4.7 Article

A combined eat me/don't eat me strategy based on extracellular vesicles for anticancer nanomedicine

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/20013078.2020.1806444

关键词

Extracellular vesicles; exosomes; nanomedicines; the mononuclear phagocyte system; antitumor efficacy

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFA0205600]
  2. National Postdoctoral Program of China [2018M631286]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81690264, 81821004, 81703441, 81872809]
  4. Innovation Team of Ministry of Education [BMU2017TD003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A long-term and huge challenge in nanomedicine is the substantial uptake and rapid clearance mediated by the mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS), which enormously hinders the development of nanodrugs. Inspired by the natural merits of extracellular vesicles, we therefore developed a combined eat me/don't eat me strategy in an effort to achieve MPS escape and efficient drug delivery. Methodologically, cationized mannan-modified extracellular vesicles derived from DC2.4 cells were administered to saturate the MPS (eat me strategy). Then, nanocarriers fused to CD47-enriched exosomes originated from human serum were administered to evade phagocytosis by MPS (don't eat me strategy). The nanocarriers were also loaded with antitumor drugs and functionalized with a novel homing peptide to promote the tumour tissue accumulation and cancer cell uptake (eat me strategy). The concept was provenin vitroas evidenced by the reduced endocytosis of macrophages and enhanced uptake by tumour cells, whereas prolonged circulation time and increased tumour accumulation were demonstratedin vivo. Specially, the strategy induced a 123.53% increase in tumour distribution compared to conventional nanocarrier. The study both shed light on the challenge overcoming of phagocytic evasion and provided a strategy for significantly improving therapeutic outcomes, potentially permitting active drug delivery via targeted nanomedicines.

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