| Literature DB >> 28273121 |
Ji Eun Park1, Se-Eun Chun1, Derek Reichel2, Jee Sun Min3, Su-Chan Lee1, Songhee Han1, Gongmi Ryoo1, Yunseok Oh1, Shin-Hyung Park1, Heon-Min Ryu1, Kyung Bo Kim2, Ho-Young Lee1, Soo Kyung Bae3, Younsoo Bae2, Wooin Lee1.
Abstract
Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a peptide epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). Despite the remarkable efficacy of CFZ against MM, the clinical trials in patients with solid cancers yielded rather disappointing results with minimal clinical benefits. Rapid degradation of CFZ in vivo and its poor penetration to tumor sites are considered to be major factors limiting its efficacy against solid cancers. We previously reported that polymer micelles (PMs) composed of biodegradable block copolymers poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) and poly(caprolactone) (PCL) can improve the metabolic stability of CFZ in vitro. Here, we prepared the CFZ-loaded PM, PEG-PCL-deoxycholic acid (CFZ-PM) and assessed its in vivo anticancer efficacy and pharmacokinetic profiles. Despite in vitro metabolic protection of CFZ, CFZ-PM did not display in vivo anticancer efficacy in mice bearing human lung cancer xenograft (H460) superior to that of the clinically used cyclodextrin-based CFZ (CFZ-CD) formulation. The plasma pharmacokinetic profiles of CFZ-PM were also comparable to those of CFZ-CD and the residual tumors that persisted in xenograft mice receiving CFZ-PM displayed an incomplete proteasome inhibition. In summary, our results showed that despite its favorable in vitro performances, the current CFZ-PM formulation did not improve in vivo anticancer efficacy and accessibility of active CFZ to solid cancer tissues over CFZ-CD. Careful consideration of the current results and potential confounding factors may provide valuable insights into the future efforts to validate the potential of CFZ-based therapy for solid cancer and to develop effective CFZ delivery strategies that can be used to treat solid cancers.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28273121 PMCID: PMC5342227 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173247
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Physicochemical characterization of drug-free and carfilzomib (CFZ) loaded Polymeric Micelles (PM).
| Group | Size (nm) | Zeta potential (mV) | CMC (mg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Drug-free PM | 41.2 ± 5.7 | -0.5 ± 0.3 | 0.18 |
| CFZ-PM | 56.0 ± 6.1 | -1.0 ± 0.4 | 0.14 |
Data are shown as means ± S.D. (n = 3). CMC, critical micelle concentration
Fig 1Effects of polymeric micelle formulation containing carfilzomib (CFZ-PM) vs cyclodextrin-based carfilzomib formulation (CFZ-CD) on tumor growth in H460 xenograft mice.
NOD/SCID mice harboring H460 xenograft tumors were randomized to 5 different groups and received respective intravenous injections on two consecutive days per week; CFZ-PM at the dose of 3 (□) or 6 (■) mg/kg, CFZ-CD at the dose of 3 (△) mg/kg, vehicle (citrate buffer ●) and empty PM (dissolved in normal saline ○). The upper arrow symbol (↑) indicates the day of drug injection. (A) Tumor growth curves. (B, C) Weights and images of excised tumor tissues on day 18. (D) Body weights. Data are shown as means ± S.D. (n = 4–5). *, p < 0.05 vs. vehicle control using ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test.
Fig 2Proteasome activities in the post-treatment tumor tissue lysates (A) and whole blood samples (B) collected from H460 xenograft mice that received the intravenous injections of polymeric micelle formulation containing carfilzomib (CFZ-PM) or cyclodextrin-based carfilzomib formulation (CFZ-CD).
The tumor tissues and whole blood samples were collected 48 h after the last injection of the respective treatments. Proteasome activities in tumor tissue lysates or whole blood lysates were assessed by measuring the cleavage rate of the fluorogenic substrate Suc-LLVY-AMC. *, p < 0.001 vs. all other groups using ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test.
Fig 3Immunoblotting analyses showing that the proteasome catalytic subunit β5, a primary target of carfilzomib remains unchanged in post-treatment tumor tissue lysates collected from the xenograft mice that received different treatments.
(CFZ-CD: cyclodextrin-based carfilzomib formulation; CFZ-PM: polymeric micelle formulation containing carfilzomib) The tumor tissues were collected 48 h after the last injection of the respective treatments.
Fig 4Plasma concentration-time profiles of carfilzomib after the intravenous administration of polymeric micelle formulation containing carfilzomib (CFZ-PM) or cyclodextrin-based carfilzomib formulation (CFZ-CD) to mice (A, 3 mg/kg and B, 6 mg/kg).
Data are shown as means ± S.D. (n = 4–5). The inset figures show the plasma concentration-time profiles up to 2 h.
Pharmacokinetic parameters of carfilzomib after the intravenous administration of polymeric micelle formulation containing carfilzomib (CFZ-PM) and cyclodextrin-based carfilzomib formulation (CFZ-CD) to ICR mice.
| Pharmacokinetic Parameters | CFZ-PM | CFZ-CD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 mg/kg | 6 mg/kg | 3 mg/kg | 6 mg/kg | |
| AUC0-2h (min*nmol/mL) | 38.6 ± 1.2 | 118.1 ± 25.3 | 33.3 ± 7.7 | 55.2 ± 21.1 |
| AUC0-24h (min*nmol/mL) | 39.8 ± 0.8 | 121.4 ± 27.2 | 35.4 ± 8.0 | 58.8 ± 21.8 |
| AUCINF (min*nmol/mL) | 39.9 ± 0.8 | 121.8 ± 27.4 | 36.4 ± 8.0 | 62.6 ± 22.9 |
| CL (mL/min/kg) | 105 ± 2 | 71 ± 15 | 119 ± 29 | 152 ± 71 |
| C0 (nmol/mL) | 8,490 ± 1,550 | 11,990 ± 1,150 | 9,940 ±4,860 | 11,760 ± 3,440 |
| t1/2, initial (min) | 21.2 ± 5.0 | 17.4 ± 1.1 | 24.8 ± 1.0 | 22.4 ± 7.3 |
| t1/2, terminal (h) | 6.1 ± 1.4 | 8.5 ± 1.7 | 13.1 ± 3.5 | 11.1 ± 4.8 |
| Vss (L/kg) | 2.19 ± 0.40 | 1.62 ± 0.07 | 13.42 ± 6.58 | 20.14 ± 10.38 |
| MRT (min) | 20.9 ± 3.6 | 23.9 ± 5.7 | 110.9 ± 46.3 | 136.2 ± 70.5 |
Data are shown as means ± S.D. (n = 4–5). AUC0-2h, Area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to 2 h; AUC0-24h, AUC from time 0 to 24 h; AUCINF, AUC extrapolated to infinity; CL, clearance; C0, extrapolated plasma concentration at 0 h; t1/2, initial, half-life from initial decline phase (0 to 2 h); t1/2, terminal, terminal half-life (0 to 24 h); Vss, volume of distribution at steady state; MRT, mean residence time.
*, p < 0.05
**, p < 0.01 vs. all other groups using ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc test.