4.4 Article

Nanolipid Formulations of Benzoporphyrin Derivative: Exploring the Dependence of Nanoconstruct Photophysics and Photochemistry on Their Therapeutic Index in Ovarian Cancer Cells

期刊

PHOTOCHEMISTRY AND PHOTOBIOLOGY
卷 95, 期 1, 页码 364-377

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/php.13002

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bullock-Wellman Fellowship
  2. NIH [K99CA215301, P01CA084203, R01CA156177, R01CA160998, R21CA220143]
  3. China Scholarship Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the rapidly emerging designs and applications of light-activated, photodynamic therapy (PDT)-based nanoconstructs, photonanomedicines (PNMs), an unmet need exists to establish whether conventional methods of photochemical and photophysical characterization of photosensitizers are relevant for evaluating new PNMs in order to intelligently guide their design. As a model system, we build on the clinical formulation of benzoporphyrin derivative (BPD), Visudyne((R)), by developing a panel of nanolipid formulations entrapping new lipidated chemical variants of BPD with differing chemical, photochemical and photophysical properties. These are 16:0 and 20:0 lysophosphocholine-BPD (16:0/20:0 BPD-PC), DSPE-PEG-BPD and BPD-cholesterol. We show that Visudyne((R)) was the most phototoxic formulation to OVCAR-5 cells, and the least effective was liposomal DSPE-PEG-BPD. However, these differences did not match their optical, photophysical and photochemical properties, as the static BPD quenching was highest in Visudyne, which also exhibited the lowest generation of singlet oxygen. Furthermore, we establish that OVCAR-5 cell phototoxicity also does not correlate with rates of photosensitizer photobleaching and fluorescence quantum yields in any nanolipid formulations. These findings warrant critical future studies into subcellular targets and molecular mechanisms of phototoxicity of photodynamic nanoconstructs, as more reliable prognostic surrogates for predicting efficacy to appropriately and intelligently guide their design.

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

4.4
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