4.7 Article

Mycobacteria emulsified in olive oil-in-water trigger a robust immune response in bladder cancer treatment

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep27232

关键词

-

资金

  1. UAB
  2. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (Instituto de Salud Carlos) [III - PI10/01438]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Economics and Competitiveness [SAF2015-63867-R, BIO2015-63557-R]
  4. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER)
  5. Generalitat of Catalunya [2014SGR-132, 2014SGR-01260]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hydrophobic composition of mycobacterial cell walls leads to the formation of clumps when attempting to resuspend mycobacteria in aqueous solutions. Such aggregation may interfere in the mycobacteria-host cells interaction and, consequently, influence their antitumor effect. To improve the immunotherapeutic activity of Mycobacterium brumae, we designed different emulsions and demonstrated their efficacy. The best formulation was initially selected based on homogeneity and stability. Both olive oil (OO)-and mineral oil-in-water emulsions better preserved the mycobacteria viability and provided higher disaggregation rates compared to the others. But, among both emulsions, the OO emulsion increased the mycobacteria capacity to induce cytokines' production in bladder tumor cell cultures. The OO-mycobacteria emulsion properties: less hydrophobic, lower pH, more neutralized zeta potential, and increased affinity to fibronectin than non-emulsified mycobacteria, indicated favorable conditions for reaching the bladder epithelium in vivo. Finally, intravesical OO-M. brumae-treated mice showed a significantly higher systemic immune response, together with a trend toward increased tumor-bearing mouse survival rates compared to the rest of the treated mice. The physicochemical characteristics and the induction of a robust immune response in vitro and in vivo highlight the potential of the OO emulsion as a good delivery vehicle for the mycobacterial treatment of bladder cancer.

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