Registered report: Coadministration of a tumor-penetrating peptide enhances the efficacy of cancer drugs

Targeting cancer with mRNA-lipid nanoparticles: key considerations and future prospects

Harnessing mRNA-lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) to treat patients with cancer has been an ongoing research area that started before these versatile nanoparticles were successfully used as COVID-19 vaccines. Currently, efforts are underway to harness this platform for oncology therapeutics, mainly focusing on cancer vaccines targeting multiple neoantigens or direct intratumoural injections of mRNA-LNPs encoding pro-inflammatory cytokines. In this Review, we describe the opportunities of using mRNA-LNPs in oncology applications and discuss the challenges for successfully translating the findings of preclinical studies of these nanoparticles into the clinic. We critically appraise the potential of various mRNA-LNP targeting and delivery strategies, considering physiological, technological and manufacturing challenges. We explore these approaches in the context of the potential clinical applications best suited to each approach and highlight the obstacles that currently need to be addressed to achieve these applications. Finally, we provide insights from preclinical and clinical studies that are leading to this powerful platform being considered the next frontier in oncology treatment.

A Perspective on EGFR and Proteasome-based Targeted Therapy for Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer is known to be the most leading cause of death worldwide. It is understood that the sources causing cancer mainly include the activity of endogenous oncogenes, nonviral compounds and the fundamental portion of these oncogenes; the tyrosine kinase activity and proteasome activity are the main biomarkers responsible for cell proliferation. These biomarkers can be used as main targets and are believed to be the 'prime switches' for the signal communication activity to regulate cell death and cell cycle. Thus, signal transduction inhibitors (ligandreceptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors) and proteasome inhibitors can be used as a therapeutic modality to block the action of signaling between the cells as well as protein breakdown in order to induce cell apoptosis.

AIMS

This article highlights the key points and provides an overview of the recent patents on EGFR and proteosome-based inhibitors having therapeutic efficacy. This review focuses on the patents related to therapeutic agents, their preparation process and the final outcome.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this study is to facilitate the advancement and current perspectives in the treatment of cancer.

CONCLUSION

There are numerous strategies discussed in these patents to improve the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of EGFR and proteasome inhibitors. Further, the resistance to targeted therapy after long-term treatment can be overcome by using various excipients that can be used as a strategy to carry the drug. However, there is a need and scope for improving targeted therapeutics for cancer treatment with better fundamentals and characteristics. The widespread research on cancer therapy can create the path for future advancements in therapy with more prominent outcomes.

Challenges for assessing replicability in preclinical cancer biology

We conducted the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology to investigate the replicability of preclinical research in cancer biology. The initial aim of the project was to repeat 193 experiments from 53 high-impact papers, using an approach in which the experimental protocols and plans for data analysis had to be peer reviewed and accepted for publication before experimental work could begin. However, the various barriers and challenges we encountered while designing and conducting the experiments meant that we were only able to repeat 50 experiments from 23 papers. Here we report these barriers and challenges. First, many original papers failed to report key descriptive and inferential statistics: the data needed to compute effect sizes and conduct power analyses was publicly accessible for just 4 of 193 experiments. Moreover, despite contacting the authors of the original papers, we were unable to obtain these data for 68% of the experiments. Second, none of the 193 experiments were described in sufficient detail in the original paper to enable us to design protocols to repeat the experiments, so we had to seek clarifications from the original authors. While authors were extremely or very helpful for 41% of experiments, they were minimally helpful for 9% of experiments, and not at all helpful (or did not respond to us) for 32% of experiments. Third, once experimental work started, 67% of the peer-reviewed protocols required modifications to complete the research and just 41% of those modifications could be implemented. Cumulatively, these three factors limited the number of experiments that could be repeated. This experience draws attention to a basic and fundamental concern about replication – it is hard to assess whether reported findings are credible.

Challenges for assessing replicability in preclinical cancer biology

We conducted the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology to investigate the replicability of preclinical research in cancer biology. The initial aim of the project was to repeat 193 experiments from 53 high-impact papers, using an approach in which the experimental protocols and plans for data analysis had to be peer reviewed and accepted for publication before experimental work could begin. However, the various barriers and challenges we encountered while designing and conducting the experiments meant that we were only able to repeat 50 experiments from 23 papers. Here we report these barriers and challenges. First, many original papers failed to report key descriptive and inferential statistics: the data needed to compute effect sizes and conduct power analyses was publicly accessible for just 4 of 193 experiments. Moreover, despite contacting the authors of the original papers, we were unable to obtain these data for 68% of the experiments. Second, none of the 193 experiments were described in sufficient detail in the original paper to enable us to design protocols to repeat the experiments, so we had to seek clarifications from the original authors. While authors were extremely or very helpful for 41% of experiments, they were minimally helpful for 9% of experiments, and not at all helpful (or did not respond to us) for 32% of experiments. Third, once experimental work started, 67% of the peer-reviewed protocols required modifications to complete the research and just 41% of those modifications could be implemented. Cumulatively, these three factors limited the number of experiments that could be repeated. This experience draws attention to a basic and fundamental concern about replication - it is hard to assess whether reported findings are credible.

The Potential of Milk-Derived Exosomes for Drug Delivery

BACKGROUND

Exosomes, one of the extracellular vesicles, are widely present in all biological fluids and play an important role in intercellular communication. Due to their hydrophobic lipid bilayer and aqueous hydrophilic core structure, they are considered a possible alternative to liposome drug delivery systems. Not only do they protect the cargo like liposomes during delivery, but they are also less toxic and better tolerated. However, due to the lack of sources and methods for obtaining enough exosomes, the therapeutic application of exosomes as drug carriers is limited.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the ScienceDirect and PubMed electronic databases to obtain information from published literature on milk exosomes related to drug delivery.

RESULTS

Here, we briefly reviewed the current knowledge of exosomes, expounded the advantages of milk-derived exosomes over other delivery vectors, including higher yield, the oral delivery characteristic and additional therapeutic benefits. The purification and drug loading methods of milk exosomes, and the current application of milk exosomes were also introduced.

CONCLUSION

The emergence of milk-derived exosomes is expected to break through the limitations of exosomes as therapeutic carriers of drugs. We hope to raise awareness of the therapeutic potential of milk-derived exosomes as a new drug delivery system.

Reimaging biological barriers affecting distribution and extravasation of PEG/peptide- modified liposomes in xenograft SMMC7721 tumor

Liposomes, as one of the most successful nanotherapeutics, have a major impact on many biomedical areas. In this study, we performed laser scanning confocal microscope (LSCM) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) assays to investigate the intra-tumor transport and antitumor mechanism of GE11 peptide-conjugated active targeting liposomes (GE11-TLs) in SMMC7721 xenograft model. According to classification of individual cell types in high resolution images, biodistribution of macrophages, tumor cells, cells with high epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression and interstitial matrix in tumor microenvironment, in addition, their impacts on intra-tumor penetration of GE11-TLs were estimated. Type I collagen fibers and macrophage flooded in the whole SMMC7721 tumor xenografts. Tumor angiogenesis was of great heterogeneity from the periphery to the center region. However, the receptor-binding site barriers were supposed to be the leading cause of poor penetration of GE11-TLs. We anticipate these images can give a deep reconsideration for rational design of target nanoparticles for overcoming biological barriers to drug delivery.

Zerumbone Induces Apoptosis in Breast Cancer Cells by Targeting αvβ3 Integrin upon Co-Administration with TP5-iRGD Peptide

Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) are highly promising tools to deliver therapeutic molecules into tumours. αVβ3 integrins are cell-matrix adhesion receptors, and are considered as an attractive target for anticancer therapies owing to their roles in the process of metastasis and angiogenesis. Therefore, this study aims to assess the effect of co-administration of zerumbone (ZER) and ZERencapsulated in hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin with TP5-iRGD peptide towards cell cytotoxicity, apoptosis induction, and proliferation of normal and cancerous breast cells utilizing in vitro assays, as well as to study the molecular docking of ZER in complex with TP5-iRGD peptide. Cell viability assay findings indicated that ZER and ZERencapsulated in hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (ZER-HPβCD) inhibited the growth of estrogen receptor positivebreast cancer cells (ER⁺ MCF-7) at 72 h treatment with an inhibitory concentration (IC)₅₀ of 7.51 ± 0.2 and 5.08 ± 0.2 µg/mL, respectively, and inhibited the growth of triple negative breast cancer cells (MDA-MB-231) with an IC₅₀ of 14.96 ± 1.52 µg/mL and 12.18 ± 0.7 µg/mL, respectively. On the other hand, TP5-iRGD peptide showed no significant cytotoxicity on both cancer and normal cells. Interestingly, co-administration of TP5-iRGD peptide in MCF-7 cells reduced the IC₅₀ of ZER from 7.51 ± 0.2 µg/mL to 3.13 ± 0.7 µg/mL and reduced the IC₅₀ of ZER-HPβCD from 5.08 ± 0.2 µg/mL to 0.49 ± 0.004 µg/mL, indicating that the co-administration enhances the potency and increases the efficacy of ZER and ZER-HPβCD compounds. Acridine orange (AO)/propidium iodide (PI) staining under fluorescence microscopy showed evidence of early apoptosis after 72 h from the co-administration of ZER or ZER-HPβCD with TP5-iRGD peptide in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. The findings of the computational modelling experiment provide novel insights into the ZER interaction with integrin αvβ3 in the presence of TP5-iRGD, and this could explain why ZER has better antitumor activities when co-administered with TP5-iRGD peptide.

Tumor penetrating peptides for improved drug delivery

In vivo screening of phage libraries in tumor-bearing mice has been used to identify peptides that direct phage homing to a tumor. The power of in vivo phage screening is illustrated by the recent discovery of peptides with unique tumor-penetrating properties. These peptides activate an endocytic transport pathway related to but distinct from macropinocytosis. They do so through a complex process that involves binding to a primary, tumor-specific receptor, followed by a proteolytic cleavage, and binding to a second receptor. The second receptor, neuropilin-1 (or neuropilin-2) activates the transport pathway. This trans-tissue pathway, dubbed the C-end Rule (CendR) pathway, mediates the extravasation transport through extravascular tumor tissue of payloads ranging from small molecule drugs to nanoparticles. The CendR technology provides a solution to a major problem in tumor therapy, poor penetration of drugs into tumors. Targeted delivery with tumor-penetrating peptides has been shown to specifically increase the accumulation of drugs, antibodies and nanotherapeutics in experimental tumors in vivo, and in human tumors ex vivo. Remarkably the payload does not have to be coupled to the peptide; the peptide activates a bulk transport system that sweeps along a drug present in the blood. Treatment studies in mice have shown improved anti-tumor efficacy and less damage to normal tissues with drugs ranging from traditional chemotherapeutics to antibodies, and to nanoparticle drugs.

Replication Study: Coadministration of a tumor-penetrating peptide enhances the efficacy of cancer drugs

In 2015, as part of the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology, we published a Registered Report (Kandela et al., 2015) that described how we intended to replicate selected experiments from the paper “Coadministration of a tumor-penetrating peptide enhances the efficacy of cancer drugs“ (Sugahara et al., 2010). Here we report the results of those experiments. We found that coadministration with iRGD peptide did not have an impact on permeability of the chemotherapeutic agent doxorubicin (DOX) in a xenograft model of prostate cancer, whereas the original study reported that it increased the penetrance of this cancer drug (Figure 2B; Sugahara et al., 2010). Further, in mice bearing orthotopic 22Rv1 human prostate tumors, we did not find a statistically significant difference in tumor weight for mice treated with DOX and iRGD compared to DOX alone, whereas the original study reported a decrease in tumor weight when DOX was coadministered with iRGD (Figure 2C; Sugahara et al., 2010). In addition, we did not find a statistically significant difference in TUNEL staining in tumor tissue between mice treated with DOX and iRGD compared to DOX alone, while the original study reported an increase in TUNEL positive staining with iRGD coadministration (Figure 2D; Sugahara et al., 2010). Similar to the original study (Supplemental Figure 9A; Sugahara et al., 2010), we did not observe an impact on mouse body weight with DOX and iRGD treatment. Finally, we report meta-analyses for each result.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.17584.001