4.8 Article

Lipid-derivatized poly(ethylene glycol) micellar formulations of benzoporphyrin derivatives

期刊

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
卷 86, 期 2-3, 页码 323-338

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-3659(02)00442-X

关键词

benzoporphyrin; poly(ethylene glycol); micelles; photodynamic therapy; photosensitizer; mouse tumor model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we describe the development of micellar formulations for increasing the solubility of lipophilic benzoporphyrins. Using a simple procedure that is readily adaptable for large-scale manufacturing, both A-ring (1) and B-ring isomers (2) of benzoporphyrins could be readily formulated, at concentrations up to 1-2 mg/ml, into small micelles (<20 nm in diameter) of methoxypoly(ethylene glycol) (M, 2000) covalently attached to the lipid anchor distearoylphos-phatidylethanolamine (mPEG-DSPE). The formulations spontaneously formed upon hydration of a thin film containing mPEG-lipid and photosensitizer and were stable upon storage at 4 degreesC for at least 1 month. Self-association of the B-ring benzoporphyrin isomer in micelles could be efficiently inhibited by either increasing the molar ratio of mPEG(2000)-DSPE to benzoporphyrin or by increasing the pH of the preparation to pH 8.5. The formulation could be freeze-dried and stored indefinitely in the lyophilized form, with restoration of the original properties upon reconstitution. In vivo, the A-ring benzoporphyrin, verteporfin, had higher levels of delivery and greater tumor control in mice than the B-ring derivative when formulated in mPEG(2000)-DSPE micelles and administered intravenously. mPEG(2000)-DSPE micellar formulations also showed tumor control when administered by a single intratumoral injection followed by light irradiation to the tumor within 45-60 min after drug administration. PEG-containing micellar formulations may be a promising delivery system for benzoporphyrin monoesters for clinical applications. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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