Proteases in cancer drug delivery

Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Volumn 97, Issue , 2016, Pages 144-155

  Vandooren, Jennifer ^a   Opdenakker, Ghislain ^a   Loadman, Paul M ^b   Edwards, Dylan R ^c,d  

^a REGA INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^d EARLHAM INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cathepsin; Legumain; Metalloproteinase; Nanoparticles; Prodrug; Urokinase

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACIDS; COMPLEX NETWORKS; DIAGNOSIS; DISEASES; ENZYME ACTIVITY; NANOPARTICLES; SUBSTRATES; TUMORS;

CATHEPSIN; LEGUMAIN; METALLOPROTEINASES; PRODRUGS; UROKINASE;

DRUG DELIVERY;

AMINOLEVULINIC ACID; ANTHRAX TOXIN; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; ASPARTYL CATHEPSIN; CATHEPSIN; COLCHICINE; CYSTEINE CATHEPSIN; CYSTEINE PROTEINASE; DOXORUBICIN; ETOPOSIDE; FLOXURIDINE; GEMCITABINE; GOLD NANOROD; ICT 2588; LEGUMAIN; METALLOPROTEINASE; METHOTREXATE; MIPSAGARGIN; NANOPARTICLE; PACLITAXEL; PLASMINOGEN; PRODRUG; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROTEASE ACTIVATED PRODRUG; PROTEINASE; PUROMYCIN; SERINE PROTEINASE; THAPSIGARGIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; UNINDEXED DRUG; VINBLASTINE; PEPTIDE HYDROLASE;

ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; BINDING AFFINITY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CANCER THERAPY; CHEMICAL MODIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DRUG DESIGN; ENZYME ANALYSIS; ENZYME PRODRUG THERAPY; HUMAN; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; MICROSURGERY; MOLECULAR PROBE; NONHUMAN; PANCREAS ADENOCARCINOMA; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; REVIEW; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT; ANIMAL; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; METABOLISM; NEOPLASMS;

ANIMALS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; NEOPLASMS; PEPTIDE HYDROLASES; PRODRUGS;

EID: 84957798682     PISSN: 0169409X     EISSN: 18728294     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2015.12.020     Document Type: Review

References (132)

1. Lopez-Otin C., Overall C.M. Protease degradomics: a new challenge for proteomics. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2002, 3(7):509-519.
2. Jin M., et al. Endogenous tissue renin-angiotensin systems. From molecular biology to therapy. Am. J. Med. 1988, 84(3 A):28-36.
3. Flexner C., Bate G., Kirkpatrick P. Tipranavir. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2005, 4(12):955-956.
4. Coussens L.M., Fingleton B., Matrisian L.M. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors and cancer: trials and tribulations. Science 2002, 295(5564):2387-2392.
5. Vandenbroucke R.E., Libert C. Is there new hope for therapeutic matrix metalloproteinase inhibition?. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2014, 13(12):904-927.
6. Egeblad M., Werb Z. New functions for the matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2002, 2(3):161-174.
7. Kessenbrock K., Plaks V., Werb Z. Matrix metalloproteinases: regulators of the tumor microenvironment. Cell 2010, 141(1):52-67.
8. Sabeh F., et al. Tumor cell traffic through the extracellular matrix is controlled by the membrane-anchored collagenase MT1-MMP. J. Cell Biol. 2004, 167(4):769-781.
9. Lopez-Otin C., Matrisian L.M. Emerging roles of proteases in tumour suppression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2007, 7(10):800-808.
10. Decock J., et al. Matrix metalloproteinases: protective roles in cancer. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2011, 15(6):1254-1265.
11. Noel A., et al. New and paradoxical roles of matrix metalloproteinases in the tumor microenvironment. Front. Pharmacol. 2012, 3:140.
12. Gutierrez-Fernandez A., et al. Matrix metalloproteinase-8 functions as a metastasis suppressor through modulation of tumor cell adhesion and invasion. Cancer Res. 2008, 68(8):2755-2763.
13. Decock J., et al. Pleiotropic functions of the tumor- and metastasis-suppressing matrix metalloproteinase-8 in mammary cancer in MMTV-PyMT transgenic mice. Breast Cancer Res. 2015, 17:38.
14. Overall C.M., Dean R.A. Degradomics: systems biology of the protease web. Pleiotropic roles of MMPs in cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2006, 25(1):69-75.
15. Fortelny N., et al. Network analyses reveal pervasive functional regulation between proteases in the human protease web. PLoS Biol. 2014, 12(5).
16. Kruger A., Kates R.E., Edwards D.R. Avoiding spam in the proteolytic internet: future strategies for anti-metastatic MMP inhibition. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2010, 1803(1):95-102.
17. Maeda H. Toward a full understanding of the EPR effect in primary and metastatic tumors as well as issues related to its heterogeneity. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2015, 91:3-6.
18. Atkinson J.M., et al. Development of a novel tumor-targeted vascular disrupting agent activated by membrane-type matrix metalloproteinases. Cancer Res. 2010, 70(17):6902-6912.
19. Ansari C., et al. Development of novel tumor-targeted theranostic nanoparticles activated by membrane-type matrix metalloproteinases for combined cancer magnetic resonance imaging and therapy. Small 2014, 10(3):566-575. (417).
20. Gill J.H., et al. Tumor-targeted prodrug ICT2588 demonstrates therapeutic activity against solid tumors and reduced potential for cardiovascular toxicity. Mol. Pharm. 2014, 11(4):1294-1300.
21. Schneider R.M., et al. Directed evolution of retroviruses activatable by tumour-associated matrix metalloproteases. Gene Ther. 2003, 10(16):1370-1380.
22. Buchholz C.J., et al. In vivo selection of protease cleavage sites from retrovirus display libraries. Nat. Biotechnol. 1998, 16(10):951-954.
23. Peng K.W., et al. Selective transduction of protease-rich tumors by matrix-metalloproteinase-targeted retroviral vectors. Gene Ther. 1999, 6(9):1552-1557.
24. Tauro M., McGuire J., Lynch C.C. New approaches to selectively target cancer-associated matrix metalloproteinase activity. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2014, 33(4):1043-1057.
25. Shay G., Lynch C.C., Fingleton B. Moving targets: emerging roles for MMPs in cancer progression and metastasis. Matrix Biol. 2015, 44-46:200-206.
26. Jastrzebska B., et al. New enzyme-activated solubility-switchable contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging: from synthesis to in vivo imaging. J. Med. Chem. 2009, 52(6):1576-1581.
27. Muhlebach M.D., et al. Liver cancer protease activity profiles support therapeutic options with matrix metalloproteinase-activatable oncolytic measles virus. Cancer Res. 2010, 70(19):7620-7629.
28. Sawant R., Torchilin V. Intracellular transduction using cell-penetrating peptides. Mol. BioSyst. 2010, 6(4):628-640.
29. Aguilera T.A., et al. Systemic in vivo distribution of activatable cell penetrating peptides is superior to that of cell penetrating peptides. Integr. Biol. (Camb.) 2009, 1(5-6):371-381.
30. Albert A. Chemical aspects of selective toxicity. Nature 1958, 182(4633):421-422.
31. Choi K.Y., et al. Protease-activated drug development. Theranostics 2012, 2(2):156-178.
32. Stella V.J. Prodrugs: some thoughts and current issues. J. Pharm. Sci. 2010, 99(12):4755-4765.
33. Rautio J., et al. Prodrugs: design and clinical applications. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2008, 7(3):255-270.
34. Sela-Passwell N., et al. Structural and functional bases for allosteric control of MMP activities: can it pave the path for selective inhibition?. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2010, 1803(1):29-38.
35. Hu J., et al. Simulation of evolution-selected propeptide by high-throughput selection of a peptidomimetic inhibitor on a capillary DNA sequencer platform. Anal. Chem. 2005, 77(7):2116-2124.
36. Piccard H., et al. "Reverse degradomics", monitoring of proteolytic trimming by multi-CE and confocal detection of fluorescent substrates and reaction products. Electrophoresis 2009, 30(13):2366-2377.
37. Vandooren J., et al. Zymography methods for visualizing hydrolytic enzymes. Nat. Methods 2013, 10(3):211-220.
38. Blasi F. uPA, uPAR, PAI-1: key intersection of proteolytic, adhesive and chemotactic highways?. Immunol. Today 1997, 18(9):415-417.
39. Van den Steen P.E., et al. Biochemistry and molecular biology of gelatinase B or matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9). Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2002, 37(6):375-536.
40. Romer J., Nielsen B.S., Ploug M. The urokinase receptor as a potential target in cancer therapy. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2004, 10(19):2359-2376.
41. Fields G.B. Protease-activated delivery and imaging systems. The Cancer Degradome 2008, Springer. D.R. Edwards, G. Hoyer-Hansen, F. Blasi, B.F. Sloane (Eds.).
42. DeFeo-Jones D., et al. A peptide-doxorubicin 'prodrug' activated by prostate-specific antigen selectively kills prostate tumor cells positive for prostate-specific antigen in vivo. Nat. Med. 2000, 6(11):1248-1252.
43. Garsky V.M., et al. The synthesis of a prodrug of doxorubicin designed to provide reduced systemic toxicity and greater target efficacy. J. Med. Chem. 2001, 44(24):4216-4224.
44. DeFeo-Jones D., et al. A prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-activated vinblastine prodrug selectively kills PSA-secreting cells in vivo. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2002, 1(7):451-459.
45. Khan S.R., Denmeade S.R. In vivo activity of a PSA-activated doxorubicin prodrug against PSA-producing human prostate cancer xenografts. Prostate 2000, 45(1):80-83.
46. Denmeade S.R., et al. Enzymatic activation of a doxorubicin-peptide prodrug by prostate-specific antigen. Cancer Res. 1998, 58(12):2537-2540.
47. Denmeade S.R., et al. Prostate-specific antigen-activated thapsigargin prodrug as targeted therapy for prostate cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2003, 95(13):990-1000.
48. Bugge T.H., et al. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator is effective in fibrin clearance in the absence of its receptor or tissue-type plasminogen activator. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1996, 93(12):5899-5904.
49. Gill J.H.a.L., P.M. Development of tumour-selective and endoprotease-activated anticancer therapeutics. The Cancer Degradome 2008, 853-876. Springer. D.R. Edwards, G. Hoyer-Hansen, F. Blasi, B.F. Sloane (Eds.).
50. Weidle U.H., Tiefenthaler G., Georges G. Proteases as activators for cytotoxic prodrugs in antitumor therapy. Cancer Genomics Proteomics 2014, 11(2):67-79.
51. Chakravarty P.K., et al. Plasmin-activated prodrugs for cancer chemotherapy. 2. Synthesis and biological activity of peptidyl derivatives of doxorubicin. J. Med. Chem. 1983, 26(5):638-644.
52. Devy L., et al. Plasmin-activated doxorubicin prodrugs containing a spacer reduce tumor growth and angiogenesis without systemic toxicity. FASEB J. 2004, 18(3):565-567.
53. Barthel B.L., et al. Synthesis and biological characterization of protease-activated prodrugs of doxazolidine. J. Med. Chem. 2012, 55(14):6595-6607.
54. Liu S., et al. Anthrax toxin: structures, functions and tumour targeting. Expert. Opin. Biol. Ther. 2003, 3(5):843-853.
55. Liu S., et al. Potent antitumor activity of a urokinase-activated engineered anthrax toxin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2003, 100(2):657-662.
56. Liu S., et al. Intermolecular complementation achieves high-specificity tumor targeting by anthrax toxin. Nat. Biotechnol. 2005, 23(6):725-730.
57. Su Y., et al. Systematic urokinase-activated anthrax toxin therapy produces regressions of subcutaneous human non-small cell lung tumor in athymic nude mice. Cancer Res. 2007, 67(7):3329-3336.
58. Peters D.E., et al. Comparative toxicity and efficacy of engineered anthrax lethal toxin variants with broad anti-tumor activities. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2014, 279(2):220-229.
59. Phillips D.D., et al. Engineering anthrax toxin variants that exclusively form octamers and their application to targeting tumors. J. Biol. Chem. 2013, 288(13):9058-9065.
60. Abi-Habib R.J., et al. A urokinase-activated recombinant diphtheria toxin targeting the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor is selectively cytotoxic to human acute myeloid leukemia blasts. Blood 2004, 104(7):2143-2148.
61. Reynolds M.A., et al. Molecular markers for prostate cancer. Cancer Lett. 2007, 249(1):5-13.
62. Mhaka A., et al. A 5-fluorodeoxyuridine prodrug as targeted therapy for prostate cancer. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2002, 12(17):2459-2461.
63. Kumar S.K., et al. Modulating paclitaxel bioavailability for targeting prostate cancer. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15(14):4973-4984.
64. Chandran S.S., et al. A prostate-specific antigen activated N-(2-hydroxypropyl) methacrylamide copolymer prodrug as dual-targeted therapy for prostate cancer. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2007, 6(11):2928-2937.
65. Doan N.T., et al. Targeting thapsigargin towards tumors. Steroids 2015, 97:2-7.
66. Doan N.T., Christensen S.B. Thapsigargin, origin, chemistry, structure-activity relationships and prodrug development. Curr Pharm Des 2015.
67. Loser R., Pietzsch J. Cysteine cathepsins: their role in tumor progression and recent trends in the development of imaging probes. Front. Chem. 2015, 3:37.
68. Ueki N., et al. Selective cancer targeting with prodrugs activated by histone deacetylases and a tumour-associated protease. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4:2735.
69. Xu Y.Y., et al. Cathepsin B-sensitive cholesteryl hemisuccinate-gemcitabine prodrug nanoparticles: enhanced cellular uptake and intracellular drug controlled release. RSC Adv. 2015, 5(9):6985-6992.
70. Tsume Y., Amidon G.L. The feasibility of enzyme targeted activation for amino acid/dipeptide monoester prodrugs of floxuridine; cathepsin D as a potential targeted enzyme. Molecules 2012, 17(4):3672-3689.
71. Abd-Elgaliel W.R., et al. Pancreatic cancer-associated cathepsin E as a drug activator. J. Control. Release 2013, 167(3):221-227.
72. Dubowchik G.M., Firestone R.A. Cathepsin B-sensitive dipeptide prodrugs. 1. A model study of structural requirements for efficient release of doxorubicin. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 1998, 8(23):3341-3346.
73. Wang Q., et al. Targeting therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma with doxorubicin prodrug PDOX increases anti-metastatic effect and reduces toxicity: a preclinical study. J. Transl. Med. 2013, 11:192.
74. Zhong Y.J., Shao L.H., Li Y. Cathepsin B-cleavable doxorubicin prodrugs for targeted cancer therapy (review). Int. J. Oncol. 2013, 42(2):373-383.
75. Chowdhury M.A., et al. Prodrug-inspired probes selective to cathepsin B over other cysteine cathepsins. J. Med. Chem. 2014, 57(14):6092-6104.
76. Lankelma J.M., et al. Cathepsin L, target in cancer treatment?. Life Sci. 2010, 86(7-8):225-233.
77. Fonovic M., Turk B. Cysteine cathepsins and extracellular matrix degradation. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2014, 1840(8):2560-2570.
78. Gawenda J., et al. Legumain expression as a prognostic factor in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2007, 102(1):1-6.
79. Wang L., et al. Legumain: a biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis of human ovarian cancer. J. Cell. Biochem. 2012, 113(8):2679-2686.
80. Haugen M.H., et al. High expression of the cysteine proteinase legumain in colorectal cancer - implications for therapeutic targeting. Eur. J. Cancer 2015, 51(1):9-17.
81. Liu C., et al. Overexpression of legumain in tumors is significant for invasion/metastasis and a candidate enzymatic target for prodrug therapy. Cancer Res. 2003, 63(11):2957-2964.
82. Ishii S. Legumain: asparaginyl endopeptidase. Methods Enzymol. 1994, 244:604-615.
83. Liu Y., et al. Targeting cell surface alpha(v)beta(3) integrin increases therapeutic efficacies of a legumain protease-activated auristatin prodrug. Mol. Pharm. 2012, 9(1):168-175.
84. Wu W., et al. Targeting cell-impermeable prodrug activation to tumor microenvironment eradicates multiple drug-resistant neoplasms. Cancer Res. 2006, 66(2):970-980.
85. Bajjuri K.M., et al. The legumain protease-activated auristatin prodrugs suppress tumor growth and metastasis without toxicity. ChemMedChem 2011, 6(1):54-59.
86. Lin Y., et al. Selective ablation of tumor-associated macrophages suppresses metastasis and angiogenesis. Cancer Sci. 2013, 104(9):1217-1225.
87. Luo Y., et al. Targeting tumor-associated macrophages as a novel strategy against breast cancer. J. Clin. Invest. 2006, 116(8):2132-2141.
88. Smith R.L., et al. Synthesis of a novel legumain-cleavable colchicine prodrug with cell-specific toxicity. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2014, 22(13):3309-3315.
89. Stern L., et al. A novel antitumor prodrug platform designed to be cleaved by the endoprotease legumain. Bioconjug. Chem. 2009, 20(3):500-510.
90. Rawlings N.D., Barrett A.J., Bateman A. MEROPS: the database of proteolytic enzymes, their substrates and inhibitors. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:D343-D350. (Database issue).
91. Apte S.S., Parks W.C. Metalloproteinases: a parade of functions in matrix biology and an outlook for the future. Matrix Biol. 2015, 44-46:1-6.
92. Vandooren J., Van den Steen P.E., Opdenakker G. Biochemistry and molecular biology of gelatinase B or matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9): the next decade. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2013, 48(3):222-272.
93. Cauwe B., Opdenakker G. Intracellular substrate cleavage: a novel dimension in the biochemistry, biology and pathology of matrix metalloproteinases. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2010, 45(5):351-423.
94. Cauwe B., Van den Steen P.E., Opdenakker G. The biochemical, biological, and pathological kaleidoscope of cell surface substrates processed by matrix metalloproteinases. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2007, 42(3):113-185.
95. Redondo-Munoz J., et al. Matrix metalloproteinase-9 promotes chronic lymphocytic leukemia b cell survival through its hemopexin domain. Cancer Cell 2010, 17(2):160-172.
96. Conant K., et al. Matrix metalloproteinase 1 interacts with neuronal integrins and stimulates dephosphorylation of Akt. J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279(9):8056-8062.
97. Garcia-Pardo A., Opdenakker G. Nonproteolytic functions of matrix metalloproteinases in pathology and insights for the development of novel therapeutic inhibitors. Metalloproteinases in Medicine 2015, 2:19-28.
98. Eguchi T., et al. Novel transcription-factor-like function of human matrix metalloproteinase 3 regulating the CTGF/CCN2 gene. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2008, 28(7):2391-2413.
99. Marchant D.J., et al. A new transcriptional role for matrix metalloproteinase-12 in antiviral immunity. Nat. Med. 2014, 20(5):493-502.
100. Stetler-Stevenson W.G., Hewitt R., Corcoran M. Matrix metalloproteinases and tumor invasion: from correlation and causality to the clinic. Semin. Cancer Biol. 1996, 7(3):147-154.
101. Deryugina E.I., Quigley J.P. Matrix metalloproteinases and tumor metastasis. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2006, 25(1):9-34.
102. Liu S., et al. Tumor cell-selective cytotoxicity of matrix metalloproteinase-activated anthrax toxin. Cancer Res. 2000, 60(21):6061-6067.
103. Andersen T.B., et al. Thapsigargin-from Thapsia L. to mipsagargin. Molecules 2015, 20(4):6113-6127.
104. Denmeade S.R., et al. Engineering a prostate-specific membrane antigen-activated tumor endothelial cell prodrug for cancer therapy. Sci. Transl. Med. 2012, 4(140). (p. 140ra86).
105. LeBeau A.M., Denmeade S.R. Protease-activated pore-forming peptides for the treatment and imaging of prostate cancer. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2015, 14(3):659-668.
106. Davis M.E., Chen Z.G., Shin D.M. Nanoparticle therapeutics: an emerging treatment modality for cancer. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2008, 7(9):771-782.
107. Vandooren J., et al. Intradermal air pouch leukocytosis as an in vivo test for nanoparticles. Int. J. Nanomedicine 2013, 8:4745-4756.
108. Hatakeyama H., et al. Systemic delivery of siRNA to tumors using a lipid nanoparticle containing a tumor-specific cleavable PEG-lipid. Biomaterials 2011, 32(18):4306-4316.
109. Yuan F., et al. Vascular permeability in a human tumor xenograft: molecular size dependence and cutoff size. Cancer Res. 1995, 55(17):3752-3756.
110. Hobbs S.K., et al. Regulation of transport pathways in tumor vessels: role of tumor type and microenvironment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998, 95(8):4607-4612.
111. Peer D., et al. Nanocarriers as an emerging platform for cancer therapy. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2007, 2(12):751-760.
112. Accardo A., et al. Receptor binding peptides for target-selective delivery of nanoparticles encapsulated drugs. Int. J. Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1537-1557.
113. Strowski M.Z., Blake A.D. Function and expression of somatostatin receptors of the endocrine pancreas. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2008, 286(1-2):169-179.
114. Harris T.J., et al. Protease-triggered unveiling of bioactive nanoparticles. Small 2008, 4(9):1307-1312.
115. Cheng J., et al. Formulation of functionalized PLGA-PEG nanoparticles for in vivo targeted drug delivery. Biomaterials 2007, 28(5):869-876.
116. Niidome T., et al. Controlled release of PEG chain from gold nanorods: targeted delivery to tumor. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2010, 18(12):4453-4458.
117. Terada T., et al. Novel PEG-matrix metalloproteinase-2 cleavable peptide-lipid containing galactosylated liposomes for hepatocellular carcinoma-selective targeting. J. Control. Release 2006, 111(3):333-342.
118. Gullotti E., Park J., Yeo Y. Polydopamine-based surface modification for the development of peritumorally activatable nanoparticles. Pharm. Res. 2013, 30(8):1956-1967.
119. Gu G., et al. PEG-co-PCL nanoparticles modified with MMP-2/9 activatable low molecular weight protamine for enhanced targeted glioblastoma therapy. Biomaterials 2013, 34(1):196-208.
120. van Rijt S.H., et al. Protease-mediated release of chemotherapeutics from mesoporous silica nanoparticles to ex vivo human and mouse lung tumors. ACS Nano 2015, 9(3):2377-2389.
121. von Maltzahn G., et al. Nanoparticle self-assembly gated by logical proteolytic triggers. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129(19):6064-6065.
122. Chen W.H., et al. Therapeutic nanomedicine based on dual-intelligent functionalized gold nanoparticles for cancer imaging and therapy in vivo. Biomaterials 2013, 34(34):8798-8807.
123. Qin S.Y., et al. Theranostic GO-based nanohybrid for tumor induced imaging and potential combinational tumor therapy. Small 2014, 10(3):599-608.
124. de Groot F.M., et al. Synthesis and biological evaluation of novel prodrugs of anthracyclines for selective activation by the tumor-associated protease plasmin. J. Med. Chem. 1999, 42(25):5277-5283.
125. Fielding A.K., et al. Inverse targeting of retroviral vectors: selective gene transfer in a mixed population of hematopoietic and nonhematopoietic cells. Blood 1998, 91(5):1802-1809.
126. Lee S., et al. A near-infrared-fluorescence-quenched gold-nanoparticle imaging probe for in vivo drug screening and protease activity determination. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2008, 47(15):2804-2807.
127. Olson E.S., et al. In vivo characterization of activatable cell penetrating peptides for targeting protease activity in cancer. Integr. Biol. (Camb.) 2009, 1(5-6):382-393.
128. Chau Y., Tan F.E., Langer R. Synthesis and characterization of dextran-peptide-methotrexate conjugates for tumor targeting via mediation by matrix metalloproteinase II and matrix metalloproteinase IX. Bioconjug. Chem. 2004, 15(4):931-941.
129. Chau Y., et al. Investigation of targeting mechanism of new dextran-peptide-methotrexate conjugates using biodistribution study in matrix-metalloproteinase-overexpressing tumor xenograft model. J. Pharm. Sci. 2006, 95(3):542-551.
130. Chau Y., et al. Antitumor efficacy of a novel polymer-peptide-drug conjugate in human tumor xenograft models. Int. J. Cancer 2006, 118(6):1519-1526.
131. Schellenberger E., et al. Protease-specific nanosensors for magnetic resonance imaging. Bioconjug. Chem. 2008, 19(12):2440-2445.
132. Mok H., et al. PEGylated and MMP-2 specifically dePEGylated quantum dots: comparative evaluation of cellular uptake. Langmuir 2009, 25(3):1645-1650.