Breaking Down the Barriers to Precision Cancer Nanomedicine

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 159-171

  von Roemeling, Christina ^a,b   Jiang, Wen ^c   Chan, Charles K ^d   Weissman, Irving L ^d   Kim, Betty Y S ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^d STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

blood brain barrier; drug delivery; mononuclear phagocyte system; nanomedicine; nanoparticles; opsonization; polyethylene glycol

Indexed keywords

CYTOLOGY; DISEASES; DRUG DELIVERY; ENZYME ACTIVITY; NANOPARTICLES; NANOSTRUCTURED MATERIALS; ONCOLOGY; POLYETHYLENE GLYCOLS; SURFACE CHEMISTRY; TUMORS;

BIOLOGICALLY INSPIRED; BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIER; CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY; MONONUCLEAR PHAGOCYTE SYSTEMS; NANOPARTICLE SURFACE; OPSONIZATION; PROTEIN CONFORMATIONAL CHANGES; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT;

MEDICAL NANOTECHNOLOGY;

BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; CANCER PATIENT; CARCINOGENESIS; HUMAN; KIDNEY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASM; NANOTOXICOLOGY; NEUROTOXICITY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETICULOENDOTHELIAL SYSTEM; REVIEW; THERANOSTIC NANOMEDICINE; TUMOR IMMUNITY; ANIMAL; CHEMISTRY; DRUG EFFECTS; IMMUNOLOGY; IMMUNOTHERAPY; INNATE IMMUNITY; NEOPLASM; PROCEDURES;

NANOPARTICLE;

ANIMALS; HUMANS; IMMUNITY, INNATE; IMMUNOTHERAPY; NANOPARTICLES; NEOPLASMS; PRECISION MEDICINE;

EID: 84997831561     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.07.006     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. 1 Hamburg, M.A., Collins, F.S., The path to personalized medicine. N. Eng. J. Med. 363 (2010), 301–304.
2. 2 Wilhelm, S.T., et al. Analysis of nanoparticle delivery to tumours. Nat. Rev. Mat., 1, 2016, 16014.
3. 3 Kim, B.Y.S., et al. Nanomedicine. N. Eng. J. Med., 363, 2010, 2434.
4. 4 Stylianopoulos, T., et al. Causes, consequences, and remedies for growth-induced solid stress in murine and human tumors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109 (2012), 15101–15108.
5. 5 Pillay, V., et al. Antibodies in oncology. Nat. Biotechnol. 28 (2011), 518–529.
6. 6 Feng, X., et al. Central nervous system toxicity of metallic nanoparticles. Int. J. Nanomedicine 10 (2015), 4321–4340.
7. 7 Sager, H.B., et al. RNAi targeting multiple cell adhesion molecules reduces immune cell recruitment and vascular inflammation after myocardial infarction. Sci. Trans. Med., 8, 2016, 342ra80.
8. 8 Kranz, L.M., et al. Systemic RNA delivery to dendritic cells exploits antiviral defence for cancer immunotherapy. Nature 534 (2016), 396–401.
9. 9 Desai, N., Challenges in development of nanoparticle-based therapeutics. AAPS J. 14 (2012), 282–295.
10. 10 Kim, S., et al. Overcoming the barriers in micellar drug delivery: loading efficiency, in vivo stability, and micelle-cell interaction. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 7 (2010), 49–62.
11. 11 Salvati, A., et al. Transferrin-functionalized nanoparticles lose their targeting capabilities when a biomolecule corona adsorbs on the surface. Nat. Nanotechnol. 8 (2013), 137–143.
12. 12 Choi, H.S., et al. Renal clearance of quantum dots. Nat. Biotechnol. 25 (2007), 1165–1170.
13. 13 Liu, W., et al. Compact cysteine-coated CdSe(ZnCdS) quantum dots for in vivo applications. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129 (2007), 14530–14531.
14. 14 Choi, H.S., et al. Tissue- and organ-selective biodistribution of NIR fluorescent quantum dots. Nano Lett. 9 (2009), 2354–2359.
15. 15 Harris, J.M., Chess, R.B., Effect of pegylation on pharmaceuticals. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2 (2003), 214–221.
16. 16 Schottler, S., et al. Protein adsorption is required for stealth effect of poly(ethylene glycol)- and poly(phosphoester)-coated nanocarriers. Nat. Nanotechnol. 11 (2016), 372–377.
17. 17 Walkey, D.J., et al. Nanoparticle size and surface chemistry determine serum protein adsorption and macrophage uptake. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134 (2012), 2139–2147.
18. 18 Parodi, A., et al. Synthetic nanoparticles functionalized with biomimetic leukocyte membranes possess cell-like functions. Nat. Nanotechnol. 8 (2013), 61–68.
19. 19 Hu, C.M., et al. Erythrocyte membrane-camouflaged polymeric nanoparticles as a biomimetic delivery platform. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (2011), 10980–10985.
20. 20 Hu, C.M., et al. Nanoparticle biointerfacing by platelet membrane cloaking. Nature 526 (2015), 118–121.
21. 21 Rodriguez, P.L., et al. Minimal “self” peptides that inhibit phagocytic clearance and enhance delivery of nanoparticles. Science 339 (2013), 971–975.
22. 22 Jaiswal, S., et al. CD47 is upregulated on circulating hematopoietic stem cells and leukemic cells to avoid phagocytosis. Cell 138 (2009), 271–285.
23. 23 Duan, X., Li, Y., Physicochemical characteristics of nanoparticles affect circulation, biodistribution, cellular internalization, and trafficking. Small 9 (2013), 1521–1532.
24. 24 Liu, J.Y., et al. Renal clearable inorganic nanoparticles: a new frontier of bionanotechnology. Mat. Today 16 (2013), 477–486.
25. 25 Ruggiero, A., et al. Paradoxical glomerular filtration of carbon nanotubes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107 (2010), 12369–12374.
26. 26 Toy, R., et al. Shaping cancer nanomedicine: the effect of particle shape on the in vivo journey of nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 9 (2014), 121–134.
27. 27 Wong, C., et al. Multistage nanoparticle delivery system for deep penetration into tumor tissue. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (2011), 2426–2431.
28. 28 Liu, J., et al. Passive tumor targeting of renal-clearable luminescent gold nanoparticles: long tumor retention and fast normal tissue clearance. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135 (2013), 4978–4981.
29. 29 Illum, L., Nasal drug delivery–possibilities, problems and solutions. J. Control Release 87 (2003), 187–198.
30. 30 Pardridgea, W.M., CSF, blood-brain barrier, and brain drug delivery. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv., 2016, 10.1517/17425247.2016.1171315.
31. 31 McDannold, N., et al. Temporary disruption of the blood-brain barrier by use of ultrasound and microbubbles: safety and efficacy evaluation in rhesus macaques. Cancer Res. 72 (2012), 3652–3663.
32. 32 Niewoehner, J., et al. Increased brain penetration and potency of a therapeutic antibody using a monovalent molecular shuttle. Neuron 81 (2014), 49–60.
33. 33 Schroeder, A., et al. Treating metastatic cancer with nanotechnology. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12 (2012), 39–50.
34. 34 Ambruosi, A., et al. Influence of surfactants, polymer and doxorubicin loading on the anti-tumour effect of poly(butyl cyanoacrylate) nanoparticles in a rat glioma model. J. Microencapsul. 23 (2006), 582–592.
35. 35 Koffie, R.M., et al. Nanoparticles enhance brain delivery of blood-brain barrier-impermeable probes for in vivo optical and magnetic resonance imaging. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (2011), 18837–18842.
36. 36 Zensi, A., et al. Human serum albumin nanoparticles modified with apolipoprotein A-I cross the blood-brain barrier and enter the rodent brain. J. Drug Target. 18 (2010), 842–848.
37. 37 Zensi, A., et al. Albumin nanoparticles targeted with Apo E enter the CNS by transcytosis and are delivered to neurones. J. Control Release 137 (2009), 78–86.
38. 38 Ulbrich, K., et al. Transferrin- and transferrin-receptor-antibody-modified nanoparticles enable drug delivery across the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 71 (2009), 251–256.
39. 39 Ulbrich, K., et al. Targeting the insulin receptor: nanoparticles for drug delivery across the blood-brain barrier (BBB). J. Drug Target. 19 (2011), 125–132.
40. 40 Hu, K., et al. Lactoferrin-conjugated PEG-PLA nanoparticles with improved brain delivery: in vitro and in vivo evaluations. J. Control Release 134 (2009), 55–61.
41. 41 Kreuter, J., Drug delivery to the central nervous system by polymeric nanoparticles: what do we know?. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 71 (2014), 2–14.
42. 42 Shilo, M., et al. The effect of nanoparticle size on the probability to cross the blood-brain barrier: an in-vitro endothelial cell model. J. Nanobiotechnology, 13, 2015, 19.
43. 43 Yuan, H., et al. TAT peptide-functionalized gold nanostars: enhanced intracellular delivery and efficient NIR photothermal therapy using ultralow irradiance. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134 (2012), 11358–11361.
44. 44 Ruan, S., et al. Tumor microenvironment sensitive doxorubicin delivery and release to glioma using angiopep-2 decorated gold nanoparticles. Biomaterials 37 (2015), 425–435.
45. 45 Chithrani, B.D., et al. Determining the size and shape dependence of gold nanoparticle uptake into mammalian cells. Nano Lett. 6 (2006), 662–668.
46. 46 Lockman, P.R., et al. Nanoparticle surface charges alter blood-brain barrier integrity and permeability. J. Drug Target. 12 (2004), 635–641.
47. 47 Jallouli, Y., et al. Influence of surface charge and inner composition of porous nanoparticles to cross blood-brain barrier in vitro. Int. J. Pharm. 344 (2007), 103–109.
48. 48 Georgieva, J.V., et al. Surface characteristics of nanoparticles determine their intracellular fate in and processing by human blood-brain barrier endothelial cells in vitro. Mol. Ther. 19 (2011), 318–325.
49. 49 Raghnaill, M.N., et al. Paracrine signalling of inflammatory cytokines from an in vitro blood brain barrier model upon exposure to polymeric nanoparticles. Analyst 139 (2014), 923–930.
50. 50 Sharma, H.S., et al. Influence of engineered nanoparticles from metals on the blood-brain barrier permeability, cerebral blood flow, brain edema and neurotoxicity. An experimental study in the rat and mice using biochemical and morphological approaches. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 9 (2009), 5055–5072.
51. 51 Wu, J., et al. Neurotoxicity of silica nanoparticles: brain localization and dopaminergic neurons damage pathways. ACS Nano. 5 (2011), 4476–4489.
52. 52 Han, D., et al. Nano-zinc oxide damages spatial cognition capability via over-enhanced long-term potentiation in hippocampus of Wistar rats. Int. J. Nanomedicine 6 (2011), 1453–1461.
53. 53 Kigerl, K.A., et al. Identification of two distinct macrophage subsets with divergent effects causing either neurotoxicity or regeneration in the injured mouse spinal cord. J. Neurosci. 29 (2009), 13435–13444.
54. 54 Hutter, E., et al. Microglial response to gold nanoparticles. ACS Nano. 4 (2010), 2595–2606.
55. 55 Papa, S., et al. Polymeric nanoparticle system to target activated microglia/macrophages in spinal cord injury. J. Control Release 174 (2014), 15–26.
56. 56 Peer, D., et al. Nanocarriers as an emerging platform for cancer therapy. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2 (2007), 751–760.
57. 57 Blanco, E., et al. Principles of nanoparticle design for overcoming biological barriers to drug delivery. Nat. Biotechnol. 33 (2015), 941–951.
58. 58 Stacker, S.A., et al. Lymphangiogenesis and lymphatic vessel remodelling in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 14 (2014), 159–172.
59. 59 Weis, S.M., Cheresh, D.A., Tumor angiogenesis: molecular pathways and therapeutic targets. Nat. Med. 17 (2011), 1359–1370.
60. 60 Chauhan, V.P., Jain, R.K., Strategies for advancing cancer nanomedicine. Nat. Mater. 12 (2013), 958–962.
61. 61 Sykes, E.A., et al. Tailoring nanoparticle designs to target cancer based on tumor pathophysiology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113 (2016), E1142–E1151.
62. 62 Jain, R.K., Stylianopoulos, T., Delivering nanomedicine to solid tumors. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 7 (2010), 653–664.
63. 63 Chauhan, V.P., et al. Normalization of tumour blood vessels improves the delivery of nanomedicines in a size-dependent manner. Nat. Nanotechnol. 7 (2012), 383–388.
64. 64 Jiang, W., et al. Remodeling tumor vasculature to enhance delivery of intermediate-sized nanoparticles. ACS Nano. 9 (2015), 8689–8696.
65. 65 Cabral, H., et al. Accumulation of sub-100 nm polymeric micelles in poorly permeable tumours depends on size. Nat. Nanotechnol. 6 (2011), 815–823.
66. 66 Ferrari, M., Frontiers in cancer nanomedicine: directing mass transport through biological barriers. Trends Biotechnol. 28 (2010), 181–188.
67. 67 Tasciotti, E., et al. Mesoporous silicon particles as a multistage delivery system for imaging and therapeutic applications. Nat. Nanotechnol. 3 (2008), 151–157.
68. 68 Ohta, S., et al. DNA-controlled dynamic colloidal nanoparticle systems for mediating cellular interaction. Science 351 (2016), 841–845.
69. 69 Kim, Y., et al. Transmutable nanoparticles with reconfigurable surface ligands. Science 351 (2016), 579–582.
70. 70 Pardoll, D.M., The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12 (2012), 252–264.
71. 71 Rizvi, N.A., et al. Cancer immunology. Mutational landscape determines sensitivity to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer. Science 348 (2015), 124–128.
72. 72 Melero, I., et al. Therapeutic vaccines for cancer: an overview of clinical trials. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 11 (2014), 509–524.
73. 73 Hamdy, S., et al. Targeting dendritic cells with nano-particulate PLGA cancer vaccine formulations. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 63 (2011), 943–955.
74. 74 Li, A.V., et al. Generation of effector memory T cell-based mucosal and systemic immunity with pulmonary nanoparticle vaccination. Science Trans. Med., 5, 2013, 204ra130.
75. 75 Joshi, V.B., et al. Biodegradable particles as vaccine delivery systems: size matters. AAPS J. 15 (2013), 85–94.
76. 76 Foged, C., et al. Particle size and surface charge affect particle uptake by human dendritic cells in an in vitro model. Int. J. Pharm. 298 (2005), 315–322.
77. 77 Wischke, C., et al. Stable cationic microparticles for enhanced model antigen delivery to dendritic cells. J. Control Release 114 (2006), 359–368.
78. 78 Demento, S.L., et al. Pathogen-associated molecular patterns on biomaterials: a paradigm for engineering new vaccines. Trends Biotechnol. 29 (2011), 294–306.
79. 79 Ma, Y., et al. The role of surface charge density in cationic liposome-promoted dendritic cell maturation and vaccine-induced immune responses. Nanoscale 3 (2011), 2307–2314.
80. 80 Champion, J.A., Mitragotri, S., Role of target geometry in phagocytosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103 (2006), 4930–4934.
81. 81 Albanese, A., et al. The effect of nanoparticle size, shape, and surface chemistry on biological systems. Ann. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 14 (2012), 1–16.
82. 82 Niikura, K., et al. Gold nanoparticles as a vaccine platform: influence of size and shape on immunological responses in vitro and in vivo. ACS Nano. 7 (2013), 3926–3938.
83. 83 Hillaireau, H., Couvreur, P., Nanocarriers’ entry into the cell: relevance to drug delivery. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 66 (2009), 2873–2896.
84. 84 Moyano, D.F., et al. Nanoparticle hydrophobicity dictates immune response. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134 (2012), 3965–3967.
85. 85 Bagalkot, V., et al. Hybrid nanoparticles improve targeting to inflammatory macrophages through phagocytic signals. J. Control Release 217 (2015), 243–255.
86. 86 Zhu, S., et al. Targeting of tumor-associated macrophages made possible by PEG-sheddable, mannose-modified nanoparticles. Mol. Pharm. 10 (2013), 3525–3530.
87. 87 Qie, Y., et al. Surface modification of nanoparticles enables selective evasion of phagocytic clearance by distinct macrophage phenotypes. Sci. Rep., 6, 2016, 26269.
88. 88 Saluja, S.S., et al. Targeting human dendritic cells via DEC-205 using PLGA nanoparticles leads to enhanced cross-presentation of a melanoma-associated antigen. Int. J. Nanomedicine 9 (2014), 5231–5246.
89. 89 Zeltins, A., Construction and characterization of virus-like particles: a review. Mol. Biotechnol. 53 (2013), 92–107.
90. 90 Kushnir, N., et al. Virus-like particles as a highly efficient vaccine platform: diversity of targets and production systems and advances in clinical development. Vaccine 31 (2012), 58–83.
91. 91 Lizotte, P.H., et al. In situ vaccination with cowpea mosaic virus nanoparticles suppresses metastatic cancer. Nat. Nanotechnol. 11 (2016), 295–303.
92. 92 Lebel, M.E., et al. Potentiating cancer immunotherapy using papaya mosaic virus-derived nanoparticles. Nano Lett. 16 (2016), 1826–1832.
93. 93 Jobsri, J., et al. Plant virus particles carrying tumour antigen activate TLR7 and Induce high levels of protective antibody. PLoS ONE, 10, 2015, e0118096.
94. 94 Sindhwani, S., et al. Three-dimensional optical mapping of nanoparticle distribution in intact tissues. ACS Nano. 10 (2016), 5468–5478.
95. 95 Geng, Y., et al. Shape effects of filaments versus spherical particles in flow and drug delivery. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2 (2007), 249–255.
96. 96 Dobrovolskaia, M.A., McNeil, S.E., Immunological properties of engineered nanomaterials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2 (2007), 469–478.
97. 97 Tenzer, S., et al. Rapid formation of plasma protein corona critically affects nanoparticle pathophysiology. Nat. Nanotechnol. 8 (2013), 772–781.
98. 98 Lesniak, A., et al. Effects of the presence or absence of a protein corona on silica nanoparticle uptake and impact on cells. ACS Nano. 6 (2012), 5845–5857.