&lt;div&gt;Effects of the protein corona on liposome&amp;ndash;liposome and liposome&amp;ndash;cell interactions&lt;/div&gt;

Corbo, Claudia; Molinaro, Roberto; Taraballi, Francesca; Furman, Naama E. Toledano; Sherman, Michael B; Parodi, Alessandro; Salvatore, Francesco; Tasciotti, Ennio

doi:10.2147/ijn.s109059

Cited by 69 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Once liposomes enter the bloodstream, plasma proteins interact with and adsorb onto the liposome surface. It has been previously shown that the liposomal surface chemistry (e.g., charge and pegylation) impacts the blood protein adsorption (known as the "protein corona"), which influences how liposomes interact with healthy and diseased cells [52][53][54]. Protein adsorption occurs due to an advantageous increase in entropy, resulting in a decrease in Gibbs free energy (∆G abs ) [55].…”

Section: Toxicological Evaluation Of Liposomes and Their Building Blocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunological and Toxicological Considerations for the Design of Liposomes

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liposomes hold great potential as gene and drug delivery vehicles due to their biocompatibility and modular properties, coupled with the major advantage of attenuating the risk of systemic toxicity from the encapsulated therapeutic agent. Decades of research have been dedicated to studying and optimizing liposomal formulations for a variety of medical applications, ranging from cancer therapeutics to analgesics. Some effort has also been made to elucidate the toxicities and immune responses that these drug formulations may elicit. Notably, intravenously injected liposomes can interact with plasma proteins, leading to opsonization, thereby altering the healthy cells they come into contact with during circulation and removal. Additionally, due to the pharmacokinetics of liposomes in circulation, drugs can end up sequestered in organs of the mononuclear phagocyte system, affecting liver and spleen function. Importantly, liposomal agents can also stimulate or suppress the immune system depending on their physiochemical properties, such as size, lipid composition, pegylation, and surface charge. Despite the surge in the clinical use of liposomal agents since 1995, there are still several drawbacks that limit their range of applications. This review presents a focused analysis of these limitations, with an emphasis on toxicity to healthy tissues and unfavorable immune responses, to shed light on key considerations that should be factored into the design and clinical use of liposomal formulations.

show abstract

Section: Toxicological Evaluation Of Liposomes and Their Building Blocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunological and Toxicological Considerations for the Design of Liposomes

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…atherosclerotic plaque), demonstrating their potential for theranostic drug delivery [81]. The leukosome’s membrane proteins, which have been characterized by proteomic-based approaches [10,82], induce also the formation of a protein corona [83–85] that is responsible for the prolonged circulation time of these nanovesicles when compared to traditional liposomes [86]. In fact, when nanoparticles encounter biological fluids, they are rapidly encased in a layer of biomolecules, creating a crown around their surface [87].…”

Section: Exosomes-like Nanocarriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exosome-like Nanovectors for Drug Delivery in Cancer

Arrighetti

Corbo²,

Evangelopoulos

et al. 2019

CMC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer treatment still represents a formidable challenge, despite substantial advancements in available therapies being made over the past decade. One major issue is poor therapeutic efficacy due to a lack of specificity and low bioavailability. The progress of nanotechnology and the development of a variety of nanoplatforms have had a significant impact in improving the therapeutic outcome of chemotherapeutics. Nanoparticles can overcome various biological barriers and localize at tumor site, while simultaneously protecting a therapeutic cargo and increasing its circulation time. Despite this, due to their synthetic origin, nanoparticles are often detected by the immune system and preferentially sequestered by filtering organs. Exosomes have recently been investigated as suitable substitutes for the shortcomings of nanoparticles due to their biological compatibility and particularly small size (i.e., 30-150 nm). In addition, exosomes have been found to play important roles in cell communication, acting as natural carriers of biological cargoes throughout the body. This review aims to highlight the use of exosomes as drug delivery vehicles for cancer and showcases the various attempts used to exploit exosomes with a focus on the delivery of chemotherapeutics and nucleic acids.

show abstract

“…Corbo and al. demonstrated that the presence of apolipoproteins and immunoglobulins in the corona increased liposome uptake in breast cancer cells [40]. They found however a similar increase in macrophages uptake, modifying the drug release rate from the carrier.…”

Section: Protein Coronamentioning

confidence: 92%

Pharmacokinetics variability: Why nanoparticles are not just magic-bullets in oncology

Rodallec

Benzekry

Lacarelle

et al. 2018

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing nanoparticles to improve the specificity of anticancer agents towards tumor tissue and to better control drug delivery is a rising strategy in oncology. An increasing number of forms (e.g., conjugated nanoparticles, liposomes, immunoliposomes…) are now available on the shelves and numerous other scaffolds (e.g., dendrimeres, nanospheres, squalenes …) are currently at various stages of development. However, as of today most nanoparticles made available remain lipidic carriers. Pharmacokinetic variability is a major, yet largely underestimated issue with liposomal nanoparticles. A wide variety of causes (e.g., tumor type and disease staging, comorbidities, patient's immune system) can explain this variability, which can in return negatively impact pharmacodynamic endpoints such as poor efficacy or severe toxicities. This review aims to cover the main causes for erratic pharmacokinetics observed with most nanoparticles, especially liposomes used in oncology. Should the main causes of such variability be identified, specific studies in non-clinical or clinical development stages could be undertaken using dedicated models (i.e., mechanistic or semi-mechanistic mathematical models such as PBPK approaches) to better describe nanoparticles pharmacokinetics and decipher PK/PD relationships. In addition, identifying relevant biomarkers or parameters likely to impact nanoparticles pharmacokinetics would allow for either the modification of their characteristics to reduce the influence of the expected variability during development phases or the development of biomarker-based adaptive dosing strategies to maintain an optimal efficacy/toxicity balance. Broadly, we call for the development of comprehensive distribution studies and state-of-the-art modeling support to better understand and anticipate nanoparticle pharmacokinetics in oncology.

show abstract

<div>Effects of the protein corona on liposome–liposome and liposome–cell interactions</div>

Cited by 69 publications

References 50 publications

Immunological and Toxicological Considerations for the Design of Liposomes

Immunological and Toxicological Considerations for the Design of Liposomes

Exosome-like Nanovectors for Drug Delivery in Cancer

Pharmacokinetics variability: Why nanoparticles are not just magic-bullets in oncology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About