Jonathan S Rink1, Michael P Plebanek, Sushant Tripathy, C Shad Thaxton. 1. aDepartment of Urology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University bDriskill Graduate Program in the Life Sciences, Northwestern University cRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois dInternational Institute for Nanotechnology (IIN), Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois eInstitute for Bionanotechnology and Medicine (IBNAM), Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the most recent preclinical and clinical advancements in therapeutic nano-oncology. RECENT FINDINGS: First-generation nanotherapies are well tolerated in humans and evidence shows that they are efficacious, while at the same time reducing the burden of side-effects. Most of these therapies are not specifically targeted, but take advantage of enhanced passive accumulation within tumors to preferentially deliver chemotherapies that demonstrate off-target toxicities when administered as free drugs. Also, actively targeted nanotherapies are entering the clinical arena and preliminary data are encouraging. Finally, a number of exciting preclinical developments in nanotechnology provide clear evidence that nanotherapies will continue to enter the clinic and will have a significant impact in oncology. SUMMARY: A number of intriguing nanoparticle therapies are being tested in preclinical and clinical trials. Nanoparticles with increasing molecular sophistication, specific targeting properties, and unique mechanisms of action will find their way to the clinic. Certainly, nanoparticle-based therapies will be increasingly represented in drug development pipelines, and will continue to provide efficacious and well tolerated drug options for patients with cancer.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the most recent preclinical and clinical advancements in therapeutic nano-oncology. RECENT FINDINGS: First-generation nanotherapies are well tolerated in humans and evidence shows that they are efficacious, while at the same time reducing the burden of side-effects. Most of these therapies are not specifically targeted, but take advantage of enhanced passive accumulation within tumors to preferentially deliver chemotherapies that demonstrate off-target toxicities when administered as free drugs. Also, actively targeted nanotherapies are entering the clinical arena and preliminary data are encouraging. Finally, a number of exciting preclinical developments in nanotechnology provide clear evidence that nanotherapies will continue to enter the clinic and will have a significant impact in oncology. SUMMARY: A number of intriguing nanoparticle therapies are being tested in preclinical and clinical trials. Nanoparticles with increasing molecular sophistication, specific targeting properties, and unique mechanisms of action will find their way to the clinic. Certainly, nanoparticle-based therapies will be increasingly represented in drug development pipelines, and will continue to provide efficacious and well tolerated drug options for patients with cancer.
Authors: Warefta Hasan; Kevin Chu; Anuradha Gullapalli; Stuart S Dunn; Elizabeth M Enlow; J Christopher Luft; Shaomin Tian; Mary E Napier; Patrick D Pohlhaus; Jason P Rolland; Joseph M DeSimone Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2011-12-21 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Robert L Coleman; William E Brady; D Scott McMeekin; Peter G Rose; John T Soper; Samuel S Lentz; James S Hoffman; Mark S Shahin Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Kaylin M McMahon; R Kannan Mutharasan; Sushant Tripathy; Dorina Veliceasa; Mariana Bobeica; Dale K Shumaker; Andrea J Luthi; Brian T Helfand; Hossein Ardehali; Chad A Mirkin; Olga Volpert; C Shad Thaxton Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2011-02-14 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Mian M K Shahzad; Lingegowda S Mangala; Hee Dong Han; Chunhua Lu; Justin Bottsford-Miller; Masato Nishimura; Edna M Mora; Jeong-Won Lee; Rebecca L Stone; Chad V Pecot; Duangmani Thanapprapasr; Ju-Won Roh; Puja Gaur; Maya P Nair; Yun-Yong Park; Nirupama Sabnis; Michael T Deavers; Ju-Seog Lee; Lee M Ellis; Gabriel Lopez-Berestein; Walter J McConathy; Laszlo Prokai; Andras G Lacko; Anil K Sood Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Mark E Davis; Jonathan E Zuckerman; Chung Hang J Choi; David Seligson; Anthony Tolcher; Christopher A Alabi; Yun Yen; Jeremy D Heidel; Antoni Ribas Journal: Nature Date: 2010-03-21 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Danielle M Valcourt; Jenna Harris; Rachel S Riley; Megan Dang; Jianxin Wang; Emily S Day Journal: Nano Res Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 8.897
Authors: Neal Shah; Afroz S Mohammad; Pushkar Saralkar; Samuel A Sprowls; Schuyler D Vickers; Devin John; Rachel M Tallman; Brandon P Lucke-Wold; Katherine E Jarrell; Mark Pinti; Richard L Nolan; Paul R Lockman Journal: Pharmacol Res Date: 2018-03-28 Impact factor: 7.658