The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/VEGF receptor (VEGFR) signaling cascade plays a critical role in tumor angiogenesis and metastasis and has been correlated with several poorly prognostic cancers such as malignant gliomas. Although a number of anti-VEGFR therapies have been conceived, inefficient drug administration still limits their therapeutic efficacy and raises concerns of potential side effects. In the present work, we propose the use of uniform mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) for VEGFR targeted positron emission tomography imaging and delivery of the anti-VEGFR drug (i.e., sunitinib) in human glioblastoma (U87MG) bearing murine models. MSNs were synthesized, characterized and modified with polyethylene glycol, anti-VEGFR ligand VEGF121 and radioisotope (64)Cu, followed by extensive in vitro, in vivo and ex vivo studies. Our results demonstrated that a significantly higher amount of sunitinib could be delivered to the U87MG tumor by targeting VEGFR when compared with the non-targeted counterparts. The as-developed VEGF121-conjugated MSN could become another attractive nanoplatform for the design of future theranostic nanomedicine.
The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/VEGF receptor (VEGFR) signaling cascade plays a critical role in tumor angiogenesis and metastasis and has been correlated with several poorly prognostic cancers such as malignant gliomas. Although a number of anti-VEGFR therapies have been conceived, inefficient drug administration still limits their therapeutic efficacy and raises concerns of potential side effects. In the present work, we propose the use of uniform mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) for VEGFR targeted positron emission tomography imaging and delivery of the anti-VEGFR drug (i.e., sunitinib) in humanglioblastoma (U87MG) bearing murine models. MSNs were synthesized, characterized and modified with polyethylene glycol, anti-VEGFR ligand VEGF121 and radioisotope (64)Cu, followed by extensive in vitro, in vivo and ex vivo studies. Our results demonstrated that a significantly higher amount of sunitinib could be delivered to the U87MGtumor by targeting VEGFR when compared with the non-targeted counterparts. The as-developed VEGF121-conjugated MSN could become another attractive nanoplatform for the design of future theranostic nanomedicine.
Angiogenesis (i.e.,
the formation of new blood vessels) is a key
hallmark of cancer growth and metastasis.[1,2] Noninvasive
imaging of angiogenesis can allow for much earlier cancer diagnosis
and better prognosis, ultimately paving the way for personalized molecular
medicine.[3] It is well-known that, for a
tumor to grow beyond ∼2 mm3, it must develop a network
of blood vessels to supply nutrients and oxygen and to remove waste
products.[4] A number of growth factor receptor
pathways form the molecular basis of angiogenesis, of which the vascular
endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family of proteins and receptors
is an integral member.[5] Research also showed
that activation of the VEGF pathway could trigger a signaling cascade
that promotes endothelial cell growth and migration from pre-existing
vasculature.[6] Due to its well-established
role in angiogenesis, radiolabeled ligands, such as VEGF121, bevacizumab, etc., which target the VEGF receptor (i.e., VEGFR),
have successfully been developed for early and sensitive lesion detection
by using positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission
computed tomography (SPECT) imaging techniques.[7−12] VEGF121, being a natural ligand of VEGFR and possessing
high binding affinity for VEGFR-2, is an excellent candidate for targeted
molecular imaging.[13] However, direct radiolabeling
of targeting ligands might alter their in vivo pharmacokinetics and
compromise the binding affinity. Besides, the presence of only a few
conjugation sites limits the potential of conjugating other functional
moieties (e.g., fluorescent dyes, anticancer drugs) to the targeting
ligands. Thus, engineering of a multifunctional platform, which can
harbor VEGFR targeting ligands (e.g., VEGF121), imaging
moieties (e.g., copper-64 [64Cu]) as well as therapeutic
agents (e.g., hydrophilic and hydrophobic anticancer drugs) together
in one nanosystem for effective VEGFR targeted cancer imaging and
therapy, is highly desired.One of the major challenges pertaining
to the suboptimal performance
of many anticancer drugs is the low bioavailability and inefficient
delivery to the target site.[14] A lot of
anticancer drugs are hydrophobic and need biocompatible drug delivery
systems to enable improved bioavailability and facilitate easier intravenous
administration. Silica is considered as “Generally Recognized
As Safe” (GRAS) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
and silica based C-dots (or Cornell dots) are among the first inorganic
nanoparticles to be approved for first-in-human trial by the FDA.[15,16] Mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) have recently been extensively
studied as drug carriers owing to their large pore volumes, high surface
area, superior biocompatibility, nontoxicity and easily modifiable
surface.[17−19] MSNs, as exipients for drug formulations, can offer
a promising approach to overcome the insolubility issue and deliver
large payloads of hydrophobic small molecule drugs.[20,21] Besides the potential for loading large amounts of drug, the silanol
bearing surface can further be easily modified for enhanced pharmacokinetics
or stimuli responsive release of the drugs.[22] However, engineering of MSN for in vivo actively targeted drug delivery
is still one of the major challenges in this field, and most of the
previously reported silica-based drug delivery system studies were
focused on passive tumor targeting, which relies on unpredictable
tumor extravasation and enhanced permeability retention (EPR) effect.[14,20,23−26]Inspired by the pivotal
role of the VEGF/VEGFR signaling pathway
in cancer and the advantages offered by MSNs, in this paper, we propose
a VEGF pathway targeting potentially theranostic nanoplatform (Figure 1A) based on surface engineering of MSN for simultaneous
noninvasive PET imaging and in vivo enhanced delivery of anti-VEGFR
drug, sunitinib (SUN). Humanglioblastoma (U87MG) bearing mice with
suitable tumor sizes (∼60 mm3, having high VEGFR
expression) were selected for in vivo active targeting study. Uniform
sized MSN was first surface modified with amino groups, followed by
chelator (e.g., S-2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triacetic
acid, or NOTA) conjugation, PEGylation, VEGF121 linkage
and radioisotope (64Cu, t1/2 = 12.7 h) labeling. The mesoporous scaffolds were loaded with a
small molecule hydrophobic drug to assess their drug loading and delivery
efficacy. Sunitinib was chosen because it is a potent receptor tyrosine
kinase inhibitor (including all VEGFRs) and has been clinically successful
in providing improved progression free survival and tumor responses
in a range of cancers.[27−31] To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study documenting
the use of MSNs for VEGFR targeted PET imaging and in vivo enhanced
drug delivery.
Figure 1
Synthesis and characterization of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN(SUN)-VEGF. (A) Schematic illustration of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN(SUN)-VEGF121 nanoconjugate. (B) Transmission
electron microscopy (TEM) image of pure MSN before surface modification.
(C) TEM image of NOTA-MSN(SUN)-VEGF121. (D) UV–vis
spectrum of pure MSN (black line) and sunitinib loaded MSN, or MSN(SUN)
(red line). (E) In vitro drug release profile of MSN(SUN) in PBS with
different pH values. (F) Elution profile of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-VEGF121 after the 64Cu labeling. Inset shows the digital
photo and PET imaging of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-VEGF121 (3.5–4.0 mL fraction).
Synthesis and characterization of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN(SUN)-VEGF. (A) Schematic illustration of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN(SUN)-VEGF121 nanoconjugate. (B) Transmission
electron microscopy (TEM) image of pure MSN before surface modification.
(C) TEM image of NOTA-MSN(SUN)-VEGF121. (D) UV–vis
spectrum of pure MSN (black line) and sunitinib loaded MSN, or MSN(SUN)
(red line). (E) In vitro drug release profile of MSN(SUN) in PBS with
different pH values. (F) Elution profile of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-VEGF121 after the 64Cu labeling. Inset shows the digital
photo and PET imaging of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-VEGF121 (3.5–4.0 mL fraction).
Experimental Section
Materials
K3-VEGF121 was purchased from
Corp. (Piscataway, NJ). p-SCN-Bn-NOTA was acquired
from Macrocyclics, Inc. (Dallas, TX). Mal-PEG5k-SCM was
purchased from Creative PEGworks (Winston Salem, NC). NHS-fluorescein
and Chelex 100 resin (50–100 mesh), tetraethyl orthosilicate
(TEOS), triethylamine (TEA), 3-aminopropylsilanetriol (APS), hexadecyl
trimethylammonium chloride (CTAC, 25 wt %) and dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO) were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Cy3-labeled
secondary antibody was purchased from Jackson Immunoresearch Laboratories,
Inc. (West Grove, CA). Sunitinib malate was purchased from Tocris
Biosciences (Minneapolis, MN). PD-10 columns were bought from GE Healthcare
(Piscataway, NJ). Absolute ethanol and sodium chloride (NaCl) were
obtained from Fisher Scientific. Water and all buffers were of Millipore
grade and pretreated with Chelex 100 resin to ensure that the aqueous
solution was free of heavy metals. All chemicals were used as received
without further purification.
Characterization
Transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
analysis was performed on a FEI T12 microscope. Dilute solutions of
as prepared and functionalized MSNs were placed dropwise onto carbon-coated
copper grids and allowed to dry. TEM images were taken at an accelerating
voltage of 120 kV. DLS and zeta potential analysis were performed
on Nano-Zetasizer (Malvern Instruments Ltd.).
Synthesis of Uniform 80
nm Sized MSNs
MSNs with a uniform
diameter of ∼80 nm were synthesized using the soft template
method as previously described in the literature.[32] In a typical synthesis, CTAC (2 g) and TEA (20 mg) were
dissolved in high Q water (20 mL) and stirred at room temperature
for 1 h. Then 1 mL of TEOS was added rapidly and the resulting mixture
was again stirred for 1 h in a 95 °C water bath. The mixture
was cooled down to room temperature. The pellet collected by centrifugation
at 10 000 rpm was washed with water and ethanol to remove the residual
reactants. The final product was extracted with a 1 wt % solution
of NaCl in methanol at room temperature to completely remove the CTAC
template. The process was carried out at least three times (24 h each
time). After the final wash, the nanoparticles were suspended in 20
mL absolute ethanol for amine modification.
Synthesis of Amine Modified
MSNs (MSN-NH2)
Amine modification of the as synthesized
MSNs was carried out to
enable further surface functionalization. To 20 mL of MSNs in absolute
ethanol solution, 1 mL of APS was added and the system sealed tight.
The mixture was kept in 80–90 °C water bath for 48 h.
This was followed by repeated centrifugation and washing with ethanol
to remove any unreacted APS. MSN-NH2 was then dispersed
in water and concentration of amine groups was measured using ninhydrin-KCN
(Kaiser) test.
Synthesis of VEGF121-SH
K3-VEGF121 was first incubated with Trauts’
Reagent (in 1:20
ratio) at pH 8.0 for 3 h to yield VEGF121-SH. The recombinant
human VEGF121 used in this study had three lysine residues
fused at the N-terminal to allow easier functionalization without
affecting the VEGFR binding affinity. Free Traut’s reagent
was removed by purification by size exclusion chromatography on PD-10
columns, using phosphate buffered saline (PBS) as mobile phase.
Synthesis of NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and FITC-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121
1 mL of MSN-NH2 (containing ∼100
nmol of -NH2 groups) in water was reacted with p-SCN-Bn-NOTA (∼45 nmol, 5 μL of 5 mg/mL solution
in DMSO) at pH 8.5 to obtain NOTA-MSN-NH2. Unreacted p-SCN-Bn-NOTA was removed by centrifugation. To this, 5
mg (1000 nmol) of Mal-PEG5k-SCM was added and reacted for
another 1 h at pH 8.5, resulting in NOTA-MSN-PEG-Mal. Excess PEG molecules
were again removed by centrifugation. To obtain NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121, NOTA-MSN-PEG-Mal was reacted with VEGF121-SH
in 1:5 ratio, in the presence of tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP)
at pH 7.5, overnight.To synthesize fluorescein conjugated MSN-PEG-VEGF121 for flow cytometry and histology studies, ∼64 nmol
of FITC in DMSO was reacted together with MSN-NH2 at pH
8.5–9 followed by NOTA, PEG and VEGF121 conjugations
as described above.
Sunitinib Loading and Release in Vitro
NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 was obtained by mixing SUN
(1 mg/mL in DMSO) with MSN-NH2 (3.5 mg) on a shaker for
24 h. Excess sunitinib-DMSO solution
was removed by centrifugation, followed by subsequent washing with
water for three times. NOTA, PEG and VEGF121 conjugations
were carried out in further reactions, as outlined above. The final
conjugate was dispersed in PBS for further in vitro and in vivo studies.SUN absorbance (absorbance maximum at ∼430 nm) determined
with UV–vis spectroscopy was used to determine the amount of
SUN loaded into MSNs. Loading capacity was calculated using the following
formula: (amount of SUN in MSN/amount of MSN) × 100%. The release
studies were carried out in PBS (pH 7.4 and pH 5.0) for 2 weeks. SUN
loaded MSNs were dispersed in 1 mL of solution of both types. At predetermined
time-points, the solutions were spun down in a centrifuge and supernatants
collected and analyzed on a UV–vis spectrometer. New solution
was replenished after each time-point.
Cell Lines and Animal Model
U87MGhumanglioblastoma
multiforme, human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) and 4T1murinebreast cancer cell lines were purchased from the American Type
Culture Collection (ATCC, Manassas, VA). U87MG and 4T1 cells were
cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM)
and RPMI 1640 media (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) respectively, with
10% fetal bovine serum at 37 °C with 5% CO2. Cells
were allowed to reach 75% confluence before use. All animal studies
were conducted under a protocol approved by the University of Wisconsin
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. The U87MGtumor model
was generated by subcutaneous injection of 2 × 106 cells in 100 μL of a phosphate buffered saline (PBS):Matrigel
(BD Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ) (1:1) mixture into the front
flank of six-week-old female athymic nude mice (Harlan, Indianapolis,
IN). Tumor sizes were monitored every alternate day. Mice were used
for in vivo experiments when the diameter of tumors reached 4–6
mm (typically 3 weeks after inoculation).
In Vitro Flow Cytometry
Both HUVEC and 4T1 cells were
harvested and suspended in cold PBS containing 2% bovine serum albumin
at a concentration of 5 × 106 cells/mL and then incubated
with fluorescein conjugated MSN-PEG-VEGF121 or fluorescein
conjugated MSN-PEG at a concentration of 5 nM for 30 min at room temperature.
The cells were washed for three times with cold PBS and centrifuged
for 5 min. A BD FACSCalibur four-color analysis cytometer, equipped
with 488 and 633 nm lasers (Becton-Dickinson, San Jose, CA), was used
to analyze the cells and data interpretation was carried out with
FlowJo analysis software (Tree Star, Ashland, OR).
64Cu Labeling and Serum Stability Studies
148 MBq of 64CuCl2 was diluted in 300 μL
of 0.1 M sodium acetate buffer (pH 6.5) and added to NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 or NOTA-MSN-PEG and reacted at 37 °C for 30 min under
constant shaking. 64Cu labeled conjugates were then purified
on PD-10 columns using Chelex-100 pretreated PBS as the mobile phase.
The radioactivity fractions (typically eluting between 3.5 and 4.5
mL) were collected for further in vitro and in vivo experiments. The
unreacted 64Cu fraction is expected to elute from the column
after 6 mL of PBS. The whole procedure of 64Cu labeling
and purification of the MSNs was completed in 90 ± 10 min (n = 10).Serum stability studies of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG were carried out by incubating
the radioconjugates in complete mouse serum at 37 °C for up to
24 h (the time period of investigation for serial PET imaging, approximately
two half-lives of 64Cu). The mixtures were sampled at different
time-points and passed through 100 kDa cutoff filters. The filtrates
were collected, and the radioactivity was measured. The retained 64Cu percentages were calculated for both 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG using the following equation:[(total radioactivity – radioactivity in filtrate)/total
radioactivity] × 100%.
In Vivo PET Imaging and Biodistribution Studies
Tumor-bearing
mice were each injected with 5–10 MBq of 64Cu-NOTAMSN-PEG-VEGF121 or 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG via tail vein before serial
PET scans. PET scans on microPET/microCT Inveon rodent model scanner
(Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc.), image reconstruction and ROI
analysis of the PET data were performed using described previously
procedures.[33] Quantitative PET data was
presented as percentage injected dose per gram of tissue (%ID/g).After the last time-point at 22 h postinjection (p.i.), mice were
euthanized and biodistribution studies were carried out to validate
the %ID/g values and radioactivity distribution based on PET imaging
in tumor-bearing mice. Blood, U87MGtumor, and major organs/tissues
were collected and wet-weighed. The radioactivity in the tissues was
measured using a γ-counter (PerkinElmer) and presented as %ID/g
(mean ± SD).
Histology
U87MGtumor-bearing mice
were injected with
fluorescein conjugated NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 or fluorescein
conjugated NOTA-MSN-PEG (5 mg/kg of mouse body weight) and euthanized
at 3 h p.i. (the point of maximum tumor uptake based on PET imaging).
Organs including U87MGtumor, liver, spleen and muscle were excised,
frozen and cryosectioned for histological analysis. The slices were
stained for endothelial marker CD31 by using a rat antimouse CD31
antibody and a Cy3-labeled donkey antirat IgG. All images were acquired
with a Nikon Eclipse Ti microscope.
In Vivo Enhanced SUN Delivery
For drug delivery studies,
SUN loaded MSN-NH2 was then conjugated with NOTA, PEG and
VEGF121 as described previously to form NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121. Nontargeted nanoconjugates (i.e., NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG) were
used as a control. For in vivo enhanced drug delivery study, U87MGtumor bearing mice were intravenously injected with NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 or NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG (5 mg nanoconjugate/kg of mouse).
The mice were then sacrificed at 3 h p.i. U87MGtumor and the major
organs were harvested and imaged on IVIS Spectrum preclinical imaging
system (ex = 430 nm; em = 640 nm) under similar experimental conditions.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis and Characterization of NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121
Uniform MSNs with an average size of about 80
nm were synthesized
using a well-established literature procedure.[32] The nanoparticles possessed a worm-like mesoporous network
of channels, as seen under TEM (Figure 1B),
with a high specific surface area of 238 m2/g and pore
size of ∼2.2 nm, described in our previous paper.[34] To aid in further functionalization, as-prepared
MSNs were surface modified with amino groups (Scheme 1), using APS (i.e., 3-aminopropylsilanetriol) to yield MSN-NH2. A hydrophobic drug (i.e., sunitinib) was then loaded into
MSN by shaking the mixture of sunitinib and MSN in dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO) for 24 h. As-obtained MSN(SUN) exhibited the characteristic
absorbance spectrum of SUN (absorbance max: 430 nm), indicating the
successful loading of the drug into the mesoporous channels of MSN
(Figure 1D). Characteristic excitation/emission
spectra of SUN in DMSO are shown in Figure S1 (Supporting Information). The loading capacity of SUN in MSNs
was found to be ∼100 mg of drug per g of nanoparticles. The
drug release profile in PBS (pH 7.4) showed negligible release of
SUN over 2 weeks, with enhanced release rate observed at lower pH
values of around 5.0 (Figure 1E), possibly
due to the protonation of silanol groups at lower pH, leading to the
weakening of interactions between SUN and MSNs.
Scheme 1
Schematic Illustration
of Stepwise Surface Modification and Drug
Loading of MSN
The surface of monodispersed
MSN (1) was modified with amino groups (−NH2) to
form MSN-NH2 (2). MSN-NH2 was then loaded with
SUN in the presence of DMSO to form MSN(SUN) (3), followed by conjugation
with NOTA and subsequent PEGylation to yield NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG (4).
Further reaction of the nanoconjugates with VEGF121-SH
yielded NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 (5). Finally, the nanoconjugates
were radiolabeled with with 64Cu to form 64Cu-NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 (6).
Schematic Illustration
of Stepwise Surface Modification and Drug
Loading of MSN
The surface of monodispersed
MSN (1) was modified with amino groups (−NH2) to
form MSN-NH2 (2). MSN-NH2 was then loaded with
SUN in the presence of DMSO to form MSN(SUN) (3), followed by conjugation
with NOTA and subsequent PEGylation to yield NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG (4).
Further reaction of the nanoconjugates with VEGF121-SH
yielded NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 (5). Finally, the nanoconjugates
were radiolabeled with with 64Cu to form 64Cu-NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 (6).Afterward, desired amount
of NOTA was added to obtain NOTA-MSN(SUN)-NH2. The nanoparticles
were then PEGylated using heterobifunctional
Mal-PEG5k-SCM; (Mal, malemide; SCM, succinidyl carboxy
methyl ester), to generate NOTA-MSN-PEG-Mal. Thiolated VEGF121 (i.e., VEGF121-SH, see the Experimental
Section) was then conjugated to obtain NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 based on the thiol-maleimide reaction chemistry. For in
vivo PET imaging, radiolabeling with 64Cu was performed
to yield the 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 nanoconjugate.TEM analysis indicates no obvious morphology changes before and
after the surface modifications, as shown in Figure 1C. The hydrodynamic diameters and surface charge of as-synthesized
nanoconjugates were measured using dynamic light scattering (DLS)
and ζ-potential after each step of conjugation. As expected,
DLS showed larger size when compared with that measured from TEM,
owing to the presence of the hydrated shell. An increase in size after
subsequent surface modifications reflects the successful addition
of NOTA, PEG molecules and targeting moieties on the surface of MSN
at each step (Table 1). In addition, surface
charge varied as expected after each step of the conjugation; from
−25.9 ± 0.5 mV (MSN only) to +47.5 ± 0.7 mV after
amine modification, and then to −38.5 ± 2.3, −10.9
± 0.7 and −10.2 ± 0.7 mV, respectively, after subsequent
NOTA, SCM-PEG-Mal and VEGF121 conjugations. The stability
of NOTA-MSN-PEG5k-VEGF121 nanoconjugates were
monitored over several weeks with no obvious aggregation observed
(pH 7.4 in PBS).
Table 1
Variation in the DLS Diameters of
the Nanoparticles after Successive Surface Modification steps
nanoparticles
DLS diameter
(nm)
PDI
MSN
88.5 ± 2.2
0.040 ± 0.002
MSN-NH2
102.5 ± 4.6
0.137 ± 0.007
NOTA-MSN
115.0 ± 3.6
0.137 ± 0.019
NOTA-MSN-PEG
125.2 ± 0.9
0.251 ± 0.019
NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121
129.1 ± 1.5
0.183 ± 0.021
Radiolabeling and Serum Stability
To radiolabel NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and NOTA-MSN-PEG, both nanoconjugates were reacted with 64Cu for 30 min at pH 5.5, and purified on PD-10 columns using
PBS as the mobile phase (to get rid of free nonchelated 64Cu). Our radiolabeling elution profile showed that 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 eluted between 3.5 and 4.5 mL from the column, whereas
free 64Cu appears after 6.0 mL (Figure 1F). The radioactive fractions were then collected for further
in vivo imaging. A phantom PET scan of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 (inset in Figure 1F) after PD-10
purification (fraction 3.5–4.5 mL) was also conducted to prove
the success of radiolabeling.Stability of radiometals in certain
tracers is a critically important aspect influencing the overall in
vivo behavior and biodistribution. Research showed that free 64Cu could possibly transchelate with serum proteins and result
in nonselective binding or off-target accumulation, leading to erroneous
interpretation of the imaging data.[35] Hence,
the stability of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 nanoconjugates
in whole mouse serum was carefully investigated. Our results showed
an excellent stability for both nanoconjugates, with over 90% 64Cu radioisotopes still attached after the incubation in whole
mouse serum for 24 h at 37 °C (Figure S2, Supporting Information).
In Vitro VEGFR Targeting
To assess whether VEGF121 maintains its binding affinity
and specificity for VEGFR
upon conjugation with MSN, systematic flow cytometry study was carried
out. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) that show a high
level of VEGFR expression were chosen as the VEGFR positive cell line,
whereas 4T1 (a murinebreast cancer cell) was selected as the VEGFR
negative cell line.MSN-NH2 was first reacted with
NHS-fluorescein (ex = 494 nm; em = 518 nm, NHS: N-hydroxy-succinimidyl), followed by NOTA conjugation, PEGylation
and VEGF121 conjugation to form fluorescein conjugated
NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121. Nontargeted nanoparticles (i.e.,
fluorescein conjugated NOTA-MSN-PEG) were prepared using the same
way but without the VEGF121 targeting moiety. As shown
in Figure 2A, strong fluorescence signals were
observed from HUVECs when incubated with fluorescein conjugated MSN-PEG-VEGF121 (targeted group, 5 nM), whereas only background fluorescence
was observed on incubation with fluorescein conjugated MSN-PEG (non-targeted
group, 5 nM). About a 50-fold enhancement in fluorescence intensity
was observed in the targeted group when compared with unstained cells
(negative control). In contrast, low nonspecific binding was observed
from VEGFR negative 4T1breast cancer cells, as evidenced by background
levels of fluorescence signal in all the groups (Figure 2B). All the results encouraged further in vivo investigation
of VEGFR targeting efficacy. The binding of VEGF121 tagged
MSN was further found to be highly specific and did not vary appreciably
with the change of particle concentrations (Figure S3, Supporting Information). A similar enhancement
in fluorescence intensities (∼50-fold) was observed when incubating
with 25 nM and 100 nM fluorescein conjugated MSN-PEG-VEGF121. The binding of fluorescein conjugated MSN-PEG remained still low
with increased concentration, indicating low nonspecific binding of
our nanoconjugates in vitro (Figure S3, Supporting
Information). To further confirm that the enhanced fluorescence
was indeed due to specific binding of to VEGFR, in vitro blocking
study was also performed. An excess amount (∼0.05 mg) of VEGF121 was added to HUVECs prior to the addition of fluorescein
conjugated MSN-PEG-VEGF121. Significantly low fluorescence
enhancement (∼1.4 fold) was observed (Figure S3, Supporting Information), even with the addition
of 100 nM of the targeted nanoconjugates, clearly indicating the specific
VEGFR targeting of our nanoconjugates.
Figure 2
In vitro VEGFR targeting.
Flow cytometry analysis of fluorescein
conjugated MSN nanoconjugates in (A) HUVECs (VEGFR positive cell line),
and (B) 4T1 murine breast cancer cell (VEGFR negative cell line).
In vitro VEGFR targeting.
Flow cytometry analysis of fluorescein
conjugated MSN nanoconjugates in (A) HUVECs (VEGFR positive cell line),
and (B) 4T1murinebreast cancer cell (VEGFR negative cell line).
In Vivo VEGFR Targeted
PET Imaging
Malignant glioblastomas
are among the most angiogenic cancers, with VEGF being the dominant
angiogenic mediator.[36] To determine the
VEGFR targeting efficacy and in vivo biodistribution patterns of as-synthesized
nanoconjugates, serial whole body PET scans were carried out at multiple
time-points (0.6, 3, 6 and 22 h postinjection [p.i.]). For this purpose,
about 7.4–11.1 MBq of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG were intravenously injected
(i.v.) in U87MGglioblastoma xenografted mice (n =
3). Figure 3 shows the tumor (marked with an
arrow) containing slices of the coronal PET images at various time-points.
The data obtained from the region-of-interest (ROI) quantification
of the PET images is also presented in Figure 4A,B.
Figure 3
In vivo VEGFR targeted PET imaging in U87MG tumor bearing mice.
Coronal PET images of (A) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and (B) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG injected intravenously in U87MG
tumor bearing mice at different time-points. The yellow arrows indicate
the location of the tumor.
Figure 4
ROI quantification and biodistribution studies.
Time-activity curves
of the liver, U87MG tumor, blood, and muscle upon i.v. injection of
(a) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 (targeted group),
and (b) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG (non-targeted group). (c) U87MG
tumor uptake comparison between targeted and non-targeted groups.
The difference between U87MG tumor uptake in targeted group and non-targeted
group was statistically significant (**P < 0.01).
(d) Ex vivo biodistribution study of two groups at 22 h p.i. (n = 3 for all groups).
In vivo VEGFR targeted PET imaging in U87MGtumor bearing mice.
Coronal PET images of (A) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and (B) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG injected intravenously in U87MGtumor bearing mice at different time-points. The yellow arrows indicate
the location of the tumor.ROI quantification and biodistribution studies.
Time-activity curves
of the liver, U87MGtumor, blood, and muscle upon i.v. injection of
(a) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 (targeted group),
and (b) 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG (non-targeted group). (c) U87MGtumor uptake comparison between targeted and non-targeted groups.
The difference between U87MGtumor uptake in targeted group and non-targeted
group was statistically significant (**P < 0.01).
(d) Ex vivo biodistribution study of two groups at 22 h p.i. (n = 3 for all groups).As apparent from the PET images, the uptake of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG
in the liver was prominent
at early time-points and declines gradually. Such a behavior is expected
for intravenously injected nanomaterials and can be attributed to
the hepatic clearance of the intravenously injected nanoparticles
by liver, which functions as the major organ in the reticulo-endothelial
system (RES). Liver uptake of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG was 24.2 ± 1.3 and
23.9 ± 3.5 percentage injected dose per gram (%ID/g) of tissue,
respectively, at 0.5 h p.i., decreasing gradually to 11.2 ± 0.8
and 13.5 ± 1.7%ID/g, respectively, at 22 h p.i. (n = 3).Successful in vivo VEGFR targeting was substantiated
by the rapid
and specific accumulation of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 (6.8 ± 0.2%ID/g) in U87MGtumor as early as 0.5 h
p.i., reaching a maximum of 7.8 ± 0.2%ID/g at 3 h p.i. Nontargeted 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG nanoconjugates, on the other hand, showed
much lower tumor uptake, peaking to 2.6 ± 0.6%ID/g at 3 h p.i.,
indicating minimum passive targeting efficacy of the nanoparticle
in U87MGtumor. It is of note that the uptake of the nanoconjugates
in organs such as liver, spleen and muscle remained similar in both
the targeted and non-targeted groups, while the tumor uptake remained
significantly different at all time-points (Figure 4A,B). These results clearly indicate that the in vivo pharmacokinetics
and biodistribution of the targeted and non-targeted nanoparticles
are comparable; and thus, VEGFR specific binding was the main factor
responsible for enhanced tumor uptake of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 over 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG. The stark contrast in
the tumor uptake and tumor-to-muscle ratios between the targeted and
non-targeted groups at different time points is also shown in Figure 4C and Table S3 (Supporting Information), respectively.Only two systematic in vivo active targeting
studies with MSNs
have been reported in the literature.[34,37] Moreover,
to the best of our knowledge, despite being an attractive target,
nanoparticle mediated VEGFR targeting has only been reported once
earlier, where VEGF121 conjugated quantum dots (QDs) were
used for dual PET and NIRF (i.e., near-infrared fluorescence) imaging.[38] It is noteworthy that the highest U87MG uptake
of QD-VEGF121 reached about 4.2 ± 0.5% ID/g at 22
h p.i. While VEGF121 conjugated MSN showed a much higher
and faster accumulation in the same tumor model in the current study.
Moreover, the off-target uptake of our nanoconjugates was much lower
(about 24%ID/g) compared to the previous study, which was reported
to be about 50%ID/g uptake in liver.[38] These
results further validate the superiority of mesoporous silica nanostructures
as potential vehicles for tumor vasculature targeted imaging.
Ex Vivo
Biodistribution Studies
Ex vivo organ distribution
studies were performed in all mice after terminal PET scans at 22
h p.i. (Figure 4D). The biodistribution values
corroborated well with ROI quantification values from PET images (taken
at 22 h p.i.) for both targeted and non-targeted cohorts. As expected,
the major clearance organs, i.e. liver, kidney and intestine, showed
enhanced accumulation of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 (12.1 ± 0.7, 7.8 ± 0.7 and 2.6 ± 0.4%ID/g, respectively),
indicating that the nanoparticles cleared through both hepatobiliary
and renal routes. Tumor uptake was still prominent at 4.5 ± 1.2%ID/g.
Moreover, apart from the tumor, the %ID/g values in all the major
organs remained similar for the non-targeted group, further confirming
the VEGFR specific tumor uptake of our nanoconjugates. The good agreement
between PET and biodistribution quantification data supports the validity
of noninvasive serial PET scans and ROI analyses in reflecting the
real in vivo fate of surface modified MSNs.
Histological Analysis
To fully understand the biodistribution
pattern in vivo and confirm PET imaging results, immunofluorescence
staining studies were performed. For this purpose, fluorescein labeled
NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 and NOTA-MSN-PEG nanoparticles were
administered intravenously in much higher doses (∼15 mg nanoconjugates/kg
of mouse body weight) in U87MGtumor bearing mice. U87MGtumor, liver,
spleen and muscle were excised, frozen and cryosectioned after euthanization
of the mice (n = 3) at 3 h p.i.Frozen tissue
slices (6 μm thick) were stained for vascular endothelial marker
CD31, using rat antimouse CD31 primary antibody and Cy3 labeled donkey
antirat secondary antibody using a previously reported protocol.[39] The stained slices were observed using a Nikon
Eclipse Ti microscope. The green fluorescence from fluorescein in
Figure 5 indicates the location of the nanoparticles
and the red fluorescence marks the position of the vessels. Excellent
overlay of the red and green signals in the U87MGtumor of the targeted
group indicates the vasculature specific uptake of MSN-PEG-VEGF121 with little extravasation. Consistent with PET imaging
and biodistribution studies, significant green signals were observed
in both the liver and spleen tissue slices, indicating high nanoparticle
uptake in these organs. However, very weak overlap was observed between
the red and green fluorescence signals, indicating the nonspecific
nature of the nanoparticle accumulation in these organs, due to the
macrophage capture or other mechanisms. As expected, no significant
green fluorescence was observed in muscle tissue, which correlated
well with the PET findings. Overall, our ex vivo histological analysis
of the tissues further confirms the VEGFR specific uptake of our nanoconjugates.
Figure 5
Ex vivo
histology analysis. Immunofluorescence staining of the
tissue slices with CD31 (red, with antimouse CD31 primary antibody;
left panel). Fluorescein conjugated MSN nanoconjugates (green, middle
panel). Merged images are also shown at the right panel. Scale bar:
100 μm.
Ex vivo
histology analysis. Immunofluorescence staining of the
tissue slices with CD31 (red, with antimouse CD31 primary antibody;
left panel). Fluorescein conjugated MSN nanoconjugates (green, middle
panel). Merged images are also shown at the right panel. Scale bar:
100 μm.
In Vivo Enhanced Drug Delivery
Efficacy of a drug depends
largely on its efficient delivery to the disease site, specifically
and in large amounts. The use of MSNs as an ideal platform to carry
drugs, especially hydrophobic and aromatic compounds, has been envisaged
for over a decade.[20,22,25,26] However, few examples of in vivo tumor targeted
drug delivery have been reported.[34] Given
the importance of VEGF/VEGFR cascade in tumor angiogenesis and metastasis,
a number of anti-VEGF/VEGFR therapies have been used to effectively
curb cancer. However, nonspecific systemic delivery of a drug can
lead to several side effects, sometimes even mortality.We hypothesized
that loading an anti-VEGFR drug into NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 nanocarriers can be an effective strategy to improve the treatment
efficacy of the drug and reduce toxicity to the nontarget organs.
Therefore, as a proof-of-concept, SUN, a hydrophobic, anti-VEGFR small
molecule drug, was selected for demonstrating the capability for in
vivo enhanced drug delivery.To achieve targeted SUN delivery
in vivo, MSN(SUN) was stepwise
conjugated to NOTA, PEG and VEGF121, as described earlier,
to produce NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 nanoconjugates (Figure 6A). A separate batch of NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG was also
synthesized to serve as a non-targeted control. Equal concentration
solutions of NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 and NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG
(∼500 μg/mL) were used for in vivo image-guided drug
delivery studies. The final dose of SUN was about 5 mg of SUN per
kg of mouse. The U87MG bearing mice were sacrificed at 3 h p.i. Fluorescence
from the drug was harnessed to image the tumor along with the major
organs, using an IVIS Spectrum imaging system (ex = 430 nm; em = 640
nm). An equal concentration of MSNs without SUN was also injected
in a separate group of mice to serve as the negative control. Enhanced
delivery of SUN to U87MGtumors was achieved in targeted group when
compared with the non-targeted group (Figure 6C). Moreover, the negative control group showed only background levels
of fluorescence in all organs, lower than even the non-targeted group,
indicating that autofluorescence from the organs was not responsible
for the observed effects. The accumulation in RES organs, such as
liver and spleen, appeared low, contrary to the PET imaging results.
This anomaly can be explained on the basis of different absorption
and scattering of SUN emission (around 580 nm) signal by different
tissues. Therefore, dark colored organs, such as liver and spleen,
may have strongly absorbed the emission wavelength from SUN, resulting
in a weaker optical signal, compared to the light colored tumor tissues.
As such, optical imaging cannot reliably measure the accurate absolute
uptake of MSN(SUN) in different organs. However, it can serve as a
handy tool to compare the drug uptake in U87MGtumors from the targeted
and non-targeted groups. About a 2-fold difference was observed between
the two groups, clearly demonstrating the superiority of using VEGF121 targeted MSNs for enhanced delivery of anti-VEGFR drugs
over passively targeted nanosystems.
Figure 6
In vivo enhanced drug delivery study.
(A) Schematic illustration
showing the synthesis of NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 for
in vivo enhanced drug delivery. Ex vivo optical images of sunitinib
in major organs at 3 h p.i. of (B) NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 (targeted group), (C) NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG (non-targeted group) in
U87MG bearing mice, and (D) pure MSN without the drug SUN (negative
control). All images were acquired using an IVIS spectrum in vivo
imaging system (ex = 430 nm; em = 640 nm).
In vivo enhanced drug delivery study.
(A) Schematic illustration
showing the synthesis of NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 for
in vivo enhanced drug delivery. Ex vivo optical images of sunitinib
in major organs at 3 h p.i. of (B) NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG-VEGF121 (targeted group), (C) NOTA-MSN(SUN)-PEG (non-targeted group) in
U87MG bearing mice, and (D) pure MSN without the drug SUN (negative
control). All images were acquired using an IVIS spectrum in vivo
imaging system (ex = 430 nm; em = 640 nm).
Conclusion
In conclusion, VEGFR targeting with nanoparticles
is a vastly unexplored
area in the literature and can serve to home imaging agents and therapeutics
simultaneously and specifically to tumor vasculature. In this study,
we report the design, synthesis and characterization of VEGFR targeted
mesoporous silica nanostructures. Extensive in vitro, in vivo and
ex vivo studies confirmed the stability and VEGFR specific targeting
ability of 64Cu-NOTA-MSN-PEG-VEGF121 nanoconjugates.
In vivo PET imaging studies indicated an almost 3-fold enhancement
in the tumor accumulation of targeted MSNs when compared to the non-targeted
group, while the uptake in the other organs remained similar. The
excellent target specificity of our nanoconjugates was also harnessed
for preliminary site specific delivery of an anti-VEGFR drug (i.e.,
sunitinib) to U87MGtumors. Overall, the encouraging results obtained
in our study indicate that VEGFR targeting with VEGF121 conjugated, anti-VEGFR therapeutics loaded MSN may represent a major
advance for angiogenesis imaging and inhibition in lethal cancers.
Authors: Hao Hong; Yunan Yang; Yin Zhang; Jonathan W Engle; Todd E Barnhart; Robert J Nickles; Bryan R Leigh; Weibo Cai Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-03-04 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Hao Hong; Kai Yang; Yin Zhang; Jonathan W Engle; Liangzhu Feng; Yunan Yang; Tapas R Nayak; Shreya Goel; Jero Bean; Charles P Theuer; Todd E Barnhart; Zhuang Liu; Weibo Cai Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Wouter B Nagengast; Marjolijn N Lub-de Hooge; Sjoukje F Oosting; Wilfred F A den Dunnen; Frank-Jan Warnders; Adrienne H Brouwers; Johan R de Jong; Patricia M Price; Harry Hollema; Geke A P Hospers; Philip H Elsinga; Jan Willem Hesselink; Jourik A Gietema; Elisabeth G E de Vries Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2010-11-17 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Daniel P Ferris; Jie Lu; Chris Gothard; Rolando Yanes; Courtney R Thomas; John-Carl Olsen; J Fraser Stoddart; Fuyuhiko Tamanoi; Jeffrey I Zink Journal: Small Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 13.281
Authors: Shreya Goel; Carolina A Ferreira; Prashant Dogra; Bo Yu; Christopher J Kutyreff; Cerise M Siamof; Jonathan W Engle; Todd E Barnhart; Vittorio Cristini; Zhihui Wang; Weibo Cai Journal: Small Date: 2019-09-29 Impact factor: 13.281
Authors: Jacob Wheatley Myerson; Olivia McPherson; Kelsey G DeFrates; Jenna H Towslee; Oscar A Marcos-Contreras; Vladimir V Shuvaev; Bruce Braender; Russell J Composto; Vladimir R Muzykantov; David M Eckmann Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2019-10-10 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Xue Tao Qi; Jiang Shan Zhan; Li Ming Xiao; Lina Li; Han Xiao Xu; Zi Bing Fu; Yan Hao Zhang; Jing Zhang; Xi Hua Jia; Guo Ge; Rui Chao Chai; Kai Gao; Albert Cheung Hoi Yu Journal: Neurochem Res Date: 2017-05-06 Impact factor: 3.996
Authors: Gina Li; Nicolas Bonamici; Mahua Dey; Maciej S Lesniak; Irina V Balyasnikova Journal: Expert Opin Drug Deliv Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 6.648