journal article·2020-10-27Open access

What Went Wrong with Anticancer Nanomedicine Design and How to Make It Right

Duxin Sun, Simon Zhou, Wei Gao

ACS Nano· Volume 14· Issue 10

Abstract

The three design criteria of anticancer nanomedicines to improve anticancer efficacy and to reduce toxicity have been debated for decades: (1) Nanomedicines increase drug accumulation through enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) in tumors to improve anticancer efficacy. (2) Long systemic circulation of nanomedicines with high plasma concentration reduces reticuloendothelial system (RES) clearance and decreases drug accumulation in the normal organs to reduce toxicity, and to enhance the EPR effect. (3) A universal nanodelivery platform based on EPR and long systemic circulation can be developed to deliver different anticancer drugs. Although these criteria have repeatedly been confirmed in preclinical xenograft cancers, the majority of anticancer nanomedicines have failed to improve clinical efficacy, while the clinical efficacies/safety of successful nanomedicines are inconsistent with these design criteria. First, the debate over tumor EPR may have mixed two different questions and missed more clinically relevant comparisons for nanomedicines versus free drugs. When tumors are compared with normal tissues, tumor EPR has been confirmed in both mouse xenograft tumors and human cancers. However, nanomedicines may not enhance drug accumulation in human tumors compared with free drugs, despite outstanding improvement in preclinical cancers. Heterogeneity of enhanced permeability and retention in human cancers occurs for small/large molecules and nanomedicines, which cannot fully explain the poor translation of nanomedicines' efficacy from preclinical cancer models to cancer patients. Second, long-circulation nanomedicine should not be used as a universal design criterion because it does not further improve tumor accumulation by tumor EPR in human patients nor universally reduce distribution in normal organs. In contrast, nanomedicines change the drug tissue distribution to alter anticancer efficacy/safety. Third, a universal nanodelivery platform that uses the same design criteria for different drugs is not feasible. Rather, drug-specific nanodelivery systems are required to overcome the intrinsic shortcomings of delivered drugs, which are determined by the physicochemical, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic properties of the delivered drugs and nanocarriers to improve their efficacy/safety.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery · Nanoplatforms for cancer theranostics · Gold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States

Clinical Pharmacology, Bristol Meyer Squibb Company, 86 Morris Avenue, Summit, New Jersey 07920, United States

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1208/s12248-016-9995-x10.1208/s12248-016-9995-x ↗
2. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2019.08.01610.1016/j.jconrel.2019.08.016 ↗
3. 10.1038/nnano.2017.6710.1038/nnano.2017.67 ↗
4. 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.7.244510.1200/JCO.1998.16.7.2445 ↗
5. 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1996.tb04152.x10.1002/j.1552-4604.1996.tb04152.x ↗
6. Cesarman E. · Nat. Rev. Disc. Primers · 2019 · 5 · 910.1038/s41572-019-0060-9 ↗
7. 10.1159/00008133510.1159/000081335 ↗
8. O’Brien M. E. · Ann. Oncol. · 2004 · 15 · 44010.1093/annonc/mdh097 ↗
9. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990701)86:1<72::AID-CNCR12>3.0.CO;2-110.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990701)86:1<72::AID-CNCR12>3.0.CO;2-1 ↗
10. 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.14.331210.1200/JCO.2001.19.14.3312 ↗
11. 10.4103/2045-080X.17493010.4103/2045-080X.174930 ↗
12. Harrington K. J. · Clin. Cancer Res. · 2001 · 7 · 243
13. Gabizon A. · Cancer Res. · 1994 · 54 · 987
14. 10.3748/wjg.v23.i32.587510.3748/wjg.v23.i32.5875 ↗
15. 10.1007/s40265-014-0291-810.1007/s40265-014-0291-8 ↗
16. 2018
17. 10.1056/NEJMoa130436910.1056/NEJMoa1304369 ↗
18. 10.1093/jnci/dju41310.1093/jnci/dju413 ↗
19. Herrera D. A. · Expert Opin. Pharmacother. · 2019 · 20 · 9510.1080/14656566.2018.1546290 ↗
20. 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.93710.1200/JCO.2005.04.937 ↗
21. Socinski M. A. · J. Clin. Oncol. · 2010 · 28 · 110.1200/jco.2010.28.18_suppl.lba7511 ↗
22. 10.1200/JCO.2011.39.584810.1200/JCO.2011.39.5848 ↗
23. Miele E. · Int. J. Nanomed. · 2009 · 4 · 9910.1504/IJNM.2009.028116 ↗
24. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.annonc.a05922010.1093/oxfordjournals.annonc.a059220 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.pain.2004.01.02910.1016/j.pain.2004.01.029 ↗
26. 10.1021/acsnano.8b0390010.1021/acsnano.8b03900 ↗
27. 10.1073/pnas.171339011410.1073/pnas.1713390114 ↗
28. 10.1038/nmat471810.1038/nmat4718 ↗
29. 10.1073/pnas.152126511310.1073/pnas.1521265113 ↗
30. Wilhelm S. · Nat. Rev. Mater. · 2016 · 1 · 1601410.1038/natrevmats.2016.14 ↗
31. Tran S. · Clin. Transl. Med. · 2017 · 6 · 4410.1186/s40169-017-0175-0 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.addr.2016.04.02510.1016/j.addr.2016.04.025 ↗
33. Ventola C. L. · P T · 2017 · 42 · 742
34. 10.2147/IJN.S4690010.2147/IJN.S46900 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.12.03010.1016/j.jconrel.2014.12.030 ↗
36. Pisano C. · J. Drug Delivery · 2013 · 2013 · 89814610.1155/2013/898146 ↗
37. 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.17.309310.1200/JCO.2000.18.17.3093 ↗
38. Kavanagh J. J. · J. Hematol. Oncol. · 2010 · 3 · 910.1186/1756-8722-3-9 ↗
39. McNeil S. E. · Nat. Rev. Mater. · 2016 · 1 · 1607310.1038/natrevmats.2016.73 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2019.10.02110.1016/j.jconrel.2019.10.021 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2019.05.04410.1016/j.jconrel.2019.05.044 ↗
42. 10.1517/14656566.3.12.173910.1517/14656566.3.12.1739 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.drudis.2016.11.00510.1016/j.drudis.2016.11.005 ↗
44. Saeki T. · Ann. Oncol. · 2017 · 28 · mdx365.01310.1093/annonc/mdx365.013 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.09.00610.1016/j.jconrel.2012.09.006 ↗
46. 10.1007/s10549-016-3736-910.1007/s10549-016-3736-9 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.addr.2017.02.00310.1016/j.addr.2017.02.003 ↗
48. 10.1021/acs.accounts.9b0022810.1021/acs.accounts.9b00228 ↗
49. 10.1200/JCO.2018.36.15_suppl.556010.1200/JCO.2018.36.15_suppl.5560 ↗
50. AIDS Treat News · 1996 · 3
51. Rosenthal E. · Am. J. Clin. Oncol. · 2002 · 25 · 5710.1097/00000421-200202000-00012 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2018.08.03410.1016/j.jconrel.2018.08.034 ↗
53. Oncology (Williston Park) · 2012 · 26 · 841
54. 10.2165/11204910-000000000-0000010.2165/11204910-000000000-00000 ↗
55. 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00986-110.1016/S0140-6736(15)00986-1 ↗
56. 10.2217/fon.15.33310.2217/fon.15.333 ↗
57. Rueda Dominguez A. · Clin. Transl. Oncol. · 2005 · 7 · 23210.1007/BF02710168 ↗
58. 10.1159/00038091310.1159/000380913 ↗
59. 10.1007/s40265-018-1022-310.1007/s40265-018-1022-3 ↗
60. 10.1200/JCO.2006.10.546010.1200/JCO.2006.10.5460 ↗
61. 10.1093/annonc/mdh39310.1093/annonc/mdh393 ↗
62. Harris L. · Cancer · 2002 · 94 · 2510.1002/cncr.10201 ↗
63. 10.1016/S2468-1253(16)30219-910.1016/S2468-1253(16)30219-9 ↗
64. 10.4143/crt.2016.28910.4143/crt.2016.289 ↗
65. Oasmia Pharmaceutical Announces Positive Overall Survival Results from Phase III Study of Paclical/Apealea for Treatment of Ovarian Cancer; https://www.oasmia.com/en/oasmia-pharmaceutical-announces-positive-overall-survival-results-phase-iii-study-paclicalapealea-treatment-ovarian-cancer/ (Accessed September 1, 2020).
66. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-254810.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2548 ↗
67. Caster J. M. · Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. · 2017 · 9 · 110.1002/wnan.1416 ↗
68. 10.1007/978-1-60761-609-2_310.1007/978-1-60761-609-2_3 ↗
69. Matsumura Y. · Cancer Res. · 1986 · 46 · 6387
70. 10.1016/j.addr.2010.03.01110.1016/j.addr.2010.03.011 ↗
71. Tang L. · Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. · 2014 · 111 · 1534410.1073/pnas.1411499111 ↗
72. 10.1111/cas.1320610.1111/cas.13206 ↗
73. 10.4155/tde.13.810.4155/tde.13.8 ↗
74. 10.1038/nrc.2016.10810.1038/nrc.2016.108 ↗
75. 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61457-410.1016/S0140-6736(14)61457-4 ↗
76. Moghimi S. M. · J. Nanopart. Res. · 2018 · 20 · 16910.1007/s11051-018-4273-8 ↗
77. 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.5.144410.1200/JCO.2001.19.5.1444 ↗
78. Cheung T. W. · Clin. Cancer Res. · 1999 · 5 · 3432
79. Gabizon A. · Cancer Res. · 1994 · 54 · 987
80. 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00542-210.1016/S1470-2045(15)00542-2 ↗
81. 10.1016/j.clbc.2013.08.00310.1016/j.clbc.2013.08.003 ↗
82. FDA. ABRAXANE for Injectable Suspension (Paclitaxel Protein-Bound Particles for Injectable Suspension) (Albumin-Bound), 2007.
83. 10.1007/s10439-015-1276-910.1007/s10439-015-1276-9 ↗
84. 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.13910.1038/nrclinonc.2010.139 ↗
85. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.11.01510.1016/j.jconrel.2016.11.015 ↗
86. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.03.05710.1016/j.jconrel.2014.03.057 ↗
87. 10.2165/00003088-200342050-0000210.2165/00003088-200342050-00002 ↗
88. 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2004.08.00210.1053/j.seminoncol.2004.08.002 ↗
89. 10.1016/j.addr.2015.01.00210.1016/j.addr.2015.01.002 ↗
90. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.07.01310.1016/j.jconrel.2012.07.013 ↗
91. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2011.09.06310.1016/j.jconrel.2011.09.063 ↗
92. 10.1016/j.addr.2017.07.00710.1016/j.addr.2017.07.007 ↗
93. 10.1038/bjc.2012.4410.1038/bjc.2012.44 ↗
94. Koukourakis M. I. · Acta Oncol. · 2000 · 39 · 20710.1080/028418600430789 ↗
95. 10.1054/bjoc.2000.145910.1054/bjoc.2000.1459 ↗
96. 10.1007/s00280-014-2477-x10.1007/s00280-014-2477-x ↗
97. 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.11.351210.1200/JCO.1999.17.11.3512 ↗
98. Stewart S. · Oncology · 1997 · 11 · 5
99. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-319310.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-3193 ↗
100. Luan, X.; Y, H., Song, Y.; Hu, H.; Wen, B.; Zhang, H.; Li, M. H. Y.; Li, F.; Burnett, J. P.; Truchan, N.; Hu, H.; Shu, P.; Palmisano, M.; Pai, M. P.; Zhou, S.; Gao, W.; Sun, D. Investigate the Validity of Anticancer Nanomedicine Design Principles in Relationship to Clinical Efficacy/Safety; Under Review, 2019.