LHRH-Targeted Nanoparticles for Cancer Therapeutics

Minko, Tamara; Patil, Mahesh L.; Zhang, Min; Khandare, Jayant; Saad, Maha; Chandna, Pooja; Taratula, Oleh

doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-609-2_19

Cited by 44 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The height differences on the surface are indicated by the color code: lighter regions indicate higher heights. Complexes of siRNA with cationic liposomes, mesoporous silica nanoparticles, PAMAM and PPI dendrimers and SPIO nanoparticles were performed in our laboratory as previously described [16,[19][20][21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotoxicity of Different Nanocarriers: Possible Modifications for the Delivery of Nucleic Acids

Shah¹,

Taratula²,

Garbuzenko³

et al. 2013

Current Drug Discovery Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevention of cyto- and genotoxicity of nanocarriers is an important task in nanomedicine. In the present investigation, we, at the first time using similar experimental conditions, compared genotoxicity of nanocarriers with different composition, architecture, size, molecular weight and charge. Poly(ethylene glycol) polymers, neutral and cationic liposomes, micelles, poly(amindo amine) and poly(propyleneimine) dendrimers, quantum dots, mesoporous silica, and supermagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) nanoparticles were studied. All nanoparticles were used in non-cytotoxic concentrations. However, even in these concentrations, positively charged cationic liposomes, dendrimers, and SPIO nanoparticles induced genotoxicity leading to the significant formation of micronuclei in cells. Negatively charged and neutral nanocarriers were not genotoxic. A strong positive correlation was found between the number of formed micronuclei and the positive charge of nanocarriers. We proposed modifications of both types of dendrimers and SPIO nanoparticles that substantially decreased their genotoxicity and allowed for an efficient intracellular delivery of nucleic acids.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotoxicity of Different Nanocarriers: Possible Modifications for the Delivery of Nucleic Acids

Shah¹,

Taratula²,

Garbuzenko³

et al. 2013

Current Drug Discovery Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dr. Minko pioneered in the use of peptide similar to luteinizing-hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) as cancer targeting moiety for many different types of nanoparticles for treatment of different cancers. [2][3][4]8,11,[15][16][17][18] It was found that LHRH receptors are over expressed in plasma membrane of many types of cancer cells. In contrast, they do not express in healthy visceral organs and their expression in healthy tissues from reproductive organs is significantly less when compared with cancerous tissues.…”

Section: Liposomal Nanopreparationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 Delivery of anticancer drugs and imaging agents by nanoscale-based carriers allows for enhancing their uptake specifically by cancer cells, overcoming or suppressing drug resistance and limit adverse side effects upon healthy organs and tissues. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Polymeric and inorganic nanoparticles, liposomes, micelles, self-assemblies, lipid emulsions and prodrug conjugates have been recently defined as "nanopreparations." 19 This chapter presents an overview of a few nanopreparations implicated in cancer therapy and diagnostics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nanopreparations for Cancer Treatment and Diagnostics

Khandare¹,

Banerjee²,

Minko³

2014

Frontiers in Nanobiomedical Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of nanopreparations for cancer treatment have been recently developed. Several advantages of nanoscale-based cancer therapeutics determine a continuous interest to these preparations. Formulation of conventional anticancer drugs as nanopreparations substantially changes their properties and allows for improving their water solubility, stability, anticancer activity, pharmacokinetics and release profi le. It also permits the inclusion of several active components with different functionalities in one delivery system. Modern nanopreparations are capable of delivering hydro-and lipophilic anticancer drugs, nucleic acids, peptides, proteins and almost any other class of therapeutic agents. Such multicomponent multifunctional nanopreparations possess newly enhanced capabilities that exceed the potentials of each individual component applied separately. In addition to traditional chemotherapy, nanopreparations can be designed to be used in several other treatment protocols. They also can be employed as imaging agents to detect primary tumors and metastases. In addition, nanotechnology approach for anticancer formulations allows for the targeting of chemotherapeutic drugs and other active substances (nucleic acids, peptides, etc.) specifi cally to cancer cells therefore enhancing their anticancer activity and limiting severe adverse side effects upon healthy organs and tissues. The present work discusses examples of a few novel approaches to the formulations of nanopreparations for cancer treatment and imaging. Handbook of Nanobiomedical Research Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com by UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM LIBRARY -INFORMATION SERVICES on 03/22/15. For personal use only.

show abstract

“…Active targeting of tumor-specific surface receptors that are expressed or overexpressed uniquely on primary tumors was described previously using nanosized medicines (nanomedicines) for the treatment of primary tumors [4][5][6][7][8] and can also be applied for the treatment of metastases [9,10]. However, the genetic mutations that cancer cells undergo increase their resistance to chemotherapeutic agents [11] and, although nanomedicines can overcome some of the mechanisms responsible for this resistance [12], biological barriers such as the high interstitial pressure and the dense extracellular matrix within tumors [13] render their penetration into the tissue largely inefficient beyond the perivascular region [14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%