Tumor microenvironment and nanotherapeutics

Translational Cancer Research

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 309-319

  Upreti, Meenakshi ^a   Jyoti, Amar ^a   Sethi, Pallavi ^a  

^a University of Kentucky   (United States)

Author keywords

Endothelial cells; Enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect; Multiple drug resistance (MDR); Nanoparticles; Tumor microenvironment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84962677122     PISSN: 2218676X     EISSN: 22196803     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2218-676X.2013.08.11     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Swartz MA, Iida N, Roberts EW, et al. Tumor microenvironment complexity: emerging roles in cancer therapy. Cancer Res 2012;72:2473-80.
2. Rubin H. Cancer as a dynamic developmental disorder. Cancer Res 1985;45:2935-42.
3. Liotta LA, Kohn EC. The microenvironment of the tumour-host interface. Nature 2001;411:375-9.
4. Nelson CM, Bissell MJ. Of extracellular matrix, scaffolds, and signaling: tissue architecture regulates development, homeostasis, and cancer. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2006;22:287-309.
5. Cadamuro M, Morton SD, Strazzabosco M, et al. Unveiling the role of tumor reactive stroma in cholangiocarcinoma: an opportunity for new therapeutic strategies. Transl Gastrointest Cancer 2013;2:130-44.
6. Zhu L, Torchilin VP. Stimulus-responsive nanopreparations for tumor targeting. Integr Biol (Camb) 2013;5:96-107.
7. Cheng R, Meng F, Deng C, et al. Dual and multi-stimuli responsive polymeric nanoparticles for programmed site-specific drug delivery. Biomaterials 2013;34:3647-57.
8. Ferrari M. Cancer nanotechnology: opportunities and challenges. Nat Rev Cancer 2005;5:161-71.
9. Cho K, Wang X, Nie S, et al. Therapeutic nanoparticles for drug delivery in cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:1310-6.
10. Mukerjee A, Ranjan AP, Vishwanatha JK. Combinatorial nanoparticles for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Curr Med Chem 2012;19:3714-21.
11. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 2011;144:646-74.
12. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 2000;100:57-70.
13. McAllister SS, Weinberg RA. Tumor-host interactions: a far-reaching relationship. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4022-8.
14. Nagy JA, Chang SH, Shih SC, et al. Heterogeneity of the tumor vasculature. Semin Thromb Hemost 2010;36:321-31.
15. Baluk P, Hashizume H, McDonald DM. Cellular abnormalities of blood vessels as targets in cancer. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2005;15:102-11.
16. Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature 2000;407:249-57.
17. Jain RK. Transport of molecules in the tumor interstitium: a review. Cancer Res 1987;47:3039-51.
18. Byrne JD, Betancourt T, Brannon-Peppas L. Active targeting schemes for nanoparticle systems in cancer therapeutics. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2008;60:1615-26.
19. Greish K. Enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect for anticancer nanomedicine drug targeting. Methods Mol Biol 2010;624:25-37.
20. Puri A, Loomis K, Smith B, et al. Lipid-based nanoparticles as pharmaceutical drug carriers: from concepts to clinic. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 2009;26:523-80.
21. Konerding MA, Miodonski AJ, Lametschwandtner A. Microvascular corrosion casting in the study of tumor vascularity: a review. Scanning Microsc 1995;9:1233-43; discussion 1243-4.
22. McDonald DM, Choyke PL. Imaging of angiogenesis: from microscope to clinic. Nat Med 2003;9:713-25.
23. Harris AL. Hypoxia-a key regulatory factor in tumour growth. Nat Rev Cancer 2002;2:38-47.
24. Vander Heiden MG, Cantley LC, Thompson CB. Understanding the Warburg effect: the metabolic requirements of cell proliferation. Science 2009;324:1029-33.
25. Szala S, Mitrus I, Sochanik A. Can inhibition of angiogenesis and stimulation of immune response be combined into a more effective antitumor therapy? Cancer Immunol Immunother 2010;59:1449-55.
26. Yatvin MB, Kreutz W, Horwitz BA, et al. pH-sensitive liposomes: possible clinical implications. Science 1980;210:1253-5.
27. Ahn RW, Chen F, Chen H, et al. A novel nanoparticulate formulation of arsenic trioxide with enhanced therapeutic efficacy in a murine model of breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2010;16:3607-17.
28. Sasidharan A, Chandran P, Menon D, et al. Rapid dissolution of ZnO nanocrystals in acidic cancer microenvironment leading to preferential apoptosis. Nanoscale 2011;3:3657-69.
29. Petros RA, DeSimone JM. Strategies in the design of nanoparticles for therapeutic applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2010;9:615-27.
30. Lee SM, O'Halloran TV, Nguyen ST. Polymer-caged nanobins for synergistic cisplatin-doxorubicin combination chemotherapy. J Am Chem Soc 2010;132:17130-8.
31. Won YY, Lee H. "pH phoresis": A new concept that can be used for improving drug delivery to tumor cells. J Control Release 2013;170:396-400.
32. Marshall JL. Maximum-tolerated dose, optimum biologic dose, or optimum clinical value: dosing determination of cancer therapies. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:2815-6.
33. Browder T, Butterfield CE, Kräling BM, et al. Antiangiogenic scheduling of chemotherapy improves efficacy against experimental drug-resistant cancer. Cancer Res 2000;60:1878-86.
34. Klement G, Baruchel S, Rak J, et al. Continuous low-dose therapy with vinblastine and VEGF receptor-2 antibody induces sustained tumor regressionwithout overt toxicity. J Clin Invest 2000;105:R15-24.
35. Hanahan D, Bergers G, Bergsland E. Less is more, regularly: metronomic dosing of cytotoxic drugs can target tumor angiogenesis in mice. J Clin Invest 2000;105:1045-7.
36. Pietras K, Hanahan D. A multitargeted, metronomic, and maximum-tolerated dose "chemo-switch" regimen is antiangiogenic, producing objective responses and survival benefit in a mouse model of cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:939-52.
37. Gasparini G. Metronomic scheduling: the future of chemotherapy? Lancet Oncol 2001;2:733-40.
38. Timur M, Akbas SH, Ozben T. The effect of Topotecan on oxidative stress in MCF-7 human breast cancer cell line. Acta Biochim Pol 2005;52:897-902.
39. Aljuffali IA, Mock JN, Costyn LJ, et al. Enhanced antitumor activity of low-dose continuous administration schedules of topotecan in prostate cancer. Cancer Biol Ther 2011;12:407-20.
40. Nagashima S, Soda H, Oka M, et al. BCRP/ABCG2 levels account for the resistance to topoisomerase I inhibitors and reversal effects by gefitinib in non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2006;58:594-600.
41. Yang X, Zhang C, Ying M, et al. Antiproliferation in human EA.hy926 endothelial cells and inhibition of VEGF expression in PC-3 cells by topotecan. Pharmazie 2007;62:534-8.
42. Tian Q, Zhang J, Chan SY, et al. Topotecan is a substrate for multidrug resistance associated protein 4. Curr Drug Metab 2006;7:105-18.
43. Merritt WM, Danes CG, Shahzad MM, et al. Anti-angiogenic properties of metronomic topotecan in ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Biol Ther 2009;8:1596-603.
44. Mainardes RM, Silva LP. Drug delivery systems: past, present, and future. Curr Drug Targets 2004;5:449-55.
45. Rautio J, Kumpulainen H, Heimbach T, et al. Prodrugs: design and clinical applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2008;7:255-70.
46. Mansour AM, Drevs J, Esser N, et al. A new approach for the treatment of malignant melanoma: enhanced antitumor efficacy of an albumin-bindingdoxorubicin prodrug that is cleaved by matrix metalloproteinase 2. Cancer Res 2003;63:4062-6.
47. Guo X, Szoka FC Jr. Chemical approaches to triggerable lipid vesicles for drug and gene delivery. Acc Chem Res 2003;36:335-41.
48. Dhar S, Kolishetti N, Lippard SJ, et al. Targeted delivery of a cisplatin prodrug for safer and more effective prostate cancer therapy in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011;108:1850-5.
49. Ling V. Multidrug resistance: molecular mechanisms and clinical relevance. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1997;40 Suppl:S3-8.
50. Mueller MM, Fusenig NE. Friends or foes - bipolar effects of the tumour stroma in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2004;4:839-49.
51. Bhowmick NA, Moses HL. Tumor-stroma interactions. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2005;15:97-101.
52. Li H, Fan X, Houghton J. Tumor microenvironment: the role of the tumor stroma in cancer. J Cell Biochem 2007;101:805-15.
53. Kopfstein L, Christofori G. Metastasis: cell-autonomous mechanisms versus contributions by the tumor microenvironment. Cell Mol Life Sci 2006;63:449-68.
54. Cretu A, Brooks PC. Impact of the non-cellular tumor microenvironment on metastasis: potential therapeutic and imagingopportunities. J Cell Physiol 2007;213:391-402.
55. Trédan O, Galmarini CM, Patel K, et al. Drug resistance and the solid tumor microenvironment. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:1441-54.
56. Dang CV, Semenza GL. Oncogenic alterations of metabolism. Trends Biochem Sci 1999;24:68-72.
57. Heldin CH, Rubin K, Pietras K, et al. High interstitial fluid pressure - an obstacle in cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2004;4:806-13.
58. Di Paolo A, Bocci G. Drug distribution in tumors: mechanisms, role in drug resistance, and methods for modification. Curr Oncol Rep 2007;9:109-14.
59. Upreti M, Jamshidi-Parsian A, Koonce NA, et al. Tumor-Endothelial Cell Three-dimensional Spheroids: New Aspects to Enhance Radiation and Drug Therapeutics. Transl Oncol 2011;4:365-76.
60. Durand RE, Sutherland RM. Effects of intercellular contact on repair of radiation damage. Exp Cell Res 1972;71:75-80.
61. Sutherland RM, Eddy HA, Bareham B, et al. Resistance to adriamycin in multicellular spheroids. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1979;5:1225-30.
62. Ozben T. Mechanisms and strategies to overcome multiple drug resistance in cancer. FEBS Lett 2006;580:2903-9.
63. Correia AL, Bissell MJ. The tumor microenvironment is a dominant force in multidrug resistance. Drug Resist Updat 2012;15:39-49.
64. Szakács G, Paterson JK, Ludwig JA, et al. Targeting multidrug resistance in cancer. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006;5:219-34.
65. Akiyama K, Ohga N, Hida Y, et al. Tumor endothelial cells acquire drug resistance by MDR1 up-regulation via VEGF signaling in tumor microenvironment. Am J Pathol 2012;180:1283-93.
66. Peer D, Karp JM, Hong S, et al. Nanocarriers as an emerging platform for cancer therapy. Nat Nanotechnol 2007;2:751-60.
67. Larsen AK, Escargueil AE, Skladanowski A. Resistance mechanisms associated with altered intracellular distribution of anticancer agents. Pharmacol Ther 2000;85:217-29.
68. Schnitzer JE. gp60 is an albumin-binding glycoprotein expressed by continuous endothelium involved in albumin transcytosis. Am J Physiol 1992;262:H246-54.
69. Tiruppathi C, Song W, Bergenfeldt M, et al. Gp60 activation mediates albumin transcytosis in endothelial cells by tyrosine kinase-dependent pathway. J Biol Chem 1997;272:25968-75.
70. Sage H, Johnson C, Bornstein P. Characterization of a novel serum albumin-binding glycoprotein secreted by endothelial cells in culture. J Biol Chem 1984;259:3993-4007.
71. Camby I, Le Mercier M, Lefranc F, et al. Galectin-1: a small protein with major functions. Glycobiology 2006;16:137R-157R.
72. Upreti M, Jamshidi-Parsian A, Apana S, et al. Radiation-induced galectin-1 by endothelial cells: a promising molecular target for preferential drug delivery to the tumor vasculature. J Mol Med (Berl) 2013;91:497-506.
73. Thijssen VL, Postel R, Brandwijk RJ, et al. Galectin-1 is essential in tumor angiogenesis and is a target for antiangiogenesis therapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006;103:15975-80.
74. Raub TJ. P-glycoprotein recognition of substrates and circumvention through rational drug design. Mol Pharm 2006;3:3-25.
75. Mozafari MR, Pardakhty A, Azarmi S, et al. Role of nanocarrier systems in cancer nanotherapy. J Liposome Res 2009;19:310-21.
76. Mulder WJ, Strijkers GJ, Habets JW, et al. MR molecular imaging and fluorescence microscopy for identification of activated tumor endothelium using a bimodal lipidic nanoparticle. FASEB J 2005;19:2008-10.
77. Sipkins DA, Cheresh DA, Kazemi MR, et al. Detection of tumor angiogenesis in vivo by alphaVbeta3-targeted magnetic resonance imaging. Nat Med 1998;4:623-6.
78. Winter PM, Caruthers SD, Kassner A, et al. Molecular imaging of angiogenesis in nascent Vx-2 rabbit tumors using a novel alpha(nu)beta3-targeted nanoparticle and 1.5 tesla magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Res 2003;63:5838-43.
79. Zhang C, Jugold M, Woenne EC, et al. Specific targeting of tumor angiogenesis by RGD-conjugated ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles using a clinical 1.5-T magnetic resonance scanner. Cancer Res 2007;67:1555-62.
80. Chen X, Park R, Shahinian AH, et al. 18F-labeled RGD peptide: initial evaluation for imaging brain tumor angiogenesis. Nucl Med Biol 2004;31:179-89.
81. Achilefu S, Bloch S, Markiewicz MA, et al. Synergistic effects of light-emitting probes and peptides for targeting and monitoring integrin expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:7976-81.
82. Chen X, Sievers E, Hou Y, et al. Integrin alpha v beta 3-targeted imaging of lung cancer. Neoplasia 2005;7:271-9.
83. Hsu AR, Hou LC, Veeravagu A, et al. In vivo near-infrared fluorescence imaging of integrin alphavbeta3 in an orthotopic glioblastoma model. Mol Imaging Biol 2006;8:315-23.
84. Wang W, Wu Q, Pasuelo M, et al. Probing for integrin alpha v beta3 binding of RGD peptides using fluorescence polarization. Bioconjug Chem 2005;16:729-34.
85. Simberg D, Duza T, Park JH, et al. Biomimetic amplification of nanoparticle homing to tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007;104:932-6.
86. Ruenraroengsak P, Cook JM, Florence AT. Nanosystem drug targeting: Facing up to complex realities. J Control Release 2010;141:265-76.