Transport and delivery of interferon-α through epithelial tight junctions via pH-responsive poly(methacrylic acid-grafted-ethylene glycol) nanoparticles

References

• Couvreur P, Vauthier C. Nanotechnology: intelligent design to treat complex disease. Pharm Res. 2006;23:1417–1450.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolas J, Mura S, Brambilla D, et al. Design, functionalization strategies and biomedical applications of targeted biodegradable/biocompatible polymer-based nanocarriers for drug delivery. Chem Soc Rev. 2013;42:1147–1235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer DS, Puranik AS, Peppas NA. Intelligent nanoparticles for advanced drug delivery in cancer treatment. Curr Opin Chem Eng. 2015;7:84–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer R, Peppas NA. Advances in biomaterials, drug delivery, and bionanotechnology. AIChE J. 2003;49:2990–3006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liechty WB, Peppas NA. Expert opinion: responsive polymer nanoparticles in cancer therapy. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2012;80:241–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steichen SD, Caldorera-Moore M, Peppas NA. A review of current nanoparticle and targeting moieties for the delivery of cancer therapeutics. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2013;48:416–427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanchette J, Peppas NA. Oral chemotherapeutic delivery: design and cellular response. Ann Biomed Eng. 2005;33:142–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldorera-Moore ME, Liechty WB, Peppas NA. Responsive theranostic systems: integration of diagnostic imaging agents and responsive controlled release drug delivery carriers. Acc Chem Res. 2011;44:1061–1070.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo C, Sun J, Du Y, et al. Emerging integrated nanohybrid drug delivery systems to facilitate the intravenous-to-oral switch in cancer chemotherapy. J Control Release. 2014;176:94–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thanki K, Gangwal RP, Sangamwar AT, et al. Oral delivery of anticancer drugs: challenges and opportunities. J Control Release. 2013;170:15–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mei L, Zhang Z, Zhao L, et al. Pharmaceutical nanotechnology for oral delivery of anticancer drugs. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2013;65:880–890.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzaferro S, Bouchemal K, Ponchel G. Oral delivery of anticancer drugs I: general considerations. Drug Discov Today. 2013;18:25–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzaferro S, Bouchemal K, Ponchel G. Oral delivery of anticancer drugs II: the prodrug strategy. Drug Discov Today. 2013;18:93–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzaferro S, Bouchemal K, Ponchel G. Oral delivery of anticancer drugs III: formulation using drug delivery systems. Drug Discov Today. 2013;18:99–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ren T, Wang Q, Xu Y, et al. Enhanced oral absorption and anticancer efficacy of cabazitaxel by overcoming intestinal mucus and epithelium barriers using surface polyethylene oxide (PEO) decorated positively charged polymer-lipid hybrid nanoparticles. J Control Release. 2018;269:423–438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bracci L, Schiavoni G, Sistigu A, et al. Immune-based mechanisms of cytotoxic chemotherapy: implications for the design of novel and rationale-based combined treatments against cancer [Review]. Cell Death Differ. 2014;21:15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Motzer RJ, Bacik J, Murphy BA, et al. Interferon-alfa as a comparative treatment for clinical trials of new therapies against advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:289–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein D, Laszlo J. The role of interferon in cancer therapy: a current perspective. CA Cancer J Clin. 1988;38:258–277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vela L, Marzo I. Bcl-2 family of proteins as drug targets for cancer chemotherapy: the long way of BH3 mimetics from bench to bedside. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2015;23:74–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker BS, Rautela J, Hertzog PJ. Antitumour actions of interferons: implications for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016;16:131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belardelli F, Ferrantini M, Proietti E, et al. Interferon-alpha in tumor immunity and immunotherapy. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2002;13:119–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brassard DL, Grace MJ, Bordens RW. Interferon-alpha as an immunotherapeutic protein . J Leukoc Biol. 2002;71:565–581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutterman JU. Cytokine therapeutics: lessons from interferon alpha. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994;91:1198–1205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parmar S, Platanias LC. Interferons: mechanisms of action and clinical applications. Curr Opin Oncol. 2003;15:431–439.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Xu D, Smolin N, Shaw RK, et al. Molecular insights into the improved clinical performance of PEGylated interferon therapeutics: a molecular dynamics perspective. RSC Adv. 2018;8:2315–2322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Micco L, Peppa D, Loggi E, et al. Differential boosting of innate and adaptive antiviral responses during pegylated-interferon-alpha therapy of chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol. 2013;58:225–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sánchez A, Tobı́o M, González L, et al. Biodegradable micro- and nanoparticles as long-term delivery vehicles for interferon-alpha. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2003;18:221–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badkar AV, Smith AM, Eppstein JA, et al. Transdermal delivery of interferon alpha-2B using microporation and iontophoresis in hairless rats. Pharm Res. 2007;24:1389–1395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lesinski GB, Sharma S, Varker KA, et al. Release of biologically functional interferon-alpha from a nanochannel delivery system. Biomed Microdevices. 2005;7:71–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Connor C, Steichen S, Peppas NA. Student Award for Outstanding Research Winner in the Undergraduate Category for the 2017 Society for Biomaterials Annual Meeting and Exposition, April 5–8, 2017, Minneapolis, Minnesota: Development and characterization of stimuli-responsive hydrogel microcarriers for oral protein delivery. J Biomed Mater Res. 2017;105:1243–1251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horava SD, Moy KJ, Peppas NA. Biodegradable hydrophilic carriers for the oral delivery of hematological factor IX for hemophilia B treatment. Int J Pharm. 2016;514:220–228.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lowman AM, Morishita M, Kajita M, et al. Oral delivery of insulin using pH-responsive complexation gels. J Pharm Sci. 1999;88:933–937. 1999/09/01/doi: 10.1021/js980337n.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morishita M, Goto T, Nakamura K, et al. Novel oral insulin delivery systems based on complexation polymer hydrogels: single and multiple administration studies in type 1 and 2 diabetic rats. J Control Release. 2006;110:587–594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrillo-Conde BR, Brewer E, Lowman A, et al. Complexation hydrogels as oral delivery vehicles of therapeutic antibodies: an in vitro and ex vivo evaluation of antibody stability and bioactivity. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2015;54:10197–10205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanchette J, Kavimandan N, Peppas NA. Principles of transmucosal delivery of therapeutic agents. Biomed Pharmacother. 2004;58:142–151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liechty WB, Caldorera-Moore M, Phillips MA, et al. Advanced molecular design of biopolymers for transmucosal and intracellular delivery of chemotherapeutic agents and biological therapeutics. J Control Release. 2011;155:119–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldorera-Moore M, Peppas NA. Micro- and nanotechnologies for intelligent and responsive biomaterial-based medical systems. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2009;61:1391–1401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peppas NA, Hilt JZ, Khademhosseini A, et al. Hydrogels in biology and medicine: from molecular principles to bionanotechnology. Adv Mater. 2006;18:1345–1360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brannon-Peppas L, Peppas NA. Equilibrium swelling behavior of pH-sensitive hydrogels. Chem Eng Sci. 1991;46:715–722.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brannon-Peppas L, Peppas NA. Time-dependent response of ionic polymer networks to pH and ionic strength changes. Int J Pharm. 1991;70:53–57.
   Google Scholar
• Brannon-Peppas L, Peppas NA. Equilibrium swelling behavior of dilute ionic hydrogels in electrolytic solutions. J Control Release. 1991;16:319–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khare AR, Peppas NA. Swelling/deswelling of anionic copolymer gels. Biomaterials. 1995;16:559–567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood KM, Stone GM, Peppas NA. The effect of complexation hydrogels on insulin transport in intestinal epithelial cell models. Acta Biomaterialia. 2010;6:48–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldorera-Moore M, Maass K, Hegab R, et al. Hybrid responsive hydrogel carriers for oral delivery of low molecular weight therapeutic agents. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol. 2015;30:352–359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lesuffleur T, Barbat A, Dussaulx E, et al. Growth adaptation to methotrexate of HT-29 human colon carcinoma cells is associated with their ability to differentiate into columnar absorptive and mucus-secreting cells. Cancer Res. 1990;50:6334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lesuffleur T, Porchet N, Aubert JP, et al. Differential expression of the human mucin genes MUC1 to MUC5 in relation to growth and differentiation of different mucus-secreting HT-29 cell subpopulations. J Cell Sci. 1993;106:771.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liechty WB, Scheuerle RL, Peppas NA. Tunable, responsive nanogels containing t-butyl methacrylate and 2-(t-butylamino)ethyl methacrylate. Polymer. 2013;54:3784–3795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puranik AS, Pao LP, White VM, et al. In vitro evaluation of pH-responsive nanoscale hydrogels for the oral delivery of hydrophobic therapeutics. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2016;55:10576–10590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou S, Sun J, Sun L, et al. Preparation and characterization of interferon-loaded magnetic biodegradable microspheres. J Biomed Mater Res. 2008;87B:189–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delie F, Rubas W. A human colonic cell line sharing similarities with enterocytes as a model to examine oral absorption: advantages and limitations of the Caco-2 model. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst. 1997;14:221–286.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidalgo IJ, Raub TJ, Borchardt RT. Characterization of the human colon carcinoma cell line (Caco-2) as a model system for intestinal epithelial permeability. Gastroenterology. 1989;96:736–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behrens I, Kissel T. Do cell culture conditions influence the carrier-mediated transport of peptides in Caco-2 cell monolayers? Eur J Pharm Sci. 2003;19:433–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wikman A, Karlsson J, Carlstedt I, et al. A drug absorption model based on the mucus layer producing human intestinal goblet cell line HT29-H. Pharm Res. 1993;10:843–852.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsson J, Wikman A, Artursson P. The mucus layer as a barrier to drug absorption in monolayers of human intestinal epithelial HT29-H goblet cells. Int J Pharm. 1993;99:209–218.
   Google Scholar
• Meaney C, O’Driscoll C. Mucus as a barrier to the permeability of hydrophilic and lipophilic compounds in the absence and presence of sodium taurocholate micellar systems using cell culture models. Eur J Pharm Sci. 1999;8:167–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pontier C, Pachot J, Botham R, et al. HT29-MTX and Caco-2/TC7 monolayers as predictive models for human intestinal absorption: role of the mucus layer. J Pharm Sci. 2001;90:1608–1619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter E, Janich S, Roessler BJ, et al. HT29-MTX/Caco-2 cocultures as an in vitro model for the intestinal epithelium: in vitro–in vivo correlation with permeability data from rats and humans. J Pharm Sci. 1996;85:1070–1076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan F, Han L, Zhang Y, et al. Optimization of Caco-2 and HT29 co-culture in vitro cell models for permeability studies. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2015;66:680–685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan B, Kolli AR, Esch MB, et al. TEER measurement techniques for in vitro barrier model systems. J Lab Autom. 2015;20:107–126.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ferraretto A, Bottani M, De Luca P, et al. Morphofunctional properties of a differentiated Caco2/HT-29 co-culture as an in vitro model of human intestinal epithelium. Biosci Rep. 2018;38:BSR20171497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadeghi AMM, Dorkoosh FA, Avadi MR, et al. Permeation enhancer effect of chitosan and chitosan derivatives: comparison of formulations as soluble polymers and nanoparticulate systems on insulin absorption in Caco-2 cells. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2008;70:270–278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Béduneau A, Tempesta C, Fimbel S, et al. A tunable Caco-2/HT29-MTX co-culture model mimicking variable permeabilities of the human intestine obtained by an original seeding procedure. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2014;87:290–298.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar