4.7 Article

PLGA Nanoparticles Loaded with Sorafenib Combined with Thermosensitive Hydrogel System and Microwave Hyperthermia for Multiple Sensitized Radiotherapy

期刊

PHARMACEUTICS
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15020487

关键词

sorafenib; PLGA nanoparticles; microwave hyperthermia; radiotherapy; breast cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a sorafenib-loaded PLGA hydrogel system (SPH) was developed and combined with microwave hyperthermia to enhance the sensitivity of radiotherapy (RT). The experiments demonstrated that SPH and MW hyperthermia achieved a double RT sensitization effect and significant tumor inhibition effect.
Hypoxia is typically the leading cause of radiotherapy (RT) resistance in solid tumors, and glutathione (GSH) overexpression in tumor cells is a potent antioxidant mechanism that protects tumor cells from radiation damage. Herein, we developed a sorafenib (SFN) loaded-PLGA hydrogel system (SPH) in combination with microwave (MW) hyperthermia for RT sensitization. SPH with stable properties was produced by combining SFN and PLGA in a specific ratio and encapsulating the mixture in agarose hydrogel. Intratumoral injection of SPH to mice combined with MW hyperthermia can not only directly cause thermal damage to tumor cells, but also increase blood oxygen delivery to the tumor site, thus overcoming the problem of intratumoral hypoxia and achieving first layer RT sensitization. Moreover, high temperatures can cause the hydrogel to disintegrate and release SFN. Not only can SFN inhibit tumor growth, but it can also achieve the second layer of RT sensitization by inhibiting glutathione (GSH) synthesis in cells and increasing reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. Experiments, both in vitro and in vivo, have indicated that SPH and MW hyperthermia can achieve a double RT sensitization effect and a significant tumor inhibition effect. In conclusion, combining our SPH nanosystem and thermoradiotherapy is a promising anti-tumor treatment.

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