» Articles » PMID: 19263431

Systematic Surface Engineering of Magnetic Nanoworms for in Vivo Tumor Targeting

Overview
Journal Small
Date 2009 Mar 6
PMID 19263431
Citations 102
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the design of nanoparticles that can target disease tissue in vivo, parameters such as targeting ligand density, type of target receptor, and nanoparticle shape can play an important role in determining the extent of accumulation. Herein, a systematic study of these parameters for the targeting of mouse xenograft tumors is performed using superparamagnetic iron oxide as a model nanoparticle system. The type of targeting peptide (recognizing cell surface versus extracellular matrix), the surface coverage of the peptide, its attachment chemistry, and the shape of the nanomaterial [elongated (nanoworm, NW) versus spherical (nanosphere, NS)] are varied. Nanoparticle circulation times and in vivo tumor-targeting efficiencies are quantified in two xenograft models of human tumors (MDA-MB-435 human carcinoma and HT1080 human fibrosarcoma). It is found that the in vivo tumor-targeting ability of the NW is superior to that of the NS, that the smaller, neutral CREKA targeting group is more effective than the larger, positively charged F3 molecule, that a maximum in tumor-targeting efficiency and blood half-life is observed with approximately 60 CREKA peptides per NW for either the HT1080 or the MDA-MB-435 tumor types, and that incorporation of a 5-kDa polyethylene glycol linker improves targeting to both tumor types relative to a short linker. It is concluded that the blood half-life of a targeting molecule-nanomaterial ensemble is a key consideration when selecting the appropriate ligand and nanoparticle chemistry for tumor targeting.

Citing Articles

Cancer cell membrane-coated nanoparticles: a promising anti-tumor bionic platform.

Guo Q, Wang S, Xu R, Tang Y, Xia X RSC Adv. 2024; 14(15):10608-10637.

PMID: 38567339 PMC: 10985588. DOI: 10.1039/d4ra01026d.


Understanding the in vivo Fate of Advanced Materials by Imaging.

Li R, Ng T, Garlin M, Weissleder R, Miller M Adv Funct Mater. 2024; 30(37).

PMID: 38545084 PMC: 10972611. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201910369.


Complement-dependent uptake of nanoparticles by blood phagocytes: brief overview and perspective.

Li Y, Moein Moghimi S, Simberg D Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2023; 85:103044.

PMID: 38091875 PMC: 11214757. DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2023.103044.


Effects of morphology and size of nanoscale drug carriers on cellular uptake and internalization process: a review.

Zhang W, Taheri-Ledari R, Ganjali F, Mirmohammadi S, Qazi F, Saeidirad M RSC Adv. 2023; 13(1):80-114.

PMID: 36605676 PMC: 9764328. DOI: 10.1039/d2ra06888e.


Multifunctional ROS-Responsive and TME-Modulated Lipid-Polymer Hybrid Nanoparticles for Enhanced Tumor Penetration.

Ni R, Huang L, Li Z, Zhang W, Wang Y, Shen Y Int J Nanomedicine. 2022; 17:5883-5897.

PMID: 36478745 PMC: 9721131. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S383517.


References
1.
Reddy G, Bhojani M, McConville P, Moody J, Moffat B, Hall D . Vascular targeted nanoparticles for imaging and treatment of brain tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2006; 12(22):6677-86. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0946. View

2.
Heller F, Dobson J . Analysis of magnetic material in the human heart, spleen and liver. Biometals. 1997; 10(4):351-5. DOI: 10.1023/a:1018340920329. View

3.
Allen T . Ligand-targeted therapeutics in anticancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002; 2(10):750-63. DOI: 10.1038/nrc903. View

4.
Farokhzad O, Cheng J, Teply B, Sherifi I, Jon S, Kantoff P . Targeted nanoparticle-aptamer bioconjugates for cancer chemotherapy in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006; 103(16):6315-20. PMC: 1458875. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0601755103. View

5.
Goldsmith S . Receptor imaging: competitive or complementary to antibody imaging?. Semin Nucl Med. 1997; 27(2):85-93. DOI: 10.1016/s0001-2998(97)80041-4. View