Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T02:05:31.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Delivery of Doxorubicin to Solid Tumors using Thermosensitive Liposomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Elizaveta V. Tazina
Affiliation:
el_tazina@yahoo.com, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Alevtina P. Polozkova
Affiliation:
polozkova@mail.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Elena V. Ignatieva
Affiliation:
ignatieva@mail.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Olga L. Orlova
Affiliation:
orlovaol@mail.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Valeria V. Mescherikova
Affiliation:
mescherikova@mail.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Adolf A. Wainson
Affiliation:
wainson@edito.umos.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Natalia A. Oborotova
Affiliation:
oborotova@mail.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Anatoliy Yu. Baryshnikov
Affiliation:
baryshnikov@mail.ru, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center of RAMS, Research Institute of Experimental Diagnostics and Therapy of Tumors, Moscow, Russian Federation
Get access

Abstract

Liposomes are lipid vesicles with an aqueous interior size between 50 nm and 200 nm in diameter. Liposomal drugs currently in clinical use are characterized primarily by their decreased side effects rather than improved therapeutic potency. Significant improvements in the efficacy of liposomal drug therapy may be obtained using thermosensitive liposomes (TSL) in combination with local hyperthermia (HT). TSL release their content at a specific formulation-dependent gel to liquid-crystalline phase transition temperature. At this temperature the membrane's permeability increases by several orders of magnitude. The purpose of present work was preparation of TSL loaded with doxorubicin (Dox) and investigation of their effect on B-16 mouse melanoma and Ehrlich (line ELD) carcinoma in combination with HT. TSL were prepared using 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, PEGylated 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine, cholesterol and α-tocopherol acetate in molar ratios of 9:1:0.02:0.2:0.2 (composition 1); 9:1:0.1:0.5 (composition 2); 9:1:0.2:0.75 (composition 3); 9:1:0.3:1 (composition 4); 9:1:0.4:1.2 (composition 5). The extrusion was performed through 200 nm polycarbonate membranes at 50 °C. Dox was loaded into TSL by ammonium ion gradient. Drug-to-lipid ratio was 0.13:1 (w/w). Dox-TSL were lyophilized for better stabilization with 4 % sucrose added as a cryoprotectant. Vesicle size was measured using Nicomp-380 Submicron Particle Sizer. Dox-TSL were separated from untrapped Dox by gel filtration. In biological experiments tumors were transplanted in the shank muscle of mice. Dox-TSL or free Dox were injected in retroorbital sinus of animals at doses of 9 and 4.5 mg Dox per kg body weight. HT treatment of shank with transplanted tumor was performed at 43 °C for 30 min using water bath. Efficacy of Dox encapsulation in TSL of compositions 4 and 5 was 60 % (diameter of vesicles was 175 ± 10 nm). TSL of compositions 2 and 3 encapsulated 88 % and 86 % of Dox, respectively (diameter of vesicles was 160 ± 10 nm). TSL of composition 1 trapped 88-94 % of Dox (diameter of vesicles was 175 ± 15 nm). The composition 1 has been chosen for preparation of lyophilized drug, which has been assessed in biological experiments. The doubling time of B-16 melanoma was 9 days after heating on a background of Dox injection at dose of 9 mg/kg, while heating of tumors after injection of Dox-TSL at doses of 4.5 and 9 mg/kg increased tumor doubling time up to 12 and 16 days, respectively. The doubling time of Ehrlich carcinoma increased from 3 days in the control group up to 14 days for the group of mice administered 9 mg/kg of Dox-TSL followed by HT in 15-20 min. Encapsulation of Dox in TSL has resulted in decrease of its toxicity as judged by animal survival. Thus, Dox-TSL in combination with HT has shown more efficiency than free Dox in suppression of tumor growth.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Allen, T.M., Hansen, C., Martin, F., Redemann, C., Yau-Young, A., Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1066, 2936 (1991).Google Scholar
2. Northfelt, D.W., Martin, F.J., Working, P., Volberding, P.A., Russell, J., Newman, M., Amantea, M.A., Kaplan, L.D., J. Clin. Pharmacol. 36, 5563 (1996).Google Scholar
3. O'Brien, M.E., Wigler, N., Inbar, M., Rosso, R., Grischke, E., Santoro, A., Catane, R., Kieback, D.G., Tomczak, P., Ackland, S.P., Orlandi, F., Mellars, L., Alland, L., Tendler, C., Ann. Oncol. 15, 440449 (2004).Google Scholar
4. Batist, G., Barton, J., Chaikin, P., Swenson, C., Welles, L., Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 3, 17391751 (2002).10.1517/14656566.3.12.1739Google Scholar
5. Judson, I., Radford, J.A., Harris, M., Blay, J.Y., van Hoesel, Q., le Cesne, A., van Oosterom, A.T., Clemons, M.J., Kamby, C., Hermans, C., Whittaker, J., Donato di Paola, E., Verweij, J., Nielsen, S., Eur. J. Cancer 37, 870877 (2001).10.1016/S0959-8049(01)00050-8Google Scholar
6. Bandak, S., Goren, D., Horowitz, A., Tzemach, D., Gabizon, A., Anticancer Drugs 10, 911920 (1999).Google Scholar
7. Mayer, L.D., Cancer Metastasis Rev. 17, 211218 (1998).Google Scholar
8. Kong, G., Dewhirst, M.W., Int. J. Hypertherm. 15, 345370 (1999).Google Scholar
9. Yatvin, M.B., Weinstein, J.N., Dennis, W.H., Blumenthal, R., Science 202, 12901293 (1978).Google Scholar
10. Chelvi, T.P., Ralhan, R., Int. J. Hypertherm. 11, 685695 (1995).Google Scholar
11. Gaber, M.H., Hong, K., Huang, S.K., Papahadjopoulos, D., Pharm. Res. 12, 14071416 (1995).Google Scholar
12. Needham, D., Dewhirst, M.W., Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 53, 285305 (2001).Google Scholar
13. Lindner, L.H., Eichhorn, M.E., Eibl, H., Teichert, N., Schmitt-Sody, M., Issels, R.D., Dellian, M., Clin. Cancer Res. 10, 21682178 (2004).Google Scholar
14. Mills, J.K., Needham, D., Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1716, 7796 (2005).10.1016/j.bbamem.2005.08.007Google Scholar
15. Mabrey, S., Sturtevant, J.M., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 73, 38623866 (1976).Google Scholar