Heterogeneous toroidal-spiral particles (TSPs) were generated by polymer droplet sedimentation, interaction, and cross-linking. TSPs provide a platform for encapsulation and release of multiple compounds of different sizes and physicochemical properties. As a model system, we demonstrate the encapsulation and independently controlled release of an anti-VEGFR-2 antibody and irinotecan for the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme. The anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was released from the TS channels and its binding to HUVECs was confirmed by confocal microscopy and flow cytometry, suggesting active antibody encapsulation and release. Irinotecan, a small molecule drug, was released from the dense polymer matrix of poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (MW ~ 700 g/mol; PEGDA 700). Released irinotecan inhibited the proliferation of U251 malignant glioma cells. Since the therapeutic compounds are released through different pathways, specifically diffusion through the polymer matrix versus TS channels, the release rate can be controlled independently through the design of the structure and material of particle components.
Heterogeneous toroidal-spiral particles (TSPs) were generated by polymer droplet sedimentation, interaction, and cross-linking. TSPs provide a platform for encapsulation and release of multiple compounds of different sizes and physicochemical properties. As a model system, we demonstrate the encapsulation and independently controlled release of an anti-VEGFR-2 antibody and irinotecan for the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme. The anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was released from the TS channels and its binding to HUVECs was confirmed by confocal microscopy and flow cytometry, suggesting active antibody encapsulation and release. Irinotecan, a small molecule drug, was released from the dense polymer matrix of poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (MW ~ 700 g/mol; PEGDA 700). Released irinotecan inhibited the proliferation of U251malignant glioma cells. Since the therapeutic compounds are released through different pathways, specifically diffusion through the polymer matrix versus TS channels, the release rate can be controlled independently through the design of the structure and material of particle components.
Treatment of complex
diseases often requires the simultaneous delivery
of multiple therapeutic agents at optimum administration rates for
a synergistic effect.[1] The goal of developing
vehicles to codeliver multiple therapeutic agents is a significant
driver of research.[2−4] Manipulating the release of multiple therapeutic
agents independently of one another is beneficial for drug synergy.
However, this can be a difficult task when the therapeutic agents
have distinct physicochemical properties, such as size, hydrophobicity,
and stability.[5] For example, many typical
small molecule drugs used for chemotherapy are hydrophobic, while
larger proteins and peptides are hydrophilic. Proteins must be protected
from degradation and denaturing before they reach the target site.
These two types of therapeutic agents require independent encapsulation
and dosing techniques. Therefore, it is desirable to design and synthesize
novel heterogeneous particles that are able to encapsulate and release
multiple compounds. Furthermore, the methods should have the flexibility
to deal with a wide spectrum of physicochemical properties and independently
tunable release rates of the compounds.We previously developed
a method for self-assembling heterogeneous
toroidal-spiral particles (TSPs) that contributed a tunable internal
structure, in addition to a polymeric matrix, to provide a second
pathway for drug encapsulation and release.[6] Short chain PEGDA was chosen as the material of the main polymer
matrix, which only allows diffusion of small molecule drugs and confines
macromolecules to the intricate spiral channels.[7−12] Encapsulated therapeutic macromolecules are released only by diffusion
through the TS channels.[6] PEG has been
approved by the FDA for a variety of biomedical applications and PEGDA-based
hydrogel has been widely used in tissue engineering.[13,14] In this study, we apply TSPs to encapsulate and independently release
anti-VEGFR-2 antibody and irinotecan, which is a drug combination
currently used for treating glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). The current
size of the TSP is millimeter scale, which can be used for postsurgical
implant or administered using catheters.GBM is the most aggressive
form of primary brain tumor and is ultimately
fatal.[15] Standard treatments include surgical
removal of the tumor, postsurgical chemotherapy, and radiotherapy
to prevent recurrence.[16] However, recurrence
is probable, with a median survival time of approximately one year.[17] Through the use of chemotherapy following resection,
recurrence of tumors can be delayed by inhibiting proliferation of
metastatic cells not excised. Several implanted systems have been
designed to locally deliver chemotherapeutic agents directly to the
brain, bypassing difficulties of crossing the blood–brain barrier
by systemic administration.[18] The postsurgical
implantation, at the site of neoplasm, of biodegradable polymeric
wafers (Gliadel) incorporating a single anticancer drug, carmustine,
was approved by the FDA in 1996 to prevent GBM recurrence.[19] However, treatment of complex diseases usually
requires synergistic delivery of multiple compounds to shut down multiple
disease pathways. Addition to anticancer drugs, such as irinotecan,
growth factor inhibitors has recently attracted attention in inhibiting
malignant gliomas.[20] Vascular endothelial
growth factor (VEGF) promotes angiogenesis and is highly up-regulated
in GBM.[21,22] The development of new vasculature at the
tumor site supplies the demand for nutrients by malignant cells and
plays a vital role in tumor growth of new metastatic foci. VEGF binds
to receptors that are selectively expressed on endothelial cells:
VEGFR-1 (flt-2), VEGFR-2 (flk-1), and VEGFR-3 (flt-4). It has been
well established that VEGFR-2 is primarily responsible for the angiogenic
effects of VEGF.[23] Many reports have documented
that the administration of anti-VEGF antibodies, along with the anticancer
drug irinotecan, leads to prohibit GBM progression.[24−27]The TSP can incorporate
small molecule drugs into the dense polymer
matrix and encapsulate macromolecules into the TS channels. Therefore,
TSPs allow for multiple compounds to release through independent pathways
and the release rates of the compounds can be manipulated separately
to reach drug synergy. The release of small molecule drug from the
main polymer matrix can be controlled by the mesh size of the polymer,
which is affected by polymer concentration and cross-link density.[28,29] The TS channels, through which the macromolecules diffuse, can be
a different polymeric phase whose material properties can be adjusted
independently. In addition, the structure (such as length and width)
of the TS channels can be varied to further fine-tune release rates
of the macromolecules. Moreover, formation of TSPs is through a single-step
process of drop interaction and solidification in an aqueous solution,
which represents benign conditions to preserve sensitive protein structure
and functionality. In this paper, we report the release of both irinotecan
and anti-VEGFR-2 antibody from the same TSP. The in vitro experiments
showed that the released anti-VEGFR-2 antibody has receptor-specific
binding with the HUVEC membrane, which proves that the bioactivity
of the protein has been preserved during the encapsulation and release.
The release of irinotecan onto U251malignant glioma cells prevented
their proliferation for approximately one week at 300 μg drug
loading in 20 particles. We expect the release of the two compounds
from the same TSPs would simultaneously shut down the angiogenic pathway
and disrupt DNA replication to hinder recurrence of GBM.
Experimental Section
Materials and Reagents
Irgacure
2959 (2-hydroxy-1-[4-(2-hydroxyethoxy)
phenyl]-2-methyl-1-propanone; I-2959) was kindly provided by Ciba
Specialty Chemicals (Basel, Switzerland). PEGDA 700, alginic acid
sodium salt from brown algae (low viscosity), glycerol, paraformaldehyde,
ethanol, bisbenzimide H 33258, Dulbecco’s phosphate buffered
saline (DPBS) with CaCl2 and MgCl2, fetal bovine
serum (FBS), calcium chloride hexahydrate, sodium azide, and irinotecan
hydrochloride were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Fluorescence
activated cell sorter (FACS) buffer was prepared as 1% PBS, 5% FBS,
and 0.05% 3 M NaN3. HumanU251malignant glioma (U251 MG)
cells were a kind gift from Dr. Lena Al-Harthi at Rush University
and were cultured in DMEM (Corning, NY) supplemented with 5% FBS.
HUVECs and EBM-2 medium along with supplements and growth factors
for the cells were purchased from Lonza (Walkersville, MD). Alexa
Fluor 647 conjugated mouse antihuman CD309 (VEGFR-2) antibody and
Alexa Fluor 647mouse IgG1 (κ isotype control; FC) antibody
were purchased from Biolegend (San Diego, CA). MTS cell proliferation
assay was purchased from Promega (Madison, WI). Water used in all
experiments was deionized to 18.2 MΩ·cm (Nanopure II, Barnstead,
Dubuque, IA). All chemicals were purchased at standard grades and
used as received.
TSP Formation
TSPs were prepared
by solidifying liquid
droplet structure during droplet sedimentation and interaction through
a stratified aqueous solution, modifying the procedure that we have
previously reported.[6,30] Briefly, a polymeric drop, consisting
of low molecular weight PEGDA and irinotecan, was dropped into a bulk
solution of similar viscosity. This was followed by the introduction
of a second drop consisting of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody solution with
or without sodium alginate (1% by weight). Specifically, the leading
drop phase contained 83% PEGDA 700, 14% DMSO, 3% I-2959 by weight,
and 3 mM irinotecan. The trailing drop phase consisted of 0.24 μM
anti-VEGFR-2 antibody, 45% glycerol, and 55% PBS buffer by weight.
To further hinder the release of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody, sodium alginate
of 1% in the final solution was added to the trailing drop. The top
layer of the bulk solution consisted of 50% glycerol, 40% DI water,
and 10% EtOH by weight, while the bottom layer of the bulk solution
consisted of 60% glycerol, 30% DI water, and 10% CaCl2 by
weight. The high viscosity of the bulk solution, which reduces molecular
diffusivity and suppresses currents, helps to maintain the salt gradient.
All solutions are miscible and the interfacial tension was negligible
compared to viscous forces. During drop sedimentation, the nonlinear
interaction of the drops causes drop catch-up and recirculation of
entrained liquid which results in the well-defined toroidal-spiral
channel.[6] When the droplets evolved into
the appropriate structures (observed through the high-speed camera),
the PEGDA droplet was polymerized by high-intensity UV light exposure
(∼10 W/cm2). The resulting particles settled further
through the bottom layer of the bulk solution, where CaCl2 ionically cross-linked the alginate contained in the trailing drop.
Finally, the particles were rinsed with DI water and placed into FACS
buffer at pH 7.4 for in vitro release measurements at 37 °C.Droplet volume (8.5 μL) was controlled by using syringe pumps.
Two needles were placed next to each other with the tip of one needle
positioned slightly lower (Figure 1a). This
allowed for both drops to fall from the same needle tip. With the
two needles close enough, the secondary drop vertically aligned with
the leading drop ensuring the axisymmetric structure of the TSPs.
The structural evolution of the TSPs was recorded using a high-speed
camera (Allied Vision Technology, Prosilica GX 1050, Germany) with
a magnification lens (MLG-10X, Computar, Commack, NY). Representative
evolutionary stages of the TSP formation by droplet interaction and
sedimentation are presented in Figure 1b.
Figure 1
Formation
of TSP by droplet interaction, sedimentation, and cross-linking.
(a) Schematic drawing of TSP formation. When the desired TSP structure
(such as TS channel length and position) was observed, PEGDA was rapidly
cross-linked by UV light, which prevented further progression of the
channels. The resulting particle settled further through the bottom
layer of the bulk solution, where CaCl2 ionically cross-linked
the alginate contained in the trailing drop. (b) High speed camera
images depicting the evolutionary stages of TSP formation. The radius
of the fused drops was 1 mm.
Formation
of TSP by droplet interaction, sedimentation, and cross-linking.
(a) Schematic drawing of TSP formation. When the desired TSP structure
(such as TS channel length and position) was observed, PEGDA was rapidly
cross-linked by UV light, which prevented further progression of the
channels. The resulting particle settled further through the bottom
layer of the bulk solution, where CaCl2 ionically cross-linked
the alginate contained in the trailing drop. (b) High speed camera
images depicting the evolutionary stages of TSP formation. The radius
of the fused drops was 1 mm.
Release of Anti-VEGFR-2 Antibody
Anti-VEGFR-2 antibody
was encapsulated in the channels of the TSPs. Two TSPs were placed
into 100 μL FACS buffer at 37 °C. At specific time points
(1, 3, 6, 24, 72, 144, 168 h), buffer was collected and replaced with
fresh buffer. Fluorescence intensities of the collected buffer solutions
were measured at an excitation and emission wavelength of 633 and
666 nm, respectively (Fluoroskan II, LabSystems, Franklin, MA). The
measured intensities were compared to a calibration curve to quantify
the amount of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody released from the TSPs into the
buffer solutions.
Release of Irinotecan
Release of
irinotecan from the
PEGDA polymer matrix of the TSP was measured in 500 μL of DMEM
at 37 °C. Based on preliminary experiments, approximately 15
μg of irinotecan was released per particle over a week. A total
of 20 and 10 TSPs were used for releasing 300 and 150 μg of
irinotecan, respectively. Particles of similar geometry were produced
with no irinotecan encapsulated as a negative control. For the release
studies, all of the DMEM was collected and replaced with 500 μL
of fresh media at specific time points (0.5, 1, 3, 6, 24, 72, 144,
168 h). Absorbance of collected DMEM buffer solutions was measured
at 370 nm using Shimadzu 1601 UV spectrophotometer (Tokyo, Japan)
and compared to a calibration curve to quantify the amount of irinotecan
released into the buffer solutions.
Encapsulation Efficiency
The encapsulation efficiency
of the drugs (irinotecan or anti-VEGFR-2 antibody) was calculated
as the ratio of the drug released from a single TSP at the end of
release measurements over a week and the amount of drug initially
dissolved in one droplet before solidification. Basing efficiency
upon release as opposed to loading (before release) makes this a particularly
stringent measure. The initial concentrations of irinoteccan (in the
leading drop) and anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (in the trailing drop) were
3 mM and 0.24 μM, respectively. The volume of the droplets was
approximately 8.5 μL.
Immunofluorescence of Anti-VEGFR-2 Antibody
Bound to HUVECs
Alexa Fluor 647 tagged anti-VEGFR-2 antibody
was allowed to release
from a single TSP for 24 h into 100 μL of FACS buffer with 1%
BSA at 37 °C.[31] A TSP with similar
structure encapsulating the same concentration of isotype control
was also generated. HUVECs (20000/well) were incubated overnight in
200 μL of medium in wells of a chambered coverglass (Lab-Tek
II 1.5). Medium was removed and cells were rinsed with PBS. Then cells
were fixed with 2% paraformaldehyde for 15 min and 4% paraformaldehyde
for 15 min subsequently. Cells were treated with 200 μL of blocking
solution (FACS buffer with 1% BSA) for 30 min on a shaker. A total
of 100 μL of the blocking solution was removed and 100 μL
of FACS buffer containing the released anti-VEGFR-2 antibody or its
isotype control was added. The cells were incubated for 3 h on a shaker.
Nuclei were counterstained with bisbenzimide H 33258 at a final concentration
of 0.1 μL/mL, which was added at the last 15 min of incubation.
Cells were rinsed with DPBS and observed under confocal microscope
(LSM510 Meta, ZEISS, Jena, Germany). Images were analyzed with LSM510
Meta software (v4.2).
Measurements of Anti-VEGFR-2 Antibody Binding
to HUVECs
Anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was allowed to release from
two TSPs into FACS
buffer at 37 °C. Buffer was collected at specific time points
(1, 3, 6, 24, 72, 144, 168 h) and stored at 4 °C until incubated
with cells. The same amount of fresh FACS buffer was added back to
the sample after collections to maintain the volume of the release
media. A total of 100000 HUVECs were washed with 500 μL of FACS
buffer. Cells were centrifuged for 5 min at 1000 rpm and supernatant
was removed. HUVECs were incubated for 30 min within 100 μL
of collected buffer solution containing the released anti-VEGFR-2
antibody or its isotype control. Cells were then centrifuged for 5
min at 1000 rpm and the supernatant was removed, followed by two stages
of washing with 500 μL of FACS buffer to remove unbound anti-VEGRF-2
antibody.[32,33] The cell suspension was added into flow
cytometry tubes (BD Falcon 12 × 75 mm tube with 35 μL cell
strainer cap) and analyzed using a flow cytometer (CyAn ADP, Beckman
Coulter, Fullerton, CA) with Summit software v4.3 (Beckman Coulter,
Fullerton, CA).
Cell Viability
Irinotecan was released
from 10 or 20
TSPs into DMEM buffer at 37 °C over the course of 168 h. Buffer
solutions were collected at specific time points (0.5, 1, 3, 6, 24,
72, 144, 168 h) and replaced with an equal volume of fresh DMEM. U251
MG cells were seeded into a 96-well plate at a density of about 3500
cells/well.[34] Cells were placed in an incubator
at 37 °C and 5% CO2 for 48 h or until cells reached
approximately 80% confluence, at which point the media was removed
and replaced with the collected buffer containing the released irinotecan.
Negative control had fresh DMEM without irinotecan while positive
controls had various concentrations of irinotecan directly dissolved
in DMEM. Cells were allowed to proliferate in an incubator for 72
h. Cells were then rinsed with DPBS and MTS reagent was added to the
wells following the Promega protocol. Reaction was allowed for 3 h
and absorbance was read at 492 nm using an absorbance plate reader
(Labsystems Multiskan Plus, Fisher Scientific Inc., Hampton, NH).
Relative proliferation was presented as the absorbance of the sample
divided by the absorbance of the negative control with the MTS blank
subtracted.
Results and Discussion
Independent Release of
Multiple Compounds
Motivated
by current approaches to the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme
and other cancers using the combination of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody and
irinotecan, these two compounds were encapsulated in the TSPs. The
self-assembly process to form TSPs has high drug encapsulation efficiency.
The drug encapsulation efficiency for anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was 79.7
± 1.2% without the presence of alginate in the channels and 73.6
± 1.1% with the presence of 1% alginate in the channels. The
encapsulation efficiency for irinotecan was 92.9 ± 3.7%. Potential
reasons for the loss of the drugs are (1) diffusion of therapeutic
compounds into the bulk solution during sedimentation, (2) drug that
is not released from the particles, (3) loss during particle rinsing,
and (4) exclusion of the long tail from the particle upon solidification.
The main limitation on encapsulation efficiency seems to be formation
and cutoff of the long tail by the surrounding bulk fluid upon cross-linking
(Figure 1b). The encapsulation efficiency was
always higher for irinotecan compared to anti-VEGFR-2 antibody because
the tails formed by the trailing drop was generally bigger than the
tails formed by the leading drop (Figure 1b).
Based on the efficient loading, it is possible to have significant
control of the release.It is ideal to control the release rates
independently in order for the compounds to work synergistically at
the targeting site. However, due to their difference in size, it is
difficult to release the small molecule and macromolecule independently
from one single device.[35] Currently, the
release of multiple compounds is mainly controlled by polymer degradation,
molecular diffusion, or a combination of both. If the release rate
is controlled by polymer degradation, then all the compounds are essentially
released at the same rate; if controlled by diffusion, the smaller
molecules will be released much faster. The heterogeneous TSPs allow
independent tuning of multiple parallel pathways of drug release.In this study, the larger protein molecule, anti-VEGFR-2 antibody,
was loaded into the TS channels, while irinotecan was preblended into
the main polymer matrix, which consists of high concentration of PEGDA
700. The high concentration of PEGDA allows for rapid photo-cross-linking
(on the milli-second time scale) and subsequent formation of dense
polymer matrix. The mesh size of the polymer (approximately 3 nm)[11] allowed slow diffusion of irinotecan and prevented
permeation of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (molecular size of approximately
150 kDa with radius of gyration approximately 5 nm).[36] Anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was released by diffusion through
the curved TS channels; it is possible that osmotic pressure differences
affect this release rate, which we will examine in the future. By
changing the material composition (empty channel vs low concentration
alginate hydrogel) in the TS channels, release of the anti-VEGFR-2
antibody was manipulated from a few hours to a few days (Figure 2a). In the first case, anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was
dissolved in an aqueous solution without any polymer. When the main
polymer matrix of PEGDA was cross-linked, anti-VEGFR-2 antibody was
encapsulated in empty TS channels (Figure 2b–d), through which the release of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody reached
approximately 80% after 3 h. In the second case, 1% sodium alginate
was added to the aqueous drop phase containing anti-VEGFR-2 antibody.
Alginate forms a porous structure in the TS channels to further prolong
the release of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (Figure 2e–g). Cross-linked alginate inside the channels produced large
pores with an average size of about 3 μm (Figure 2g), which allows for the complete release of the protein.
In this case, the release took more than 3 days to reach 80% and continued
for several more days.
Figure 2
(a) Release of irinotecan and anti-VEGFR-2 antibody with
and without
incorporation of alginate in TS channels. Each point represents the
mean plus or minus the standard deviation (n = 3).
(b–d) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of representative
internal structures of TSPs not incorporating alginate into the channels.
Scale bars are 1 mm (b), 500 μm (c), and 250 μm (d). Representative
SEM images of the TSP made with alginate incorporated into the channels
(e, f). (g) Porous structure of alginate. Scale bars are 1 mm (e),
100 μm (f), and 10 μm (g).
(a) Release of irinotecan and anti-VEGFR-2 antibody with
and without
incorporation of alginate in TS channels. Each point represents the
mean plus or minus the standard deviation (n = 3).
(b–d) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of representative
internal structures of TSPs not incorporating alginate into the channels.
Scale bars are 1 mm (b), 500 μm (c), and 250 μm (d). Representative
SEM images of the TSP made with alginate incorporated into the channels
(e, f). (g) Porous structure of alginate. Scale bars are 1 mm (e),
100 μm (f), and 10 μm (g).
In Vitro Activity of the Anti-VEGFR-2 Antibody Released from
TSPs
The activity of the protein was characterized by the
binding of antibody to receptors on human vascular cells, that is,
HUVECs. The binding of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody with HUVECs was confirmed
by confocal microscopy (Figure 3). When active
anti-VEGFR-2 antibody is bound to the receptor on the cell membrane,
the fluorescence can be observed from the cell membranes. If antibodies
are denatured, they are unable to bind to their native ligands in
a specific manner. Confocal microscopy confirmed that anti-VEGFR-2
antibody remained active through the TSP-fabrication process (Figure 3). The isotype control showed minimum binding when
compared to the anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (Figure 3b), indicating that the binding was specific to the ligand.
Figure 3
Confocal microscopy
images of antibody binding to HUVECs. (a) Anti-VEGFR-2
antibody (red) attachment to HUVECs. Nucleus was dyed blue for ease
of interpretation. (b) Isotype control showed minimal attachment to
HUVECs. Scale bars are 20 μm.
Confocal microscopy
images of antibody binding to HUVECs. (a) Anti-VEGFR-2
antibody (red) attachment to HUVECs. Nucleus was dyed blue for ease
of interpretation. (b) Isotype control showed minimal attachment to
HUVECs. Scale bars are 20 μm.Flow cytometry was used to quantify the binding to HUVECs
of the
anti-VEGFR-2 antibody cumulatively released from two TSPs at certain
time points. It was determined that the released antibody kept the
same cell binding capacity as the original unprocessed anti-VEGFR-2
antibody in solution (Supporting Information,
Figure 1). Collected buffer solutions from later stages of
the release show increased cell binding. This indicates that significant
release is still occurring at these times as fresh media was added
after each time point. For TSPs with empty channels (without the incorporation
of sodium alginate), most of the binding occurred within the first
3 h (Figure 4). With the incorporation of 1%
sodium alginate into the TS channels, release of the anti-VEGFR-2
antibody was hindered by the polymer and a similar binding required
72 h of release (Figure 4d). This corresponded
well with the release rate for the anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (Figure 2a). Release of the same concentration of isotype
control from the TSPs was monitored for the same time period and exhibited
minimal binding to cells at any time (Figure 4a,b). This indicates that the anti-VEGFR-2 antibody has bound with
HUVECs through VEGFR-2 expressed on the cells. Therefore, the bioactivity
of the released antibody was preserved through the TSP fabrication
process.
Figure 4
Flow cytometry measurements of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody binding to
HUVECs. (a) Anti-VEGFR-2 antibody released from TS channels without
alginate showed similar fluorescence from the cells for time points
after 3 h (representative data acquired from one sample run). (b)
Percent cells bound with the antibody were similar for release times
beyond three hours. (c) For TSPs fabricated with alginate in the channels,
the fluorescence from the cells increased with longer time of release
up to 72 h (representative data acquired from one sample run). (d)
The percent cells bound with the antibody increased over time up to
72 h. The isotype control for each case showed minimal binding. Each
data point represents the mean plus or minus the standard deviation
of three independent samples.
Flow cytometry measurements of anti-VEGFR-2 antibody binding to
HUVECs. (a) Anti-VEGFR-2 antibody released from TS channels without
alginate showed similar fluorescence from the cells for time points
after 3 h (representative data acquired from one sample run). (b)
Percent cells bound with the antibody were similar for release times
beyond three hours. (c) For TSPs fabricated with alginate in the channels,
the fluorescence from the cells increased with longer time of release
up to 72 h (representative data acquired from one sample run). (d)
The percent cells bound with the antibody increased over time up to
72 h. The isotype control for each case showed minimal binding. Each
data point represents the mean plus or minus the standard deviation
of three independent samples.
In Vitro Activity of Released Irinotecan
The activity
of irinotecan released from the TSP to hinder the proliferation of
U251malignant glioma cells is demonstrated. The toxicity of irinotecan
was initially measured to determine the concentration required for
irinotecan to effectively hinder cell growth (Supporting Information, Figure 2). Based on this concentration
and the previously measured irinotecan release rate, we were able
to decide the loading of irinotecan into the polymer matrix of the
TSPs. Cells were monitored visually and the metabolic activity of
the cells was characterized using MTS assay. With 150 μg irinotecan
released from 10 TSPs, cell growth was effectively inhibited for 2
days (Figure 5a), which is evidenced by severe
cell morphologic change and lower cell number (Figure 5b). With twice the number of particles used, inhibition lasted
six days (Figure 5c). In response to the releasate
of the next 24 h, cell proliferation was almost 100% as remaining
irinotecan was not sufficient to inhibit the cell growth. All negative
control samples exhibited no hindering effect on cell growth, indicating
the drug carrier (TSPs without drug) was nontoxic to the cells (Figure 5a). Although free radicals formed by photoinitiators
may be considered toxic to cells,[37] the
cross-linking involved in TSP formation evidently consumes the majority
of free radicals during polymerization. Furthermore, irinotecan was
not degraded by UV exposure during droplet solidification, which is
evident by the similar UV absorbance (Supporting
Information, Figure 3) of pure irinotecan and irinotecan irradiated
with UV light.
Figure 5
Inhibition of U251 MG cell growth by sustained release
of irinotecan
from TSPs. (a) Relative proliferation of U251 MG cells for 7 days.
After the first 24 h, the release media was collected and replaced
every 24 h. Therefore, the media only contained irinotecan released
after the last collection within 24 h. (b) Representative images of
U251 MG cells after being treated with media containing irinotecan
released on the second, third, and fourth days. The total drug loading
is 150 μg in 10 TSPs. (c) Images of U251 cells treated with
release media from the sixth day of release containing no irinotecan
(left), irinotecan released from 10 TSPs (middle), and irinotecan
released from 20 TSPs (right). The drug loading in one TSP was about
15 μg.
Inhibition of U251 MG cell growth by sustained release
of irinotecan
from TSPs. (a) Relative proliferation of U251 MG cells for 7 days.
After the first 24 h, the release media was collected and replaced
every 24 h. Therefore, the media only contained irinotecan released
after the last collection within 24 h. (b) Representative images of
U251 MG cells after being treated with media containing irinotecan
released on the second, third, and fourth days. The total drug loading
is 150 μg in 10 TSPs. (c) Images of U251 cells treated with
release media from the sixth day of release containing no irinotecan
(left), irinotecan released from 10 TSPs (middle), and irinotecan
released from 20 TSPs (right). The drug loading in one TSP was about
15 μg.
Conclusion
Herein,
we presented the formation of TSPs encapsulating irinotecan
(small molecule, 587 Da) and anti-VEGFR-2 antibody (macromolecule,
∼150 kDa) as a drug combination for treatment of GBM. Independent
modes of release were achieved for the two compounds. The bioactivities
of both drugs were maintained throughout the fabrication process.
The macromolecule was loaded into the TS channels by droplet sedimentation
and interaction. The small molecule drug was preblended in the precursor
polymer solution. Release rates of the macromolecules were modulated
by the addition of sodium alginate to the TSP channels, increasing
from 3 h to 3 days for 80% release. Small molecule chemotherapeutic
drug with 300 μg loaded into a dense PEGDA 700 polymer matrix
sustained release for approximately one week. The independent manipulation
of the release rates for two compounds was demonstrated in vitro.
Systematic tuning of TSP structure, guided by in vivo measurements
of drug release and activity, to optimize drug synergy certainly merits
more investigation in the future.The encapsulation in different
regions in the single TSP and release
through independent pathways resolve any potential problems in dealing
with incompatibility of multiple drugs. The particle formation process
is benign to delicate proteins and peptides. The TSP technology described
in this paper would have broader implications for treatment of complex
diseases, insofar as these require multiple therapeutic compounds
with various physicochemical properties.
Authors: Dietmar Krex; Barbara Klink; Christian Hartmann; Andreas von Deimling; Torsten Pietsch; Matthias Simon; Michael Sabel; Joachim P Steinbach; Oliver Heese; Guido Reifenberger; Michael Weller; Gabriele Schackert Journal: Brain Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: James J Vredenburgh; Annick Desjardins; James E Herndon; Jennifer Marcello; David A Reardon; Jennifer A Quinn; Jeremy N Rich; Sith Sathornsumetee; Sridharan Gururangan; John Sampson; Melissa Wagner; Leighann Bailey; Darell D Bigner; Allan H Friedman; Henry S Friedman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-10-20 Impact factor: 44.544