| Literature DB >> 31592196 |
Amber Gonda1, Nanxia Zhao2, Jay V Shah1, Hannah R Calvelli3, Harini Kantamneni1, Nicola L Francis1, Vidya Ganapathy1.
Abstract
As a nascent and emerging field that holds great potential for precision oncology, nanotechnology has been envisioned to improve drug delivery and imaging capabilities through precise and efficient tumor targeting, safely sparing healthy normal tissue. In the clinic, nanoparticle formulations such as the first-generation Abraxane® in breast cancer, Doxil® for sarcoma, and Onivyde® for metastatic pancreatic cancer, have shown advancement in drug delivery while improving safety profiles. However, effective accumulation of nanoparticles at the tumor site is sub-optimal due to biological barriers that must be overcome. Nanoparticle delivery and retention can be altered through systematic design considerations in order to enhance passive accumulation or active targeting to the tumor site. In tumor niches where passive targeting is possible, modifications in the size and charge of nanoparticles play a role in their tissue accumulation. For niches in which active targeting is required, precision oncology research has identified targetable biomarkers, with which nanoparticle design can be altered through bioconjugation using antibodies, peptides, or small molecule agonists and antagonists. This review is structured to provide a better understanding of nanoparticle engineering design principles with emphasis on overcoming tumor-specific biological barriers.Entities:
Keywords: cancer; nano-bio interactions; nanomedicine; nanoparticles; nanotechnology; targeting; theranostic
Year: 2019 PMID: 31592196 PMCID: PMC6779336 DOI: 10.20900/mo.20190021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med One ISSN: 2397-9119
Nanoparticles with FDA approval or currently in at least a Phase III clinical trial for cancer therapy and diagnostics (http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov) [18].
| Nanoparticle name | NP formulation | Cancer targets | Trial name, status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doxorubicin-loaded liposome | Ovarian, Kaposi’s sarcoma, multiple myeloma, breast | FDA approval 1995 | |
| Liposomal daunorubicin | Kaposi’s sarcoma | FDA approval 1996 | |
| Albumin-bound paclitaxel | Breast, lung, pancreatic cancer, melanoma | FDA approval 2005 | |
| Iron oxide nanoparticle | Glioblastoma | EU approval 2010 | |
| Liposome vincristine | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia | FDA approval 2012 | |
| Irinotecan-loaded liposome | Metastatic pancreatic cancer | FDA approval 2015 | |
| Daunorubicin and cytarabine loaded liposome | Acute myeloid leukemia | FDA approval 2017 | |
| Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles + MRI | Pancreatic cancer metastasis | Phase IV (2008–2017) | |
| Paclitaxel-containing polymeric micelle | Breast cancer recurrence | Phase III (2015–2020) | |
| Crystalline NP + radiation | Soft tissue sarcoma | Phase II//III (2015–2020) |
MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.
Figure 1.Biological barriers for nanoparticle delivery. The schematic highlights the barriers to nanoparticle delivery at common organs of tumor development and metastatic progression.
Figure 2.Nanoparticle classification and design characteristics.