Jaleesa Bresseleers1,2, Mahsa Bagheri3, Gert Storm3,4, Josbert M Metselaar5, Wim E Hennink3, Silvie A Meeuwissen1, Jan C M van Hest2. 1. ChemConnection BV - Ardena Oss, 5349 AB Oss, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Bio-Organic chemistry, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Pharmaceutics, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Faculty of Science, Utrecht University, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Section - Targeted Therapeutics, Department of Biomaterials Science and Technology, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Twente, 7522 NB Enschede, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Nanomedicine and Theranostics, Institute for Experimental Molecular Imaging RWTH University Clinic, 52074 Aachen, Germany.
Abstract
An efficient, scalable, and good manufacturing practice (GMP) compatible process was developed for the production of docetaxel-loaded poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(N-2-benzoyloxypropyl methacrylamide) (mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)) micelles. First, the synthesis of the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer was optimized through step-by-step investigation of the batch synthesis procedures. This resulted in the production of 1 kg of mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer with a 5 kDa PEG block and an overall molecular weight of 22.5 kDa. Second, the reproducibility and scalability of micelle formation was investigated for both batch and continuous flow setups by assessing critical process parameters. This resulted in the development of a new and highly efficient continuous flow process, which led to the production of 100 mL of unloaded micelles with a size of 55 nm. Finally, the loading of the micelles with the anticancer drug docetaxel was successfully fine-tuned to obtain precise control on the loaded micelle characteristics. As a result, 100 mL of docetaxel-loaded micelles (20 mg/mL polymer and 5 mg/mL docetaxel in the feed) with a size of 55 nm, an encapsulation efficiency of 65%, a loading capacity of 14%, and stable for at least 2 months in water at room temperature were produced with the newly developed continuous flow process. In conclusion, this study paves the way for efficient and robust large-scale production of docetaxel-loaded micelles with high encapsulation efficiencies and stability, which is crucial for their applicability as a clinically relevant drug delivery platform.
An efficient, scalable, and good manufacturing practice (GMP) compatible process was developed for the production of docetaxel-loaded poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(N-2-benzoyloxypropyl methacrylamide) (mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)) micelles. First, the synthesis of the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer was optimized through step-by-step investigation of the batch synthesis procedures. This resulted in the production of 1 kg of mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer with a 5 kDa PEG block and an overall molecular weight of 22.5 kDa. Second, the reproducibility and scalability of micelle formation was investigated for both batch and continuous flow setups by assessing critical process parameters. This resulted in the development of a new and highly efficient continuous flow process, which led to the production of 100 mL of unloaded micelles with a size of 55 nm. Finally, the loading of the micelles with the anticancer drug docetaxel was successfully fine-tuned to obtain precise control on the loaded micelle characteristics. As a result, 100 mL of docetaxel-loaded micelles (20 mg/mL polymerand 5 mg/mL docetaxel in the feed) with a size of 55 nm, an encapsulation efficiency of 65%, a loading capacity of 14%, and stable for at least 2 months in water at room temperature were produced with the newly developed continuous flow process. In conclusion, this study paves the way for efficient and robust large-scale production of docetaxel-loaded micelles with high encapsulation efficiencies and stability, which is crucial for their applicability as a clinically relevant drug delivery platform.
Long-standing developments
in the field of nanomedicine have resulted
in a range of promising nanocarrier formulations for drug delivery.[1−4] For example, polymeric micelles, which are core–shell nanoparticulate
structures composed of amphiphilic polymers, have attracted much attention.
Their hydrophobic core allows for the accommodation and potentially
improved pharmacokinetics of poorly water-soluble drugs such as quite
some chemotherapeutics used for cancer treatment. The hydrophilic
shell of polymer micelles, often based on the hydrophilic poly(ethylene
glycol) (PEG), provides colloidal stability and stealth-like properties.[5−10]Despite promising preclinical results and their high pharmaceutical
and economical potential,[2,11] there are still some
important hurdles that typically appear in the development process
of nanomedicines. A main challenge that needs to be tackled is the
scalable and reproducible production of not only the building blocks
but also the drug-loaded assembled nanoparticles. This challenge is
even more prominent in the relatively new area of nanomedicine due
to the complexity of the chemistry required (since nanoparticles are
usually assemblies of multiple components), the manufacturing process,
and the quality control, which should all match with the standards
of GMP.[12−14] Besides that, the instability of the nanoparticles
is also a typical issue that needs attention. During early experimentation
and preclinical research programs, these crucial aspects are often
not studied. This is reflected by very limited publications regarding
scalability, reproducibility, and process development toward GMP production
of nanomedicines.Recently, a highly promising polymer micelle
formulation based
on poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(N-2-benzoyloxypropyl methacrylamide) (mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz))
was reported.[15−17] These micelles demonstrated high drug loading for
paclitaxelanddocetaxel (DTX), drug retention, and particle stability
as a result of the π–π stacking and hydrophobic
interactions enabled by the hydrophobic benzyl groups containing blocks
in the core of the micelles. In this contribution, the chemotherapeutic
drug DTX was chosen as a model drug for the loading of the micelles
since it is a clinically well-established drug that presents high
therapeutic efficacy against a range of solid tumors. In general,
the application of DTX is limited by its dose-dependent neurotoxic
side effects and its high hydrophobic nature. For the latter, solubility
enhancers such as Cremophor EL are used, which in turn are associated
with hypersensitivity reactions.[18] In previous
studies, it was shown that DTX can be encapsulated with high efficiency
because of its high hydrophobicity and the presence of aromatic groups
in its molecular structure contributing to the π–π
stacking interactions in the core of the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)
micelles.[15]The goal of the research
described in this contribution was to
develop an efficient, scalable, and highly controlled process for
the manufacturing of the newly developed DTX-loaded polymer micelles
based on mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz), keeping GMP regulations
in mind. This was achieved by first optimizing the four-step synthesis
of the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) building block with a fixed
molecular weight of the mPEG of 5 kDa and an aimed molecular weight
of the p(HPMA-Bz) block between 15–20 kDa. Subsequently, a
thorough evaluation of batch production versus continuous flow processes
was performed to enable the selection of the preferred preparation
methodology for both unloaded and drug-loaded micelles at a large
scale.
Materials and Methods
Materials
DL-1-amino-2-propanol,
methacryloyl chloride,
sodium hydroxide (NaOH), sodium chloride (NaCl), magnesium sulfate
(MgSO4), benzoyl chloride, triethyl amine (TEA), benzoic
anhydride, 4,4′-azobis(4-cyanopentanoic acid) (ABCPA), N,N′-dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (DCC),
and trichloroacetyl isocyanate (TAIC) were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich
(Darmstadt, Germany) and used without further purification. Poly(ethylene
glycol) methyl ether (mPEG) (5 kDa) was obtained from Polysciences
(Warrington, USA) and dried in a vacuum stove overnight at 70 °C.
Docetaxel was obtained from Alfa Aesar (Kandel, Germany) and used
without further purification. All solvents were purchased from commercial
suppliers and used as received.
Monomer Synthesis
N-(2-Hydroxypropyl) methacrylamide (HPMA)
HPMA was synthesized
through the reaction between DL-1-amino-2-propanolandmethacryloyl chloride (Scheme ) without adding more stabilizing antioxidant. The
synthesis was performed by mixing 1 equiv of DL-1-amino-2-propanol
(1066 mL, 13.78 mol) with 1.2 equiv of NaOH (1475 mL of 11.2 M NaOH)
and 1500 mL water. This solution was stirred and brought to −10
°C. Then, 1.05 equiv of methacryloyl chloride (1400 mL, 14.46
mol, containing ∼200 ppm monomethyl ether hydroquinone as stabilizer)
was added dropwise in 90–120 min, while allowing the temperature
to rise to 10 °C in the first 30 min. Thereafter, the temperature
was kept constant at 10 °C. After the addition of all the methacryloyl
chloride, the temperature was allowed to reach room temperature and
the reaction was stirred for another 30 min. The mixture was analyzed
using thin layer chromatography (TLC; SiO2, eluent: toluene/acetone
6/4, coloring agent: KMnO4 stain) to verify complete conversion
of the reaction. Once the reaction was completed, three liquid extractions
with 1500 mL of toluene each were performed to remove apolar byproducts.
The product was then isolated by a liquid extraction with 3 L of dichloromethane
(DCM). Then, five more liquid extractions, each using 1500 mL of a
DCM/methanol (9:1) mixture, were performed. Each extract was analyzed
using TLC. The combined product layers were dried with MgSO4and filtered, and the product was obtained after solvent evaporation
in vacuo at 30 °C. The product was recrystallized in acetone
(100 g of product in approximately 100 mL of hot solvent) followed
by slowly cooling down the solution to room temperature and then storing
overnight at 2–7 °C. The HPMA crystals were collected
through filtration, dried under vacuum to remove remaining acetone,
and analyzed by 1H-NMR and HPLC.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of HPMA
N-(2-Benzoyloxypropyl) methacrylamide
(HPMA-Bz)
HPMA-Bz was synthesized through the coupling reaction
of HPMAandbenzoyl chloride, (no stabilizer was added) and using triethyl amine
(TEA) as a base (Scheme ). One equivalent of HPMA (1041 g, 7.27 mol) and 1.43 equiv of TEA
(1457 mL, 10.4 mol) were dissolved in 1 L of DCM. Once all the HPMA
was dissolved, the homogeneous solution was cooled to 15 °C.
Then, 1.43 equiv of benzoyl chloride (1207 mL, 10.4 mol) was added
dropwise, while keeping the temperature at 15 °C. After complete
addition of benzoyl chloride, the mixture was allowed to reach room
temperature and stirred overnight. The solution was filtered to remove
the formed TEAHCl salt, and unreacted HPMA was removed through extraction
with 1 L of water three times. The product-containing DCM layer was
dried with MgSO4, filtered, and evaporated in vacuo. The obtained
powder was stirred in 2 L of heptane to remove benzoic anhydride.
Both benzoic anhydrideandbenzoic acid are present in trace amounts
in the benzoyl chloride starting material, but both are also formed
by reaction of benzoyl chloride with water to benzoic acidand as
was shown by Dhimitruka et al. in the presence of TEA will eventually
lead to the formation of benzoic anhydride.[19] The heptane was removed by filtration, and the solid–liquid
extraction cycle was repeated until all the benzoic anhydride was
removed, as detected by HPLC (in general after two extractions). The
product was dried in vacuo at 30 °C and analyzed via HPLC and1H-NMR.
Scheme 2
Synthesis of HPMA-Bz
Macroinitiator (MI) Synthesis
The mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG macroinitiator
(MI) was synthesized, as previously described,[20] through an esterification of 1 equiv ABCPAand 2 equiv
of mPEG (Scheme ).
For this synthesis, 3 equiv of DCC was used as a coupling reagent,
and 0.3 equiv of 4-(dimethylamino)pyridinium 4-toluenesulfonate (DPTS)
was used as a catalyst (Scheme ). ABCPA, mPEG, andDPTS (12 g of ABCPA, 450 g of mPEG, and
4 g of DPTS) were dissolved in 2.25 L of DCM, and the solution was
brought to 0 °C and under a nitrogen atmosphere. Then, 26 g of
DCC was dissolved in 2.25 L of DCMand added dropwise to the cooled
solution. This mixture was left to react overnight at room temperature
and subsequently filtered to remove precipitated 1,3-dicyclohexylurea
(DCU). The product was precipitated in cold methyl-tert-butylether (MTBE), collected through filtration, and dried in vacuo.
The product was then analyzed by GPCand1H-NMR.
Scheme 3
Synthesis
of mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG Macroinitiator
Polymerization
mPEG-block-poly(N-2-benzoyloxypropyl methacrylamide) (mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)) block copolymer was synthesized via free radical polymerization
using mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG as macroinitiator (MI) and N-(2-benzoyloxypropyl methacrylamide) (HPMA-Bz) as monomer, as was
described earlier (Scheme ).[15−17] The MI and monomer were dissolved in ACN at a total
concentration of 300 g/L with a molar feed ratio of MI/HPMA-Bz (1:200
mol/mol). More specifically, 1367 g of HPMA-Bzand 300 g of MI were
dissolved in 5.5 L of ACN, and the polymerization was conducted at
70 °C under a nitrogen atmosphere for 24 h. The resulting mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer was collected through precipitation
in cold MTBE (1 L of product in ACN to 5 L of MTBE) followed by filtration.
To remove the unreacted monomer from the product, the polymer powder
was dissolved in ACN (300 g/L) and reprecipitated in cold MTBE (1
L of product in ACN to 5 L of MTBE). After filtration and drying of
the product in vacuo, the polymer was analyzed by 1H-NMR
andGPC.
Scheme 4
Synthesis of mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)
Poly(N-2-benzoyloxypropyl methacrylamide)p(HPMA-Bz)homopolymer was synthesized using the same procedure, via free radical
polymerization using ABCPA as initiator andHPMA-Bz as monomer. They
were dissolved in ACN at a total concentration of 0.3 g/ mL with a
molar feed ratio of ABCPA/HPMA-Bz (1:200 mol/mol). More specifically,
3 g of HPMA-Bzand 0.017 g of ABPCA were dissolved in 10 mL of ACN,
and the polymerization was conducted at 70 °C under a nitrogen
atmosphere for 24 h. Workup was exactly the same as described for
the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer.
Homopolymer
Removal
The polymerization procedure of
the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer, as described
in the previous section, might result also in the formation of p(HPMA-Bz)homopolymer. As pointed out and demonstrated in our previous paper,
this homopolymer will solubilize in the core of the micelles, leading
to an increase in micelle size.[20] To maintain
a highly controllable and reproducible process for the production
of micelles with a size of 50–60 nm, a procedure was developed
to remove the p(HPMA-Bz) homopolymer from the polymer mixture.mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) spiked with 10% p(HPMA-Bz) was
dissolved in ethanol (2 g in 20 mL). Since the polymers did not dissolve
in ethanol at ambient temperature, the mixture was heated to 70 °C.
This heated solution was then rapidly added to room temperature water
in a 1:1 volume ratio while continuously stirring. The precipitate
was removed by centrifugation (15 min, 2886 g), and both the supernatant
and the precipitate were dried in a vacuum oven at 40 °C overnight
to obtain the purified mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) from the
supernatant. Both the product and the precipitate (homopolymer) were
analyzed using GPCand1H-NMR.The described procedure
above was also employed for the synthesized
block copolymer to ensure no presence of homopolymer.
Micelle Preparation
in Batch
mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) micelles were
prepared in batch by dissolving the homopolymer-free
mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) in THF (20 mg/mL) and pipetting
1 mL into 1 mL of Milli-Q water as nonsolvent. After THF evaporation
overnight, this nanoprecipitation method results in the formation
of micelles. Prior to analysis, the micelle dispersions were filtered
through a 0.2 μm disk filter. Residual THF content was determined
using GC-headspace. The size of the micelles was determined by dynamic
light scattering (DLS).Instead of THF evaporation overnight,
THF can also be removed by placing the 2 mL polymer/THF/Milli-Q mixture
in a regenerated cellulose dialysis bag with a cutoff at 12–14
kDa and dialyzing against Milli-Q water overnight.
Micelle Preparation
in Continuous Flow
mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) micelles
were prepared in continuous flow by
dissolving the homopolymer-free mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)
block copolymer in THF (20 mg/mL). A homemade setup consisting of
two piston pumps was used, both at 1 mL/min, to pump both the polymer/THF
mixture and Milli-Q water via different inlets through a T-mixer to
ensure rapid mixing (Figure ). The outlet stream was collected in a flask and continuously
stirred until a total of 200 mL was collected. The THF was removed
through tangential flow filtration (TFF) and replaced by Milli-Q water
using a Sius-LS TFF Hystream, MWCO 100 kDa, 0.02 m2 cassette.
Due to the low compatibility of the membrane with THF, the micelle
dispersion was diluted 10 times using Milli-Q water prior to loading
onto the membrane. Next, using the TFF setup, the micelle dispersion
was concentrated to 20 mg/mL and the concentrated dispersion was further
purified with four diafiltration volumes of water to ensure complete
THF depletion. Eventually, this process resulted in the production
of 100 mL of micellar dispersion with a concentration of 20 mg of
polymer/mL Milli-Q. Residual THF content was determined using GC headspace.
The size of the micelles was determined by dynamic light scattering
(DLS).
Figure 1
Schematic representation of the continuous flow setup.
Schematic representation of the continuous flow setup.
Preparation of Docetaxel-Loaded Micelles
DTX-loaded
mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) micelles were prepared using the
same procedures as for the unloaded micelles described above, both
in batch and in flow. DTX was codissolved with the polymer in THF
(20 mg of polymerand 5 mg of DTX/mL THF). Using the batch setup,
1 mL of the polymer/DTX in THF was pipetted to 1 mL of Milli-Q water.
THF was removed by either evaporation overnight or overnight dialysis
against Milli-Q water using a regenerated cellulose dialysis bag with
a cutoff at 12–14 kDa. Using the continuous flow setup, two
piston pumps were used, both at 1 mL/min, to pump the polymer/DTX
in THF mixture and Milli-Q water through a T-mixer to ensure rapid
mixing. The outlet stream was collected in a flask and continuously
stirred until a total of 200 mL was collected. The THF was removed
through TFF, as described above, resulting in the production of 100
mL of micellar dispersion with a concentration of 20 mg of polymer/mL
Milli-Q. The dispersion was first filtered through a 0.45 μm
disk filter and then through a 0.2 μm disk filter to remove
free DTX. The latter filtration step can also be used for sterilization
purposes. The size of the DTX-loaded micelles was measured by DLS,
and the encapsulation efficiency of DTX in the micelles was determined
by HPLC. Residual THF content was determined using GC-headspace.
Stability Study
The stability of the unloaded andDTX-loaded
micelles was determined by storing samples at 4 °C and at room
temperature for a period up to 2 months. At different time points,
samples of the stored micelle dispersions were filtered through a
0.2 μm disk filter to remove released/free DTX. The size of
the DTX-loaded micelles was measured by DLS, and the remaining DTX
in the micelles was determined by HPLC.
1H-NMR
Approximately 20 mg of the product
was dissolved in 700 μL (for HPMA, HPMA-Bz, mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)andp(HPMA-Bz), DMSO-d6 was used as the solvent and for the MI, CDCl3 was used as the solvent) and measured using a 400 MHz NMR
with a 5 mm PABBO BB probe from Bruker.The amount of unreacted
mPEG-OH in the MI product was determined by TAIC. Five drops of TAIC
were added to the NMR tube and after 20 min, a 1H-NMR spectrum
was recorded. Using TAIC, the signal of the methylene group neighboring
the terminal hydroxyl group was reported to shift from 4.2 to 4.4
ppm.[21] The amount of unreacted mPEG-OH
was subsequently determined based on the peak areas.[17,22] The Mn of the block copolymer, before
and after removal of the homopolymer, as well as the Mn of the removed homopolymer, were determined using the
following formula
Content 1H-NMR
Content 1H-NMR
can be used to give information on the content or percentage of total
compound present in an obtained product. This is done by adding a
known amount of an internal standard with a distinct integration area
compared to those of the tested compound. In our case for HPMA-Bz,
approximately 20 mg of HPMA-Bz was dissolved in 700 μL DMSO-d6and measured using a 400 MHz NMR with a 5 mm PABBO BB probe from Bruker.
For determination of the content, ∼9 mg of maleic acid was
added to the samples as an internal reference content standard (99.94%).
The content of the compound can be calculated using the following
formulawhere Px is the
content of the sample (% m/m), Pstd is
the content of the standard (% m/m), Ix is one of the integration areas of the HPMA-Bz sample (in our case
the one at 5.59 ppm), Istd is the integration
area of the standard at 6.28 ppm, Nx is
the number of protons (1 proton) of the integrated peak at 5.59 ppm
of the HPMA-Bz sample, Nstd is the number
of protons (2 protons) of the integrated peak of the standard, Mx is the molecular weight of the sample (247.29
g/mol), Mstd is the molecular weight of
the standard (116.07 g/mol), Wx is the
weight of the sample (mg), and Wstd is
the weight of the standard (mg).
HPLC
The synthesized
HPMAandHPMA-Bz, and the encapsulated
DTX were analyzed via high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)
by injecting 1 μL, using an Agilent XDB-C18 (50 × 4.6 mm,
1.8 μm) column and a gradient flow of 1 mL/min, going from 95%
of 0.1% formic acid in waterand 5% of 0.05% formic acid in acetonitrile
(ACN) to 95% of 0.05% formic acid in ACNand 5% of 0.1% formic acid
in water. Detection was done at 254 nm for HPMAandHPMA-Bzand at
230 nm for DTX. HPMAandHPMA-Bz samples were prepared by dissolving
20 mg in 1 mL of ACN. For the determination of DTX loading, samples
were prepared by dissolving 50 μL of filtered micelle dispersion
in 950 μL of ACN. This mixture was vortexed to ensure complete
disassembly of the micelles and a homogeneous distribution of DTX
in the solution.The remaining ABCPA in de MI product was analyzed
and quantified via HPLC by injecting 10 μL, using an XBridge
C8 (50 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) column and a gradient flow of 1
mL/min, going from 98% of 0.1% formic acid in waterand 5% of 0.05%
formic acid in acetonitrile (ACN) to 95% of 0.05% formic acid in ACNand 5% of 0.1% formic acid in water. Detection was done at 210 nm.
Samples were prepared by dissolving 20 mg of MI in 1 mL of ACN.
GPC
The MI and the synthesized mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz)
before and after homopolymer removal were analyzed by
GPC to measure the number-average molecular weight (Mn), weight-average molecular weight (Mw), and molecular weight distribution using a PSS PFG
analytical linear S column andPEGs of narrow molecular weights as
calibration standards. The samples were prepared by dissolving approximately
5 mg in 1 mL of DMF containing 10 mM LiCl. Samples of 20 μL
were injected and eluted with DMF containing 10 mM LiCl as the eluent.
The elution rate was 0.7 mL/min, with a temperature of 40 °C,
and the sample was detected using a refractive index detector.
Gas Chromatography
Headspace Analysis (GC-Headspace)
To determine residual solvent
in the micellar dispersions, GC-headspace
was conducted. A Shimadzu GC-2010 equipped with a flame ionization
detector and Shimadzu HS-20 headspace autosampler was used together
with a 30 m × 0.32 mm capillary column with a film thickness
of 0.25 μm. For the internal standard, a stock solution was
prepared by dissolving 150 μL of 2-propanol (analytical standard)
in water using a volumetric 100 mL flask. One milliliter of this solution
was transferred into another 100 mL volumetric flask and diluted to
the 100 mL volume with DMF. The standard, used for the calibration,
was made by pipetting 300 μL analytical grade THF in a 50 mL
volumetric flask, which was diluted to volume with DMF. One milliliter
of this stock was transferred to a 100 mL volumetric flask and diluted
to volume with DMF to get a THF concentration of 1067 ppm. One milliliter
of this standard solution was mixed with 4 mL of internal standard
stock solution and put in a 20 mL GC-headspace vial. The samples were
prepared dissolving 50 μL of micellar dispersion in 1 mL of
DMF. To this mixture, 4 mL of internal standard stock solution was
added, and the mixture was put in a 20 mL GC-headspace vial. The flow
rate of nitrogen was 1.8 mL/min. All measurements were done in triplicate.
DLS
For dynamic light scattering (DLS) measurements,
a Malvern Zetasizer nano series ZS90 with a measurement angle of 173°
and a temperature of 25 °C was used. Concentrations were approximately
20 mg/mL, without further diluting after production.
Cryogenic
Transmission Electron Microscopy (Cryo-TEM) Analysis
Cryo-TEM
measurements were performed on loaded and unloaded, batch
made, and in flow made micelles. The samples were prepared on Quantifoil
R 2/2 grids. In short, 3 μL of micellar dispersion was pipetted
onto a grid and blotted for 3 s using a fully automated vitrification
robot (MARK III) at 20 °C and 100% relative humidity. The grid
was then rapidly plunged and frozen in liquid ethane. Micrographs
were taken using an FEI Tecnai G2 Sphera (200 kV electron source)
equipped with LaB6 filament utilizing a cryoholder or an FEI Titan
(300 kV electron source) equipped with an autoloader station.
Results
and Discussion
To attain a clinically applicable nanomedicine
formulation, all
aspects of the production, from monomer synthesis to preparation of
the drug-loaded particles, have to be done in a commercially feasible
and reproducible manner. Synthesis was therefore performed on a kilogram
scale. Furthermore, in the preclinical preparation protocol, a number
of adjustments had to be made to achieve this level of scalability.
In the following sections, the different steps are discussed in detail.
Monomer
Synthesis
HPMA Synthesis
In a publication of Kopeček and
Bažilová, HPMA was synthesized by reaction of methacryloyl
chloride with 1-amino-2-propanol in acetonitrile at 0 °C.[23] We later switched to a Schotten–Baumann
reaction overnight where 1-amino-2-propanol was stirred in a two-layer
system of waterandDCM while NaOH was titrated together with the
methacryloyl chloride to neutralize the formed HCl, resulting in a
∼80% yield.[15−17]In the present study, however, a new method
was developed in which it was decided to perform the reaction in water
only with an excess of NaOH. The presence of this excess neutralizes
the formed HCl. An additional advantage of this method was that the
reaction was completed in less than 3 h instead of overnight. Additionally,
after purification and workup, this reaction resulted in an excellent
yield of ∼90% and 99.9% purity according to HPLC (Figures S1 and S2).
HPMA-Bz Synthesis
HPMA-Bz was synthesized by the reaction
of HPMAandbenzoyl chloride. The latter contained trace amounts of
benzoyl anhydride, as detected by HPLC (Figure S3). During the HPMA-Bz synthesis, it was shown that even more
benzoyl anhydride was formed, probably due to the reaction of benzoyl
chloride with water present in the used DCM (Figure S5). This anhydride remained present during regular workup
procedures, and therefore, an adequate extraction method was developed
to remove this impurity from the solid HPMA-Bz. Multiple solvents
were tested for a solid–liquid extraction process, including
acetone, ACN, ethanol, methanol, andheptane. It was found that heptane
was able to dissolve and extract the remaining anhydride from the
product because HPMA-Bz is essentially insoluble in this solvent.
After a solid–liquid extraction, followed by filtration and
drying of the powder, HPMA-Bz was obtained in a yield of ∼85%
and a purity of 99.3%, as determined by HPLC (Figure S6) and a content of 98.5% as determined by content 1H-NMR (Figure S7).
Macroinitiator
Synthesis
Following a recently optimized
procedure,[20] the mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG MI (mPEG5K) was successfully synthesized on a large scale (450 g).
The only difference with the previous method was that the product
was precipitated in MTBE and collected through filtration instead
of centrifugation. The total yield of the synthesized MI was very
high (∼97%).As described in the Materials
and Methods section, there is a possibility that the monofunctionalized
initiator mPEG-ABCPA is formed upon MI synthesis, leading to the formation
of unwanted p(HPMA-Bz) homopolymer during radical polymerization.
This homopolymer will be solubilized in the core of the micelles,
which in turn will result in an increase in micellar size.[20] Analysis of the synthesized MI by GPC showed
that approximately 9% impurity was present in the form of a molecular
species with 5 kDa molecular weight, which corresponds to the monofunctionalized
initiator mPEG-ABCPAand /or free mPEG (Figure S9). Analysis by 1H-NMR using TAIC, which allowed
to detect the free OH group of unreacted PEG, showed that the impurity
of the MI with free mPEG-OH also amounted to 9%, indicating that the
product only contained a trace amount of mPEG-ABCPA (Figure S10). It was envisioned that using this MI would result
in only very low amounts of the homopolymerp(HPMA-Bz). However, there
is also a possibility that nonfunctionalized ABCPA is present in the
mixture, which will give p(HPMA-Bz) upon polymerization. The detection
limit of ABCPA together with MI was determined to be 0.1 wt %. Further
HPLC analysis was not able to detect any ABCPA in the actual MI mixtureand therefore indicated that only very low amounts of ABCPA were present
(below 0.1 wt %), if present at all (Figure S13). The total yield of the synthesized MI was very high (∼97%).
Polymerization of HPMA-Bz Using mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG as Macroinitiator
The mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer was successfully
synthesized on a scale of ∼1.6 kg, using mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG as
macroinitiator. After two precipitations in cold MTBE, mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) was obtained with a yield of ∼71% with
only trace amounts of residual monomer, as determined by 1H-NMR (Figure S17).Even though
the formation of p(HPMA-Bz) homopolymer was reduced, due to the optimization
of the procedure of the mPEG-ABCPA-mPEG macroinitiator, some homopolymer
is still present in the mixture, which probably comes from nonfunctionalized
ABCPA present in the mixture. Therefore, a method was successfully
developed to remove even trace amounts of p(HPMA-Bz) homopolymer.
This newly developed method can be found in the Materials
and Methods section. Upon performing this method, ∼15%
of precipitation was removed from the block copolymer mixture. It
was shown by 1H-NMR that the precipitate in ethanol has
a weight fraction of mPEG present of only 2% (Figure S18). This is 10 times smaller than envisioned for
normally synthesized block copolymerand would give a block copolymer
with an Mn of 222.3 kDa. This indicates
that it was indeed mainly p(HPMA-Bz) homopolymer that precipitated.
With the homopolymer removed, approximately 1 kg of the purified mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer (Mn, 22.5 kDa) was eventually obtained.This mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) block copolymer product
did not contain detectable residual monomer, as detected by 1H-NMR, and the molecular weights were determined by 1H-NMR
(Mn, 22.5 kDa) andGPC (Mn, 19.3 kDa and Mw, 21.6 kDa).
(Figures S16and S19).
Micelle Preparation
In previous studies, the micelles
were prepared through a nanoprecipitation method.[16,20] Purified mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) was dissolved in THFand pipetted into water. This solution was left overnight in a fume
hood for THF to spontaneously evaporate. For obvious reasons, when
working on a large scale with multiple liters of solution, this is
not a feasible method. An attempt was therefore made to remove the
THF in vacuo, which unfortunately resulted in aggregation and visual
precipitation of the polymeric material. As a result, it was decided
to remove THF using dialysis. A simple dialysis was performed for
the polymerTHF/water solution against water in a dialysis bag with
a cutoff at 12–14 kDa. This resulted in the formation of micelles
with an average diameter of ∼57 nm and a narrow size distribution
(PDI) lower than 0.1 according to DLS. This was in agreement with
the solvent evaporation method that yielded a size of ∼55 nm
and a PDI < 0.1. To replace the batch-wise dialysis process into
a scalable procedure, continuous transient flow filtration (TFF) was
explored.Previous research showed that if supersaturation upon
mixing is not obtained, micelle formation will result in poorly defined
micelles of varying sizes.[20] To reduce
the risk in these variations and therefore ensure supersaturation
of the mixture, the polymer was dissolved at high concentration (20
mg/mL) in THF, and the ratio in which this solution was added to water
was kept at 1:1 while collecting the micelle dispersions under continuous
stirring. This was first tested on a small scale, collecting only
10 mL and evaporating the THF overnight in a fume hood, which resulted
in the formation of micelles with a mean size of 55 nm and a PDI lower
than 0.1. With the continuous flow preparation, larger amounts of
micellar dispersions were prepared, diluted, concentrated, and purified
by TFF. This resulted in the production of 100 mL of micellar dispersion
in water with a concentration of 20 mg of polymer/mL and a residual
THF content below the detection limit of GC-headspace and therefore
conform safety regulations. The mean size of the micelles was 55 nm
and the PDI was below 0.1, which is the same as the micelles produced
using the batch setup. The produced micelle dispersion was split in
two parts, which were stored at 4 °C and at room temperature.
After 2 months, no precipitation or changes in size andPDI were observed
for both storage conditions. It is envisioned that even up to multiple
liters can be prepared using this newly developed continuous flow
method.For the preparation
of DTX-loaded mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) micelles, mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) was dissolved in THF (20 mg/mL), and subsequently,
DTX was added and dissolved (final concentration was 5 mg/mL). The
preparation method was first tested on a small scale in a fume hood.
To this end, 1 mL of the polymer/DTX solution was added to 1 mL of
water, and the THF was removed either by evaporation overnight in
the fume hood or by dialysis against water. Both methods resulted
in the formation of micelles with a mean size of 55 nm andPDI below
0.1, which is a similar size andPDI as the nonloaded micelles. Cryo-TEM
imaging showed no difference between the structures of the loaded
versus the nonloaded micelles (Figure ). HPLC analysis showed that the encapsulation efficiency
was ∼85% for the evaporated samples and ∼65% for the
dialyzed samples (Figure ). The loading capacities were determined to be ∼17.5
and ∼14% respectively.
Figure 2
Cryo-TEM images of the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) micelles.
Scale bars correspond to 50 nm. (A) Unloaded and prepared in batch
(average diameter, 29 nm). (B) DTX-loaded and prepared in batch (average
diameter, 28 nm). (C) Unloaded and prepared using continuous flow
(average diameter, 28 nm). (D) DTX-loaded and prepared using continuous
flow (average diameter, 27 nm).
Figure 3
Encapsulation
efficiencies of DTX-loaded micelles using batch mode
(left) and the evaporation and dialysis methods for workup and the
results of a stability study (right) at room temperature of the DTX-loaded
micelles that were prepared using the solvent evaporation method.
Time points are day 0 (D0), after 1 day (D1), after 6 days (D6), after
2 weeks (D14), after 1 month (M1), after 2 months (M2).
Cryo-TEM images of the mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) micelles.
Scale bars correspond to 50 nm. (A) Unloaded and prepared in batch
(average diameter, 29 nm). (B) DTX-loaded and prepared in batch (average
diameter, 28 nm). (C) Unloaded and prepared using continuous flow
(average diameter, 28 nm). (D) DTX-loaded and prepared using continuous
flow (average diameter, 27 nm).Encapsulation
efficiencies of DTX-loaded micelles using batch mode
(left) and the evaporation and dialysis methods for workup and the
results of a stability study (right) at room temperature of the DTX-loaded
micelles that were prepared using the solvent evaporation method.
Time points are day 0 (D0), after 1 day (D1), after 6 days (D6), after
2 weeks (D14), after 1 month (M1), after 2 months (M2).One possible hypothesis for this difference in encapsulation
efficiencies
relies on the difference between the two workup methods that leads
to a difference in the final concentration of DTX in the dispersions.
During dialysis, THF is passively replaced by waterand therefore
the micelle dispersion is diluted, whereas during evaporation, THF
is removed leaving a more concentrated dispersion. It is hypothesized
that not all DTX is perfectly partitioned into the micellar cores
with part of it located into the PEG corona. Once the micelle dispersion
is then diluted during dialysis, the DTX that is present in the corona
area will be released rapidly. In that case, visible precipitation
of DTX is observed. For the micelles prepared using the evaporation
method, this is not the case. It is envisioned that over time, the
DTX that is present in the corona area will be slowly released. Eventually,
only DTX that is partitioned in the micelle cores will remain in the
micelle dispersion and will be retained for a prolonged period of
time.The stability of the DTX-loaded micelles that were prepared
using
the solvent evaporation method was followed upon incubation of the
micellar dispersions at room temperature for 2 months. The micellar
size distribution remained similar over this entire period, whereas
the encapsulation efficiency decreased from ∼85 to ∼65%
in 2 weeks. This latter value resembles the DTX-loaded micelles that
were produced using the dialysis method. On the contrary, looking
into the stability of the DTX-loaded micelles produced in batch mode
using dialysis, the encapsulation efficiency did not decrease over
time (Figure S20). This reinforces the
hypothesis that not all DTX is partitioned in the micellar core and
that a part is located in the PEG corona. For the dialysis workup,
as mentioned before, no decrease in encapsulation efficiency was observed
over time since all the DTX that was absorbed into the corona was
already released due to the dilution factor. For the evaporation workup,
this is not the case and the DTX that is located in the PEG corona
will be released over time in the stability study. This result demonstrates
that for reproducible micelle preparation, a dialysis method is preferred.DTX-loaded micelles were also prepared using the newly developed
continuous flow procedure. The DTX/polymer in THF solution was continuously
added to Milli-Q water at a 1:1 flow ratio with a total flow rate
of 2 mL/min, using two piston pumps, until a total volume of 200 mL
was obtained. Out of this dispersion, two 1 mL samples were taken:
for one, THF was removed by overnight evaporation (Figure A) and the other sample was
dialyzed against water (Figure B). The remaining ∼200 mL micelle dispersion was filtered
over a 0.2 μm disk filter. A 1 mL sample was taken after filtration,
andTHF was removed by overnight evaporation (Figure C). The micelle dispersion was then diluted
10 times (Figure D)
and, by using TFF, concentrated to a 20 mg polymer/mL (Figure E). As a final purification
step, the micelle dispersion was washed with four diafiltration volumes,
thus four times with 100 mL of Milli-Q water to obtain the final DTX-loaded
micelle product (Figure F) without any detectable residual THF as measured by GC-headspace.
Analysis of the intermediate steps and the final product confirmed
similar behavior regarding encapsulation efficiency as was observed
for the small-scale productions. Once the micelle dispersion was further
diluted with water, either by dialysis or simple addition of the water,
the encapsulation efficiency dropped from approximately 85 to 65%.
Micelle size distributions did remain constant with an average size
of 55 nm and a PDI below 0.1, identical to those sizes obtained for
the small-scale production methods. Cryo-TEM imaging confirmed these
results (Figure ).
Figure 4
Encapsulation
efficiencies of DTX (left) of the different steps
and controls during DTX-loaded micelle production using a continuous
flow process. (A) After overnight evaporation of THF; (B) After dialysis
against water; (C) After filtration over a 0.2 μm disk filter
and overnight evaporation; (D) After diluting 10 times; (E) After
concentrating to a 20 mg/mL polymer; (F) Final DTX-loaded micelle
product. (right) Stability study at room temperature of the DTX-loaded
micelles that were produced in continuous flow. Time points are starting
point (D0), after 1 week (W1), after 3 weeks (W3), and after 2 months
(M2).
Encapsulation
efficiencies of DTX (left) of the different steps
and controls during DTX-loaded micelle production using a continuous
flow process. (A) After overnight evaporation of THF; (B) After dialysis
against water; (C) After filtration over a 0.2 μm disk filter
and overnight evaporation; (D) After diluting 10 times; (E) After
concentrating to a 20 mg/mL polymer; (F) Final DTX-loaded micelle
product. (right) Stability study at room temperature of the DTX-loaded
micelles that were produced in continuous flow. Time points are starting
point (D0), after 1 week (W1), after 3 weeks (W3), and after 2 months
(M2).The stability of the DTX-loaded
micelles regarding drug retention,
made using the continuous flow setup, was followed for a period of
2 months. After 2 months, the micelle size distribution and encapsulation
efficiency did not change significantly (Figure and Figure S19). This reinforces the hypothesis that upon micelle formation, not
all DTX is solubilized in the micellar core and that a part is present
at the core–shell interface or even in the more hydrophilic
mPEG corona. Most noteworthy, very stable particles with negligible
DTX release during storage were produced on a large scale. The described
continuous flow production process can be likely translated into a
large-scale manufacturing process for the production of liters of
loaded micelles suitable for clinical evaluation.
Conclusions
The goal of this study was to develop an efficient, scalable, and
highly controlled process for the manufacturing of DTX-containing
nanoparticles based on polymer micelles assembled from the amphiphilic
block copolymermPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz). The results demonstrate
an excellent and optimized process for the large batch synthesis on
∼1 kg scale of mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) (mPEG5K, Mn 22.5 kDa). It is important
to know that the amount of polymer produced is sufficient for the
production of enough micelle formulation to go through the first phase
of clinical trials. Using this polymer, micelles were easily made
by both batch and continuous flow setups. Comparison of the results
and feasibility for larger scale production indicates a clear preference
to use the continuous flow setup. Since the most important parameters
for homogenous micelle formation are mixing and saturation conditions,
polymer micelles were efficiently made in a reproducible manner regarding
particle size using a continuous flow processing. The loading of mPEG-b-p(HPMA-Bz) with DTX was very efficient, with outstanding
encapsulation efficiency of ∼65% and a loading capacity of
14%. Moreover, the drug-loaded micelles retained the encapsulated
drug over a prolonged period of time. Most importantly, the production
methodology described herein to produce the loaded nanoparticles can
be readily translated for production under GMP conditions for future
clinical trials.
Authors: Merel van Elk; Bruce P Murphy; Tatiane Eufrásio-da-Silva; Daniel P O'Reilly; Tina Vermonden; Wim E Hennink; Garry P Duffy; Eduardo Ruiz-Hernández Journal: Int J Pharm Date: 2016-10-07 Impact factor: 5.875
Authors: Yang Shi; Mies J van Steenbergen; Erik A Teunissen; Luís Novo; Sabine Gradmann; Marc Baldus; Cornelus F van Nostrum; Wim E Hennink Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2013-05-10 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: Vanessa Sainz; João Conniot; Ana I Matos; Carina Peres; Eva Zupancic; Liane Moura; Liana C Silva; Helena F Florindo; Rogério S Gaspar Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Yang Shi; Roy van der Meel; Benjamin Theek; Erik Oude Blenke; Ebel H E Pieters; Marcel H A M Fens; Josef Ehling; Raymond M Schiffelers; Gert Storm; Cornelus F van Nostrum; Twan Lammers; Wim E Hennink Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2015-04-06 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Mahsa Bagheri; Jaleesa Bresseleers; Aida Varela-Moreira; Olivier Sandre; Silvie A Meeuwissen; Raymond M Schiffelers; Josbert M Metselaar; Cornelus F van Nostrum; Jan C M van Hest; Wim E Hennink Journal: Langmuir Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: Mahsa Bagheri; Marcel H Fens; Tony G Kleijn; Robin B Capomaccio; Dora Mehn; Przemek M Krawczyk; Enzo M Scutigliani; Andrei Gurinov; Marc Baldus; Nicky C H van Kronenburg; Robbert J Kok; Michal Heger; Cornelus F van Nostrum; Wim E Hennink Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 4.939