Literature DB >> 34926430

Kinetics of Nanomedicine in Tumor Spheroid as an In Vitro Model System for Efficient Tumor-Targeted Drug Delivery With Insights From Mathematical Models.

Sayoni Maitra Roy1, Vrinda Garg2, Sourav Barman1, Chitrita Ghosh3, Amit Ranjan Maity1, Surya K Ghosh2.   

Abstract

Numerous strategies have been developed to treat cancer conventionally. Most importantly, chemotherapy shows its huge promise as a better treatment modality over others. Nonetheless, the very complex behavior of the tumor microenvironment frequently impedes successful drug delivery to the tumor sites that further demands very urgent and effective distribution mechanisms of anticancer drugs specifically to the tumor sites. Hence, targeted drug delivery to tumor sites has become a major challenge to the scientific community for cancer therapy by assuring drug effects to selective tumor tissue and overcoming undesired toxic side effects to the normal tissues. The application of nanotechnology to the drug delivery system pays heed to the design of nanomedicine for specific cell distribution. Aiming to limit the use of traditional strategies, the adequacy of drug-loaded nanocarriers (i.e., nanomedicine) proves worthwhile. After systemic blood circulation, a typical nanomedicine follows three levels of disposition to tumor cells in order to exhibit efficient pharmacological effects induced by the drug candidates residing within it. As a result, nanomedicine propounds the assurance towards the improved bioavailability of anticancer drug candidates, increased dose responses, and enhanced targeted efficiency towards delivery and distribution of effective therapeutic concentration, limiting toxic concentration. These aspects emanate the proficiency of drug delivery mechanisms. Understanding the potential tumor targeting barriers and limiting conditions for nanomedicine extravasation, tumor penetration, and final accumulation of the anticancer drug to tumor mass, experiments with in vivo animal models for nanomedicine screening are a key step before it reaches clinical translation. Although the study with animals is undoubtedly valuable, it has many associated ethical issues. Moreover, individual experiments are very expensive and take a longer time to conclude. To overcome these issues, nowadays, multicellular tumor spheroids are considered a promising in vitro model system that proposes better replication of in vivo tumor properties for the future development of new therapeutics. In this review, we will discuss how tumor spheroids could be used as an in vitro model system to screen nanomedicine used in targeted drug delivery, aiming for better therapeutic benefits. In addition, the recent proliferation of mathematical modeling approaches gives profound insight into the underlying physical principles and produces quantitative predictions. The hierarchical tumor structure is already well decorous to be treated mathematically. To study targeted drug delivery, mathematical modeling of tumor architecture, its growth, and the concentration gradient of oxygen are the points of prime focus. Not only are the quantitative models circumscribed to the spheroid, but also the role of modeling for the nanoparticle is equally inevitable. Abundant mathematical models have been set in motion for more elaborative and meticulous designing of nanomedicine, addressing the question regarding the objective of nanoparticle delivery to increase the concentration and the augmentative exposure of the therapeutic drug molecule to the core. Thus, to diffuse the dichotomy among the chemistry involved, biological data, and the underlying physics, the mathematical models play an indispensable role in assisting the experimentalist with further evaluation by providing the admissible quantitative approach that can be validated. This review will provide an overview of the targeted drug delivery mechanism for spheroid, using nanomedicine as an advantageous tool.
Copyright © 2021 Roy, Garg, Barman, Ghosh, Maity and Ghosh.

Entities:  

Keywords:  in vitro cell culture; mathematical modeling; multicellular tumor spheroids; nanomedicine; tumor microenvironment; tumor penetration and accumulation; tumor-targeted drug delivery

Year:  2021        PMID: 34926430      PMCID: PMC8671936          DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.785937

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol        ISSN: 2296-4185


  170 in total

Review 1.  Nanoscale drug delivery systems for enhanced drug penetration into solid tumors: current progress and opportunities.

Authors:  Carolyn L Waite; Charles M Roth
Journal:  Crit Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2012

2.  Polymeric Hybrid Nanomicelles for Cancer Theranostics: An Efficient and Precise Anticancer Strategy for the Codelivery of Doxorubicin/miR-34a and Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Xiaoxue Xie; Yu Chen; Zhongyuan Chen; Yi Feng; Jing Wang; Tingting Li; Shun Li; Xiang Qin; Chunhui Wu; Chuan Zheng; Jie Zhu; Fengming You; Yiyao Liu; Hong Yang
Journal:  ACS Appl Mater Interfaces       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 9.229

Review 3.  Factors controlling the pharmacokinetics, biodistribution and intratumoral penetration of nanoparticles.

Authors:  Mark J Ernsting; Mami Murakami; Aniruddha Roy; Shyh-Dar Li
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 9.776

4.  Hyaluronic acid-coated single-walled carbon nanotubes loaded with doxorubicin for the treatment of breast cancer.

Authors:  Dan Liu; Qi Zhang; Jing Wang; Li Fan; Wenquan Zhu; Defu Cai
Journal:  Pharmazie       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 1.267

5.  Chlorin e6 Conjugated Methoxy-Poly(Ethylene Glycol)-Poly(D,L-Lactide) Glutathione Sensitive Micelles for Photodynamic Therapy.

Authors:  Preeti Kumari; Milan Paul; Himanshu Bhatt; Sri Vishnu Kiran Rompicharla; Debolina Sarkar; Balaram Ghosh; Swati Biswas
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Cancer-Cell-Membrane-Coated Nanoparticles with a Yolk-Shell Structure Augment Cancer Chemotherapy.

Authors:  Di Nie; Zhuo Dai; Jialin Li; Yiwei Yang; Ziyue Xi; Jie Wang; Wei Zhang; Kun Qian; Shiyan Guo; Chunliu Zhu; Rui Wang; Yiming Li; Miaorong Yu; Xinxin Zhang; Xinghua Shi; Yong Gan
Journal:  Nano Lett       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 11.189

Review 7.  Tumor Hypoxia as a Barrier in Cancer Therapy: Why Levels Matter.

Authors:  Tord Hompland; Christina Sæten Fjeldbo; Heidi Lyng
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 8.  Nanodrugs: pharmacokinetics and safety.

Authors:  Satomi Onoue; Shizuo Yamada; Hak-Kim Chan
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2014-02-20

Review 9.  Tumor angiogenesis and anti-angiogenic gene therapy for cancer.

Authors:  Tinglu Li; Guangbo Kang; Tingyue Wang; He Huang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 2.967

10.  2D and 3D cell cultures - a comparison of different types of cancer cell cultures.

Authors:  Marta Kapałczyńska; Tomasz Kolenda; Weronika Przybyła; Maria Zajączkowska; Anna Teresiak; Violetta Filas; Matthew Ibbs; Renata Bliźniak; Łukasz Łuczewski; Katarzyna Lamperska
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 3.318

View more
  1 in total

1.  Intrinsic Differences in Spatiotemporal Organization and Stromal Cell Interactions Between Isogenic Lung Cancer Cells of Epithelial and Mesenchymal Phenotypes Revealed by High-Dimensional Single-Cell Analysis of Heterotypic 3D Spheroid Models.

Authors:  Maria L Lotsberg; Gro V Røsland; Austin J Rayford; Sissel E Dyrstad; Camilla T Ekanger; Ning Lu; Kirstine Frantz; Linda E B Stuhr; Henrik J Ditzel; Jean Paul Thiery; Lars A Akslen; James B Lorens; Agnete S T Engelsen
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 5.738

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.