Factors affecting the selectivity of nanoparticle-based photoinduced damage in free and xenografted chorioallantoïc membrane model

References

• Agostinis P, Berg K, Cengel KA, et al. Photodynamic therapy of cancer: an update. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61:250–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derycke AS, De Witte PA. Liposomes for photodynamic therapy. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2004;56:17–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taurin S, Nehoff H, Greish K. Anticancer nanomedicine and tumor vascular permeability; where is the missing link? J Control Release 2012;164:265–75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maherani B, Arab-Tehrani E, Linder M. Mechanism of bioactive transfer through liposomal bilayers. Curr Drug Targets 2011;12:531–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim CK, Heo J, Shin S, et al. Nanophotosensitizers toward advanced photodynamic therapy of Cancer. Cancer Lett 2013;334:176–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senge MO, Brandt JC. Temoporfin (Foscan(R), 5,10,15,20-tetra(m-hydroxyphenyl)chlorin) – a second-generation photosensitizer. Photochem Photobiol 2011;87:1240–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovis MJ, Woodhams JH, Loizidou M, et al. Improved in vivo delivery of m-THPC via pegylated liposomes for use in photodynamic therapy. J Control Release 2012;157:196–205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubler AC, Stenzel W, Ruhling M, et al. Experimental evaluation of possible side effects of intra-operative photodynamic therapy on rabbit blood vessels and nerves. Lasers Surg Med 2003;33:247–55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lange N, Ballini JP, Wagnieres G, Van Den Bergh H. A new drug-screening procedure for photosensitizing agents used in photodynamic therapy for CNV. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:38–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debefve E, Pegaz B, Van Den Bergh H, et al. Video monitoring of neovessel occlusion induced by photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (Visudyne), in the CAM model. Angiogenesis 2008;11:235–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrier J, Reshetov V, Zorin V, et al. Contrasting facets of nanoparticles-based phototherapy: photo-damage and photo-regeneration. In: Photodynamic therapy: new research. New York, USA: Nova Science Publishers, Inc
   Google Scholar
• Pegaz B, Debefve E, Ballini JP, et al. Photothrombic activity of m-THPC-loaded liposomal formulations: pre-clinical assessment on chick chorioallantoic membrane model. Eur J Pharm Sci 2006;28:134–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hornung R, Hammer-Wilson MJ, Kimel S, et al. Systemic application of photosensitizers in the chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model: photodynamic response of CAM vessels and 5-aminolevulinic acid uptake kinetics by transplantable tumors. J Photochem Photobiol 1999;B49:41–9
   Google Scholar
• Gottfried V, Davidi R, Averguj C, Kimel S. In vivo damage to chorioallantoic membrane blood vessels by porphycene-induced photodynamic therapy. J Photochem Photobiol B 1995;30:115–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho CF, Ablack A, Leong HS, et al. Evaluation of nanoparticle uptake in tumors in real time using intravital imaging. J Vis Exp 2011 doi: 10.3791/2808
   Google Scholar
• Ribatti D. The chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane in the study of tumor angiogenesis. Rom J Morphol Embryol 2008;49:131–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu M, Scanlon CS, Banerjee R, et al. The histone methyltransferase EZH2 mediates tumor progression on the chick chorioallantoic membrane assay, a novel model of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Transl Oncol 2013;6:273–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeisser-Labouebe M, Delie F, Gurny R, Lange N. Screening of nanoparticulate delivery systems for the photodetection of cancer in a simple and cost-effective model. Nanomedicine 2009;4:135–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ismail MS, Torsten U, Dressler C, et al. Photodynamic therapy of malignant ovarian tumours cultivated on CAM. Lasers Med Sci 1999;14:91–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reshetov V, Kachatkou D, Shmigol T, et al. Redistribution of meta-tetra(hydroxyphenyl)chlorin (m-THPC) from conventional and PEGylated liposomes to biological substrates. Photochem Photobiol Sci 2011;10:911–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romanoff AL, Romanoff AJ. 1967. Biochemistry of the avian embryo: a quantitative analysis of prenatal development. New York: Interscience Publishers
   Google Scholar
• Malloy A, Carr B. NanoParticle Tracking Analysis – The Halo™ System. Part Part Syst Charact 2006;23:197–204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reshetov V, Zorin V, Siupa A, et al. Interaction of liposomal formulations of meta-tetra(hydroxyphenyl)chlorin (temoporfin) with serum proteins: protein binding and liposome destruction. Photochem Photobiol 2012;88:1256–64
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Filipe V, Hawe A, Jiskoot W. 2010. Critical evaluation of Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) by NanoSight for the measurement of nanoparticles and protein aggregates. Pharm Res 2010;27:796–810
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kachatkou D, Sasnouski S, Zorin V, et al. Unusual photoinduced response of mTHPC liposomal formulation (Foslip). Photochem Photobiol 2009;85:719–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lasic DD, Martin FJ, Gabizon A, et al. Sterically stabilized liposomes: a hypothesis on the molecular origin of the extended circulation times. Biochim Biophys Acta 1991;1070:187–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan X, Scherphof GL, Kamps JA. Liposome opsonization. J Liposome Res 2005;15:109–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harashima H, Hiraiwa T, Ochi Y, Kiwada H. Size dependent liposome degradation in blood: in vivo/in vitro correlation by kinetic modeling. J Drug Target 1995;3:253–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishida T, Funato K, Kojima S, et al. Enhancing effect of cholesterol on the elimination of liposomes from circulation is mediated by complement activation. Int J Pharm 1997;156:27–37
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torchilin VP. Recent advances with liposomes as pharmaceutical carriers. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2005;4:145–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribatti D. Chicken chorioallantoic membrane angiogenesis model. Methods Mol Biol 2012;843:47–57
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ribatti D. Chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane as a useful tool to study angiogenesis. Int Rev Cell Mol Biol 2008;270:181–224
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagedorn M, Balke M, Schmidt A, et al. VEGF coordinates interaction of pericytes and endothelial cells during vasculogenesis and experimental angiogenesis. Dev Dyn 2004;230:23–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vargas A, Zeisser-Labouebe M, Lange N, et al. The chick embryo and its chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) for the in vivo evaluation of drug delivery systems. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2007;59:1162–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson M, Singh G. Observations on the use of the avian chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model in investigations into angiogenesis. Curr Drug Targets Cardiovasc Haematol Disord 2003;3:155–85
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ausprunk DH, Knighton DR, Folkman J. Differentiation of vascular endothelium in the chick chorioallantois: a structural and autoradiographic study. Dev Biol 1974;38:237–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ausprunk DH. 1986. Distribution of hyaluronic acid and sulfated glycosaminoglycans during blood-vessel development in the chick chorioallantoic membrane. Am J Anat 1986;177:313–31
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ulrich AS. Biophysical aspects of using liposomes as delivery vehicles. Biosci Rep 2002;22:129–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunzi-Rapp K, Genze F, Kufer R, et al. Chorioallantoic membrane assay: vascularized 3-dimensional cell culture system for human prostate cancer cells as an animal substitute model. J Urol 2001;166:1502–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozcetin A, Aigner A, Bakowsky U. A chorioallantoic membrane model for the determination of anti-angiogenic effects of imatinib. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2013;85:711--15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagedorn M, Javerzat S, Gilges D, et al. Accessing key steps of human tumor progression in vivo by using an avian embryo model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005;102:1643–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang J, Nakamura H, Maeda H. The EPR effect: unique features of tumor blood vessels for drug delivery, factors involved, and limitations and augmentation of the effect. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2011;63:136–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadzuka Y, Tokutomi K, Iwasaki F, et al. The phototoxicity of photofrin was enhanced by PEGylated liposome in vitro. Cancer Lett 2006;241:42–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen C, Dos Santos N, Gallagher R, et al. Controlling the physical behavior and biological performance of liposome formulations through use of surface grafted poly(ethylene glycol). Biosci Rep 2002;22:225–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchholz J, Kaser-Hotz B, Khan T, et al. Optimizing photodynamic therapy: in vivo pharmacokinetics of liposomal meta-(tetrahydroxyphenyl)chlorin in feline squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:7538–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Visscher SA, Kascakova S, De Bruijn HS, et al. Fluorescence localization and kinetics of mTHPC and liposomal formulations of mTHPC in the window-chamber tumor model. Lasers Surg Med 2011;43:528–36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charrois GJ, Allen TM. Drug release rate influences the pharmacokinetics, biodistribution, therapeutic activity, and toxicity of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin formulations in murine breast cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta 2004;1663:167–77
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar