4.6 Review

Evaluating the safety profile of focused ultrasound and microbubble-mediated treatments to increase blood-brain barrier permeability

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON DRUG DELIVERY
Volume 16, Issue 2, Pages 129-142

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17425247.2019.1567490

Keywords

Blood-brain barrier; focused ultrasound; microbubbles; targeted drug delivery; low intensity pulsed ultrasound; image-guided therapy

Funding

  1. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering of the National Institutes of Health [R01 EB003268]
  2. Canadian Institutes for Health Research [FRN 119312]
  3. Canada Research Chair Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Treatment of several diseases of the brain are complicated by the presence of the skull and the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Focused ultrasound (FUS) and microbubble (MB)-mediated BBB treatment is a minimally invasive method to transiently increase the permeability of blood vessels in targeted brain areas. It can be used as a general delivery system to increase the concentration of therapeutic agents in the brain parenchyma. Areas covered: Over the past two decades, the safety of using FUS+MBs to deliver agents across the BBB has been interrogated through various methods of imaging, histology, biochemical assays, and behavior analyses. Here we provide an overview of the factors that affect the safety profile of these treatments, describe methods by which FUS+MB treatments are controlled, and discuss data that have informed the assessment of treatment risks. Expert opinion: There remains a need to assess the risks associated with clinically relevant treatment strategies, specifically repeated FUS+MB treatments, with and without therapeutic agent delivery. Additionally, efforts to develop metrics by which FUS+MB treatments can be easily compared across studies would facilitate a more rapid consensus on the risks associated with this intervention.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available