4.7 Article

Liposome formulated with TAT-modified cholesterol for improving brain delivery and therapeutic efficacy on brain glioma in animals

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
卷 420, 期 2, 页码 304-312

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.09.008

关键词

TAT; Cholesterol; Doxorubicin; Brain delivery; Blood-brain barrier

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30873166, 81072599, 81130060]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2009CB903300]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The treatment of central nervous system diseases such as brain glioma is a major challenge due to the presence of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). A cell-penetrating peptide TAT (AYGRKKRRQRRR), which appears to enter cells with alacrity, was employed to enhance the delivery efficiency of normal drug formulation to the brain. Targeting liposomal formulations often apply modified phospholipids as anchors. However, cholesterol, another liposomal component more stable and cheaper, has not been fully investigated as an alternative anchor. In our study, TAT was covalently conjugated with cholesterol for preparing doxorubicin-loaded liposome for brain glioma therapy. Cellular uptake by brain capillary endothelial cells (BCECs) and C6 glioma cells was explored. The anti-proliferative activity against C6s confirmed strong inhibitory effect of the liposomes modified with doxorubicin-loaded TAT. The bio-distribution findings in brains and hearts were evident of higher efficiency of brain delivery and lower cardiotoxic risk. The results on survival of the brain glioma-bearing animals indicate that survival time of the glioma-bearing rats treated with TAT-modified liposome was much longer than in the other groups. In conclusion, the potency of the TAT-modified liposome to enter the BBB appears to be related with the TAT on the liposome's surface. The TAT-modified liposome may improve the therapeutic efficacy on brain glioma in vitro and in vivo. (c) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据