Lu Wang1,2, Yafei Rao1, Xiali Liu1, Liya Sun3, Jiameng Gong3, Huasheng Zhang4, Lei Shen4, Aihua Bao5, Hong Yang6,7. 1. Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 201620, China. 2. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongda Hospital, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China. 3. School of Biomedical Engineering, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China. 4. Shanghai Institute of Immunology, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200025, China. 5. Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 201620, China. aihuabao312@126.com. 6. School of Biomedical Engineering, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China. hongyang@tmu.edu.cn. 7. The Province and Ministry Co-Sponsored Collaborative Innovation Center for Medical Epigenetics, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China. hongyang@tmu.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled inflammation is a central problem for many respiratory diseases. The development of potent, targeted anti-inflammatory therapies to reduce lung inflammation and re-establish the homeostasis in the respiratory tract is still a challenge. Previously, we developed a unique anti-inflammatory nanodrug, P12 (made of hexapeptides and gold nanoparticles), which can attenuate Toll-like receptor-mediated inflammatory responses in macrophages. However, the effect of the administration route on its therapeutic efficacy and tissue distribution remained to be defined. RESULTS: In this study, we systematically compared the effects of three different administration routes [the intratracheal (i.t.), intravenous (i.v.) and intraperitoneal (i.p.)] on the therapeutic activity, biodistribution and pulmonary cell targeting features of P12. Using the LPS-induced ALI mouse model, we found that the local administration route via i.t. instillation was superior in reducing lung inflammation than the other two routes even treated with a lower concentration of P12. Further studies on nanoparticle biodistribution showed that the i.t. administration led to more accumulation of P12 in the lungs but less in the liver and other organs; however, the i.v. and i.p. administration resulted in more nanoparticle accumulation in the liver and lymph nodes, respectively, but less in the lungs. Such a lung favorable distribution was also determined by the unique surface chemistry of P12. Furthermore, the inflammatory condition in the lung could decrease the accumulation of nanoparticles in the lung and liver, while increasing their distribution in the spleen and heart. Interestingly, the i.t. administration route helped the nanoparticles specifically target the lung macrophages, whereas the other two administration routes did not. CONCLUSION: The i.t. administration is better for treating ALI using nanodevices as it enhances the bioavailability and efficacy of the nanodrugs in the target cells of the lung and reduces the potential systematic side effects.
BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled inflammation is a central problem for many respiratory diseases. The development of potent, targeted anti-inflammatory therapies to reduce lung inflammation and re-establish the homeostasis in the respiratory tract is still a challenge. Previously, we developed a unique anti-inflammatory nanodrug, P12 (made of hexapeptides and gold nanoparticles), which can attenuate Toll-like receptor-mediated inflammatory responses in macrophages. However, the effect of the administration route on its therapeutic efficacy and tissue distribution remained to be defined. RESULTS: In this study, we systematically compared the effects of three different administration routes [the intratracheal (i.t.), intravenous (i.v.) and intraperitoneal (i.p.)] on the therapeutic activity, biodistribution and pulmonary cell targeting features of P12. Using the LPS-induced ALI mouse model, we found that the local administration route via i.t. instillation was superior in reducing lung inflammation than the other two routes even treated with a lower concentration of P12. Further studies on nanoparticle biodistribution showed that the i.t. administration led to more accumulation of P12 in the lungs but less in the liver and other organs; however, the i.v. and i.p. administration resulted in more nanoparticle accumulation in the liver and lymph nodes, respectively, but less in the lungs. Such a lung favorable distribution was also determined by the unique surface chemistry of P12. Furthermore, the inflammatory condition in the lung could decrease the accumulation of nanoparticles in the lung and liver, while increasing their distribution in the spleen and heart. Interestingly, the i.t. administration route helped the nanoparticles specifically target the lung macrophages, whereas the other two administration routes did not. CONCLUSION: The i.t. administration is better for treating ALI using nanodevices as it enhances the bioavailability and efficacy of the nanodrugs in the target cells of the lung and reduces the potential systematic side effects.