Targeted nanomedicines for the treatment of bone disease and regeneration

Ordikhani, Farideh; Zandi, Nooshin; Mazaheri, Mehdi; Luther, Gaurav; Ghovvati, Mahsa; Akbarzadeh, Abolfazl; Annabi, Nasim

doi:10.1002/med.21759

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 247 publications

(323 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[195,196] Although no visceral toxicity or other problems have been identified for any of the nanoplatforms mentioned above, there is still a possibility of transient hepatic and renal accumulation or unexpected off-target effects from these drug-loaded nanoplatforms. [197] In addition, the evaluation system and methods of nanomaterials' toxicity are primarily based on lower-mammalian animal models, such as rats, mice, and rabbits, which are largely unsuitable for modeling the actual behavior and toxicity of nanomaterials in humans. In this way, the accuracy of predicted therapeutic effects and strategies in clinical experiments remains questionable due to differences in pathological construction and microenvironment between humans and these animals.…”

Section: Challenges Of Stimuli-responsive Drug Delivery Nanoplatforms...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus‐Responsive Drug Delivery Nanoplatforms for Osteoarthritis Therapy

Jiang

Zhang

2023

Small

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fundamentally degenerative, OA represents a considerably negative impact on the quality of life. [1,2] With an increasingly aging global population, greater numbers of OA patients are representing a clear increase in economic and societal burden. OA is primarily characterized by the degeneration or deterioration of articular cartilage. [3] More specifically, as a result of the excessive recruitment of inflammatory cells at the joint site, [4] matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) [5] and a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with thrombospondin motifs (ADAMTS) [6] are overexpressed during the development of OA, which leads to the destruction of the collagen II network and glycosaminoglycan (GAG). Articular cartilage dysfunction and degradation then eventually result, often presenting with permanent pathologic alterations to the entire joint.Current pharmacological treatments, (primarily focused on pain relief and antiinflammation), and/or surgery, (including microfracture surgery and joint replacement), are the most conventional therapeutic approaches for OA. [1,7] There are several disadvantages to these conventional approaches. Whilst microfracture surgery provides a measure of relief and functional recovery of the smaller-scale joint defects through the local generation of fibrocartilage from bone marrow obtained from the subchondral bone, due to the lower abrasion-resistance ability of fibrocartilage this method is often unsuitable to provide long-term relief, or for situations where large-scale defects have occurred. [8] A number of clinical strategies of joint replacement, including osteochondral autografts or allografts, are also limited by the restricted availability of donor grafts or by complications requiring secondary surgery. [9] Along with the continued development of surgical treatments, more advanced therapeutic methods have also been developed for OA surgery. These include ACI (autologous chondrocyte implantation) and MACI (matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation). However, for ACI, the viability and loss of chondrocytes during the planting procedure seem to be an unavoidable problem. MACI was developed as a potential solution to this, where the in vitro use of a biodegradable (collagen matrix membrane) material as a temporary scaffold for the pre-plantation of chondrocytes could effectively lessen the loss of cells during the process of transplantation. However, for patients of more advanced ages or with too large an area of injury to the cartilage, MACI remains an unsuitable therapeutic approach.Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent age-related degenerative diseases. With an increasingly aging global population, greater numbers of OA patients are providing clear economic and societal burdens. Surgical and pharmacological treatments are the most common and conventional therapeutic strategies for OA, but often fall considerably short of desired or optimal outcomes. With the development of stimulus-responsive nanoplatforms has come the potential for improved therapeutic strategies for...

show abstract

Section: Challenges Of Stimuli-responsive Drug Delivery Nanoplatforms...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus‐Responsive Drug Delivery Nanoplatforms for Osteoarthritis Therapy

Jiang

Zhang

2023

Small

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Efforts have also been made to develop strategies of enhancing nanoparticles accumulation in the bone marrow. Bisphosphonates (like alendronate) conjugated to different types of nanoparticles can increase their targeting affinity to hydroxyapatite, major mineral component of the bone [ 30 ]. Synthetic substances, like the anionic amphiphilic; l -glutamic acid N -(3-carboxy-1-oxopropyl)-1,5-dihexadecyl ester, can increase the accumulation of liposomes in the bone marrow and inhibit hepatic uptake concomitantly [ 31 ].…”

Section: The Interaction Between Nps and The Immune Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interaction between nanoparticles and immune system: application in the treatment of inflammatory diseases

Liu

Pang

et al. 2022

J Nanobiotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanoparticle (NP) is an emerging tool applied in the biomedical field. With combination of different materials and adjustment of their physical and chemical properties, nanoparticles can have diverse effects on the organism and may change the treating paradigm of multiple diseases in the future. More and more results show that nanoparticles can function as immunomodulators and some formulas have been approved for the treatment of inflammation-related diseases. However, our current understanding of the mechanisms that nanoparticles can influence immune responses is still limited, and systemic clinical trials are necessary for the evaluation of their security and long-term effects. This review provides an overview of the recent advances in nanoparticles that can interact with different cellular and molecular components of the immune system and their application in the management of inflammatory diseases, which are caused by abnormal immune reactions. This article focuses on the mechanisms of interaction between nanoparticles and the immune system and tries to provide a reference for the future design of nanotechnology for the treatment of inflammatory diseases. Graphical Abstract

show abstract

“…Thirdly, controlled and targeted delivery is unachievable, which significantly hinders the function of GFs [ 38 ]. Therefore, using carriers to protect and achieve the controlled delivery of GFs is necessary [ 39 ]. As mentioned above, nanomaterials are popular carriers of GFs because of their unique nanoscale properties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Delivery and Activation of Growth Factors Using Nanomaterials for Bone Repair

Lei

2023

Pharmaceutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone regeneration is a comprehensive process that involves different stages, and various growth factors (GFs) play crucial roles in the entire process. GFs are currently widely used in clinical settings to promote bone repair; however, the direct application of GFs is often limited by their fast degradation and short local residual time. Additionally, GFs are expensive, and their use may carry risks of ectopic osteogenesis and potential tumor formation. Nanomaterials have recently shown great promise in delivering GFs for bone regeneration, as they can protect fragile GFs and control their release. Moreover, functional nanomaterials can directly activate endogenous GFs, modulating the regeneration process. This review provides a summary of the latest advances in using nanomaterials to deliver exogenous GFs and activate endogenous GFs to promote bone regeneration. We also discuss the potential for synergistic applications of nanomaterials and GFs in bone regeneration, along with the challenges and future directions that need to be addressed.

show abstract

Targeted nanomedicines for the treatment of bone disease and regeneration

Cited by 22 publications

References 247 publications

Stimulus‐Responsive Drug Delivery Nanoplatforms for Osteoarthritis Therapy

Stimulus‐Responsive Drug Delivery Nanoplatforms for Osteoarthritis Therapy

The interaction between nanoparticles and immune system: application in the treatment of inflammatory diseases

The Delivery and Activation of Growth Factors Using Nanomaterials for Bone Repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About