Page - 6 - in Cancer Nanotheranostics - What Have We Learnd So Far?
Image of the Page - 6 -
Text of the Page - 6 -
Condeetal. RecentAdvancesonCancerNanotheranostics
substances within the body at a reduced risk in comparison to
conventional therapies. At the present time, there is a growing
need to enhance the capabilityof theranosticsprocedureswhere
innovativemultifunctional nanocarriers for cancer theranostics
may allow the development of diagnostics systems such as
colorimetric and immunoassays, and in therapy approaches
throughgenetherapy,drugdeliveryandtumortargetingsystems
incancer (Condeetal., 2014).
Some of the thousands and thousands of published
nanosystems so far will most likely revolutionize our
understanding of biologicalmechanisms and push forward the
clinical practice through their integration in future diagnostics
platforms. Nevertheless, despite the significant efforts toward
the use of nanomaterials in biologically relevant research,more
in vivo studies are needed to assess the applicability of these
materialsasdeliveryagents. Infact,onlyafewhavegonethrough
feasible clinical trials. Nanomaterials have to serve as the norm
rather than an exception in the future conventional cancer
treatments. Future in vivoworkwill need to carefully consider
the correct choiceof chemicalmodifications to incorporate into
the multifunctional nanocarriers to avoid activation off-target,
sideeffectsandtoxicity.
It is imperious to learn how advances in nanosystems’
capabilities are being used to identify new diagnostic and
therapy apparatuses driving the development of personalized
andprecisionmedicine in cancer therapy anddiagnostics; learn
howincorporatingcancerresearchandnanotechnologycanhelp
patient life quality; identify how to decipher nanotheranostics
data intoarealclinical strategy;and, lastbutnot least, learnwhat
methodsare showing fertile results in turningpromisingclinical
data into treatmentrealities (Condeetal., 2014).
Althoughall studiesdescribedinthisTopicprovideabaseline
level of data in support of the effectiveness and safety of
nanomaterials,wewonderwhathavewe learnedsofar?
Current trends inbiomedicinehavebeen focused toward the
useofnewmaterials capable toaddressparticularandindividual
characteristics in strategies for molecular precision therapies.
In this endeavor, nanoparticles have allowed a tremendous leap
forward incombiningdiagnosticsandtherapy inasingle system
and doing so at the nanoscale. Nanotheranostics have enabled
the integration of targeting, imaging and therapeutics in a
singleplatform,withprovenapplicabilityon themanagementof
heterogeneousdiseases.
Despite the plethora of proposed systems, only but a few
products are currently includedclinical trials andmuchremains
to be done to allow effective clinical translation of these
promisingnanotheranosticsplatforms.
Several nanoconjugates have been proposed, varying in
material, size and shape; some bringing current therapeutic
approaches to thenanometer scalewhileothers enactdisruptive
properties only possible by combination of differentmolecules
and chemistries at the nanoscale (Conde et al.). For example,
achievingcontrolledcellularresponsesofnanoparticles iscritical
for the successful development and translation of NP-based
drug delivery systems. Conde et al. and Hong et al. (Pearson
et al.) reportedacomplete surveyon themost important factors
for careful design of nanoparticles and the demand for precise control over the physicochemical and biological properties of
NPs.
Liu et al. discuss the potential of star shaped nanoparticles
in novel imaging approaches and strategies combining therapy
and imaging in cancer. In fact, the potential of application of
nanoconjugates in enhanced imaging strategies andplatforms is
discussedbyAlcantara et al.withparticular emphasis in current
trendsinmolecular imagingforoptimizedmanagementofbreast
cancer.
Theranostics of brain diseases such as brain cancer, is a
daunting challenge due to the unique environment of central
nervous system (Bhaskar et al., 2010). Yet passing the blood-
brain barrier (BBB) is particularly difficult. The proper design
of such engineered “nanocarriers” becomes very important
in translocating the impermeable membranes of the brain to
facilitate drug delivery. At the same time, it is also required
to retain the drug stability and ensure that early degradation
of drugs from the nanocarriers does not take place. In fact,
Mahmoudi and Hadjipanayis reported a great opinion piece
about the applicationofmagneticnanoparticles (MNPS) for the
treatment of brain tumors and howMNPswill likely assume a
larger role in brain cancer treatment in combinationwith other
adjuvant therapies.
Talking about other adjuvant therapies, radiation and gene
therapyhavealsogainedmomentuminthe lastyearswhenusing
nanomaterials for cancer therapy. Cooper et al. reported how
radiation therapy is oneof themost commonlyused treatments
forcancerandwhichdirections to followfor the futurebasedon
current stateofnanoparticle-assistedradiationtherapy.
Regardinggene therapy,MorenoandPegoreportedacritical
overviewofusing therapeutic antisenseoligonucleotides against
cancer and how difficult has been to get to the clinic. This is
in fact not only a problem with gene therapy but a universal
issue aswhilstmanypre-clinical datahas beengenerated, a lack
of understanding still exists on how to efficiently tackle all the
different challenges presented for cancer targeting in a clinical
setting.
Perhaps another interesting avenue in cancer
nanotheranostics is the interfering effect of the immune
system in the efficacy of proposed platforms. In fact, a clear
perspective on the interaction between immune response and
immune modulators is still missing from the general picture
of nanotheranostics, not only in what concerns the organisms
response to the systemic delivery of nanoconjugates that may
hamper efficacy, but also the use of the immune response and
nanoconjugates interaction with immune system as means to
achievehigher andmoredirected/targeted therapy to thecancer
site. As such, the effect and response of diverse properties of
nanodiagnosticsplatforms in theorganismshavebeendiscussed
by Clift et al. where nanoconjugates are discussed in terms
of the immune response triggered after systemic delivery;
whereasConniot et al. andPearsonetal. (Dawidczyketal.)have
demonstrated how nanotheranostics may use and profit from
thespecificandunspecific immuneresponse toenhanceefficacy.
Actually, cancer immunotherapy is nowadays consider a hot
topic andahugebreakthrough inmodernScience (Condeet al.,
2015).
Frontiers inChemistry |www.frontiersin.org January2016 |Volume3 |Article71 6|
Cancer Nanotheranostics
What Have We Learnd So Far?
- Title
- Cancer Nanotheranostics
- Subtitle
- What Have We Learnd So Far?
- Authors
- JoĂŁo Conde
- Pedro Viana Baptista
- JesĂşs M. De La Fuente
- Furong Tian
- Editor
- Frontiers in Chemistry
- Date
- 2016
- Language
- English
- License
- CC BY 4.0
- ISBN
- 978-2-88919-776-7
- Size
- 21.0 x 27.7 cm
- Pages
- 132
- Keywords
- Nanomedicine, Nanoparticles, nanomaterials, Cancer, heranostics, Immunotherapy, bioimaging, Drug delivery, Gene Therapy, Phototherapy
- Categories
- Naturwissenschaften Chemie