| Literature DB >> 35127374 |
Shuwen Fu1, Guanting Li2, Wenli Zang3, Xinyu Zhou4, Kexin Shi5, Yinglei Zhai5.
Abstract
Nanoparticulate drug delivery systems (Nano-DDSs) have emerged as possible solution to the obstacles of anticancer drug delivery. However, the clinical outcomes and translation are restricted by several drawbacks, such as low drug loading, premature drug leakage and carrier-related toxicity. Recently, pure drug nano-assemblies (PDNAs), fabricated by the self-assembly or co-assembly of pure drug molecules, have attracted considerable attention. Their facile and reproducible preparation technique helps to remove the bottleneck of nanomedicines including quality control, scale-up production and clinical translation. Acting as both carriers and cargos, the carrier-free PDNAs have an ultra-high or even 100% drug loading. In addition, combination therapies based on PDNAs could possibly address the most intractable problems in cancer treatment, such as tumor metastasis and drug resistance. In the present review, the latest development of PDNAs for cancer treatment is overviewed. First, PDNAs are classified according to the composition of drug molecules, and the assembly mechanisms are discussed. Furthermore, the co-delivery of PDNAs for combination therapies is summarized, with special focus on the improvement of therapeutic outcomes. Finally, future prospects and challenges of PDNAs for efficient cancer therapy are spotlighted.Entities:
Keywords: ABC, accelerated blood clearance; ACT, adoptive cell transfer; ATO, atovaquone; ATP, adenosine triphosphate; BV, Biliverdin; Ber, berberine; CI, combination index; CPT, camptothecin; CTLs, cytotoxic T lymphocytes; Cancer treatment; Carrier-free; Ce6, chlorine e6; Combination therapy; DBNP, DOX-Ber nano-assemblies; DBNP@CM, DBNP were cloaked with 4T1 cell membranes; DCs, dendritic cells; DOX, doxorubicin; DPDNAs, dual pure drug nano-assemblies; EGFR, epithelial growth factor receptor; EPI, epirubicin; EPR, enhanced permeability and retention; FRET, Forster Resonance Energy Transfer; GEF, gefitinib; HCPT, hydroxycamptothecin; HMGB1, high-mobility group box 1; IC50, half maximal inhibitory concentration; ICB, immunologic checkpoint blockade; ICD, immunogenic cell death; ICG, indocyanine green; ITM, immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment; MDS, molecular dynamics simulations; MPDNAs, multiple pure drug nano-assemblies; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; MTX, methotrexate; NIR, near-infrared; NPs, nanoparticles; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; Nano-DDSs, nanoparticulate drug delivery systems; Nanomedicine; Nanotechnology; PAI, photoacoustic imaging; PD-1, PD receptor 1; PD-L1, PD receptor 1 ligand; PDNAs, pure drug nano-assemblies; PDT, photodynamic therapy; PPa, pheophorbide A; PTT, photothermal therapy; PTX, paclitaxel; Poly I:C, polyriboinosinic:polyribocytidylic acid; Pure drug; QSNAP, quantitative structure-nanoparticle assembly prediction; RBC, red blood cell; RNA, ribonucleic acid; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SPDNAs, single pure drug nano-assemblies; Self-assembly; TA, tannic acid; TEM, transmission electron microscopy; TLR4, Toll-like receptor 4; TME, tumor microenvironment; TNBC, triple negative breast; TTZ, trastuzumab; Top I & II, topoisomerase I & II; UA, ursolic acid; YSV, tripeptide tyroservatide; ZHO, Z-Histidine-Obzl; dsRNA, double-stranded RNA; α-PD-L1, anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody
Year: 2021 PMID: 35127374 PMCID: PMC8799886 DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2021.08.012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Pharm Sin B ISSN: 2211-3835 Impact factor: 11.413
Figure 1Pure drug nano-assemblies for efficient cancer therapy.
List of pure drug nano-assemblies for cancer therapy.
| Drug 1 | Drug 2 | Drug 3 | Ratio | Drug loading | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Curcumin | – | – | – | 78% | |
| – | – | – | 100% | ||
| Ursolic acid | – | – | – | ~60% | |
| DiR | – | – | – | 80% | |
| Camptothecin | – | – | – | 74.8% | |
| – | – | – | 100% | ||
| Hydroxycamptothecin | – | – | – | 78% | |
| Paclitaxel | – | – | – | 88.5% | |
| – | – | – | 100% | ||
| Doxorubicin | – | – | – | 90.47% | |
| Chlorin e6 | – | – | – | 100% | |
| BMS-202 | – | – | – | 100% | |
| Vitamin B2 | – | – | – | – | |
| Teniposide | – | – | – | 100% | |
| Squaraine | – | – | – | 100% | |
| Methotrexate | – | – | – | 100% | |
| H2TpyP | – | – | – | 100% | |
| 6-mercaptopurine | – | – | – | 100% | |
| Teniposide | Paclitaxel | – | – | 100% | |
| H2TpyP | – | – | 100% | ||
| Ursolic acid | Isothiocyanate | – | – | – | |
| Hydroxycamptothecin | Doxorubicin | – | 1:4 (m) | ~100% | |
| Irinotecan | SN38 | – | 1:1 (m) | ~100% | |
| Curcumin | – | 1:2 (m) | ~95% | ||
| Topotecan | Curcumin | – | – | – | |
| Clopidogrel | Pheophorbide A | – | 37.1:29 (w) | 66.1% | |
| Indocyanine green | Epirubicin | – | 1:2 (m) | ~92% | |
| Hydroxycamptothecin | – | 1:2 (m) | ~92% | ||
| Paclitaxel | – | 9.2:90.7 (w) | ~100% | ||
| NLG919 | – | – | – | ||
| Gefitinib | – | – | – | ||
| Sorafenib | – | – | – | ||
| Vandetanib | – | – | – | ||
| Probucol | – | – | – | ||
| Bicalutamide | – | – | – | ||
| Celecoxib | – | – | – | ||
| Azelnidipine | – | – | – | ||
| Chlorin e6 | Sorafenib | – | 1:1 (w) | ~100% | |
| Doxorubicin | – | 2:1 (m) | ~100% | ||
| Hydroxycamptothecin | – | 1:4 (m) | – | ||
| Fmoc- | – | 1:4 (w) | ~100% | ||
| Diphenylalanine | – | 1:4 (w) | ~100% | ||
| Erastin | – | 1:3.55 (w) | ~100% | ||
| Atovaquone | – | 26.7:73.3 (w) | ~100% | ||
| BMS-202 | – | 1:2 (w) | 100% | ||
| DiR | Chlorin e6 | – | 2:1 (m) | 100% | |
| Hypericin | – | 2:1 (m) | 100% | ||
| 3-Bodipy-propanoic acid | – | 2:1 (m) | 100% | ||
| Zinc phthalocyanine | – | 2:1 (m) | 100% | ||
| Pheophorbide A | – | 2:1 (m) | 100% | ||
| Paclitaxel | Indomethacin | – | 1:2 (w) | – | |
| Poly I:C | – | 64:3 (w) | 67% | ||
| Gefitinib | Tyroservatide | – | 1:11.25 (w) | ~100% | |
| Porphyrin | Adenosine triphosphate | – | ~6:4 (w) | ~100% | |
| Doxorubicin | Celastrol | Mn2+ | 1:4 (m) | ~100% | |
| Berberine | Trastuzumab | 4:1 (w) | – | ||
| Biliverdin | Methotrexate | 6:2:5 (m) | ~100% | ||
| Camptothecin | Doxorubicin | H2TPyP | 25.7:67.3:7 (w) | ~100% | |
| Hydroxycamptothecin | Paclitaxel | Ursolic acid | 49.1:26.6:24.3 (w) | – | |
| Curcumin | Perylene | Doxorubicin | 77.6:22.3:0.1 (w) | ~100% | |
| Indocyanine green | Paclitaxel | 23.58:51.27:25.14 (w) | ~100% | ||
| Tannic acid | ~37:39:24 (w) | ~100% |
‒Not applicable.
The molar ratio is abbreviated as (m), and the mass ratio was abbreviated as (w).
Figure 2(A) Self-assembly of DiR molecules into uniform nano-assemblies. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 22. Copyright © 2018 ACS Publishing Group. (B) Schematic illustration of the ice-template-assisted strategy. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 32. Copyright © 2018 ACS Publishing Group.
Figure 3(A1) Schematic illustration of the RBC membranes cloaked ICG-HCPT nano-assemblies. (A2) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images of ICG-HCPT nano-assemblies with different molar ratios of HCPT to ICG (1:0, 4:1, 2:1, 1:1, 1:2, and 1:4). Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 37. Copyright © 2019 ACS Publishing Group. (B) Schematic illustration of the charge-conversional irinotecan-curcumin nano-assemblies for better targeted cancer therapy. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 38. Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. (C) Schematic illustration of the porphyrin-ATP nanofibers. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 39. Copyright © 2021 ACS Publishing Group.
Figure 4Step-by-step assembly process and lysosome escape of DTIG NPs. (A) First step assembly of DOX and TA into DT NPs. (B) Second step assembly of ICG and DT NPs into DTIG NPs. (C) Schematic illustration of the hydrophilic-hydrophobic conversion and size conversion of DTIG NPs. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 44. Copyright © 2020 ACS Publishing Group.
Figure 5Assembly mechanisms of pure drug nano-assemblies. (A) Intermolecular interactions between drug molecules and water molecules in aqueous solution. (B) Intermolecular interactions during the self-assembly of single drug molecules in aqueous solution. (C) Intermolecular interactions during the co-assembly of different drug molecules in aqueous solution. (D) Graphical symbols.
Figure 6BVMn NPs for multimodal tumor imaging and photothermal therapy. (A) Schematic illustration of BVMn NPs. (B) Photoacoustic imaging of MCF-7 tumor-bearing mice treated with BVMn NPs. (C) T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of MCF-7 tumor-bearing mice treated with BVMn NPs. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 61. Copyright © 2019 John Wiley and Sons Group.
Figure 7(A) Schematic illustration of DBNP@CM for efficient chemotherapy with minimal chemotherapy-exacerbated metastasis. (B) Biodistribution of DBNP@CM. (C) Images of lung tissues. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 60. Copyright © 2021, Elsevier Inc.
Figure 8(A) Schematic illustration of the FRET photosensitizer pairs co-assembled erythrocyte camouflaged Ce6@DiR-M NPs for programmed cascade-activatable PTT-PDT with low phototoxicity. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 23. Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. (B) Schematic illustration of ATO-Ce6 NPs for O2-economized PDT. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 55. Copyright © 2020 ACS Publishing Group.
Figure 9(A1) Molecular presentation and self-assembly of Ce6 and BMS-202. (A2) Ce6/BMS-202 NPs potentiate PD-L1 blockade to induce systemic antitumor immunity for combination of ICB immunotherapy and PDT. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 47. Copyright © 2019 John Wiley and Sons Group. (B1) Self-assembly of PTX-ICG nano-assemblies. (B2) Schematic illustration of PTX-ICG NPs for immuno-photo-chemo triple therapy. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 33. Copyright © 2020 John Wiley and Sons Group. (C) Schematic illustration of the PNRplex for cytosolic targeting chemo-immunotherapy. Reprinted with the permission from Ref. 57. Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc.