ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
My Activity
CONTENT TYPES

Figure 1Loading Img

Factors Affecting the Clearance and Biodistribution of Polymeric Nanoparticles

View Author Information
Laboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, MIT-Harvard Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. O.C.F.: Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis St., CWN-L1, Boston, MA 02115; telephone, (617) 732-6093; fax, (617) 730-2801; e-mail, [email protected]. F.A.: Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis St., MRB-505, Boston, MA 02115; e-mail, [email protected]
†Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
‡MIT-Harvard Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
§Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
∥Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
⊥National Institutes of Health.
Cite this: Mol. Pharmaceutics 2008, 5, 4, 505–515
Publication Date (Web):August 4, 2008
https://doi.org/10.1021/mp800051m

Copyright © 2008 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

  • Open Access

Article Views

43552

Altmetric

-

Citations

LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (592 KB)

Abstract

Nanoparticle (NP) drug delivery systems (5−250 nm) have the potential to improve current disease therapies because of their ability to overcome multiple biological barriers and releasing a therapeutic load in the optimal dosage range. Rapid clearance of circulating nanoparticles during systemic delivery is a critical issue for these systems and has made it necessary to understand the factors affecting particle biodistribution and blood circulation half-life. In this review, we discuss the factors which can influence nanoparticle blood residence time and organ specific accumulation. These factors include interactions with biological barriers and tunable nanoparticle parameters, such as composition, size, core properties, surface modifications (pegylation and surface charge), and finally, targeting ligand functionalization. All these factors have been shown to substantially affect the biodistribution and blood circulation half-life of circulating nanoparticles by reducing the level of nonspecific uptake, delaying opsonization, and increasing the extent of tissue specific accumulation.

SPECIAL ISSUE

This article is part of the Biodistribution of Nanomedicines special issue.

Introduction

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Nanoparticles have drawn increasing interest from every branch of medicine (1-5) for their ability to deliver drugs in the optimum dosage range, often resulting in increased therapeutic efficacy of the drug, weakened side effects, (6, 7) and improved patient compliance. Today, there are several examples of nontargeted NPs currently used in clinical practice (Doxil (8-11) and Daunoxome (12)) and in clinical development (Cyclosert). (13) Early success of these lipid-based vesicular drug delivery nanoparticles has led to the investigation and development of many different compositions of polymeric nanoparticles, including polymeric micelles, dendrimers, drug conjugates, and polypeptide- and polysaccharide-based nanoparticles. Among these, Genexol-PM [methoxy-PEG-poly(d,l-lactide)Taxol] is the first polymeric micellar nanoparticle in phase II clinical trials in the United States. (14, 15) Generally, clinical success correlates well with pharmacological and toxicological parameters. Blood circulation residence, maximal tolerated dose (MTD), and selectivity are the most important factors for achieving a high therapeutical index and corresponding clinical success. Polymeric nanoparticles are defined by their morphology and polymer composition in the core and corona (Figure 1). The therapeutic load is typically conjugated to the surface of the nanoparticle, or encapsulated and protected inside the core. The delivery systems can be designed to provide either controlled release or a triggered release of the therapeutic molecule. (16, 17) The nanoparticle surface can then be functionalized by various methods to form the corona. Surface functionalization can be utilized to increase residence time in the blood, reduce nonspecific distribution, and, in some cases, target tissues or specific cell surface antigens with a targeting ligand (peptide, aptamer, antibody/antibody fragment, small molecule). For instance, it is well established that hydrophilic polymers, most notably poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG), can be grafted, conjugated, or absorbed to the surface of nanoparticles to form the corona, which provides steric stabilization and confers “stealth” properties such as prevention of protein absorption. (18, 19) Surface functionalization can address the major limiting factor for long-circulating nanoparticle systems, which is protein absorption. Proteins adsorbed on the surface of the nanoparticle promote opsonization, leading to aggregation and rapid clearance from the bloodstream. (20-23) The resultant rapid clearance is due to phagocytosis by the mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS) in the liver and splenic filtration. Typically, the majority of opsonized particles are cleared by a receptor-mediated mechanism in fewer than a few minutes due to the high concentration of phagocytic cells in the liver and spleen, or they are excreted. (21) Thus, over the past 20 years, numerous approaches to improving nanoparticle blood residence and accumulation in specific tissues for the treatment of disease have been developed. In this review, we will discuss the effects of physiological tissue defects (high permeability) and polymeric nanoparticle physicochemical properties on their biodistribution and clearance. Specifically, polymeric composition, nanoparticle size, pegylation, surface charge, and targeting functionality will be discussed.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Nanoparticle platforms for drug delivery. Polymeric nanoparticle platforms are characterized by their physicochemical structures, including polymerosome, solid polymeric nanoparticle, nanoshell, dendrimer, polymeric micelle, and polymer−drug conjugates.

Overcoming Biological Barriers: Effect of Physiological Defects

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Numerous biological barriers exist to protect the human body from invasion by foreign particles. These barriers include cellular and humoral arms of the immune system as well as mucosal barriers among others. These barriers must be overcome in order for nanoparticles to reach their target (Figure 2). Due to their unique size, and amenability to surface functionalization to incorporate the desired characteristics, nanoparticles are particularly well suited to overcoming these barriers. This is especially true in the case of abnormal neovascularization. Blood vessels are responsible for delivering molecules, nutrients, and oxygen to organs throughout the body. Endothelia composing the blood vessels have been classified as continuous, fenestrated, or discontinuous, depending on the morphological features of the endothelium. The continuous endothelium morphology appears in arteries, vessels, (24, 25) and the lungs. (26) In contrast, fenestrated endothelium (27) appears in glands, (28) digestive mucosa, and kidney. Fenestrae have an octagonal symmetry with radial fibrils interweaving in a central point forming pores of approximately 60 nm. Discontinuous endothelium is a characteristic of the liver (fenestrea of 50−100 nm) (29) and bone marrow. Endothelial cells from the blood vessels are able to respond to the physiological environment, resulting in angiogenic activity. Angiogenesis (30, 31) is well-characterized for cancers (32) as well as ocular and inflammatory diseases, (33) with antiangiogenesis compounds commonly used for therapy. (34, 35) Angiogenesis during tumor growth results in defective hypervasculature and a deficient lymphatic drainage system, which has given rise to the concept of passive targeting of nanoparticles to tumors through the “enhanced permeability and retention” (EPR) effect. (36, 37) The EPR is a unique feature which allows macromolecules or drug delivery nanoparticles (cutoff size of >400 nm) to preferentially accumulate and diffuse in tumor tissues. (38) Long-circulating drug delivery nanoparticles are able to extravasate into tumor tissues, accumulate, and release the therapeutic drug locally in the extracellular area. Similarly, abnormal neovascularization or angiogenesis as well as enhanced vascular permeability are major causes of many ocular disorders, including age-related macular degeneration (AMD), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), ischemic retinal vein occlusions, and diabetic retinopathy (DR), causing irreversible vision loss. In ocular disorders, the angiogenic process appears to be due to a stimulus response for retinal neovascularization. The stimulus can be tissue hypoxia, inflammatory cell infiltration, increased local concentration of cytokines (VEGF, PDGF, FGF5 TNF, IGF etc.). The result is the formation of new vessels, which disrupt the organizational structure of the neural retina or break through the inner limiting membranes into the vitreous. (39) Many other disorders are also characterized by angiogenesis or vasculature defects such as obesity, (40) asthma, (41) diabetes, (42, 43) and multiple sclerosis. (44, 45) The development of new imaging systems and medical knowledge about physiological defects is leading to novel therapeutic approaches using nanoparticle drug delivery systems. It is now well accepted that nanoparticles are suitable for crossing biological barriers through tissue diffusion, extravasation, and escape from hepatic filtration.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Biodistribution and clearance of polymeric nanoparticles. Tissue defects, stealth properties, targeting, and the size of the nanoparticles are major factors affecting the biodistribution and clearance of polymeric nanoparticles.

Nanoparticle Properties

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Composition. Historically, the administration of therapeutic agents has been limited by multiple factors, primary among these being low solubility, stability and rapid clearance. The result is a short circulation half-life and low efficacy, making frequent administration necessary. Additionally, there can be significant side effects in non-diseased tissues that adsorb therapeutic agent. These issues have led to the development of various targeting strategies aimed at increasing therapeutic index, including monoclonal antibodies and immunoconjugates. Some of the strategies are currently used in clinical practice and others are in clinical development. (46) In addition to these strategies, it has been shown that polymer−drug conjugates can substantially improve the blood residence time and weaken side effects. It is anticipated that engineered multifunctional nanoparticles can address issues with targeting as well as carry a more substantial drug payload. Many polymers have been investigated, including HPMA [N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide], dextran, and polyglutamate. HPMA and polyglutamate drug conjugates represent ∼35% of all the polymeric drug delivery systems in clinical development. The clinical success of AP5346, PK1, PK2, Xyotax, and CT-2106 seems to be due to their long circulation half-life, passive targeting ability, and, most importantly, lower toxicity allowing higher dosages (see Table 1). Thus far, the main impact of polymer conjugates has been to improve the pharmacokinetic parameters of drugs already in clinical use. These polymeric nanocarriers must be non-toxic, non-immunogenic, and carry sufficient amount of drug and release the drug at the optimal dose. The use of poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) for nanoparticle surface functionalization has had led to very favorable results due to its intrinsic physicochemical properties but has had limited impact as a drug conjugate carrier due to low drug loadings. PEG polymers have low toxicity and no immunogenicity and are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for clinical use. PEG−drug conjugates or nanoparticles functionalized with PEG chains have been described as long-circulating drug delivery systems with potential applications for systemic drug administration. (21, 47) Poly(ethylene glycol) or poly(ethylene oxide) refers to an oligomer or polymer of ethylene oxide in linear or branched structures. (48) PEG is a hydrophilic polymer that can be adsorbed or covalently attached to the surface of nanoparticles. Hrkach et al. have demonstrated the formation of PLA−PEG nanoparticles in a core−corona structure with a solid core and anchored PEG chains on the surface. Their results showed for the first time that PEG chains, covalently attached to a particle surface, could exhibit flexibility similar to that of free PEG polymer dissolved in water. Furthermore, PEG has been shown to substantially reduce nonspecific interactions with proteins through its hydrophilicity and steric repulsion effects, reducing opsonization and complement activation. (49-55) The chain length, shape, and density of PEG on the particle surface have been shown to be the main parameters affecting nanoparticle surface hydrophilicity and phagocytosis. The mechanism involved in phagocytosis of opsonized nanoparticles is receptor-mediated by interaction of specific proteins absorbed on the surface of the nanoparticles with phagocytes. Gref et al. were the first to report the advantages of pegylation on PLGA−PEG nanoparticles, resulting in a substantial increase in blood residence time. Apolipoproteins (A-IV and E) were found to be present on the surface of pure PLA nanoparticles in contrast to the PLA−PEG nanoparticles using gel electrophoresis analysis. (53) Although the assay did not provide a precise quantitative analysis, it was clearly shown that protein adsorption, particularly apolipoprotein J and complement protein C3, was substantially reduced on the surface of the PLA−PEG nanoparticles compared with pure PLA formulations. These results suggest that these specific apolipoproteins might also play a role in the process of opsonization of the particles. Gref et al. (53) have systematically studied the effect of PEG chain length in preventing protein adsorption on the surface of the nanoparticles. The results showed that an optimal molecular mass (Mw) range exists (between 2 and 5 kDa) in order to reduce plasma protein adsorption. The amount of protein absorbed on PLA−PEG 5 kDa was substantially reduced (∼80%) compared to the amount of nonpegylated PLA nanoparticles. PEG content as low as 0.5 wt % on the surface of the nanoparticles was able to significantly reduce the total amount of protein when compared to the nonpegylated PLA nanoparticles. The most significant reduction of protein absorption was found for pegylated particles (5 wt %). The effect of PEG on the surface of the nanoparticle in preventing protein absorption correlated with the polymorphonuclear leukocyte (PMN) and human monocyte (THP-1) uptake. Interestingly, a threshold of 1−2 nm space between the PEG chains was estimated for minimal protein absorption. Since then, many research groups have investigated the interaction of polymeric nanoparticles with serum opsonins, characterizing both uptake mechanisms and kinetics. (53, 56-58) In one study, the relationship between the protein adsorption kinetics of the nanoparticles and their uptake in the liver was investigated. (56) The results showed that the rate of hepatic uptake of polystyrene nanoparticles (50 nm) was significantly higher when nanoparticles were incubated with serum prior to transfusion in the rat liver. It was suggested that the increased rate of hepatic uptake was mainly mediated by opsonization. In vitro uptake studies showed that the increased amount of complement protein C3 and immunoglobulin G (IgG) adsorbed on nanoparticles was directly reflected in the increased rate of uptake of nanoparticles by Kupffer cells. These results indicate that the amount of opsonins associated with the surface of the nanoparticles increased over time and triggered substantial hepatic agglomeration. Similarly, C. Fang et al. (59) have recently shown the effect of the molecular mass of PEG for passive targeting of stealth poly(cyanoacrylate-co-n-hexadecyl) cyanoacrylate (PHDCA) nanoparticles. As in previous studies, PEG surface modification of nanoparticles was able to dramatically reduce protein absorption as detected using quantitative assays (BCA assay). The amount of protein adsorbed was directly dependent on the molecular mass of the PEG. Medium-sized pegylated nanoparticles (100−200 nm) showed 10−40% protein absorption, and PEG 10 kDa was found to be the most efficient size of PEG as compared to PEG 2 kDa and PEG 5 kDa in preventing protein absorption. The results suggest that a dense PEG shielding over a negatively charged surface is important in preventing protein absorption. The trend in shielding properties was confirmed by the analysis of nanoparticle uptake by murine macrophages and blood clearance kinetics. Interestingly, the level of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) delivered by nanoparticles into tumor-bearing mice was clearly correlated with the shielding density. Another recent example confirmed the advantages of surface pegylation by utilizing thiolated gelatin nanoparticles (∼300 nm) to improve passive tumor targeting in an orthotopic human breast adenocarcinoma xenograft mouse model. (60) Despite the fact that these particles were twice the size of those in the previous study, the results showed a lower rate of uptake of the PEG-modified nanoparticles by the liver, indicative of the stealth properties of pegylated nanoparticles. In general, pegylated nanoparticles were found to have longer circulation time and higher levels of tumor accumulation than nonpegylated nanoparticles. In summary, much has been learned about PEG molecular mass and PEG density on nanoparticles which has led to reduced plasma protein adsorption, opsonization, and nonspecific uptake. In turn, this has resulted in increased nanoparticle circulation half-life and improved therapeutic efficacy of drugs delivered using pegylated nanocarriers.
Table 1. Clinical Status of Polymeric Drug Delivery Nanoparticles under Development
composition (trade name)statusparticle size (nm)circulation half-liferelative tissue accumulation of the drugmaximum tolerated dose (MTD)efficacy
methoxy-PEG-poly(d,l-lactide)Taxol (Genexol-PM)Phase II30−60 nmpaclitaxel, 12 h (human) (61)Genexol-PM vs Taxol: 2× more in liver, spleen, heart, and tumor (mice) (62)390 mg/m2 administered intravenously for 3 h every 3 weeks (human) (14)75% of metastatic breast cancer patient showed 2 years overall survival (15)
HPMA-DACH palatinate (ProLindac, previously AP5346)Phase II6−15 nmDACH-platinum, 70 h (human) (63)NAa640 mg/m2 (initial cycle); repeated cycles of therapy were not assessed (human) (64)NAa
PEG-arginine deaminase (Hepacid, previously ADI-SS PEG 20000 MW)Phase I/IINAaarginine deaminase, 7 days (human) (65)NAa640 units/m2 once a week (MTD > maximum feasible dose by intravenous (iv) administration) (66)double median survival time of patients with metastatic melanoma; 47% response rate in HCC patients (n = 19) (66)
PEG-camptothecin (Prothecan)Phase I/IINAacamptothecin, 40 h (human) (67)camptothecin % ID/g of tissue 24 h postinjection: 3.7% in tumor, 4.41% in blood, 2.32% in liver (mice) (68)7000 mg/m2 administered in 1 h iv infusions every 3 weeks (human) (67)NAa
Pluronic-doxorubicin (SP1049C)Phase II∼25 nmdoxorubicin, 3 h (human) (69)enhanced AUC in tumor (50.8 vs 30.1) and brain (9.2 vs 5.6) compared with free doxorubicin (mice) (70)70 mg/m2 administered intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles (human) (69)three patients over 21 showed responses to treatment (69)
polycyclodextrin camptothecin (IT-101)Phase I∼40 nmcamptothecin, 38 h (mice)71camptothecin % ID/g of tissue: tumor = 1.3%; liver = 1.9% (24 h) (mice) (13, 71)NAapreliminary data is reported to show stable disease rate in patients with solid tumors (13)
polyglutamate camptothecin (CT-2106)Phase I/IINAacamptothecin, 44−63 h (human) (72)NAa25 mg/m2 administered by iv infusion weekly every 3 of 4 weeks (human) (72)less toxicity than free drug (72)
polyglutamate paclitaxel (Xyotax)Phase IIINAapaclitaxel, 100 h (human) (73)paclitaxel % ID/g of tissue: tumor = 2.2%; spleen = 16%; liver = 8% (mice) (74)for an iv administration, 233 mg/m2 for patients on a two-dose weekly schedule and 177 mg/m2 on a three-dose weekly schedule (human) (73)response rate of 10% for 99 patients and a median time to disease progression of 2 months (75)
dextran-doxorubicin (AD-70)Phase INAadoxorubicin, 3−12 h (human) (76)NAa20 mg/m2 (human) (76)discontinued due to severe hepatotoxicity limiting the dose at 20 mg/m2(76)
dextran-camptothecin (DE-310)Phase I/IINAacamptothecin, 300−400 h (human) (77)NAa9 mg/m2 given once every 4 weeks (human) (77)no new major toxicity compared to drug beside hepatotoxicity reported as reversible (77)
HPMA-paclitaxel (PNU166945)Phase INAapaclitaxel, 3−12 h (human) (78)NAa196 mg/m2 (human) (78)discontinued due to severe neurotoxicity (78)
HPMA-doxorubicin (PK1)Phase IINAadoxorubicin, 93 h (human) (79)NAa320 mg/m2 (human) (79)hepatic toxicity at doses > 120 mg/m2; two partial and two minor responses over 36 patients (79)
PEG-aspartic acid-doxorubicin (NK911)Phase I30−50 nmdoxorubicin, 1.6−4.7 h (human) (80) 67 mg/m2, plasma clearance 400-fold higher than Doxil (human) (80)no severe toxicity; Phase II clinical trial for pancreatic cancer (80)
HPMA-doxorubicin with galactosamine (PK2)Phase I∼8.4 nmbiphasic clearance with half-lives of 2.9 and 26.7 h when 120 mg/m2 administered by 24 h infusion (human) (81)enhanced accumulation in liver, hepatoma, and metastatic hepatoma compared with nontargeted HPMA-doxorubicin (human) (81)160 mg/m2 with administration by iv infusion over 1 h every 3 weeks (human) (81)of 18 patients, three responded to treatment, with two in partial remission for >26 and >47 months (81)
a

Not applicable.

Effect of Size

On the basis of physiological parameters such as hepatic filtration, tissue extravasation, tissue diffusion, and kidney excretion, it is clear that, along with surface composition, particle size is a key factor in the biodistribution of long-circulating nanoparticles and achieving therapeutic efficacy (Figure 2). In one study, in vivo biodistribution results of polystyrene nanoparticles with consistent composition and varying particle sizes of 50 and 500 nm showed higher levels of agglomeration of the larger nanoparticles in the liver. (56) It was suggested that the mechanism of hepatic uptake was mediated by surface absorption of proteins leading to opsonization. However, the effect of temperature (37 °C vs 4 °C) on hepatic elimination showed unexpectedly faster uptake of the 50 nm polystyrene nanoparticles at the lower temperature. Similarly, the size of the nanoparticle was shown to have a substantial effect on the protein absorption. Small (<100 nm), medium (100−200 nm), and large (>200 nm) pegylated PHDCA nanoparticles incubated with serum protein for 2 h showed a significant correlation between particle size and protein absorption. (59)Protein absorption on small nanoparticles (80 nm) was quantified (6%) and compared to the same nanoparticle formulation with a larger size (171 and 243 nm, 23 and 34%, respectively). The effect of protein absorption on different sized nanoparticles was also confirmed with the analysis of nanoparticle uptake by murine macrophages and blood clearance kinetics. Blood clearance of the smaller nanoparticles was twice as slow as with the larger nanoparticle formulations. More importantly, the amount of drug encapsulated (TNF-α) in nanoparticles that accumulated in the tumor within 24 h was twice that of the larger nanoparticle formulation. The results suggest that it might be due to a higher surface PEG density (brushlike) on the surface of smaller nanoparticles. Rijcken et al. (81) have shown that size and polydispersity can substantially affect the biodistribution of micelles. Cross-linked micelles incubated in PBS (pH 7.4) at 37 °C for more than 3 days did not show substantial increases in size and polydispersity in contrast to non-cross-linked micelles (PD ∼ 0.5 after 10 h). Stable micelles showed a long circulation half-life of ∼8 h due to a low rate of hepatic uptake (liver ∼ 10% of the injected dose; spleen ∼ 2% of the injected dose). Similar to results with small liposomes (<100 nm), micelles were found to accumulate in the skin.
In summary, it has been consistently shown that pegylated nanoparticles smaller than 100 nm have reduced plasma protein adsorption on their surface and also have reduced hepatic filtration. Further, these small pegylated nanoparticles have a long blood residence time and a high rate of extravasation into permeable tissues, demonstrating the importance of tunable particle size and surface composition for achieving effective, targeted delivery.

Effect of the Core

Shenoy et al. (82) investigated the biodistribution of stealth poly(β-amino ester) nanoparticles (PbAE) and poly(caprolactone) (PCL)-based nanoparticles with a similar size range of 100−200 nm. In addition, both nanoparticle formulations had a very high positive surface charge of approximately +30 mV. The results clearly showed a significantly higher level of accumulation in the heart and lung tissues for the PbAE nanoparticles. This was correlated with a lower level of accumulation in the liver as compared to PCL nanoparticles. It was suggested that a higher degree of aggregation of PbAE nanoparticles in the presence of serum proteins affected the biodistribution leading, to such high levels of accumulation in the lung. Recently, greater degrees of nanoparticle “flexibility” were hypothesized to improve the binding ability of particles on the cell surface. (83) Shell cross-linked nanoparticles (SCKs) containing partially hydrochlorinated poly(isoprene) cores were shown to undergo temperature-dependent deformation. (84) SCK nanoparticles with similar physiochemical properties (size, ca. 20 nm; ζ, ca. −25 mV) possessing a low glass transition temperature (Tg) with a fluidlike poly(methyl acrylate) (PMA) core or a high Tg with a glassy poly(styrene) (PS) core were synthesized to evaluate the effects of the rigidity of the polymeric core on the in vivo biodistribution. (84) The results showed that high-Tg poly(styrene) core nanoparticles exhibited a significantly higher blood residence time compared to the low-Tg poly(methyl acrylate) nanoparticles. The low-Tg core is expected to provide greater flexibility and an increased number of surface interactions of the nanoparticles with the tissues and biological environment. However, it was not clear if the relative rigidity or other physicochemical properties of the polymers (hydrophobicity) affected the blood residence time. The results suggested that the composition of the core has an important effect on the blood residence time. In this case, PEG surface modifications did not have a noticeable effect on kidney accumulation and clearance most probably due to the small size of the nanoparticle formulations. These results are consistent with previous work investigating the effect of the core composition on the nature of absorbed proteins using a series of block copolymers with the same PEG thickness and density. (85) Copolymers of poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) and polyesters with increased hydrophobicity (PLGA, PLA, and PCL) were synthesized. (85) Evidence of C3 cleavage was used as a semiquantitative way to characterize the level of complement activation by naked and pegylated nanocapsules (NCs) formed with different core copolymers. The results showed that PLA NCs prepared from biodegradable polyesters act as strong activators of complement. Since PCL showed a lower level of complement activation, the reason for the stronger complement response did not seem to correlate with the hydrophobicity of the copolymer. However, pegylated NCs had significantly reduced levels of complement activation which were shown to depend on PEG chain length and density. In another study, polymeric nanoparticles coated with polysorbate were shown to be able to accumulate in the brain tissues. (86) The brain blood vessels are characterized by tight junctions between endothelial cells possessing a TEER (trans-endothelial electrical resistance) of approximately 1500−2000 Ω/cm2 which prevents paracellular transport of molecules and represents a biological barrier for delivery of the drug to the brain. However, poly(butyl cyanoacrylate) nanoparticles coated with polysorbate 80 were able to deliver significant amounts of doxorubicin to the brain. Multiple formulations were studied, and polysorbate 80-coated nanoparticles exhibited a high doxorubicin concentration (6 μg/g) in brain tissues as compared to noncoated nanoparticles (0.1 μg/g). It was found that apolipoprotein E (apoE) binds substantially to polysorbate 80 surfactants, and the results suggest that apoE is involved in the mediated transport of the polysorbate 80-coated nanoparticles to the brain. Further explanation of the high concentration of doxorubicin drug delivered to the brain can be derived from the fact that polysorbate can act as an anchor for apoE protein binding and interact with LDL receptors expressed in the brain blood vessels. Polysorbate 80 also has been shown to have Pgp inhibition properties which could provide an additional rationale for the delivery of the doxorubicin with nanoparticles having a polysorbate 80 coating. (87) Recently, Shaw and Weissleder (in press in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America) have found interesting results regarding the core composition and relative toxicities of nanoparticles utilizing an in vitro, high-throughput, multidimensional analysis across varying concentrations utilizing multiple cell types and multiple assays of cellular physiology. Their generalizable, systematic approach indicates that biological effects result from the combined effects of many aspects of nanoparticle composition, including the core composition which was found to have a somewhat surprising effect on biological properties. Future work developing such structure−activity relationships may shed even more light on the complex interplay between nanoparticle properties and subsequent biological effects. In summary, it has been found that physicochemical properties of the core are critical parameters of the nanoparticle formulations. Precise modifications of these properties are able to dramatically affect the extent of interactions with blood and biodistribution of nanoparticles.

Effect of Surface Functionality and Charge

It has been established that the physicochemical characteristics of a polymeric nanoparticle such as surface charge and functional groups can affect its uptake by the cells of the phagocytic system. It was previously shown that polystyrene microparticles with a primary amine at the surface underwent significantly more phagocytosis as compared to microparticles having sulfate, hydroxyl, and carboxyl groups. Therefore, it is well accepted that positively charged nanoparticles have a higher rate of cell uptake compared to neutral or negatively charged formulations. Nanoparticles carrying a positively charged surface are also expected to have a high nonspecific internalization rate and short blood circulation half-life. Nanoshells having a negative surface charge have shown a marked reduction in the rate of uptake. The ζ potential for nanoshells with BSA absorbed on the surface of the nanoparticle was characterized by a shift to a more negative value. However, the BSA absorption did not promote a higher rate of cell uptake. Interestingly, when the biodistribution of Tyr- and Tyr-Glu-PEG/PDLLA micelles was investigated in mice, (88) both the Tyr- (neutral) and Tyr-Glu (negatively charged) PEG/PDLLA micelles exhibited no remarkable difference in their blood clearance kinetics. The pharmacokinetic parameters suggest that all the micelle formulations are distributed mainly into the extracellular space volume of the spleen and liver. However, the anionic Tyr-Glu-PEG/PDLLA micelles showed a lower distribution (10 times lower) into the liver and spleen 4 h post-injection. Remarkably, a lower level of accumulation of Tyr-Glu-PEG/PDLLA micelles into the liver and spleen is believed to be due to synergic steric and electrostatic repulsion which decrease the rate of cellular uptake. In addition, urinary excretion was the major excretion route, confirming a low rate of hepatic uptake of the micelle formulation. Recently, thiolated gel nanoparticles (∼250 nm; ca. −5 mV) (60) have had a higher level of tumor accumulation than nonthiolated nanoparticles, and it was correlated with a very short plasma half-life of ∼3 h, indicating a possible preferential uptake or accumulation in the tumor tissues. In addition, the thiolated nanoparticles were found to have a higher rate of uptake into the spleen. The reasons for such an impact of the thiolated functional group on the surface of the nanoparticles are not very clear, but it could be due to aggregation of nanoparticles through disulfide bond formation or reaction with thiolated molecules circulating in the blood. In summary, it is established that neutral or negatively charged surface nanoparticles have a reduced plasma protein adsorption and low rate of nonspecific cellular uptake. Thus, surface functionality is another critical parameter in controlling the development of long-circulating nanoparticles.

Effect of Active Targeting

Active targeting of nanoparticles involves the conjugation of targeting ligands to the surface of nanoparticles. These ligands can include antibodies, engineered antibody fragments, proteins, peptides, small molecules, and aptamers. The active targeting mechanism takes advantage of highly specific interactions between the targeting ligand and certain tissues or cells within the body to promote the accumulation of nanoparticles. (3, 89-92) In the case of weak binding ligands, low affinity can be offset by increased avidity through the surface functionalization of multiple molecules or multivalent designs and has been shown to be a valid approach. There are several examples of FDA-approved antibodies in clinical practice today, (93, 94) including Rituxan (target, CD20-positive B-cells for the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and rheumatoid arthritis), Herceptin (target, HER-2-overexpressing breast cancer cells), Erbitux [target, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) for the treatment of colorectal cancer], Iressa (target, EGFR for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer and metastatic breast cancer), and Avastin [target, vascular epidermal growth factor (VEGF) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal, non-small lung, and breast cancers]. While the progress with monoclocal antibodies has been encouraging, they have not been shown to be curative. This has led to the development of immunoconjugates with the intent of utilizing the targeting specificity of the antibody to deliver a relatively potent drug. The development of immunoconjugates has been slow due to various challenges but has resulted in the FDA approval of three immunoconjugates (46) such as Mylotarg (conjugate of calicheamicin targeting CD33 for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia), Zevalin (yttrium-90 radio-immunotherapy conjugates targeting CD20-positive B-cells for the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma), and tositumomab (131I radio-immunotherapy conjugates targeting CD20-positive B-cells for the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma). Currently, drug delivery carriers are being functionalized with proteins, including antibodies or antibody fragments and various other targeting ligands, with the goal of both delivering a high therapeutic dose and delivering this high therapeutic dose to specific tissues or cells. Conjugation approaches for controlling the amount of targeting proteins on the surface of the nanoparticles have been developed to increase specificity and binding affinity. Research using proteins for targeting applications has led to a better understanding of the effect of stability and size of the ligand for successful targeting and clinical development. (95, 96) Antibody molecules are very large and complex and can be expensive to manufacture relative to small-molecule drugs. In addition, antibodies have a hydrodynamic size of ∼20 nm that can increase the size of the NPs. Recently, Davis et al. (97) have demonstrated the therapeutic impact of differential distribution between intracellular and extracellular tumor domains. Cyclodextran-based nanoparticles containing transferrin targeting ligand (NP size of ∼70 nm) showed enhanced intracellular accumulation in a human tumor xenograft mouse model. Interestingly, the model of tumor accumulation and uptake fit the experimental data, suggesting that tumor retention time and internalization into tumor cells are the critical factors affecting accumulation of nanoparticles in targeted tissues. The same group (98) reported the first toxicology study of a targeted, polymeric nanoparticle platform in non-human primates as reported above. This type of study is crucial for answering the numerous critical questions about the toxicological response to polymeric nanoparticles circulating in the blood. The results clearly show that their intravenously injected polymeric nanoparticles were safely administered to non-human primates even after multiple administrations over 3 weeks. These promising results led to the submission of an investigational new drug application.
While targeting with proteins has been shown to be advantageous in some cases, for various reasons, it may be desirable to achieve targeting with relatively small targeting ligands that are potentially easier to manufacture. The discovery of new peptide targeting domains (99) provides the advantage of being able to utilize small synthetic molecules for active targeting. One such example is peptides which are relatively stable compared to antibodies and are also less likely to be immunogenic. Similarly, small molecules can be very attractive for use as targeting ligands, and small molecules such as folic acid or sugar molecules have been extensively used. For example, cell surface membrane lectins have been shown to be overexpressed on the surface of numerous cancer cells and are able to specifically internalize sugar molecules (lactose, galactose, and mannose). (5) Similarly, nucleic acid aptamers are able to fold into unique structures capable of binding to specific targets with high affinity and specificity. (100) Favorable characteristics of aptamers have resulted in their rapid progress into clinical applications. Our group is interested in developing this class of molecules for targeted delivery of controlled drug-releasing polymer vehicles. (101) We described the first proof-of-concept drug delivery polymeric nanoparticle utilizing aptamers as targeting ligands in vitro (102) and subsequently showed the efficacy of similarly designed nanoparticles against prostate cancer tumors in vivo. (103) In vivo results using a human prostate cancer tumor xenograft mouse model showed a significant therapeutic efficacy of aptamer-targeted nanoparticles loaded with docetaxel compared to nontargeted formulations. Targeted nanoparticles substantially reduced the size of the tumor after a single intratumoral injection, and all of the treated mice survived more than 3 months in contrast to other controls. More recently, we reported a novel strategy for facile synthesis of targeted nanoparticle formulations. (104) We have shown that targeted nanoparticles specifically accumulated in the prostate tumor xenograft mouse model (∼1.8%ID/g of tissue) compared to nontargeted nanoparticles (0.5%ID/g of tissue). In summary, it has now been shown both in vitro and in vivo that targeted nanoparticles are able to agglomerate in specific tissues to improve the therapeutic efficacy, and there is a growing body of literature in this area. Clearly, active targeting provides a powerful approach to increasing the drug delivery load at a specific site for treatment.

Conclusion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The exact role of each of the proteins adsorbed on the surface of the nanoparticles in the clearance and biodistribution is still not clear besides their role in opsonization and enhanced hepatic uptake. It is generally assumed that the rapid uptake of injected nanoparticles is triggered by receptor-mediated mechanisms of absorbed proteins from the blood (opsonins) onto their surface and complement activation. However, it is not clear if a specific type, a combination of proteins, or even the protein conformation is the most important factor for a high rate of phagocytotic uptake. The efficacy of the PEG “brush” in altering the biodistribution of nanoparticles has been clearly demonstrated, and in vivo studies showed a drastic increase in blood circulation time with an increase in PEG surface density. It is also clear that relatively small physicochemical differences have significant biological implications in the fate of the biodistribution of nanoparticles. Pegylated nanoparticles between 10 and 100 nm in size are able to remain in the systemic circulation for hours and extravasate or diffuse into the diseased tissues by a passive targeting mechanism. Recently, targeted nanoparticles funtionalized with ligands that have high affinity and specificity have been shown to efficiently accumulate in specific tissues and dramatically increase the therapeutic efficacy of long-circulating nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Natural and synthetic polymers are now in preclinical and clinical phases for drug delivery. More importantly, targeted and nontargeted polymeric nanoparticles are now in the preclinical and clinical phases and confirm the great promise of the past 20 years of research and lessons learned from the failure of some clinical studies to increase the therapeutic index of drugs approved for clinical use.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Authors
    • Frank Alexis - Laboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, MIT-Harvard Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 Email: [email protected] [email protected]
    • Omid C. Farokhzad - Laboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, MIT-Harvard Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 Email: [email protected] [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Eric Pridgen - Laboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, MIT-Harvard Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
    • Linda K. Molnar - Laboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, MIT-Harvard Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892

Acknowledgment

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants CA119349 and EB003647 and a Koch−Prostate Cancer Foundation Award in Nanotherapeutics.

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 104 other publications.

  1. 1
    Zhang, L. Nanoparticles in Medicine: Therapeutic Applications and Developments Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 2008 83 761 769
  2. 2
    Moghimi, S. M.; Hunter, A. C. Poloxamers and poloxamines in nanoparticle engineering and experimental medicine Trends in biotechnology 2000 18 412 420
  3. 3
    Farokhzad, O. C.; Langer, R. Nanomedicine: Developing smarter therapeutic and diagnostic modalities Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2006 58 1456 1459
  4. 4
    Shaffer, C. Nanomedicine transforms drug delivery Drug Discovery Today 2005 10 1581 1582
  5. 5
    Alexis, F. New frontiers in nanotechnology for cancer treatment Urol. Oncol. 2008 26 74 85
  6. 6
    Safra, T. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (doxil): Reduced clinical cardiotoxicity in patients reaching or exceeding cumulative doses of 500 mg/m2 Ann. Oncol. 2000 11 1029 1033
  7. 7
    Fassas, A.; Buffels, R.; Kaloyannidis, P.; Anagnostopoulos, A. Safety of high-dose liposomal daunorubicin (daunoxome) for refractory or relapsed acute myeloblastic leukaemia Br. Jo. Haematol. 2003 122 161 163
  8. 8
    James, N. D. Liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil): An effective new treatment for Kaposi’s sarcoma in AIDS Clin. Oncol. 1994 6 294 296
  9. 9
    Doxil receives FDA market clearance. AIDS Patient Care and STDs , 1996; Vol. 10, p 135.
  10. 10
    Muggia, F. M. Doxil in breast cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 1998 16 811 812
  11. 11
    Food and Drug Administration FDA approves DaunoXome as first-line therapy for Kaposi’s sarcoma. Journal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care 1996 2 50 51
  12. 12
    DaunoXome approved. AIDS Patient Care and STDs , 1996; Vol. 10, p 263.
  13. 13
    Schluep, T. Preclinical efficacy of the camptothecin-polymer conjugate IT-101 in multiple cancer models Clin. Cancer Res. 2006 12 1606 1614
  14. 14
    Kim, D. W. Multicenter phase II trial of Genexol-PM, a novel Cremophor-free, polymeric micelle formulation of paclitaxel, with cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer Ann. Oncol. 2007 18 2009 2014
  15. 15
    Lee, K. S. Multicenter phase II trial of Genexol-PM, a Cremophor-free, polymeric micelle formulation of paclitaxel, in patients with metastatic breast cancer Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2008 108 241 250
  16. 16
    Pridgen, E. M.; Langer, R.; Farokhzad, O. C. Biodegradable, polymeric nanoparticle delivery systems for cancer therapy Nanomedicine (London, U.K.) 2007 2 669 680
  17. 17
    Moghimi, S. M. Recent developments in polymeric nanoparticle engineering and their applications in experimental and clinical oncology Anti-Cancer Agents Med. Chem. 2006 6 553 561
  18. 18
    Avgoustakis, K. Pegylated poly(lactide) and poly(lactide-co-glycolide) nanoparticles: Preparation, properties and possible applications in drug delivery Curr. Drug Delivery 2004 1 321 333
  19. 19
    Otsuka, H.; Nagasaki, Y.; Kataoka, K. PEGylated nanoparticles for biological and pharmaceutical applications Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2003 55 403 419
  20. 20
    Romberg, B.; Hennink, W. E.; Storm, G. Sheddable coatings for long-circulating nanoparticles Pharm. Res. 2008 25 55 71
  21. 21
    Moghimi, S. M.; Hunter, A. C.; Murray, J. C. Long-circulating and target-specific nanoparticles: Theory to practice Pharmacol. Rev. 2001 53 283 318
  22. 22
    Vittaz, M. Effect of PEO surface density on long-circulating PLA-PEO nanoparticles which are very low complement activators Biomaterials 1996 17 1575 1581
  23. 23
    Owens, D. E., III; Peppas, N. A. Opsonization, biodistribution, and pharmacokinetics of polymeric nanoparticles Int. J. Pharm. 2006 307 93 102
  24. 24
    Predescu, D.; Palade, G. E. Plasmalemmal vesicles represent the large pore system of continuous microvascular endothelium Am. J. Physiol. 1993 265 H725 H733
  25. 25
    Simionescu, M.; Simionescu, N.; Palade, G. E. Morphometric data on the endothelium of blood capillaries J. Cell Biol. 1974 60 128 152
  26. 26
    Brigham, K. L. Estimations of permeability properties of pulmonary capillaries (continuous endothelium) Physiologist 1980 23 44 46
  27. 27
    Ludatscher, R. M.; Stehbens, W. E. Vesicles of fenestrated and non-fenestrated endothelium Z. Zellforsch. Mikrosk. Anat. 1969 97 169 177
  28. 28
    Ryan, U. S.; Ryan, J. W.; Smith, D. S.; Winkler, H. Fenestrated endothelium of the adrenal gland: Freeze-fracture studies Tissue Cell 1975 7 181 190
  29. 29
    Braet, F. Contribution of high-resolution correlative imaging techniques in the study of the liver sieve in three-dimensions Microsc. Res. Tech. 2007 70 230 242
  30. 30
    Eisenstein, R. Angiogenesis in arteries: review Pharmacol. Ther. 1991 49 1 19
  31. 31
    Folkman, J. What is the role of endothelial cells in angiogenesis Laboratory Investigation: A Journal of Technical Methods and Pathology 1984 51 601 604
  32. 32
    Folkman, J. Tumor angiogenesis: Therapeutic implications N. Engl. J. Med. 1971 285 1182 1186
  33. 33
    Folkman, J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease Nat. Med. 1995 1 27 31
  34. 34
    Folkman, J.; Ingber, D. Inhibition of angiogenesis Semin. Cancer Biol. 1992 3 89 96
  35. 35
    Kerbel, R.; Folkman, J. Clinical translation of angiogenesis inhibitors Nat. Rev. 2002 2 727 739
  36. 36
    Maeda, H. The enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect in tumor vasculature: The key role of tumor-selective macromolecular drug targeting Adv. Enzyme Regul. 2001 41 189 207
  37. 37
    Greish, K. Enhanced permeability and retention of macromolecular drugs in solid tumors: A royal gate for targeted anticancer nanomedicines J. Drug Targeting 2007 15 457 464
  38. 38
    Hobbs, S. K. Regulation of transport pathways in tumor vessels: Role of tumor type and microenvironment Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998 95 4607 4612
  39. 39
    Folkman, J. Fundamental concepts of the angiogenic process Curr. Mol. Med. 2003 3 643 651
  40. 40
    Lijnen, H. R. Angiogenesis and obesity Cardiovasc. Res. 2008 78 286 293
  41. 41
    Chetta, A.; Zanini, A.; Torre, O.; Olivieri, D. Vascular remodelling and angiogenesis in asthma: Morphological aspects and pharmacological modulation Inflammation Allergy Drug Targets 2007 6 41 45
  42. 42
    Norrby, K.; Jakobsson, A.; Simonsen, M.; Sorbo, J. Increased angiogenesis in diabetes Experientia 1990 46 856 860
  43. 43
    Martin, A.; Komada, M. R.; Sane, D. C. Abnormal angiogenesis in diabetes mellitus Med. Res. Rev. 2003 23 117 145
  44. 44
    Kirk, S.; Frank, J. A.; Karlik, S. Angiogenesis in multiple sclerosis: Is it good, bad or an epiphenomenon J. Neurol. Sci. 2004 217 125 130
  45. 45
    Siegel, R. C. Angiogenesis in progressive systemic sclerosis N. Engl. J. Med. 1972 286 217
  46. 46
    Wu, A. M.; Senter, P. D. Arming antibodies: Prospects and challenges for immunoconjugates Nat. Biotechnol. 2005 23 1137 1146
  47. 47
    Gref, R. Biodegradable long-circulating polymeric nanospheres Science 1994 263 1600 1603
  48. 48
    Ben-Shabat, S.; Kumar, N.; Domb, A. J. PEG-PLA block copolymer as potential drug carrier: Preparation and characterization Macromol. Biosci. 2006 6 1019 1025
  49. 49
    Bazile, D. Stealth Me.PEG-PLA nanoparticles avoid uptake by the mononuclear phagocytes system J. Pharm. Sci. 1995 84 493 498
  50. 50
    Peracchia, M. T. Stealth PEGylated polycyanoacrylate nanoparticles for intravenous administration and splenic targeting J. Controlled Release 1999 60 121 128
  51. 51
    Peracchia, M. T. Visualization of in vitro protein-rejecting properties of PEGylated stealth polycyanoacrylate nanoparticles Biomaterials 1999 20 1269 1275
  52. 52
    Li, Y. PEGylated PLGA nanoparticles as protein carriers: Synthesis, preparation and biodistribution in rats J. Controlled Release 2001 71 203 211
  53. 53
    Gref, R. ‘Stealth’ corona-core nanoparticles surface modified by polyethylene glycol (PEG): Influences of the corona (PEG chain length and surface density) and of the core composition on phagocytic uptake and plasma protein adsorption Colloids Surf. 2000 18 301 313
  54. 54
    Scott, M. D.; Murad, K. L. Cellular camouflage: Fooling the immune system with polymers Curr. Pharm. Des. 1998 4 423 438
  55. 55
    Francis, G. E.; Delgado, C.; Fisher, D.; Malik, F.; Agrawal, A. K. Polyethylene glycol modification: Relevance of improved methodology to tumour targeting J. Drug Targeting 1996 3 321 340
  56. 56
    Nagayama, S.; Ogawara, K.; Fukuoka, Y.; Higaki, K.; Kimura, T. Time-dependent changes in opsonin amount associated on nanoparticles alter their hepatic uptake characteristics Int. J. Pharm. 2007 342 215 221
  57. 57
    Panagi, Z. Effect of dose on the biodistribution and pharmacokinetics of PLGA and PLGA-mPEG nanoparticles Int. J. Pharm. 2001 221 143 152
  58. 58
    Beletsi, A.; Panagi, Z.; Avgoustakis, K. Biodistribution properties of nanoparticles based on mixtures of PLGA with PLGA-PEG diblock copolymers Int. J. Pharm. 2005 298 233 241
  59. 59
    Fang, C. In vivo tumor targeting of tumor necrosis factor-α-loaded stealth nanoparticles: Effect of MePEG molecular weight and particle size Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2006 27 27 36
  60. 60
    Kommareddy, S.; Amiji, M. Biodistribution and pharmacokinetic analysis of long-circulating thiolated gelatin nanoparticles following systemic administration in breast cancer-bearing mice J. Pharm. Sci. 2007 96 397 407
  61. 61
    Kim, T. Y. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of Genexol-PM, a cremophor-free, polymeric micelle-formulated paclitaxel, in patients with advanced malignancies Clin. Cancer Res. 2004 10 3708 3716
  62. 62
    Kim, S. C. In vivo evaluation of polymeric micellar paclitaxel formulation: Toxicity and efficacy J. Controlled Release 2001 72 191 202
  63. 63
    Campone, M. Phase I and pharmacokinetic trial of AP5346, a DACH-platinum-polymer conjugate, administered weekly for three out of every 4 weeks to advanced solid tumor patients Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2007 60 523 533
  64. 64
    Rice, J. R.; Gerberich, J. L.; Nowotnik, D. P.; Howell, S. B. Preclinical efficacy and pharmacokinetics of AP5346, a novel diaminocyclohexane-platinum tumor-targeting drug delivery system Clin. Cancer Res. 2006 12 2248 2254
  65. 65
    Ascierto, P. A. Pegylated arginine deiminase treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: Results from phase I and II studies J. Clin. Oncol. 2005 23 7660 7668
  66. 66
    Ensor, C. M.; Holtsberg, F. W.; Bomalaski, J. S.; Clark, M. A. Pegylated arginine deiminase (ADI-SS PEG20,000 mw) inhibits human melanomas and hepatocellular carcinomas in vitro and in vivo Cancer Res. 2002 62 5443 5450
  67. 67
    Posey, J. A., III Phase 1 study of weekly polyethylene glycol-camptothecin in patients with advanced solid tumors and lymphomas Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 7866 7871
  68. 68
    Conover, C. D.; Greenwald, R. B.; Pendri, A.; Gilbert, C. W.; Shum, K. L. Camptothecin delivery systems: Enhanced efficacy and tumor accumulation of camptothecin following its conjugation to polyethylene glycol via a glycine linker Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 1998 42 407 414
  69. 69
    Danson, S. Phase I dose escalation and pharmacokinetic study of pluronic polymer-bound doxorubicin (SP1049C) in patients with advanced cancer Br. J. Cancer 2004 90 2085 2091
  70. 70
    Schluep, T.; Cheng, J.; Khin, K. T.; Davis, M. E. Pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of the camptothecin-polymer conjugate IT-101 in rats and tumor-bearing mice Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2006 57 654 662
  71. 71
    Homsi, J. Phase I trial of poly-l-glutamate camptothecin (CT-2106) administered weekly in patients with advanced solid malignancies Clin. Cancer Res. 2007 13 5855 5861
  72. 72
    Boddy, A. V. A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of paclitaxel poliglumex (XYOTAX), investigating both 3-weekly and 2-weekly schedules Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 7834 7840
  73. 73
    Li, C. Biodistribution of paclitaxel and poly(l-glutamic acid)-paclitaxel conjugate in mice with ovarian OCa-1 tumor Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2000 46 416 422
  74. 74
    Sabbatini, P. Phase II study of CT-2103 in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2004 22 4523 4531
  75. 75
    Danhauser-Riedl, S. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic trial of dextran conjugated doxorubicin (AD-70, DOX-OXD) Invest. New Drugs 1993 11 187 195
  76. 76
    Soepenberg, O. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of DE-310 in patients with advanced solid tumors Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 703 711
  77. 77
    Meerum Terwogt, J. M. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of PNU166945, a novel water-soluble polymer-conjugated prodrug of paclitaxel Anti-Cancer Drugs 2001 12 315 323
  78. 78
    Vasey, P. A. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of PK1 [N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide copolymer doxorubicin]: First member of a new class of chemotherapeutic agents-drug-polymer conjugates. Cancer Research Campaign Phase I/II Committee Clin. Cancer Res. 1999 5 83 94
  79. 79
    Matsumura, Y. Phase I clinical trial and pharmacokinetic evaluation of NK911, a micelle-encapsulated doxorubicin Br. J. Cancer 2004 91 1775 1781
  80. 80
    Hopewel, J. W.; Duncan, R.; Wilding, D.; Chakrabarti, K. Preclinical evaluation of the cardiotoxicity of PK2: A novel HPMA copolymer-doxorubicin-galactosamine conjugate antitumour agent Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 2001 20 461 470
  81. 81
    Rijcken, C. J.; Snel, C. J.; Schiffelers, R. M.; van Nostrum, C. F.; Hennink, W. E. Hydrolysable core-crosslinked thermosensitive polymeric micelles: Synthesis, characterisation and in vivo studies Biomaterials 2007 28 5581 5593
  82. 82
    Shenoy, D.; Little, S.; Langer, R.; Amiji, M. Poly(ethylene oxide)-modified poly(β-amino ester) nanoparticles as a pH-sensitive system for tumor-targeted delivery of hydrophobic drugs: Part 2. In vivo distribution and tumor localization studies Pharm. Res. 2005 22 2107 2114
  83. 83
    Takeoka, S. Rolling properties of rGPIbα-conjugated phospholipid vesicles with different membrane flexibilities on vWf surface under flow conditions Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2002 296 765 770
  84. 84
    Sun, X. An assessment of the effects of shell cross-linked nanoparticle size, core composition, and surface PEGylation on in vivo biodistribution Biomacromolecules 2005 6 2541 2554
  85. 85
    Mosqueira, V. C. Relationship between complement activation, cellular uptake and surface physicochemical aspects of novel PEG-modified nanocapsules Biomaterials 2001 22 2967 2979
  86. 86
    Gulyaev, A. E. Significant transport of doxorubicin into the brain with polysorbate 80-coated nanoparticles Pharm. Res. 1999 16 1564 1569
  87. 87
    Kreuter, J. Nanoparticulate systems for brain delivery of drugs Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2001 47 65 81
  88. 88
    Yamamoto, Y.; Nagasaki, Y.; Kato, Y.; Sugiyama, Y.; Kataoka, K. Long-circulating poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(d,l-lactide) block copolymer micelles with modulated surface charge J. Controlled Release 2001 77 27 38
  89. 89
    Freeman, A. I.; Mayhew, E. Targeted drug delivery Cancer 1986 58 573 583
  90. 90
    Emerich, D. F.; Thanos, C. G. Targeted nanoparticle-based drug delivery and diagnosis J. Drug Targeting 2007 15 163 183
  91. 91
    van Vlerken, L. E.; Vyas, T. K.; Amiji, M. M. Poly(ethylene glycol)-modified nanocarriers for tumor-targeted and intracellular delivery Pharm. Res. 2007 24 1405 1414
  92. 92
    Peppas, N. A. Intelligent therapeutics: Biomimetic systems and nanotechnology in drug delivery Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2004 56 1529 1531
  93. 93
    Schrama, D.; Reisfeld, R. A.; Becker, J. C. Antibody targeted drugs as cancer therapeutics Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2006 5 147 159
  94. 94
    Weiner, L. M.; Adams, G. P. New approaches to antibody therapy Oncogene 2000 19 6144 6151
  95. 95
    Clauss, M. A.; Jain, R. K. Interstitial transport of rabbit and sheep antibodies in normal and neoplastic tissues Cancer Res. 1990 50 3487 3492
  96. 96
    Graff, C. P.; Wittrup, K. D. Theoretical analysis of antibody targeting of tumor spheroids: Importance of dosage for penetration, and affinity for retention Cancer Res. 2003 63 1288 1296
  97. 97
    Bartlett, D. W.; Su, H.; Hildebrandt, I. J.; Weber, W. A.; Davis, M. E. 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 15554
  98. 98
    Heidel, J. D. Administration in non-human primates of escalating intravenous doses of targeted nanoparticles containing ribonucleotide reductase subunit M2 siRNA Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007 104 5715 5721
  99. 99
    Scott, J. K.; Smith, G. P. Searching for peptide ligands with an epitope library Science 1990 249 386 390
  100. 100
    Gopinath, S. C. Methods developed for SELEX Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2007 387 171 182
  101. 101
    Cheng, J. Formulation of functionalized PLGA-PEG nanoparticles for in vivo targeted drug delivery Biomaterials 2007 28 869 876
  102. 102
    Farokhzad, O. C. Nanoparticle-aptamer bioconjugates: A new approach for targeting prostate cancer cells Cancer Res. 2004 64 7668 7672
  103. 103
    Farokhzad, O. C. Targeted nanoparticle-aptamer bioconjugates for cancer chemotherapy in vivo Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006 103 6315 6320
  104. 104
    Gu, F. Precise engineering of targeted nanoparticles by using self-assembled biointegrated block copolymers Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008 105 2586 2591

Cited By

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article is cited by 2813 publications.

  1. Lu Fu, Claire A. Bridges, Ha Na Kim, Catherine Ding, Nicole Chiwei Bao Hou, Jonathan Yeow, Sandra Fok, Alexander Macmillan, James D. Sterling, Shenda M. Baker, Megan S. Lord. Cationic Polysaccharides Bind to the Endothelial Cell Surface Extracellular Matrix Involving Heparan Sulfate. Biomacromolecules 2024, Article ASAP.
  2. Zhijin Fan, Sicheng Wu, Huaping Deng, Guanlin Li, Linghong Huang, Hongxing Liu. Light-Triggered Nanozymes Remodel the Tumor Hypoxic and Immunosuppressive Microenvironment for Ferroptosis-Enhanced Antitumor Immunity. ACS Nano 2024, 18 (19) , 12261-12275. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c00844
  3. Narjes Dridi, Zhicheng Jin, Woody Perng, Hedi Mattoussi. Probing Protein Corona Formation around Gold Nanoparticles: Effects of Surface Coating. ACS Nano 2024, 18 (12) , 8649-8662. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.3c08005
  4. Gaurav Sinsinbar, Anivind Kaur Bindra, Shaoqiong Liu, Teck Wan Chia, Eunice Chia Yoong Eng, Ser Yue Loo, Jian Hang Lam, Katherine Schultheis, Madhavan Nallani. Amphiphilic Block Copolymer Nanostructures as a Tunable Delivery Platform: Perspective and Framework for the Future Drug Product Development. Biomacromolecules 2024, 25 (2) , 541-563. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.3c00858
  5. Lys Hamond Regua Mangia, Flávia Yamashita, Camila Guindani, Helen Conceição Ferraz, José Carlos Pinto. The Influence of Glass Transition Temperature of PMMA-Based Nanoparticles on the Release Profile of Praziquantel as a Strategy for Controlling Drug Release. ACS Applied Nano Materials 2024, 7 (3) , 2417-2429. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.3c06099
  6. Yin Wang, Yuxuan Lyu, Zhao Li. Constitutionally Isomeric Peptides: Subtle Changes Leading to Dramatic Differences in Properties. ACS Applied Engineering Materials 2024, Article ASAP.
  7. Siyi Li, Na Liang, Jiyang Liu, Yuecong Shi, Pengfei Yan, Shaoping Sun. Fabrication of AIE-Featured Probe-Incorporated Multifunctional Polymeric Micelles for Cellular Imaging and Intelligent Delivery of Paclitaxel. ACS Applied Polymer Materials 2024, 6 (1) , 484-495. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsapm.3c02171
  8. Jiaxing Di, Kangzeng Wu, Peng Hou, Clairissa D. Corpstein, Yuhong Xu, Tonglei Li. Multiphysics-Informed Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Systemic Exposure of Intramuscularly Injected LNPs. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2023, 20 (12) , 6162-6168. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.3c00555
  9. Wenliang Wang, Aaron Tasset, Ilya Pyatnitskiy, Peter Lin, Arjun Bellamkonda, Rohan Mehta, Christian Gabbert, Feng Yuan, Heba Galaa Mohamed, Nicholas A. Peppas, Huiliang Wang. Reversible, Covalent DNA Condensation Approach Using Chemical Linkers for Enhanced Gene Delivery. Nano Letters 2023, 23 (20) , 9310-9318. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c02429
  10. Shuji Fujisawa, Kazuho Daicho, Ayhan Yurtsever, Takeshi Fukuma, Tsuguyuki Saito. Morphological Changes of Polymer-Grafted Nanocellulose during a Drying Process. Biomacromolecules 2023, 24 (8) , 3908-3916. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.3c00530
  11. Eshan A. Narasipura, Rachel VanKeulen-Miller, Yutian Ma, Owen S. Fenton. Ongoing Clinical Trials of Nonviral siRNA Therapeutics. Bioconjugate Chemistry 2023, 34 (7) , 1177-1197. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.3c00205
  12. Alex Golubovic, Shannon Tsai, Bowen Li. Bioinspired Lipid Nanocarriers for RNA Delivery. ACS Bio & Med Chem Au 2023, 3 (2) , 114-136. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomedchemau.2c00073
  13. Wenjing Huang, Binbin Hu, Yalin Yuan, Huaqiang Fang, Junkai Jiang, Qun Li, Yi Zhuo, Xuetao Yang, Jinlu Wei, Xiaolei Wang. Visible Light-Responsive Selenium Nanoparticles Combined with Sonodynamic Therapy to Promote Wound Healing. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2023, 9 (3) , 1341-1351. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.2c01119
  14. Aaron H. Colby, Jack Kirsch, Amit N. Patwa, Rong Liu, Beth Hollister, William McCulloch, Joanna E. Burdette, Cedric J. Pearce, Nicholas H. Oberliels, Yolonda L. Colson, Kebin Liu, Mark W. Grinstaff. Radiolabeled Biodistribution of Expansile Nanoparticles: Intraperitoneal Administration Results in Tumor Specific Accumulation. ACS Nano 2023, 17 (3) , 2212-2221. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.2c08451
  15. Yanan Xu, Qian Zhang, Runzhi Chen, Haiting Cao, Jie Tang, Yuqi Wu, Xing Lu, Binbin Chu, Bin Song, Houyu Wang, Yao He. NIR-II Photoacoustic-Active DNA Origami Nanoantenna for Early Diagnosis and Smart Therapy of Acute Kidney Injury. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2022, 144 (51) , 23522-23533. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.2c10323
  16. Konika Choudhury, Arun Chattopadhyay, Siddhartha Sankar Ghosh. Mannosylated Gold Nanoclusters Incorporated with a Repurposed Antihistamine Drug Promethazine for Antibacterial and Antibiofilm Applications. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2022, 5 (12) , 5911-5923. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.2c00867
  17. Mohamed F. Attia, Roman Akasov, Nancy M. Elbaz, Tyler C. Owens, Evan C. Curtis, Soham Panda, Ralph Santos-Oliveira, Frank Alexis, Forrest M. Kievit, Daniel C. Whitehead. Radiopaque Iodosilane-Coated Lipid Hybrid Nanoparticle Contrast Agent for Dual-Modality Ultrasound and X-ray Bioimaging. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2022, 14 (49) , 54389-54400. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c09104
  18. Ya Guan, Hong Niu, Jiaxing Wen, Yu Dang, Mohamed Zayed, Jianjun Guan. Rescuing Cardiac Cells and Improving Cardiac Function by Targeted Delivery of Oxygen-Releasing Nanoparticles after or Even before Acute Myocardial Infarction. ACS Nano 2022, 16 (11) , 19551-19566. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.2c10043
  19. Maximilian R. J. Marek, Trong-Nhan Pham, Jianxin Wang, Qiuqi Cai, Glenn P. A. Yap, Emily S. Day, Joel Rosenthal. Isocorrole-Loaded Polymer Nanoparticles for Photothermal Therapy under 980 nm Light Excitation. ACS Omega 2022, 7 (41) , 36653-36662. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c04723
  20. Gadi Slor, Shahar Tevet, Roey J. Amir. Stimuli-Induced Architectural Transition as a Tool for Controlling the Enzymatic Degradability of Polymeric Micelles. ACS Polymers Au 2022, 2 (5) , 380-386. https://doi.org/10.1021/acspolymersau.2c00023
  21. Cong Wu, Zhiming Shen, Yi Lu, Fei Sun, Hongcan Shi. p53 Promotes Ferroptosis in Macrophages Treated with Fe3O4 Nanoparticles. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2022, 14 (38) , 42791-42803. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c00707
  22. Amy C. Doty Cassie M. Jarvis Erik V. Munsell . Formulation Strategies to Enable Delivery of Therapeutic Peptides across Cell Membranes. , 223-254. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2022-1417.ch009
  23. Lulu Ren, Peirong Xu, Jie Yao, Zihan Wang, Kewei Shi, Weidong Han, Hangxiang Wang. Targeting the Mitochondria with Pseudo-Stealthy Nanotaxanes to Impair Mitochondrial Biogenesis for Effective Cancer Treatment. ACS Nano 2022, 16 (7) , 10242-10259. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.1c08008
  24. Marie Piantino, Masahiko Nakamoto, Michiya Matsusaki. Development of Highly Sensitive Molecular Blocks at Cancer Microenvironment for Rapid Cancer Cell Death. Langmuir 2022, 38 (17) , 5209-5217. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.1c02390
  25. Maya Holay, Jiarong Zhou, Joon Ho Park, Igor Landa, Christian J. Ventura, Weiwei Gao, Ronnie H. Fang, Liangfang Zhang. Organotropic Targeting of Biomimetic Nanoparticles to Treat Lung Disease. Bioconjugate Chemistry 2022, 33 (4) , 586-593. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.1c00599
  26. Alexey V. Verkhovtsev, Adam Nichols, Nigel J. Mason, Andrey V. Solov’yov. Molecular Dynamics Characterization of Radiosensitizing Coated Gold Nanoparticles in Aqueous Environment. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A 2022, 126 (14) , 2170-2184. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.2c00489
  27. John Ndayishimiye, Tushar Kumeria, Amirali Popat, James Robert Falconer, Mark A. T. Blaskovich. Nanomaterials: The New Antimicrobial Magic Bullet. ACS Infectious Diseases 2022, 8 (4) , 693-712. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsinfecdis.1c00660
  28. Md Ishak Khan, M. Imran Hossain, M. Khalid Hossain, M. H. K. Rubel, K. M. Hossain, A. M. U. B. Mahfuz, Muzahidul I. Anik. Recent Progress in Nanostructured Smart Drug Delivery Systems for Cancer Therapy: A Review. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2022, 5 (3) , 971-1012. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.2c00002
  29. Celestine Hong, Osaid Alser, Anthony Gebran, Yanpu He, Wontae Joo, Nikolaos Kokoroskos, George Velmahos, Bradley D. Olsen, Paula T. Hammond. Modulating Nanoparticle Size to Understand Factors Affecting Hemostatic Efficacy and Maximize Survival in a Lethal Inferior Vena Cava Injury Model. ACS Nano 2022, 16 (2) , 2494-2510. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.1c09108
  30. Dedai Lu, Lili Yu, Zhengpeng Chen, Mingshu Chen, Ziqiang Lei, Hongyun Guo, Xingdong Wang, Yongdong Zhang, Tingting Xu, Haijun Wang, Xing Zhou, Shenghong Ju, Gaojun Teng. A Simple and Efficient Embolization-Combined Therapy for Solid Tumors by Smart Poly(amino acid)s Nanocomposites. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2022, 5 (2) , 661-674. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.1c01106
  31. Natalie Boehnke, Paula T. Hammond. Power in Numbers: Harnessing Combinatorial and Integrated Screens to Advance Nanomedicine. JACS Au 2022, 2 (1) , 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacsau.1c00313
  32. Dedai Lu, Mingshu Chen, Lili Yu, Zhengpeng Chen, Hongyun Guo, Yongdong Zhang, Zhiming Han, Tingting Xu, Haijun Wang, Xing Zhou, Zubang Zhou, Gaojun Teng. Smart-Polypeptide-Coated Mesoporous Fe3O4 Nanoparticles: Non-Interventional Target-Embolization/Thermal Ablation and Multimodal Imaging Combination Theranostics for Solid Tumors. Nano Letters 2021, 21 (24) , 10267-10278. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c03340
  33. Shakil Ahmed Polash, Tushar Khare, Vinay Kumar, Ravi Shukla. Prospects of Exploring the Metal–Organic Framework for Combating Antimicrobial Resistance. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2021, 4 (12) , 8060-8079. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.1c00832
  34. Marilyn E. Allen, Amit Golding, Violeta Rus, Nicholas B. Karabin, Sophia Li, Chamille J. Lescott, Sharan Bobbala, Evan A. Scott, Gregory L. Szeto. Targeted Delivery of Chloroquine to Antigen-Presenting Cells Enhances Inhibition of the Type I Interferon Response. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2021, 7 (12) , 5666-5677. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c01047
  35. Yi Wang, Yannan Zhao, Jiangling Wu, Ming Li, Juan Tan, Wensheng Fu, Hua Tang, Pu Zhang. Negatively Charged Sulfur Quantum Dots for Treatment of Drug-Resistant Pathogenic Bacterial Infections. Nano Letters 2021, 21 (22) , 9433-9441. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c02697
  36. Niranjan Meher, Kyounghee Seo, Sinan Wang, Anil P. Bidkar, Miko Fogarty, Suchi Dhrona, Xiao Huang, Ryan Tang, Charles Blaha, Michael J. Evans, David R. Raleigh, Young-Wook Jun, Henry F. VanBrocklin, Tejal A. Desai, David M. Wilson, Tomoko Ozawa, Robert R. Flavell. Synthesis and Preliminary Biological Assessment of Carborane-Loaded Theranostic Nanoparticles to Target Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2021, 13 (46) , 54739-54752. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c16383
  37. Bilal Hussain, Vivek Kasinath, Joren C. Madsen, Jonathan Bromberg, Stefan G. Tullius, Reza Abdi. Intra-Organ Delivery of Nanotherapeutics for Organ Transplantation. ACS Nano 2021, 15 (11) , 17124-17136. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.1c04707
  38. Esther H. Roh, Thomas H. Epps, III, Millicent O. Sullivan. Kinetic Modeling to Accelerate the Development of Nucleic Acid Formulations. ACS Nano 2021, 15 (10) , 16055-16066. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.1c04555
  39. Aaron S. Schwartz-Duval, Rachele Wen, Indrajit Srivastava, Parikshit Moitra, Dipanjan Pan. A Simplistic Single-Step Method for Preparing Biomimetic Nanoparticles from Endogenous Biomaterials. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2021, 13 (39) , 46464-46477. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c17302
  40. Abdelnour Alhourani, Jan-Lukas Førde, Lutz Andreas Eichacker, Lars Herfindal, Hanne Røland Hagland. Improved pH-Responsive Release of Phenformin from Low-Defect Graphene Compared to Graphene Oxide. ACS Omega 2021, 6 (38) , 24619-24629. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c03283
  41. Ana Cláudia Lima, Rui L. Reis, Helena Ferreira, Nuno M. Neves. Cellular Uptake of Three Different Nanoparticles in an Inflammatory Arthritis Scenario versus Normal Conditions. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2021, 18 (9) , 3235-3246. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.1c00066
  42. Vidumin Dahanayake, Trevor Lyons, Brendan Kerwin, Olga Rodriguez, Christopher Albanese, Erika Parasido, Yichien Lee, Edward Van Keuren, Luxi Li, Evan Maxey, Tatjana Paunesku, Gayle Woloschak, Sarah L. Stoll. Paramagnetic Mn8Fe4-co-Polystyrene Nanobeads as a Potential T1–T2 Multimodal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Contrast Agent with In Vivo Studies. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2021, 13 (33) , 39042-39054. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c09232
  43. Irina Muljajew, Sophie Huschke, Anuradha Ramoji, Zoltán Cseresnyés, Stephanie Hoeppener, Ivo Nischang, Wanling Foo, Jürgen Popp, Marc Thilo Figge, Christine Weber, Michael Bauer, Ulrich S. Schubert, Adrian T. Press. Stealth Effect of Short Polyoxazolines in Graft Copolymers: Minor Changes of Backbone End Group Determine Liver Cell-Type Specificity. ACS Nano 2021, 15 (7) , 12298-12313. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.1c04213
  44. Andreas Frutiger, Alexander Tanno, Stephanie Hwu, Raphael F. Tiefenauer, János Vörös, Nako Nakatsuka. Nonspecific Binding—Fundamental Concepts and Consequences for Biosensing Applications. Chemical Reviews 2021, 121 (13) , 8095-8160. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00044
  45. Eugenia Li Ling Yeo, Nurul ‘Ain Azman, James Chen Yong Kah. Stealthiness and Hematocompatibility of Gold Nanoparticles with Pre-Formed Protein Corona. Langmuir 2021, 37 (16) , 4913-4923. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.1c00151
  46. Assaf Zinger, Manuela Sushnitha, Tomoyuki Naoi, Gherardo Baudo, Enrica De Rosa, Jenny Chang, Ennio Tasciotti, Francesca Taraballi. Enhancing Inflammation Targeting Using Tunable Leukocyte-Based Biomimetic Nanoparticles. ACS Nano 2021, 15 (4) , 6326-6339. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c05792
  47. Cara Katterman, Christopher Pierce, Jessica Larsen. Combining Nanoparticle Shape Modulation and Polymersome Technology in Drug Delivery. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2021, 4 (4) , 2853-2862. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.1c00203
  48. Nahid S. Awad, Vinod Paul, Nour M. AlSawaftah, Gail ter Haar, Theresa M. Allen, William G. Pitt, Ghaleb A. Husseini. Ultrasound-Responsive Nanocarriers in Cancer Treatment: A Review. ACS Pharmacology & Translational Science 2021, 4 (2) , 589-612. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsptsci.0c00212
  49. Cristhian Marcelo Chingo Aimacaña, Dilan Andres Quinchiguango Perez, Suyene Rocha Pinto, Alexis Debut, Mohamed F. Attia, Ralph Santos-Oliveira, Daniel C. Whitehead, Thibault Terencio, Frank Alexis, Si Amar Dahoumane. Polytetrafluoroethylene-like Nanoparticles as a Promising Contrast Agent for Dual Modal Ultrasound and X-ray Bioimaging. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2021, 7 (3) , 1181-1191. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c01635
  50. Eliz Amar-Lewis, Nitsa Buaron, Ramesh Chintakunta, Chen Benafsha, Riki Goldbart, Tamar Traitel, Manu Prasad, Moshe Elkabets, Joseph Kost. Quaternized Starch-Based Composite Nanoparticles for siRNA Delivery to Tumors. ACS Applied Nano Materials 2021, 4 (2) , 2218-2229. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.1c00032
  51. Daniel Fleischmann, Sara Maslanka Figueroa, Achim Goepferich. Steric Shielding of cRGD-Functionalized Nanoparticles from Premature Exposition to Off-Target Endothelial Cells under a Physiological Flow. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2021, 4 (1) , 640-650. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c01193
  52. Yuliang Xie, Joseph Rufo, Ruoyu Zhong, Joseph Rich, Peng Li, Kam W. Leong, Tony Jun Huang. Microfluidic Isolation and Enrichment of Nanoparticles. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (12) , 16220-16240. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c06336
  53. Durga M. Arvapalli, Alex T. Sheardy, Kokougan Allado, Harish Chevva, Ziyu Yin, Jianjun Wei. Design of Curcumin Loaded Carbon Nanodots Delivery System: Enhanced Bioavailability, Release Kinetics, and Anticancer Activity. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (12) , 8776-8785. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c01144
  54. Dedai Lu, Jiachen Wang, Yunfei Li, Yongyong Zhang, Lili Yu, Tingting Xu, Hongyun Guo, Yongdong Zhang, Xingdong Wang, Xiaoqi Wang, Gaojun Teng, Ziqiang Lei. Tumor Noninvasive and Target Embolization Therapy Platform by Intravenous Injection Based on Acidic Microenvironment-Responsive Hyperbranched Poly(amino acid)s. ACS Central Science 2020, 6 (11) , 1977-1986. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.0c00506
  55. Pouran Makhdoumi, Hazhir Karimi, Mozafar Khazaei. Review on Metal-Based Nanoparticles: Role of Reactive Oxygen Species in Renal Toxicity. Chemical Research in Toxicology 2020, 33 (10) , 2503-2514. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.9b00438
  56. Yumeng Xue, Junmin Lee, Han-Jun Kim, Hyun-Jong Cho, Xingwu Zhou, Yaowen Liu, Peyton Tebon, Tyler Hoffman, Moyuan Qu, Haonan Ling, Xing Jiang, Zhikang Li, Shiming Zhang, Wujin Sun, Samad Ahadian, Mehmet. R. Dokmeci, KangJu Lee, Ali Khademhosseini. Rhodamine Conjugated Gelatin Methacryloyl Nanoparticles for Stable Cell Imaging. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (10) , 6908-6918. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c00802
  57. Karolina P. Valente, Afzal Suleman, Alexandre G. Brolo. Exploring Diffusion and Cellular Uptake: Charged Gold Nanoparticles in an in Vitro Breast Cancer Model. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (10) , 6992-7002. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c00872
  58. Hui Tao, Jiawei Guo, Yongchang Ma, Yang Zhao, Taotao Jin, Lijuan Gu, Yin Dou, Jinyi Liu, Houyuan Hu, Xiaoxing Xiong, Jianxiang Zhang. Luminescence Imaging of Acute Liver Injury by Biodegradable and Biocompatible Nanoprobes. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (9) , 11083-11099. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c00539
  59. Lauren Maghak, Jessica Larsen. Intact or in Pieces? A Look at How Clinically Approved, Biodegradable Block Co-Polymers Affect Blood Components. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2020, 6 (9) , 4846-4850. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00680
  60. Yuhang Huang, Arman Moini Jazani, Elliot P. Howell, Lisa A. Reynolds, Jung Kwon Oh, Matthew G. Moffitt. Microfluidic Shear Processing Control of Biological Reduction Stimuli-Responsive Polymer Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2020, 6 (9) , 5069-5083. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00896
  61. Li Wang, Shu-Ya Li, Wei Jiang, Hao Liu, Jia-Xiang Dou, Xiao-Qiu Li, Yu-Cai Wang. Polyphosphoestered Nanomedicines with Tunable Surface Hydrophilicity for Cancer Drug Delivery. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (29) , 32312-32320. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c07016
  62. Junghoon Jahng, Jin Gyeong Son, Hyunhong Kim, Jongnam Park, Tae Geol Lee, Eun Seong Lee. Direct Chemical Imaging of Ligand-Functionalized Single Nanoparticles by Photoinduced Force Microscopy. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 2020, 11 (14) , 5785-5791. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.0c01536
  63. Pranav P. Kalelkar, David M. Collard. Tricomponent Amphiphilic Poly(oligo(ethylene glycol) methacrylate) Brush-Grafted Poly(lactic acid): Synthesis, Nanoparticle Formation, and In Vitro Uptake and Release of Hydrophobic Dyes. Macromolecules 2020, 53 (11) , 4274-4283. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.macromol.9b02467
  64. Akihiro Nishiguchi, Fumiaki Shima, Smriti Singh, Mitsuru Akashi, Martin Moeller. 3D-Printing of Structure-Controlled Antigen Nanoparticles for Vaccine Delivery. Biomacromolecules 2020, 21 (6) , 2043-2048. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.9b01775
  65. Deep S. Bhattacharya, Denis Svechkarev, Aishwarya Bapat, Prathamesh Patil, Michael A. Hollingsworth, Aaron M. Mohs. Sulfation Modulates the Targeting Properties of Hyaluronic Acid to P-Selectin and CD44. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2020, 6 (6) , 3585-3598. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00115
  66. Teresa Martínez Martínez, Ángeles García Aliaga, Iván López-González, Alejandra Abella Tarazona, María José Ibáñez Ibáñez, José Luis Cenis, Luis Meseguer-Olmo, Antonio Abel Lozano-Pérez. Fluorescent DTPA-Silk Fibroin Nanoparticles Radiolabeled with 111In: A Dual Tool for Biodistribution and Stability Studies. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2020, 6 (6) , 3299-3309. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c00247
  67. Gizem Cinar, Christoph Englert, Marc Lehmann, Ivo Nischang. In Situ, Quantitative Assessment of Multifunctional Nanoscale Drug Delivery Systems in Human Serum. Analytical Chemistry 2020, 92 (11) , 7932-7939. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c01323
  68. Kira Scheffler, Nicole C. Bilz, Mandy Brueckner, Megan L. Stanifer, Steeve Boulant, Claudia Claus, Uta Reibetanz. Enhanced Uptake and Endosomal Release of LbL Microcarriers Functionalized with Reversible Fusion Proteins. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (3) , 1553-1567. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.9b01168
  69. Zhaoqing Cong, Lu Zhang, Si-Qi Ma, Kit S. Lam, Fei-Fei Yang, Yong-Hong Liao. Size-Transformable Hyaluronan Stacked Self-Assembling Peptide Nanoparticles for Improved Transcellular Tumor Penetration and Photo–Chemo Combination Therapy. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (2) , 1958-1970. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b08434
  70. Zhaoyi Sun, Chengjun Song, Chao Wang, Yiqiao Hu, Jinhui Wu. Hydrogel-Based Controlled Drug Delivery for Cancer Treatment: A Review. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2020, 17 (2) , 373-391. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b01020
  71. Srirupa Bhattacharyya, Siddhartha Sankar Ghosh. Transmembrane TNFα-Expressed Macrophage Membrane-Coated Chitosan Nanoparticles as Cancer Therapeutics. ACS Omega 2020, 5 (3) , 1572-1580. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.9b03531
  72. Lu Zhang, Qinghua Chen, Yao Ma, Jiashu Sun. Microfluidic Methods for Fabrication and Engineering of Nanoparticle Drug Delivery Systems. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (1) , 107-120. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.9b00853
  73. Yuhang Huang, Arman Moini Jazani, Elliot P. Howell, Jung Kwon Oh, Matthew G. Moffitt. Controlled Microfluidic Synthesis of Biological Stimuli-Responsive Polymer Nanoparticles. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (1) , 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b17101
  74. Chunqi Zhu, Xiaomeng Guo, Lihua Luo, Zhe Wu, Zhenyu Luo, Mengshi Jiang, Junlei Zhang, Bing Qin, Yingying Shi, Yan Lou, Yunqing Qiu, Jian You. Extremely Effective Chemoradiotherapy by Inducing Immunogenic Cell Death and Radio-Triggered Drug Release under Hypoxia Alleviation. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (50) , 46536-46547. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b16837
  75. Wei Zhang, Miaorong Yu, Ziyue Xi, Di Nie, Zhuo Dai, Jie Wang, Kun Qian, Huixian Weng, Yong Gan, Lu Xu. Cancer Cell Membrane-Camouflaged Nanorods with Endoplasmic Reticulum Targeting for Improved Antitumor Therapy. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (50) , 46614-46625. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b18388
  76. Jiayan Lang, Xiao Zhao, Yingqiu Qi, Yinlong Zhang, Xuexiang Han, Yanping Ding, Jiajing Guan, Tianjiao Ji, Ying Zhao, Guangjun Nie. Reshaping Prostate Tumor Microenvironment To Suppress Metastasis via Cancer-Associated Fibroblast Inactivation with Peptide-Assembly-Based Nanosystem. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (11) , 12357-12371. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b04857
  77. Beob Soo Kim, Hyun Jin Kim, Shigehito Osawa, Kotaro Hayashi, Kazuko Toh, Mitsuru Naito, Hyun Su Min, Yu Yi, Ick Chan Kwon, Kazunori Kataoka, Kanjiro Miyata. Dually Stabilized Triblock Copolymer Micelles with Hydrophilic Shell and Hydrophobic Interlayer for Systemic Antisense Oligonucleotide Delivery to Solid Tumor. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2019, 5 (11) , 5770-5780. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b00384
  78. Nataliya Kuplennik, Kristina Lang, Robert Steinfeld, Alejandro Sosnik. Folate Receptor α-Modified Nanoparticles for Targeting of the Central Nervous System. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (43) , 39633-39647. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b14659
  79. Prashanth K.B. Nagesh, Pallabita Chowdhury, Elham Hatami, Sonam Kumari, Vivek Kumar Kashyap, Manish K. Tripathi, Santosh Wagh, Bernd Meibohm, Subhash C. Chauhan, Meena Jaggi, Murali M. Yallapu. Cross-Linked Polyphenol-Based Drug Nano-Self-Assemblies Engineered to Blockade Prostate Cancer Senescence. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (42) , 38537-38554. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b14738
  80. Maya Al-Sid-Cheikh, Claude Rouleau, Daniel Bussolaro, Ciro A. Oliveira Ribeiro, Emilien Pelletier. Tissue Distribution of Radiolabeled 110mAg Nanoparticles in Fish: Arctic Charr (Salvelinus alpinus). Environmental Science & Technology 2019, 53 (20) , 12043-12053. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b04010
  81. Antonino Puglisi, Ece Bayir, Suna Timur, Yusuf Yagci. pH-Responsive Polymersome Microparticles as Smart Cyclodextrin-Releasing Agents. Biomacromolecules 2019, 20 (10) , 4001-4007. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.9b01083
  82. Danxuan Fang, Menghan Pi, Zhicheng Pan, Nijia Song, Xueling He, Jiehua Li, Feng Luo, Hong Tan, Zhen Li. Stable, Bioresponsive, and Macrophage-Evading Polyurethane Micelles Containing an Anionic Tripeptide Chain Extender. ACS Omega 2019, 4 (15) , 16551-16563. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.9b02326
  83. Amira A. Boseila, Hassan M. Rashed, Tamer M. Sakr, Amal Y. Abdel-Reheem, Emad B. Basalious. Superiority of DEAE-Dx-Stabilized Cationic Bile-Based Vesicles over Conventional Vesicles for Enhanced Hepatic Delivery of Daclatasvir. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2019, 16 (10) , 4190-4199. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b00517
  84. Fan Fan, Dan Tan, Sen Shang, Xingjuan Wu, Jiping Zhao, Ganqiao Ran, Xiaoyun Lu. Poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyhexanoate) Biopolyester Based Nanoparticles as NVP-BEZ235 Delivery Vehicle for Tumor Targeting Therapy. Biomacromolecules 2019, 20 (9) , 3313-3323. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.9b00505
  85. Kun Ma, Yawen Li, Zhenguo Wang, Yuzhi Chen, Xin Zhang, Chunyuan Chen, Hao Yu, Jia Huang, Zhiying Yang, Xuefei Wang, Zhuo Wang. Core–Shell Gold Nanorod@Layered Double Hydroxide Nanomaterial with Highly Efficient Photothermal Conversion and Its Application in Antibacterial and Tumor Therapy. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (33) , 29630-29640. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b10373
  86. Somiraa S. Said, Scott Campbell, Todd Hoare. Externally Addressable Smart Drug Delivery Vehicles: Current Technologies and Future Directions. Chemistry of Materials 2019, 31 (14) , 4971-4989. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.9b01798
  87. Joël Bourquin, Dedy Septiadi, Dimitri Vanhecke, Sandor Balog, Lukas Steinmetz, Miguel Spuch-Calvar, Patricia Taladriz-Blanco, Alke Petri-Fink, Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser. Reduction of Nanoparticle Load in Cells by Mitosis but Not Exocytosis. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (7) , 7759-7770. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b01604
  88. Hassan A. Albarqi, Leon H. Wong, Canan Schumann, Fahad Y. Sabei, Tetiana Korzun, Xiaoning Li, Mikkel N. Hansen, Pallavi Dhagat, Abraham S. Moses, Olena Taratula, Oleh Taratula. Biocompatible Nanoclusters with High Heating Efficiency for Systemically Delivered Magnetic Hyperthermia. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (6) , 6383-6395. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.8b06542
  89. Karolina P. Valente, Sapanbir S. Thind, Mohsen Akbari, Afzal Suleman, Alexandre G. Brolo. Collagen Type I–Gelatin Methacryloyl Composites: Mimicking the Tumor Microenvironment. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2019, 5 (6) , 2887-2898. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b00264
  90. Hongwei Ren, Yuwei He, Jianming Liang, Zhekang Cheng, Meng Zhang, Ying Zhu, Chao Hong, Jing Qin, Xinchun Xu, Jianxin Wang. Role of Liposome Size, Surface Charge, and PEGylation on Rheumatoid Arthritis Targeting Therapy. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (22) , 20304-20315. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.8b22693
  91. Barbara Albertini, Véronique Mathieu, Nunzio Iraci, Matthias Van Woensel, Aurélie Schoubben, Anna Donnadio, Silvio M.L. Greco, Maurizio Ricci, Andrea Temperini, Paolo Blasi, Nathalie Wauthoz. Tumor Targeting by Peptide-Decorated Gold Nanoparticles. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2019, 16 (6) , 2430-2444. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b00047
  92. Srinivas Abbina, Usama Abbasi, Arshdeep Gill, Kendrew Wong, Manu Thomas Kalathottukaren, Jayachandran N. Kizhakkedathu. Design of Safe Nanotherapeutics for the Excretion of Excess Systemic Toxic Iron. ACS Central Science 2019, 5 (5) , 917-926. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.9b00284
  93. Alexander M. Cryer, Cheuk Chan, Anastasia Eftychidou, Christy Maksoudian, Mohan Mahesh, Teresa D. Tetley, Alan C. Spivey, Andrew J. Thorley. Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Gold Nanoconjugates for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (18) , 16336-16346. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b02986
  94. Haley R. Phillips, Zachary P. Tolstyka, Bryan C. Hall, Joseph K. Hexum, Perry B. Hackett, Theresa M. Reineke. Glycopolycation–DNA Polyplex Formulation N/P Ratio Affects Stability, Hemocompatibility, and in Vivo Biodistribution. Biomacromolecules 2019, 20 (4) , 1530-1544. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.8b01704
  95. Mohini Kamra, Bappa Maiti, Akanksha Dixit, Anjali A. Karande, Santanu Bhattacharya. Tumor Chemosensitization through Oncogene Knockdown Mediated by Unique α-Tocopherylated Cationic Geminis. Biomacromolecules 2019, 20 (4) , 1555-1566. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.8b01751
  96. Anitha T. Simon, Deepanjalee Dutta, Arun Chattopadhyay, Siddhartha Sankar Ghosh. Copper Nanocluster-Doped Luminescent Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles for Antibacterial and Antibiofilm Applications. ACS Omega 2019, 4 (3) , 4697-4706. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b03076
  97. Armin Tahmasbi Rad, Ching-Wen Chen, Wafa Aresh, Yan Xia, Ping-Shan Lai, Mu-Ping Nieh. Combinational Effects of Active Targeting, Shape, and Enhanced Permeability and Retention for Cancer Theranostic Nanocarriers. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2019, 11 (11) , 10505-10519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.8b21609
  98. Mikhail Durymanov, Christian Kroll, Anastasia Permyakova, Joshua Reineke. Role of Endocytosis in Nanoparticle Penetration of 3D Pancreatic Cancer Spheroids. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2019, 16 (3) , 1074-1082. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.8b01078
  99. Guillaume Thomas, Julien Boudon, Lionel Maurizi, Mathieu Moreau, Paul Walker, Isabelle Severin, Alexandra Oudot, Christine Goze, Sophie Poty, Jean-Marc Vrigneaud, Fréderic Demoisson, Franck Denat, François Brunotte, Nadine Millot. Innovative Magnetic Nanoparticles for PET/MRI Bimodal Imaging. ACS Omega 2019, 4 (2) , 2637-2648. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b03283
  100. Qiao Jin, Yongyan Deng, Xiaohui Chen, Jian Ji. Rational Design of Cancer Nanomedicine for Simultaneous Stealth Surface and Enhanced Cellular Uptake. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (2) , 954-977. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.8b07746
Load more citations
  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Nanoparticle platforms for drug delivery. Polymeric nanoparticle platforms are characterized by their physicochemical structures, including polymerosome, solid polymeric nanoparticle, nanoshell, dendrimer, polymeric micelle, and polymer−drug conjugates.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Biodistribution and clearance of polymeric nanoparticles. Tissue defects, stealth properties, targeting, and the size of the nanoparticles are major factors affecting the biodistribution and clearance of polymeric nanoparticles.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 104 other publications.

    1. 1
      Zhang, L. Nanoparticles in Medicine: Therapeutic Applications and Developments Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 2008 83 761 769
    2. 2
      Moghimi, S. M.; Hunter, A. C. Poloxamers and poloxamines in nanoparticle engineering and experimental medicine Trends in biotechnology 2000 18 412 420
    3. 3
      Farokhzad, O. C.; Langer, R. Nanomedicine: Developing smarter therapeutic and diagnostic modalities Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2006 58 1456 1459
    4. 4
      Shaffer, C. Nanomedicine transforms drug delivery Drug Discovery Today 2005 10 1581 1582
    5. 5
      Alexis, F. New frontiers in nanotechnology for cancer treatment Urol. Oncol. 2008 26 74 85
    6. 6
      Safra, T. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (doxil): Reduced clinical cardiotoxicity in patients reaching or exceeding cumulative doses of 500 mg/m2 Ann. Oncol. 2000 11 1029 1033
    7. 7
      Fassas, A.; Buffels, R.; Kaloyannidis, P.; Anagnostopoulos, A. Safety of high-dose liposomal daunorubicin (daunoxome) for refractory or relapsed acute myeloblastic leukaemia Br. Jo. Haematol. 2003 122 161 163
    8. 8
      James, N. D. Liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil): An effective new treatment for Kaposi’s sarcoma in AIDS Clin. Oncol. 1994 6 294 296
    9. 9
      Doxil receives FDA market clearance. AIDS Patient Care and STDs , 1996; Vol. 10, p 135.
    10. 10
      Muggia, F. M. Doxil in breast cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 1998 16 811 812
    11. 11
      Food and Drug Administration FDA approves DaunoXome as first-line therapy for Kaposi’s sarcoma. Journal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care 1996 2 50 51
    12. 12
      DaunoXome approved. AIDS Patient Care and STDs , 1996; Vol. 10, p 263.
    13. 13
      Schluep, T. Preclinical efficacy of the camptothecin-polymer conjugate IT-101 in multiple cancer models Clin. Cancer Res. 2006 12 1606 1614
    14. 14
      Kim, D. W. Multicenter phase II trial of Genexol-PM, a novel Cremophor-free, polymeric micelle formulation of paclitaxel, with cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer Ann. Oncol. 2007 18 2009 2014
    15. 15
      Lee, K. S. Multicenter phase II trial of Genexol-PM, a Cremophor-free, polymeric micelle formulation of paclitaxel, in patients with metastatic breast cancer Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2008 108 241 250
    16. 16
      Pridgen, E. M.; Langer, R.; Farokhzad, O. C. Biodegradable, polymeric nanoparticle delivery systems for cancer therapy Nanomedicine (London, U.K.) 2007 2 669 680
    17. 17
      Moghimi, S. M. Recent developments in polymeric nanoparticle engineering and their applications in experimental and clinical oncology Anti-Cancer Agents Med. Chem. 2006 6 553 561
    18. 18
      Avgoustakis, K. Pegylated poly(lactide) and poly(lactide-co-glycolide) nanoparticles: Preparation, properties and possible applications in drug delivery Curr. Drug Delivery 2004 1 321 333
    19. 19
      Otsuka, H.; Nagasaki, Y.; Kataoka, K. PEGylated nanoparticles for biological and pharmaceutical applications Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2003 55 403 419
    20. 20
      Romberg, B.; Hennink, W. E.; Storm, G. Sheddable coatings for long-circulating nanoparticles Pharm. Res. 2008 25 55 71
    21. 21
      Moghimi, S. M.; Hunter, A. C.; Murray, J. C. Long-circulating and target-specific nanoparticles: Theory to practice Pharmacol. Rev. 2001 53 283 318
    22. 22
      Vittaz, M. Effect of PEO surface density on long-circulating PLA-PEO nanoparticles which are very low complement activators Biomaterials 1996 17 1575 1581
    23. 23
      Owens, D. E., III; Peppas, N. A. Opsonization, biodistribution, and pharmacokinetics of polymeric nanoparticles Int. J. Pharm. 2006 307 93 102
    24. 24
      Predescu, D.; Palade, G. E. Plasmalemmal vesicles represent the large pore system of continuous microvascular endothelium Am. J. Physiol. 1993 265 H725 H733
    25. 25
      Simionescu, M.; Simionescu, N.; Palade, G. E. Morphometric data on the endothelium of blood capillaries J. Cell Biol. 1974 60 128 152
    26. 26
      Brigham, K. L. Estimations of permeability properties of pulmonary capillaries (continuous endothelium) Physiologist 1980 23 44 46
    27. 27
      Ludatscher, R. M.; Stehbens, W. E. Vesicles of fenestrated and non-fenestrated endothelium Z. Zellforsch. Mikrosk. Anat. 1969 97 169 177
    28. 28
      Ryan, U. S.; Ryan, J. W.; Smith, D. S.; Winkler, H. Fenestrated endothelium of the adrenal gland: Freeze-fracture studies Tissue Cell 1975 7 181 190
    29. 29
      Braet, F. Contribution of high-resolution correlative imaging techniques in the study of the liver sieve in three-dimensions Microsc. Res. Tech. 2007 70 230 242
    30. 30
      Eisenstein, R. Angiogenesis in arteries: review Pharmacol. Ther. 1991 49 1 19
    31. 31
      Folkman, J. What is the role of endothelial cells in angiogenesis Laboratory Investigation: A Journal of Technical Methods and Pathology 1984 51 601 604
    32. 32
      Folkman, J. Tumor angiogenesis: Therapeutic implications N. Engl. J. Med. 1971 285 1182 1186
    33. 33
      Folkman, J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease Nat. Med. 1995 1 27 31
    34. 34
      Folkman, J.; Ingber, D. Inhibition of angiogenesis Semin. Cancer Biol. 1992 3 89 96
    35. 35
      Kerbel, R.; Folkman, J. Clinical translation of angiogenesis inhibitors Nat. Rev. 2002 2 727 739
    36. 36
      Maeda, H. The enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect in tumor vasculature: The key role of tumor-selective macromolecular drug targeting Adv. Enzyme Regul. 2001 41 189 207
    37. 37
      Greish, K. Enhanced permeability and retention of macromolecular drugs in solid tumors: A royal gate for targeted anticancer nanomedicines J. Drug Targeting 2007 15 457 464
    38. 38
      Hobbs, S. K. Regulation of transport pathways in tumor vessels: Role of tumor type and microenvironment Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998 95 4607 4612
    39. 39
      Folkman, J. Fundamental concepts of the angiogenic process Curr. Mol. Med. 2003 3 643 651
    40. 40
      Lijnen, H. R. Angiogenesis and obesity Cardiovasc. Res. 2008 78 286 293
    41. 41
      Chetta, A.; Zanini, A.; Torre, O.; Olivieri, D. Vascular remodelling and angiogenesis in asthma: Morphological aspects and pharmacological modulation Inflammation Allergy Drug Targets 2007 6 41 45
    42. 42
      Norrby, K.; Jakobsson, A.; Simonsen, M.; Sorbo, J. Increased angiogenesis in diabetes Experientia 1990 46 856 860
    43. 43
      Martin, A.; Komada, M. R.; Sane, D. C. Abnormal angiogenesis in diabetes mellitus Med. Res. Rev. 2003 23 117 145
    44. 44
      Kirk, S.; Frank, J. A.; Karlik, S. Angiogenesis in multiple sclerosis: Is it good, bad or an epiphenomenon J. Neurol. Sci. 2004 217 125 130
    45. 45
      Siegel, R. C. Angiogenesis in progressive systemic sclerosis N. Engl. J. Med. 1972 286 217
    46. 46
      Wu, A. M.; Senter, P. D. Arming antibodies: Prospects and challenges for immunoconjugates Nat. Biotechnol. 2005 23 1137 1146
    47. 47
      Gref, R. Biodegradable long-circulating polymeric nanospheres Science 1994 263 1600 1603
    48. 48
      Ben-Shabat, S.; Kumar, N.; Domb, A. J. PEG-PLA block copolymer as potential drug carrier: Preparation and characterization Macromol. Biosci. 2006 6 1019 1025
    49. 49
      Bazile, D. Stealth Me.PEG-PLA nanoparticles avoid uptake by the mononuclear phagocytes system J. Pharm. Sci. 1995 84 493 498
    50. 50
      Peracchia, M. T. Stealth PEGylated polycyanoacrylate nanoparticles for intravenous administration and splenic targeting J. Controlled Release 1999 60 121 128
    51. 51
      Peracchia, M. T. Visualization of in vitro protein-rejecting properties of PEGylated stealth polycyanoacrylate nanoparticles Biomaterials 1999 20 1269 1275
    52. 52
      Li, Y. PEGylated PLGA nanoparticles as protein carriers: Synthesis, preparation and biodistribution in rats J. Controlled Release 2001 71 203 211
    53. 53
      Gref, R. ‘Stealth’ corona-core nanoparticles surface modified by polyethylene glycol (PEG): Influences of the corona (PEG chain length and surface density) and of the core composition on phagocytic uptake and plasma protein adsorption Colloids Surf. 2000 18 301 313
    54. 54
      Scott, M. D.; Murad, K. L. Cellular camouflage: Fooling the immune system with polymers Curr. Pharm. Des. 1998 4 423 438
    55. 55
      Francis, G. E.; Delgado, C.; Fisher, D.; Malik, F.; Agrawal, A. K. Polyethylene glycol modification: Relevance of improved methodology to tumour targeting J. Drug Targeting 1996 3 321 340
    56. 56
      Nagayama, S.; Ogawara, K.; Fukuoka, Y.; Higaki, K.; Kimura, T. Time-dependent changes in opsonin amount associated on nanoparticles alter their hepatic uptake characteristics Int. J. Pharm. 2007 342 215 221
    57. 57
      Panagi, Z. Effect of dose on the biodistribution and pharmacokinetics of PLGA and PLGA-mPEG nanoparticles Int. J. Pharm. 2001 221 143 152
    58. 58
      Beletsi, A.; Panagi, Z.; Avgoustakis, K. Biodistribution properties of nanoparticles based on mixtures of PLGA with PLGA-PEG diblock copolymers Int. J. Pharm. 2005 298 233 241
    59. 59
      Fang, C. In vivo tumor targeting of tumor necrosis factor-α-loaded stealth nanoparticles: Effect of MePEG molecular weight and particle size Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2006 27 27 36
    60. 60
      Kommareddy, S.; Amiji, M. Biodistribution and pharmacokinetic analysis of long-circulating thiolated gelatin nanoparticles following systemic administration in breast cancer-bearing mice J. Pharm. Sci. 2007 96 397 407
    61. 61
      Kim, T. Y. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of Genexol-PM, a cremophor-free, polymeric micelle-formulated paclitaxel, in patients with advanced malignancies Clin. Cancer Res. 2004 10 3708 3716
    62. 62
      Kim, S. C. In vivo evaluation of polymeric micellar paclitaxel formulation: Toxicity and efficacy J. Controlled Release 2001 72 191 202
    63. 63
      Campone, M. Phase I and pharmacokinetic trial of AP5346, a DACH-platinum-polymer conjugate, administered weekly for three out of every 4 weeks to advanced solid tumor patients Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2007 60 523 533
    64. 64
      Rice, J. R.; Gerberich, J. L.; Nowotnik, D. P.; Howell, S. B. Preclinical efficacy and pharmacokinetics of AP5346, a novel diaminocyclohexane-platinum tumor-targeting drug delivery system Clin. Cancer Res. 2006 12 2248 2254
    65. 65
      Ascierto, P. A. Pegylated arginine deiminase treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: Results from phase I and II studies J. Clin. Oncol. 2005 23 7660 7668
    66. 66
      Ensor, C. M.; Holtsberg, F. W.; Bomalaski, J. S.; Clark, M. A. Pegylated arginine deiminase (ADI-SS PEG20,000 mw) inhibits human melanomas and hepatocellular carcinomas in vitro and in vivo Cancer Res. 2002 62 5443 5450
    67. 67
      Posey, J. A., III Phase 1 study of weekly polyethylene glycol-camptothecin in patients with advanced solid tumors and lymphomas Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 7866 7871
    68. 68
      Conover, C. D.; Greenwald, R. B.; Pendri, A.; Gilbert, C. W.; Shum, K. L. Camptothecin delivery systems: Enhanced efficacy and tumor accumulation of camptothecin following its conjugation to polyethylene glycol via a glycine linker Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 1998 42 407 414
    69. 69
      Danson, S. Phase I dose escalation and pharmacokinetic study of pluronic polymer-bound doxorubicin (SP1049C) in patients with advanced cancer Br. J. Cancer 2004 90 2085 2091
    70. 70
      Schluep, T.; Cheng, J.; Khin, K. T.; Davis, M. E. Pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of the camptothecin-polymer conjugate IT-101 in rats and tumor-bearing mice Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2006 57 654 662
    71. 71
      Homsi, J. Phase I trial of poly-l-glutamate camptothecin (CT-2106) administered weekly in patients with advanced solid malignancies Clin. Cancer Res. 2007 13 5855 5861
    72. 72
      Boddy, A. V. A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of paclitaxel poliglumex (XYOTAX), investigating both 3-weekly and 2-weekly schedules Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 7834 7840
    73. 73
      Li, C. Biodistribution of paclitaxel and poly(l-glutamic acid)-paclitaxel conjugate in mice with ovarian OCa-1 tumor Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2000 46 416 422
    74. 74
      Sabbatini, P. Phase II study of CT-2103 in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2004 22 4523 4531
    75. 75
      Danhauser-Riedl, S. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic trial of dextran conjugated doxorubicin (AD-70, DOX-OXD) Invest. New Drugs 1993 11 187 195
    76. 76
      Soepenberg, O. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of DE-310 in patients with advanced solid tumors Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 703 711
    77. 77
      Meerum Terwogt, J. M. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of PNU166945, a novel water-soluble polymer-conjugated prodrug of paclitaxel Anti-Cancer Drugs 2001 12 315 323
    78. 78
      Vasey, P. A. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of PK1 [N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide copolymer doxorubicin]: First member of a new class of chemotherapeutic agents-drug-polymer conjugates. Cancer Research Campaign Phase I/II Committee Clin. Cancer Res. 1999 5 83 94
    79. 79
      Matsumura, Y. Phase I clinical trial and pharmacokinetic evaluation of NK911, a micelle-encapsulated doxorubicin Br. J. Cancer 2004 91 1775 1781
    80. 80
      Hopewel, J. W.; Duncan, R.; Wilding, D.; Chakrabarti, K. Preclinical evaluation of the cardiotoxicity of PK2: A novel HPMA copolymer-doxorubicin-galactosamine conjugate antitumour agent Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 2001 20 461 470
    81. 81
      Rijcken, C. J.; Snel, C. J.; Schiffelers, R. M.; van Nostrum, C. F.; Hennink, W. E. Hydrolysable core-crosslinked thermosensitive polymeric micelles: Synthesis, characterisation and in vivo studies Biomaterials 2007 28 5581 5593
    82. 82
      Shenoy, D.; Little, S.; Langer, R.; Amiji, M. Poly(ethylene oxide)-modified poly(β-amino ester) nanoparticles as a pH-sensitive system for tumor-targeted delivery of hydrophobic drugs: Part 2. In vivo distribution and tumor localization studies Pharm. Res. 2005 22 2107 2114
    83. 83
      Takeoka, S. Rolling properties of rGPIbα-conjugated phospholipid vesicles with different membrane flexibilities on vWf surface under flow conditions Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2002 296 765 770
    84. 84
      Sun, X. An assessment of the effects of shell cross-linked nanoparticle size, core composition, and surface PEGylation on in vivo biodistribution Biomacromolecules 2005 6 2541 2554
    85. 85
      Mosqueira, V. C. Relationship between complement activation, cellular uptake and surface physicochemical aspects of novel PEG-modified nanocapsules Biomaterials 2001 22 2967 2979
    86. 86
      Gulyaev, A. E. Significant transport of doxorubicin into the brain with polysorbate 80-coated nanoparticles Pharm. Res. 1999 16 1564 1569
    87. 87
      Kreuter, J. Nanoparticulate systems for brain delivery of drugs Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2001 47 65 81
    88. 88
      Yamamoto, Y.; Nagasaki, Y.; Kato, Y.; Sugiyama, Y.; Kataoka, K. Long-circulating poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(d,l-lactide) block copolymer micelles with modulated surface charge J. Controlled Release 2001 77 27 38
    89. 89
      Freeman, A. I.; Mayhew, E. Targeted drug delivery Cancer 1986 58 573 583
    90. 90
      Emerich, D. F.; Thanos, C. G. Targeted nanoparticle-based drug delivery and diagnosis J. Drug Targeting 2007 15 163 183
    91. 91
      van Vlerken, L. E.; Vyas, T. K.; Amiji, M. M. Poly(ethylene glycol)-modified nanocarriers for tumor-targeted and intracellular delivery Pharm. Res. 2007 24 1405 1414
    92. 92
      Peppas, N. A. Intelligent therapeutics: Biomimetic systems and nanotechnology in drug delivery Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2004 56 1529 1531
    93. 93
      Schrama, D.; Reisfeld, R. A.; Becker, J. C. Antibody targeted drugs as cancer therapeutics Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2006 5 147 159
    94. 94
      Weiner, L. M.; Adams, G. P. New approaches to antibody therapy Oncogene 2000 19 6144 6151
    95. 95
      Clauss, M. A.; Jain, R. K. Interstitial transport of rabbit and sheep antibodies in normal and neoplastic tissues Cancer Res. 1990 50 3487 3492
    96. 96
      Graff, C. P.; Wittrup, K. D. Theoretical analysis of antibody targeting of tumor spheroids: Importance of dosage for penetration, and affinity for retention Cancer Res. 2003 63 1288 1296
    97. 97
      Bartlett, D. W.; Su, H.; Hildebrandt, I. J.; Weber, W. A.; Davis, M. E. 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 15554
    98. 98
      Heidel, J. D. Administration in non-human primates of escalating intravenous doses of targeted nanoparticles containing ribonucleotide reductase subunit M2 siRNA Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007 104 5715 5721
    99. 99
      Scott, J. K.; Smith, G. P. Searching for peptide ligands with an epitope library Science 1990 249 386 390
    100. 100
      Gopinath, S. C. Methods developed for SELEX Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2007 387 171 182
    101. 101
      Cheng, J. Formulation of functionalized PLGA-PEG nanoparticles for in vivo targeted drug delivery Biomaterials 2007 28 869 876
    102. 102
      Farokhzad, O. C. Nanoparticle-aptamer bioconjugates: A new approach for targeting prostate cancer cells Cancer Res. 2004 64 7668 7672
    103. 103
      Farokhzad, O. C. Targeted nanoparticle-aptamer bioconjugates for cancer chemotherapy in vivo Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006 103 6315 6320
    104. 104
      Gu, F. Precise engineering of targeted nanoparticles by using self-assembled biointegrated block copolymers Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008 105 2586 2591

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect