453-1464 (2009).
149. Steenblock, E. R., Fahmy, T. M. A comprehensive platform for ex vivo T-cell expansion based on biodegradable polymeric artificial antigen-presenting cells. Mol. Ther. 16, 765-772 (2008).
150. Perica, K., Kosmides, A. K., Schneck, J. P. Linking form to function: biophysical aspects of artificial antigen presenting cell design. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1853, 781-790 (2015).
151. Sunshine, J. C., Perica, K., Schneck, J. P., Green, J. J. Particle shape dependence of CD8+ T cell activation by artificial antigen presenting cells. Biomaterials 35, 269-277 (2014).
152. Zeng, R. et al. Synergy of IL-21 and IL-15 in regulating CD8+ T cell expansion and function. J. Exp. Med. 201, 139-148 (2005).
153. Schwartz, R. N., Stover, L., Dutcher, J. Managing toxicities of high-dose interleukin-2. Oncol. Williston Park 16 (Suppl. 13), 11-20 (2002).
154. Stephan, M. T., Moon, J. J., Um, S. H., Bershteyn, A., Irvine, D. J. Therapeutic cell engineering with surface-conjugated synthetic nanoparticles. Nat. Med. 16, 1035-1041 (2010).
155. Stephan, M. T., Stephan, S. B., Bak, P., Chen, J., Irvine, D. J. Synapse-directed delivery of immunomodulators using T-cell-conjugated nanoparticles. Biomaterials 33, 5776-5787 (2012).
156. Zheng, Y. et al. In vivo targeting of adoptively transferred T-cells with antibody-and cytokine-conjugated liposomes. J. Control. Release 172, 426-435 (2013).
157. Stephan, S. B. et al. Biopolymer implants enhance the efficacy of adoptive T-cell therapy. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 97-101 (2015).
158. Barenholz, Y. Doxil®-the first FDA-approved nano-drug: lessons learned. J. Control. Release 160, 117-134 (2012).
159. Dolgin, E. Cancer vaccines: material breach. Nature 504, S16-S17 (2013).
160. 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. 46, 6387-6392 (1986).
161. Chu, K. S. et al. Plasma, tumor and tissue pharmacokinetics of docetaxel delivered via nanoparticles of different sizes and shapes in mice bearing SKOV-3 human ovarian carcinoma xenograft. Nanomed. Nanotechnol. Biol. Med. 9, 686-693 (2013).
162. Park, J.-H. et al. Magnetic iron oxide nanoworms for tumor targeting and imaging. Adv. Mater. 20, 1630-1635 (2008).
163. Sykes, E. A., Chen, J., Zheng, G., Chan, W. C. W. Investigating the impact of nanoparticle size on active and passive tumor targeting efficiency. ACS Nano 8, 5696-5706 (2014).
164. Hu, C.-M. J., Fang, R. H., Luk, B. T., Zhang, L. Polymeric nanotherapeutics: clinical development and advances in stealth functionalization strategies. Nanoscale 6, 65 (2014).
165. Arvizo, R. R. et al. Modulating pharmacokinetics, tumor uptake and biodistribution by engineered nanoparticles. PLoS ONE 6, e24374 (2011).
166. Ruoslahti, E., Bhatia, S. N., Sailor, M. J. Targeting of drugs and nanoparticles to tumors. J. Cell Biol. 188, 759-768 (2010).
167. Bertrand, N., Wu, J., Xu, X., Kamaly, N., Farokhzad, O. C. Cancer nanotechnology: the impact of passive and active targeting in the era of modern cancer biology. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 66, 2-25 (2014).
168. Batist, G. et al. Reduced cardiotoxicity and preserved antitumor efficacy of liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with conventional doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in a randomized, multicenter trial of metastatic breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 1444-1454 (2001).
169. Mross, K. et al. Pharmacokinetics of liposomal doxorubicin (TLC-D99; Myocet) in patients with solid tumors: an open-label, single-dose study. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 54, 514-524 (2004).
170. Gradishar, W. J. et al. Phase III trial of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel compared with polyethylated castor oil-based paclitaxel in women with breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 7794-7803 (2005).
171. Feldman, E. J. et al. First-in-man study of CPX-351: a liposomal carrier containing cytarabine and daunorubicin in a fixed 5:1 molar ratio for the treatment of relapsed and refractory acute myeloid leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol. 29, 979-985 (2011).
172. Lancet, J. E. et al. Phase 2 trial of CPX-351, a fixed 5:1 molar ratio of cytarabine/daunorubicin, versus cytarabine/daunorubicin in older adults with untreated AML. Blood 123, 3239-3246 (2014).
173. Hrkach, J. et al. Preclinical development and clinical translation of a PSMA-targeted docetaxel nanoparticle with a differentiated pharmacological profile. Sci. Transl Med. 4, 128-39 (2012).
174. Sugahara, K. N. et al. Tissue-penetrating delivery of compounds and nanoparticles into tumors. Cancer Cell 16, 510-520 (2009).
175. Olson, E. S. et al. Activatable cell penetrating peptides linked to nanoparticles as dual probes for in vivo fluorescence and MR imaging of proteases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 4311-4316 (2010).
176. Rodriguez, P. L. et al. Minimal 'self' peptides that inhibit phagocytic clearance and enhance delivery of nanoparticles. Science 339, 971-975 (2013).
177. Hu, C.-M. J. et al. Nanoparticle biointerfacing by platelet membrane cloaking. Nature 526, 118-121 (2015).
178. Gu, L. et al. In vivo time-gated fluorescence imaging with biodegradable luminescent porous silicon nanoparticles. Nat. Commun. 4, 2326 (2013).
179. Dykman, L., Khlebtsov, N. Gold nanoparticles in biomedical applications: recent advances and perspectives. Chem. Soc. Rev. 41, 2256-2282 (2012).
180. Schwartz, J. A. et al. Feasibility study of particle-assisted laser ablation of brain tumors in orthotopic canine model. Cancer Res. 69, 1659-1667 (2009).
181. Mahmoudi, M., Sant, S., Wang, B., Laurent, S., Sen, T. Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs): development, surface modification and applications in chemotherapy. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 63, 24-46 (2011).
182. Chi, X. et al. Nanoprobes for in vitro diagnostics of cancer and infectious diseases. Biomaterials 33, 189-206 (2012).
183. Chikkaveeraiah, B. V., Bhirde, A. A., Morgan, N. Y., Eden, H. S., Chen, X. Electrochemical immunosensors for detection of cancer protein biomarkers. ACS Nano 6, 6546-6561 (2012).