Ioana A.

Duceac
Diana M. Puscasu Perspectives on the antitumor treatment: P. Poni Institute of
Regional Institute of a critical review of the most recent research Macromolecular
Oncology Iasi, Romania studies on controlled drug delivery systems Chemistry Iasi, Romania

Introduction Main observations [1,4,5]

• New classes of carriers are • Knowledge transfer from clinician • Integration of photosensitizers with
designed and explored to one or to researcher and vice-versa multifunctional organic NPs, can
more functions: diagnostic, frequently occurs with difficulty. circumvent the associated drawbacks of
imaging, load and controlled • Physiochemical properties of conventional treatments, and perfect the
targeted release of anticancer nanoparticles NPs affect stability ability to use insoluble, toxic or unstable
agents. in physiological fluids, compounds
accumulation in non-target • Polymeric nanoparticles (PNPs) have been
Functionalization of a controlled organs and limit large scale- extensively researched and have more
drug delivery vehicle [5] production influential roles in cancer treatment than
• Physiological barriers, conventional chemotherapy procedures
hypersensitivity reactions and • PNPs can reduce cytotoxicity following
osmotic pressure in cancer cells chemotherapy drug administration,
lessen the amount of accumulated improve the solubility characteristics of
NPs in the cancerous cells these therapeutic agents and inhibit the
• Immobilization of anti-cancer rate of tumor growth.
drugs on the nanoparticles can • Micelles loaded with paclitaxel, doxorubicin
enhance their biocompatibility or cisplatin were successfully introduced in
• Metastatic cancers are clinical testing trials for targeted therapy.
challenging – metastasized cells Drawbacks: dissociation and dilution.
General challenges are too small, they produce lower • Liposomes and lipid-based are among the
microenvironment and EPR effect most used in clinic. They do tend to lack
• Scalability compared to solid tumors inherent effective active targeting abilities.
• Sensitivity to stimuli • Surface modification with active • Biological NPs (Virus-like and albumin
• Biocompatibility, dose- targeting ligands (antibodies, folic NPs), have great potential for treatment,
dependent, long-term toxicity acid, aptamer etc.) enhances due to their low toxicity, high
• Absorption, biodistribution and selective drug accumulation in biodegradability and biocompatibility,
excretion tumor cells and improves the ability to evade the immune system
overall treatment outcome components uncoated.
Specific challenges
(Nano)carriers as controlled delivery vehicles for cancer treatment
• Retinoblastoma [2,6,7]
• accessing posterior segment
of the eye and increase intra-
vitreal half life
• Brain cancer
• Non-uniform drug
distribution and low
diffusion
• Lung cancer
• Tissue compatibility with
particles
• Melanoma
• Minimize systemic
absorption

Bridging the bench-bed gap [3] Conclusions

1. Physico-chemical 2. In Vitro Characterization 3. In Vivo 4. Design of clinical trial
characterization Characterization and patient pre-selection • Numerous
• Physical properties: • LAL Assays • Efficacy evaluation: • Evaluation of the extent nanoplatforms
size, density, surface area, • Targeting efficiency: therapeutics, of EPR: MRI & PET are on the verge
porosity, etc. cell binding and internalization imaging imaging before and of entering to
• Surface characterization: • Drug release • Disposition: during clinical trials preclinical trials
charge, hydrophilicity, surface • Immunological evaluation: Tissue distribution, • Target receptor profiling:
chemistry, solubility, etc. hemolysis, platelet aggregation, plasma clearance, half-life, MRI, PET imaging,
• Despite the large
• Stability assessment corona, complement activation, exposure etc. immune staining of number of
• Batch-to-batch phagocytosis, cytokine release etc. • Single-and repeated- tumor biopsies etc. successful pre-
reproducibility: purity, • Toxicity: oxidative stress, cytotoxicity etc. dose toxicity clinical studies,
sterility, uniformity, etc. • Efficacy evaluation • Immunotoxicity the translation of
References
1. N. Salari et al., Cancer Treatment and Research Communications, 32, 2022, 100605
new DDSs to the
2. S. Senapati et al., Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 3, 7 (2018)
Corresponding author: market and
3. D. Rosenblum et al., Nature Communications, 9, 1410 (2018)
4. E. Tseligka et al., Pharm Res (2016) 33:1945–1958 Ioana A. Duceac bedside is still a
5. H. Montaseri et al., Oncotarget. 2020; 11:2120-2136 duceac.ioana@icmpp.ro big challenge.
6. Zhang, R. et al. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 8, 13262–13269 (2016).
7. Qi, X. et al. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 1, 1287–1299 (2015).