4.7 Article

177Lu-labeled micro liposomes as a potential radiosynoviorthesis therapeutic agent

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2021.121106

关键词

Radiosynoviorthesis; Liposome; Lu-177 radiolabeling; Synovitis; Rheumatoid arthritis; TEM; Cryo-TEM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Micro-sized multivesicular liposomes labeled with Lu-177 were prepared and tested in vitro and in vivo for potential use in radiosynoviorthesis therapy. The results demonstrated high stability and retention of Lu-177-micro liposomes in synovial fluid for up to 30 days, suggesting their possible application in RSO therapy.
Micro-sized multivesicular liposomes were prepared, radiolabeled with Lu-177, and tested in vitro and in vivo to evaluate the potential of Lu-177-labeled micro liposomes in radiosynoviorthesis (RSO) therapy. A standard reverse-phase procedure of liposome preparation with a lipid mixture of DPPC: CHOL (80:20%) was used for the synthesis. TEM and fluorescence microscopy imaging were performed to determine the size, shape, and structure of the prepared liposomes. Both measurements are in good agreement while TEM micrographs additionally indicate to a large multivesicular inner structure of prepared liposomes. A simple and straightforward procedure was used for liposome radiolabeling with Lu-177, a well-known and commonly used radionuclide in radiotherapy with favorable properties, that can be exploited in RSO therapy. Radiolabeled Lu-177-liposomes were tested in vitro for stability and then injected into the knee joints of Wistar rats where liposome in vivo behavior was followed up to 30 days post injection. Results from both ex vivo biodistribution and in vivo imaging studies presented a high stability and retention (>94 %ID) of Lu-177-micro liposomes in the synovial liquid for the entire observation period. Leakage of free Lu-177 or Lu-177-liposomes from the synovial fluid has not been detected, indicating to a possible application of Lu-177-liposomes in radiosynoviorthesis (RSO) therapy.

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