Literature DB >> 32036448

Nonlinear response to cancer nanotherapy due to macrophage interactions revealed by mathematical modeling and evaluated in a murine model via CRISPR-modulated macrophage polarization.

Fransisca Leonard1, Louis T Curtis2, Ahmed R Hamed1,3, Carolyn Zhang1, Eric Chau1, Devon Sieving1, Biana Godin4,5, Hermann B Frieboes6,7,8,9.   

Abstract

Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) have been shown to both aid and hinder tumor growth, with patient outcomes potentially hinging on the proportion of M1, pro-inflammatory/growth-inhibiting, to M2, growth-supporting, phenotypes. Strategies to stimulate tumor regression by promoting polarization to M1 are a novel approach that harnesses the immune system to enhance therapeutic outcomes, including chemotherapy. We recently found that nanotherapy with mesoporous particles loaded with albumin-bound paclitaxel (MSV-nab-PTX) promotes macrophage polarization towards M1 in breast cancer liver metastases (BCLM). However, it remains unclear to what extent tumor regression can be maximized based on modulation of the macrophage phenotype, especially for poorly perfused tumors such as BCLM. Here, for the first time, a CRISPR system is employed to permanently modulate macrophage polarization in a controlled in vitro setting. This enables the design of 3D co-culture experiments mimicking the BCLM hypovascularized environment with various ratios of polarized macrophages. We implement a mathematical framework to evaluate nanoparticle-mediated chemotherapy in conjunction with TAM polarization. The response is predicted to be not linearly dependent on the M1:M2 ratio. To investigate this phenomenon, the response is simulated via the model for a variety of M1:M2 ratios. The modeling indicates that polarization to an all-M1 population may be less effective than a combination of both M1 and M2. Experimental results with the CRISPR system confirm this model-driven hypothesis. Altogether, this study indicates that response to nanoparticle-mediated chemotherapy targeting poorly perfused tumors may benefit from a fine-tuned M1:M2 ratio that maintains both phenotypes in the tumor microenvironment during treatment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer liver metastases; Cancer immunotherapy; Macrophage polarization; Mathematical modeling; Nanotherapy; computational simulation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32036448      PMCID: PMC7186159          DOI: 10.1007/s00262-020-02504-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother        ISSN: 0340-7004            Impact factor:   6.968


  46 in total

1.  Systematic validation of specific phenotypic markers for in vitro polarized human macrophages.

Authors:  C A Ambarus; S Krausz; M van Eijk; J Hamann; T R D J Radstake; K A Reedquist; P P Tak; D L P Baeten
Journal:  J Immunol Methods       Date:  2011-10-29       Impact factor: 2.303

2.  Regulators of macrophage activation.

Authors:  Fernando O Martinez
Journal:  Eur J Immunol       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 5.532

3.  Liposomes: a nanoscale drug carrying system to prevent indomethacin passage to the fetus in a pregnant mouse model.

Authors:  Jerrie S Refuerzo; Jenolyn F Alexander; Fransisca Leonard; Mateo Leon; Monica Longo; Biana Godin
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  M-1/M-2 macrophages and the Th1/Th2 paradigm.

Authors:  C D Mills; K Kincaid; J M Alt; M J Heilman; A M Hill
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2000-06-15       Impact factor: 5.422

Review 5.  Current treatment for liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Lian-Xin Liu; Wei-Hui Zhang; Hong-Chi Jiang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  The effect of interstitial pressure on tumor growth: coupling with the blood and lymphatic vascular systems.

Authors:  Min Wu; Hermann B Frieboes; Steven R McDougall; Mark A J Chaplain; Vittorio Cristini; John Lowengrub
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 2.691

7.  Modeling of Combination Chemotherapy and Immunotherapy for Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Louis T Curtis; Hermann B Frieboes
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2019-07

8.  CSF-1R inhibition alters macrophage polarization and blocks glioma progression.

Authors:  Stephanie M Pyonteck; Leila Akkari; Alberto J Schuhmacher; Robert L Bowman; Lisa Sevenich; Daniela F Quail; Oakley C Olson; Marsha L Quick; Jason T Huse; Virginia Teijeiro; Manu Setty; Christina S Leslie; Yoko Oei; Alicia Pedraza; Jianan Zhang; Cameron W Brennan; James C Sutton; Eric C Holland; Dylan Daniel; Johanna A Joyce
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2013-09-22       Impact factor: 53.440

9.  Novel Markers to Delineate Murine M1 and M2 Macrophages.

Authors:  Kyle A Jablonski; Stephanie A Amici; Lindsay M Webb; Juan de Dios Ruiz-Rosado; Phillip G Popovich; Santiago Partida-Sanchez; Mireia Guerau-de-Arellano
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Targeting Macrophages in Cancer: From Bench to Bedside.

Authors:  Ashleigh R Poh; Matthias Ernst
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 6.244

View more
  8 in total

1.  Modeling of tumor response to macrophage and T lymphocyte interactions in the liver metastatic microenvironment.

Authors:  Louis T Curtis; Susanne Sebens; Hermann B Frieboes
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 6.968

2.  Modeling of Tumor Growth with Input from Patient-Specific Metabolomic Data.

Authors:  Hunter A Miller; John Lowengrub; Hermann B Frieboes
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 3.934

3.  Evaluation of Lung Cancer Patient Response to First-Line Chemotherapy by Integration of Tumor Core Biopsy Metabolomics with Multiscale Modeling.

Authors:  Hunter A Miller; Donald M Miller; Victor H van Berkel; Hermann B Frieboes
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-10-12       Impact factor: 4.219

Review 4.  Nanomaterial-assisted CRISPR gene-engineering - A hallmark for triple-negative breast cancer therapeutics advancement.

Authors:  Jabeen Farheen; Narayan S Hosmane; Ruibo Zhao; Qingwei Zhao; M Zubair Iqbal; Xiangdong Kong
Journal:  Mater Today Bio       Date:  2022-10-04

Review 5.  Extracellular Vesicles-A New Potential Player in the Immunology of Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Marcin Kleibert; Miłosz Majka; Klaudia Łakomska; Małgorzata Czystowska-Kuźmicz
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-05-10

Review 6.  Nanomedicine-based cancer immunotherapy: recent trends and future perspectives.

Authors:  Vinoth-Kumar Lakshmanan; Shlok Jindal; Gopinath Packirisamy; Shreesh Ojha; Sen Lian; Ajeet Kaushik; Abdulqadir Ismail M Abdullah Alzarooni; Yasser Abdelraouf Farahat Metwally; Sadras Panchatcharam Thyagarajan; Young Do Jung; Salem Chouaib
Journal:  Cancer Gene Ther       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 5.987

7.  Impact of tumor-parenchyma biomechanics on liver metastatic progression: a multi-model approach.

Authors:  Yafei Wang; Erik Brodin; Kenichiro Nishii; Hermann B Frieboes; Shannon M Mumenthaler; Jessica L Sparks; Paul Macklin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 8.  Insights into Nanomedicine for Immunotherapeutics in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the head and neck.

Authors:  Qiang Xu; Meiyu Fang; Jing Zhu; Haoru Dong; Jun Cao; Lin Yan; Fransisca Leonard; Felix Oppel; Holger Sudhoff; Andreas M Kaufmann; Andreas E Albers; Xu Qian
Journal:  Int J Biol Sci       Date:  2020-07-19       Impact factor: 6.580

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.