4.8 Article

Optimizing tumor targeting of the lipophilic EGFR-binding radiotracer SKI 243 using a liposomal nanoparticle delivery system

期刊

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
卷 149, 期 3, 页码 292-298

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2010.10.024

关键词

Cancer; EGFR; Inhibitors; Imaging; Radio tracer; Nanoparticle; Drug delivery; Diagnostics; Theraphy

资金

  1. NIH [R24 CA83084, P30 CA08748, P50 CA86438]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Positron emission tomography (PET) of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) kinase-specific radiolabeled tracers could provide a means for non-invasively characterizing EGFR expression and signaling activity in patients' tumors before, during, and after therapy with EGFR inhibitors. Towards this goal, our group has developed PET tracers which irreversibly bind to EGFR. However, tumor uptake is relatively low because of both the lipophilicity of such tracers (e.g. the morpholino-[124I]-IPQA [SKI 212243]), with octanol-to-water partition coefficients of up to 4, and a short dwell time in the blood and significant hepatobiliary clearance and intestinal reuptake. Liposomal nanoparticle delivery systems may favorably alter the pharmacokinetic profile and improve tumor targeting of highly lipophilic but otherwise promising cancer imaging tracers, such as the EGFR inhibitor SKI 243. SKI 243 is therefore an interesting model molecule for incorporation into lipid-based nanoparticles, as it would not only improve their solubility but also increase the circulation time, availability and, potentially, targeting of tumors. In the current study, we compared the pharmacokinetics and tumor targeting of the bare EGFR kinase-targeting radiotracer SKI 212243 (SKI 243) with that of the same tracer embedded in liposomes. SKI 243 and liposomal SKI 243 are both taken up by tumor xenografts but liposomal SKI 243 remained in the blood longer and consequently exhibited a 3- to 6-fold increase in uptake in the tumor among several other organs. (C) 2010 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

4.8
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