4.7 Article

A Combined Chemoimmunotherapy Approach Using a Plasmid-Doxorubicin Complex

期刊

MOLECULAR PHARMACEUTICS
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 1019-1028

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/mp800177f

关键词

Doxorubicin; plasmid; chemoimmunotherapy; adjuvant; complex

资金

  1. Cell Dynamic Research Center
  2. Korean Ministry of Science and Technology [R11-2007-007-03002-0]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [R11-2007-007-03002-0] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report a combined chemoimmunotherapy vehicle consisting of plasmid loaded with doxorubicin and evaluate its efficacy in two different tumor models. A stable complex was formed with a 1300:1 ratio of doxorubicin bound to native plasmid via intercalation. Pharmacokinetics of the complex showed much slower clearance from plasma up to 3 h compared to 10 min for free doxorubicin. In mice bearing NCl-H358 xenografts, lower doses of complex (doxorubicin 0.5 mg/kg, plasmid 4 mg/kg) effectively reduced tumor growth compared to high doses (5 mg/kg) of free doxorubicin (68% versus 77%). Similar results were observed in mice bearing 4T1 murine allografts; the complex (doxorubicin 2 mg/kg, plasmid 8 mg/kg) was effective and caused similar reduction of tumor compared to free doxorubicin (4 mg/kg) (47% versus 46%). The complex showed no signs of severe systemic toxicity or cardiotoxicity compared to the free doxorubicin in mice as indicated by body weights and heart tissue histology. Elevated levels of cytokines (IL-12, IL-6, and IFN-gamma) were observed in serum as well as in tumor tissue after intravenous injection of complex when compared to plasmid or doxorubicin alone. This approach simultaneously delivers both chemotherapeutic and immunotherapeutic agents without time delay, improves pharmacokinetics of the free drug, lowers drug toxicity, upregulates a variety of cytokines, and is effective against different tumors.

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