9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Mimicking Tumors: Toward More Predictive In Vitro Models for Peptide- and Protein-Conjugated Drugs

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Macromolecular drug candidates and nanoparticles are typically tested in 2D cancer cell culture models, which are often directly followed by in vivo animal studies. The majority of these drug candidates, however, fail in vivo. In contrast to classical small-molecule drugs, multiple barriers exist for these larger molecules that two-dimensional approaches do not recapitulate. In order to provide better mechanistic insights into the parameters controlling success and failure and due to changing ethical perspectives on animal studies, there is a growing need for in vitro models with higher physiological relevance. This need is reflected by an increased interest in 3D tumor models, which during the past decade have evolved from relatively simple tumor cell aggregates to more complex models that incorporate additional tumor characteristics as well as patient-derived material. This review will address tissue culture models that implement critical features of the physiological tumor context such as 3D structure, extracellular matrix, interstitial flow, vascular extravasation, and the use of patient material. We will focus on specific examples, relating to peptide-and protein-conjugated drugs and other nanoparticles, and discuss the added value and limitations of the respective approaches.

          Related collections

          Most cited references79

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Tumor delivery of macromolecular drugs based on the EPR effect.

          Enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect is the physiology-based principal mechanism of tumor accumulation of large molecules and small particles. This specific issue of Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews is summing up multiple data on the EPR effect-based drug design and clinical outcome. In this commentary, the role of the EPR effect in the intratumoral delivery of protein and peptide drugs, macromolecular drugs and drug-loaded long-circulating pharmaceutical nanocarriers is briefly discussed together with some additional opportunities for drug delivery arising from the initial EPR effect-mediated accumulation of drug-containing macromolecular systems in tumors. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Recent advances in three-dimensional multicellular spheroid culture for biomedical research.

            Many types of mammalian cells can aggregate and differentiate into 3-D multicellular spheroids when cultured in suspension or a nonadhesive environment. Compared to conventional monolayer cultures, multicellular spheroids resemble real tissues better in terms of structural and functional properties. Multicellular spheroids formed by transformed cells are widely used as avascular tumor models for metastasis and invasion research and for therapeutic screening. Many primary or progenitor cells on the other hand, show significantly enhanced viability and functional performance when grown as spheroids. Multicellular spheroids in this aspect are ideal building units for tissue reconstruction. Here we review the current understanding of multicellular spheroid formation mechanisms, their biomedical applications, and recent advances in spheroid culture, manipulation, and analysis techniques.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Drug targeting to tumors: principles, pitfalls and (pre-) clinical progress.

              Many different systems and strategies have been evaluated for drug targeting to tumors over the years. Routinely used systems include liposomes, polymers, micelles, nanoparticles and antibodies, and examples of strategies are passive drug targeting, active drug targeting to cancer cells, active drug targeting to endothelial cells and triggered drug delivery. Significant progress has been made in this area of research both at the preclinical and at the clinical level, and a number of (primarily passively tumor-targeted) nanomedicine formulations have been approved for clinical use. Significant progress has also been made with regard to better understanding the (patho-) physiological principles of drug targeting to tumors. This has led to the identification of several important pitfalls in tumor-targeted drug delivery, including I) overinterpretation of the EPR effect; II) poor tumor and tissue penetration of nanomedicines; III) misunderstanding of the potential usefulness of active drug targeting; IV) irrational formulation design, based on materials which are too complex and not broadly applicable; V) insufficient incorporation of nanomedicine formulations in clinically relevant combination regimens; VI) negligence of the notion that the highest medical need relates to metastasis, and not to solid tumor treatment; VII) insufficient integration of non-invasive imaging techniques and theranostics, which could be used to personalize nanomedicine-based therapeutic interventions; and VIII) lack of (efficacy analyses in) proper animal models, which are physiologically more relevant and more predictive for the clinical situation. These insights strongly suggest that besides making ever more nanomedicine formulations, future efforts should also address some of the conceptual drawbacks of drug targeting to tumors, and that strategies should be developed to overcome these shortcomings. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Bioconjug Chem
                Bioconjug. Chem
                bc
                bcches
                Bioconjugate Chemistry
                American Chemical Society
                1043-1802
                1520-4812
                25 January 2017
                15 March 2017
                : 28
                : 3 , Peptide Conjugates for Biological Applications
                : 846-856
                Affiliations
                []Department of Biochemistry, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences (RIMLS), Radboud University Medical Center , Geert Grooteplein 28, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                []Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center , Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [* ]E-mail: Wouter.Verdurmen@ 123456radboudumc.nl . Tel: +31-24 36 142 63.
                Article
                10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00699
                5355905
                28122451
                91ed67f1-f259-44fd-9a63-7becb630fae6
                Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society

                This is an open access article published under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND) Attribution License, which permits copying and redistribution of the article, and creation of adaptations, all for non-commercial purposes.

                History
                : 06 December 2016
                : 24 January 2017
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                bc6b00699
                bc-2016-00699w

                Biochemistry
                Biochemistry

                Comments

                Comment on this article