4.8 Review

Engineering and evaluating drug delivery particles in microfluidic devices

Journal

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
Volume 190, Issue -, Pages 139-149

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.04.030

Keywords

Nanomedicine; Nanoparticles; Microfluidics; In vitro/in vivo model

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council under Australian Laureate Fellowship scheme [FL120100030]
  2. Australian Research Council under Discovery Early Career Researcher Award [DE130100488]
  3. Australian Government through an International Postgraduate Research Scholarship
  4. Australian Postgraduate Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The development of new and improved particle-based drug delivery is underpinned by an enhanced ability to engineer particles with high fidelity and integrity, as well as increased knowledge of their biological performance. Microfluidics can facilitate these processes through the engineering of spatiotemporally highly controlled environments using designed microstructures in combination with physical phenomena present at the microscale. In this review, we discuss microfluidics in the context of addressing key challenges in particle-based drug delivery. We provide an overview of how microfluidic devices can: (i) be employed to engineer particles, by providing highly controlled interfaces, and (ii) be used to establish dynamic in vitro models that mimic in vivo environments for studying the biological behavior of engineered particles. Finally, we discuss how the flexible and modular nature of microfluidic devices provides opportunities to create increasingly realistic models of the in vivo milieu (including multi-cell, multi-tissue and even multi-organ devices), and how ongoing developments toward commercialization of microfluidic tools are opening up new opportunities for the engineering and evaluation of drug delivery particles. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available