Visualization of the distribution of nanoparticle-formulated AZD2811 in mouse tumor model using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry imaging

Stimuli-Responsive Polymer-Based Nanosystems for Cancer Theranostics

Stimuli-responsive polymers can respond to internal stimuli, such as reactive oxygen species (ROS), glutathione (GSH), and pH, biological stimuli, such as enzymes, and external stimuli, such as lasers and ultrasound, etc., by changing their hydrophobicity/hydrophilicity, degradability, ionizability, etc., and thus have been widely used in biomedical applications. Due to the characteristics of the tumor microenvironment (TME), stimuli-responsive polymers that cater specifically to the TME have been extensively used to prepare smart nanovehicles for the targeted delivery of therapeutic and diagnostic agents to tumor tissues. Compared to conventional drug delivery nanosystems, TME-responsive nanosystems have many advantages, such as high sensitivity, broad applicability among different tumors, functional versatility, and improved biosafety. In recent years, a great deal of research has been devoted to engineering efficient stimuli-responsive polymeric nanosystems, and significant improvement has been made to both cancer diagnosis and therapy. In this review, we summarize some recent research advances involving the use of stimuli-responsive polymer nanocarriers in drug delivery, tumor imaging, therapy, and theranostics. Various chemical stimuli will be described in the context of stimuli-responsive nanosystems. Accordingly, the functional chemical groups responsible for the responsiveness and the strategies to incorporate these groups into the polymer will be discussed in detail. With the research on this topic expending at a fast pace, some innovative concepts, such as sequential and cascade drug release, NIR-II imaging, and multifunctional formulations, have emerged as popular strategies for enhanced performance, which will also be included here with up-to-date illustrations. We hope that this review will offer valuable insights for the selection and optimization of stimuli-responsive polymers to help accelerate their future applications in cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Advances in Structure Pharmaceutics from Discovery to Evaluation and Design

Drug delivery systems (DDSs) play an important role in delivering active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) to targeted sites with a predesigned release pattern. The chemical and biological properties of APIs and excipients have been extensively studied for their contribution to DDS quality and effectiveness; however, the structural characteristics of DDSs have not been adequately explored. Structure pharmaceutics involves the study of the structure of DDSs, especially the three-dimensional (3D) structures, and its interaction with the physiological and pathological structure of organisms, possibly influencing their release kinetics and targeting abilities. A systematic overview of the structures of a variety of dosage forms, such as tablets, granules, pellets, microspheres, powders, and nanoparticles, is presented. Moreover, the influence of structures on the release and targeting capability of DDSs has also been discussed, especially the in vitro and in vivo release correlation and the structure-based organ- and tumor-targeting capabilities of particles with different structures. Additionally, an in-depth discussion is provided regarding the application of structural strategies in the DDSs design and evaluation. Furthermore, some of the most frequently used characterization techniques in structure pharmaceutics are briefly described along with their potential future applications.

A nano-preparation approach to enable the delivery of daphnoretin to potentiate the therapeutical efficacy in hepatocellular cancer

Daphnoretin (DAP), isolated from a traditional Chinese medicine Wikstroemia indica (Linn. C. A. Meyer), could induce apoptosis of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and inhibit tumor growth. However, the application of DAP in cancer therapies was hampered because to its poor solubility. Herein, this study aimed to design an approach of double-targeted nano-preparation to enable the delivery of DAP to potentiate the therapeutical efficacy in liver cancer via glycyrrhetinic acid-polyethylene glycol-block-poly (D,L-lactic acid)/polyethylene glycol-block-poly (D,L-lactic acid)-DAP (GPP/PP-DAP). In particular, the purity of separated DAP was up to 98.12% for preparation research. GPP/PP-DAP was successfully prepared by the thin-film hydration method. Subsequently, the GPP/PP-DAP was optimized by univariate analysis and the response surface methodology, producing a stable and systemically injectable nano-preparation. Impressively, on the one hand, cytotoxicity studies showed that the IC₅₀ of the GPP/PP-DAP was lower than that of free DAP. On the other hand, the GPP/PP-DAP was more likely to be endocytosed by HepG2 cells and targeted to the liver with orthotopic tumors, potentiating the therapeutical efficacy in HCC. Collectively, both in vitro and in vivo results indicated the excellent tumor inhibition and liver targeting of GPP/PP-DAP, suggesting the nano-preparation could serve as a potential drug delivery system for natural ingredients with anti-hepatoma activity to lay the theoretical foundation for clinical application.

Method To Visualize the Intratumor Distribution and Impact of Gemcitabine in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Multimodal Imaging

Gemcitabine (dFdC) is a common treatment for pancreatic cancer; however, it is thought that treatment may fail because tumor stroma prevents drug distribution to tumor cells. Gemcitabine is a pro-drug with active metabolites generated intracellularly; therefore, visualizing the distribution of parent drug as well as its metabolites is important. A multimodal imaging approach was developed using spatially coregistered mass spectrometry imaging (MSI), imaging mass cytometry (IMC), multiplex immunofluorescence microscopy (mIF), and hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining to assess the local distribution and metabolism of gemcitabine in tumors from a genetically engineered mouse model of pancreatic cancer (KPC) allowing for comparisons between effects in the tumor tissue and its microenvironment. Mass spectrometry imaging (MSI) enabled the visualization of the distribution of gemcitabine (100 mg/kg), its phosphorylated metabolites dFdCMP, dFdCDP and dFdCTP, and the inactive metabolite dFdU. Distribution was compared to small-molecule ATR inhibitor AZD6738 (25 mg/kg), which was codosed. Gemcitabine metabolites showed heterogeneous distribution within the tumor, which was different from the parent compound. The highest abundance of dFdCMP, dFdCDP, and dFdCTP correlated with distribution of endogenous AMP, ADP, and ATP in viable tumor cell regions, showing that gemcitabine active metabolites are reaching the tumor cell compartment, while AZD6738 was located to nonviable tumor regions. The method revealed that the generation of active, phosphorylated dFdC metabolites as well as treatment-induced DNA damage primarily correlated with sites of high proliferation in KPC PDAC tumor tissue, rather than sites of high parent drug abundance.

Comparative study on the efficacy and exposure of molecular target agents in non-small cell lung cancer PDX models with driver genetic alterations

Patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) can adequately reflect clinical drug efficacy. However, the methods for evaluating drug efficacy are not fully established. We selected five non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) PDXs with genetic alterations from established PDXs and the corresponding molecular targeted therapy was administered orally for 21 consecutive days. Genetic analysis, measurement of drug concentrations in blood and tumors using liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry, and analysis of drug distribution in tumors using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry were performed. Fifteen (20%) PDXs were established using samples collected from 76 NSCLC patients with genetic alterations. The genetic alterations observed in original patients were largely maintained in PDXs. We compared the drug efficacy in original patients and PDX models; the efficacies against certain PDXs correlated with the clinical effects, while those against the others did not. We determined blood and intratumor concentrations in the PDX model, but both concentrations were low, and no evident correlation with the drug efficacy could be observed. The intratumoral spatial distribution of the drugs was both homogeneous and heterogeneous for each drug, and the distribution was independent of the expression of the target protein. The evaluation of drug efficacy in PDXs enabled partial reproduction of the therapeutic effect in original patients. A more detailed analysis of systemic and intratumoral pharmacokinetics may help clarify the mode of action of drugs. Further development of evaluation methods and indices to improve the prediction accuracy of clinical efficacy is warranted.