4.5 Article

Starlike vs. classic macromolecular prodrugs:: Two different antibody-targeted HPMA copolymers of doxorubicin studied in vitro and in vivo as potential anticancer drugs

Journal

PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH
Volume 20, Issue 10, Pages 1558-1564

Publisher

KLUWER ACADEMIC/PLENUM PUBL
DOI: 10.1023/A:1026170830782

Keywords

antibody-targeted doxorubicin; HPMA copolymer; polymer drug carrier; starlike conjugate; drug delivery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose. Two different monoclonal antibody-targeted HPMA copolymer-doxorubicin conjugates, classic and starlike, were synthesized to be used for site-specific cancer therapy. The anti-mouse Thy-1.2 (IgG3) and two anti-human CD71/A (IgG1) and CD71/B (IgG2a) monoclonal antibodies were used as targeting structures. Methods. Their binding and cytotoxic activity in vitro, body distribution, and anticancer activity in vivo were evaluated. Results. The results of flow cytometric analysis showed comparable binding of classic and starlike conjugates to the target cells. The in vitro cytotoxic effect was 10-fold higher if cancer cells were exposed to the starlike conjugate compared to the classic one. Biodistribution studies showed that the starlike conjugate remained in a relatively high concentration in blood, whereas the classic conjugate was found in a 6.5-times lower amount. In contrast to the low antitumor activity of free doxorubicin and nontargeted HPMA copolymer-doxorubicin conjugate, both anti-Thy-1.2 targeted conjugates ( classic and starlike) cured all mice bearing T-cell lymphoma EL4. On the other hand, starlike conjugates containing anti-CD71/A or anti-CD71/B monoclonals as targeting structures were more effective against human colorectal cancer SW 620 than the classic one. Conclusions. We have shown that the starlike conjugates are more effective systems for targeted drug delivery and cancer treatment than classic conjugates.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available