Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Definition of nanotechnology and examples of nanotechnology platforms used in drug development. This figure was obtained with permission from the Society for Leukocyte Biology (Fig. 3 of ref. 97).
- Figure 2.
Collage of nanomedical particles and devices developed by members of the NCI Alliance for Nanotechnology in Cancer. This figure was obtained with permission from IEEE (Fig. 1 of ref. 98; photo courtesy of the NCI Alliance for Nanotechnology in Cancer, Nanotechnology Image Library).
- Figure 3.
Nanoparticle biocompatibility trends. The zeta potential, size, and solubility affect the cytotoxicity (surface reactivity), clearance process (renal or biliary), MPS/RES recognition, and EPR effect. This figure was obtained with permission from John Wiley and Sons (Fig. 3 of ref. 99).
- Figure 4.
Efficacy of BIND-014 PSMA-targeted docetaxel nanoparticles in PSMA-expressing human LNCaP prostate cancer xenograft mouse model. Passively targeted docetaxel nanoparticles (PTNP, green) decrease tumor growth rate compared with conventional docetaxel (DTXL, red). BIND-014 (blue) is identical to PTNP in every way except for PSMA-targeting ligand on the surface. The additional active PSMA binding by BIND-014 results in tumor shrinkage of nearly 50%, a vast improvement over DTXL. Mice were treated 4 times with 5 mg/kg of DTXL, PTNP, or BIND-014 at 4-day intervals.
- Figure 5.
Summary of the clearance of nanoparticle agents via the MPS. Most of the studies evaluating factors affecting nanoparticle agents have been done in patients receiving PEGylated and non-PEGylated liposomal agents, and, thus, these carrier systems are depicted. However, in theory, these factors may also affect other nanocarrier systems, but need to be evaluated in future studies. Nanoparticle agents are primarily cleared via the monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells of the MPS that are located in the liver, spleen, and blood. In addition, the MPS cells in the lung and bone marrow also seem to be involved. The tumor delivery of nanoparticle agents is determined by the EPR effect and potentially MPS in tumors. The factors affecting the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of nanoparticle agents in patients and animal models included age, gender, body composition, tumors in the liver, the dose and regimen, other drugs, type of cancer, and prior therapy. PBMC, peripheral blood mononuclear cell.
Volume 18, Issue 12
