4.5 Article

Effect of galactose density on asialoglycoprotein receptor-mediated uptake of galactosylated liposomes

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
卷 94, 期 10, 页码 2266-2275

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1002/jps.20443

关键词

drug delivery system; site-specific delivery; targeting; targeted drug delivery; galactosylated liposomes; liposomes; lipids; asialoglycoprotein receptors; hepatocytes; pharmacokinetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Galactosylated (Gal) liposomes containing various molar ratios of cholesten-5-yloxy-N-(4-((1-imino-2-(D)-thiogalactosylethyl)formamide (Gal-C4-Chol) as a ligand for asialoglycoprotein receptors were prepared to study the effect of the galactose content of Gal-liposomes labeled with [H-3]cholesteryl hexadecyl ether on their targeted delivery to hepatocytes. The uptake characteristics of Gal-liposomes having Gal-C4-Chol of 1.0%, 2.5%, 3.5%, 5.0%, and 7.5% were evaluated. The uptake and internalization by HepG2 cells was enhanced by the addition of Gal-C4-Chol to the Gal-liposomes. In the presence of excess galactose, the uptake of Gal-liposomes having Gal-C4-Chol of 3.5%, 5.0%, and 7.5% was inhibited suggesting asialoglycoprotein receptor mediated uptake. After intravenous injection, Gal-liposomes having Gal-C4-Chol of 3.5%, 5.0%, and 7.5%, rapidly disappeared from the blood and exhibited rapid liver accumulation with up to about 80% of the dose within 10 min whereas Gal-liposomes having low Gal-C4-Chol (1.0% and 2.5%) showed a slight improvement in liver accumulation compared with bare-liposomes. Gal-liposomes with high Gal-C4-Chol are preferentially taken up by hepatocytes and the highest uptake ratio by parenchymal cells (PC) and nonparenchymal cells (NPC) (PC/ NPC ratio) was observed with Gal-liposomes having of 5.0% Gal-C4-Chol. We report here that the galactose density of Gal-liposomes prepared by Gal-C4-Chol is important for both effective recognition by asialoglycoprotein receptors and cell internalization. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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

4.5
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