4.8 Review

Surface Engineering of Nanoparticles for Targeted Delivery to Hepatocellular Carcinoma

期刊

SMALL
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/smll.201702037

关键词

drug delivery; hepatocellular carcinoma; nanoparticles; surface engineering; targeting ligands

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFA0203600]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51703195, 51503180, 5161101036]
  3. Thousand Talents Program for Distinguished Young Scholars [588020*G81501/048]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [520002*172210161]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-associated deaths worldwide. There is a lack of efficient therapy for HCC; the only available first-line systemic drug, sorafenib, can merely improve the average survival by two months. Among the efforts to develop an efficient therapy for HCC, nanomedicine has drawn the most attention, owing to its unique features such as high drug-loading capacity, intrinsic anticancer activities, integrated diagnostic and therapeutic functionalities, and easy surface engineering with targeting ligands. Despite its tremendous advantages, no nanomedicine can be effective unless it successfully targets the tumor site, which is a challenging task. In this review, the features of HCC are described, and the physiological hurdles that prevent nanoparticles from targeting HCC are discussed. Then, the surface physicochemical factors of nanoparticles that can influence targeting efficiency are discussed. Finally, a thorough description of the physiological barriers that nanomedicine must conquer before uptake by HCC cells if possible is provided, as well as the surface engineering approaches to nanomedicine to achieve targeted delivery to HCC cells. The physiological hurdles and corresponding solutions summarized in this review provide a general guide for the rational design of HCC targeting nanomedicine systems.

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

4.8
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