132,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
Addressing a cutting-edge, multidisciplinary field, this book reviews nanomaterials and their biomedical applications. It covers regeneration, implants, adhesives, and biosensors and strategies for more efficient therapy, diagnosis, and drug delivery with the use of nanotechnology. * Addresses the increasing demand for nanomedicine in a cutting-edge, multidisciplinary field * Introduces concepts, strategies, and requirements of developing materials * Discusses hot topics in drug delivery, such as neural regeneration, cartilage regeneration, bone tissue regeneration, dental regeneration, biomedical imaging, tissue adhesives and biosensors * Includes a chapter about nanotoxicology to help readers further understand the biocompatability of nanomaterials
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 560
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016
Ähnliche
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER
TITLE PAGE
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
PREFACE
1 NANOMATERIALS FOR MEDICINE
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 NANOSCALE MATERIAL PROPERTIES
1.3 NANOMATERIALS FOR UNDERSTANDING DISEASE PATHWAYS
1.4 NANOMATERIALS FOR THERAPY
1.5 CHALLENGES AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
2 NANOSIZED DELIVERY SYSTEMS FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 DELIVERY OF PROTEIN THERAPEUTICS WITH NANOCARRIERS FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.3 GENE AND
SI
RNA DELIVERY WITH NANOCARRIERS FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.4 SYSTEMIC TARGETING AND CELLULAR INTERNALIZATION STRATEGIES FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.5 FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
3 NANOMATERIALS FOR NEURAL REGENERATION
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 NANOMATERIALS FOR NEURAL REGENERATION
3.3 CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL FUNCTIONALIZATION OF NANOMATERIALS FOR NEURAL DIFFERENTIATION
3.4 CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
4 THERAPEUTIC NANOMATERIALS FOR CARTILAGE REGENERATION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 CURRENT TREATMENT METHODS FOR CARTILAGE INJURIES
4.3 TISSUE ENGINEERING EFFORTS
4.4 CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS FOR CARTILAGE REGENERATION
4.5 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
5 WOUND HEALING APPLICATIONS OF NANOMATERIALS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 APPLICATIONS OF NANOMATERIALS FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF WOUND HEALING PROCESS
5.3 PEPTIDE NANOFIBER GELS FOR WOUND HEALING
REFERENCES
6 NANOMATERIALS FOR BONE TISSUE REGENERATION AND ORTHOPEDIC IMPLANTS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 BONE MATRIX
6.3 INORGANIC MATRIX, MINERALIZATION, AND BONE ORGANIZATION
6.4 REGULATION OF BONE MATRIX IN ADULT TISSUE
6.5 STRATEGIES FOR BONE TISSUE REGENERATION
6.6 SOFT GRAFTS FOR BONE REGENERATION
6.7 FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
7 NANOMATERIALS FOR THE REPAIR AND REGENERATION OF DENTAL TISSUES
7.1 INTRODUCTION
7.2 FORMATION OF DENTAL AND OSSEOUS TISSUES
7.3 DENTAL IMPLANTS
7.4 OSSEOINTEGRATION OF DENTAL IMPLANTS
7.5 USES OF NANOTECHNOLOGY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF DENTAL IMPLANTS
7.6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
8 NANOMATERIALS AS TISSUE ADHESIVES
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8.2 TISSUE ADHESIVES BASED ON SYNTHETIC POLYMERS
8.3 NATURALLY DERIVED TISSUE ADHESIVES
8.4 BIOINSPIRED STRATEGIES
8.5 NANOENABLED ADHESIVES
8.6 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
REFERENCES
9 ADVANCES IN NANOPARTICLE-BASED MEDICAL DIAGNOSTIC AND THERAPEUTIC TECHNIQUES
9.1 INTRODUCTION
9.2 NPs USED IN MRI
9.3 NPs USED IN COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY
9.4 NPs USED IN OPTICAL AND FLUORESCENCE IMAGING
9.5 THERANOSTIC APPROACHES AND MULTIMODAL SYSTEMS
9.6 OVERLOOK AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
REFERENCES
10 BIOSENSORS FOR EARLY DISEASE DIAGNOSIS
10.1 INTRODUCTION
10.2 BIOSENSOR ELEMENTS
10.3 THE IMPACT OF NANOTECHNOLOGY AND NANOMATERIALS IN BIOSENSOR DESIGN
10.4 EARLY DIAGNOSIS AND BIOSENSOR-BASED DISEASE DETECTION
10.5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
REFERENCES
11 SAFETY OF NANOMATERIALS
11.1 INTRODUCTION
11.2 CHARACTERIZATION, DESIGN, AND SYNTHESIS OF NANOMATERIALS
11.3 INTERACTIONS AT THE CELL–MATERIAL INTERFACE
11.4 ASSAYS FOR CELL VIABILITY/PROLIFERATION
11.5 ANIMAL MODELS AND LONG-TERM RISK ASSESSMENT
11.6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
INDEX
END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
List of Tables
Chapter 04
TABLE 4.1 Current Pharmacological Drugs Used in Clinics
TABLE 4.2 Potential Future Therapeutics in Preclinical and Clinical Trials
Chapter 05
TABLE 5.1 Commercially Available Wound Dressings and Their Recommended Regions of Application
Chapter 06
TABLE 6.1 Short Peptides for Bone Regeneration
Chapter 08
TABLE 8.1 Currently Available Tissue Adhesives
Chapter 09
TABLE 9.1 Medical imaging techniques and the contrast agents used for their enhancement
Chapter 10
TABLE 10.1 Output Types, Recognition Elements, Sensitivities, and Analysis Times for Recent Biosensors
TABLE 10.2 Target Molecules, Detection Methods, and Sensitivities of Biosensor-based Diagnostic Methods
Chapter 11
TABLE 11.1 Inhibitors Used to Study the Uptake Mechanisms of ENMs
List of Illustrations
Chapter 03
FIGURE 3.1 Physical properties to induce neural differentiation of neural stem cells (NSCs).
Chapter 05
FIGURE 5.1 Three-dimensional nanofibrous network formed by peptide amphiphile nanofibers.
Chapter 06
FIGURE 6.1 Hierarchical organization of bone from macro- to nanoscale.
Chapter 08
FIGURE 8.1 Cyanoacrylate and acrylate-containing adhesives. (a) Monomeric units of cyanoacrylates (i) and acrylates (ii) used as tissue adhesives. (b) Anionic polymerization (curing) of methyl cyanoacrylate in the presence of water. (c) Chemical structure of PTMC
m
–PEG
m
–PTMC
m
diacrylate adhesive.
FIGURE 8.2 Mechanism of (a) adhesion of urethane-based adhesives through reacting with amine groups of proteins and water, (b) cross-linked fibrin curing, and (c) schematic illustration of complex coacervation.
FIGURE 8.3 Nanoparticles can function as soft tissue adhesives. (a) Schematic illustration of nanoparticle-mediated bonding of polymer networks. Network chains are adsorbed on nanoparticles, via squeezing (see the arrows), at the interface of the bonding gels. (b) Particle adsorption creates anchorage points to the gel networks. Under stress, one of the chains that detaches from a particle surface, can cause energy dissipation, thereby allowing for large deformations. (c) Bonding two calf liver parts using TM50 silica solution casting in between them and then gently pressing for 30 s. (d)
In vivo
application of SiO
2
nanoparticles to bond the dorsal skin in a rat model. An arbitrary drop of nanoparticle dispersion is simply casted onto the wound edges and then the two ends are gently pressed for about 1 min. Histological examination on day 3 shows no wound leakages, infection, or inflammatory reactions with nanoparticle-mediated wound closure, which is comparable with suturing. On the other hand, the wound edges fail to bond correctly. (e) Implantation of a 3D scaffold to a beating rat heart using Ludox TM50 silica nanoparticles (Meddahi-Pellé et al., 2014). The scaffold remains attached to the heart at the end of 3 days.
Chapter 11
FIGURE 11.1 Uptake mechanisms and the intracellular transport of ENMs. Uptake may occur through micropinocytosis (a), pinocytosis (b), caveolin-mediated endocytosis (c), clathrin-mediated endocytosis (d), unknown endocytic pathways (e), or diffusion/penetration (f). After cellular entry, ENMs may localize into different organelles and cellular compartments. ENMs that enter to the Golgi apparatus can cause organelle damage and/or leave the cell via vesicles involved in the regular secretion system (g). ENMs remaining in early endosomes move slowly along cytoskeletal elements, fuse with late endosomes, and finally accumulate in the lysosome (h), nucleus (j), nucleolus (k), and mitochondria (m). In addition to these possible endpoints, ENMs can also accumulate in the cytoplasm (l) after escaping from late endosomes or lysosomes. Ultimately, ENMs can be excreted from the cell by transcytosis (i).
FIGURE 11.2 Schematic representation of the blood–brain barrier (BBB). Microvascular endothelial cells are connected through tight junctions (TJs) and adherens junctions (AJs) that prevent the leakage of foreign material into the brain. Nanoparticles ordinarily cannot pass through the BBB (a) and must be functionalized with targeting moieties that facilitate BBB transport through endocytosis (b), receptor-mediated transcytosis (c), or the loosening of the junctions between endothelial cells (d).
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
iii
iv
xi
xiii
xiv
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
THERAPEUTIC NANOMATERIALS
Edited by
MUSTAFA O. GULER
Institute of Materials Science and NanotechnologyNational Nanotechnology Research Center (UNAM)Bilkent UniversityAnkara, Turkey
AYSE B. TEKINAY
Institute of Materials Science and NanotechnologyNational Nanotechnology Research Center (UNAM)Bilkent UniversityAnkara, Turkey
Copyright © 2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved
Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New JerseyPublished simultaneously in Canada
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 750-4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at (317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Therapeutic nanomaterials / edited by Mustafa O. Guler, Ayse B. Tekinay. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-118-98745-2 (cloth)1. Nanostructured materials–Therapeutic use. 2. Medical technology. I. Guler, Mustafa O., 1978– editor. II. Tekinay, Ayse B., editor. R857.N34T44 2016 610.28–dc23 2015034452
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
Elif Arslan
Hakan Ceylan
Goksu Cinar
Aykutlu Dana
Mevhibe Gecer
Melis Goktas
Mustafa O. Guler
Gulcihan Gulseren
Nuray Gunduz
Busra Mammadov
Rashad Mammadov
Didem Mumcuoglu
Alper Devrim Ozkan
Melis Sardan
Berna Senturk
Melike Sever
Gulistan Tansık
Ayse B. Tekinay
Ahmet E. Topal
Gozde Uzunalli
I. Ceren Yasa
Seher Ustun Yaylacı
Aygul Zengin
Affiliation (all contributors): Institute of Materials Science and Nanotechnology, National Nanotechnology Research Center (UNAM), Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
PREFACE
Interdisciplinary approaches through contributions from chemistry, biology, materials science, physics, engineering, and medicine offer a new generation of therapeutic methods, which can be used for the early diagnosis and treatment of many diseases and injuries that ail human population today. This book aims to provide a general perspective about nanomaterials and their use for therapeutic purposes for scientists, clinicians, patients, students, and novices in the field. It also provides detailed information on types of nanomaterials and their biomedical application areas for experts in nanosciences. Here we discussed how nanomaterials can be used for biomedical applications in addition to understanding side effects of these materials to humans and environment, and we also cautioned the lawmakers to make the necessary regulations.
This book discusses new materials for treatments of different types of tissues and organs. In addition to therapy, new methods for diagnosing diseases are briefly described. Main treatment methods were discussed under regeneration of tissues in situ. With the increase in aging population in the world, especially in developed countries, there is also an increased prevalence of degenerative disorders. Both degenerative disorders and accidental injuries can cause detrimental changes in various tissues, which result in not only deterioration of life quality of patients and caregivers but also a considerable amount of financial burden on the health systems of individual countries. Current treatment options for many of these injuries are insufficient. We believe that new generation of therapeutic materials will be utilized extensively in the regenerative medicine field. Although there are many species that can perfectly regenerate the injuries in their tissues, Homo sapiens is not one of them. Therefore, when humans get injured, they need external help for repair of their injuries, with the fact in mind that they cannot fully regenerate. The deficiency of tissue repair mechanisms is more evident in some tissues like brain or cartilage, and the ability to repair is known to decrease with age.
Mustafa O. Guler and Ayse B. Tekinay
1NANOMATERIALS FOR MEDICINE
Mustafa O. Guler and Ayse B. Tekinay
Institute of Materials Science and Nanotechnology, National Nanotechnology Research Center (UNAM), Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Nanotechnology is an interdisciplinary research area that studies the characteristics of materials at nanometer scale and developing new materials with new functionalities. Advances in nanotechnology enable us to develop new molecules and materials with more controlled chemical, physical, and biological properties. The new techniques and materials produced by using nanotechnology provide a vast array of opportunities for diagnosis and therapy of many diseases that are still considered extremely challenging by medical professionals such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, and aging-related disorders. In addition, nanotechnology provides us tools to study the in-depth mechanisms of the biological machinery enabling us to learn more about the pathophysiology of the diseases. These detailed analyses can be utilized to pinpoint the exact causes behind these diseases and correct the defects in the biological machinery. Since biological machinery works at nanoscale (e.g., the diameter of DNA is 2 nm; a typical ribosome’s diameter is 20–30 nm; individual collagen fibers of the extracellular matrix are ~1.5 nm in diameter and 300 nm in length), it can best be manipulated by using nanoscale materials with controlled functionalities. Thus, nanomaterials with controlled physical, chemical, and biological characteristics can be used for the therapy of the specific causes of the diseases.
Overall, nanomaterials serve two important purposes for medical applications: They can be utilized to understand the pathophysiology of the diseases by enhancing detailed knowledge of biological machinery and increasing diagnosis efficiency, and they can provide us novel approaches to interrupt or correct the regular biological activity depending on the disease type and the treatment strategy.
1.2 NANOSCALE MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Nanoscale is generally considered as dimensions between 0.1 and 100 nm, and nanomaterials can display extraordinary characteristics compared to their micro- or macroscale counterparts. New synthesis techniques can control shape and function of materials at the nanometer level. There are several ways to develop new materials in nanometer scale. Mainly, top-down and bottom-up approaches are the two major techniques to produce nanomaterials. In the top-down techniques, bulk materials are tailored into specific shape and size with recent high-tech tools. For example, soft-lithography techniques can craft bulk surfaces into nanostructured textures to create a high surface area and molecular contact points with the biological materials. In bottom-up approaches, small molecular building blocks are used to form more complex and higher-scale nanometer-sized materials. Both techniques have advantages and disadvantages in terms of their fabrication method and product function. In theory, it is desired to utilize both techniques in conjunction so that we can eliminate the weaknesses of each technique. Depending on the application area, either one or both of these approaches can be used to develop materials that can be used in studying pathophysiology of diseases and their diagnosis and therapy. Especially, bioinspired and biomimetic strategies yield products that can replace or accommodate activities of the natural biomolecules. Nevertheless, for effective diagnosis and therapy of diseases, it is almost crucial to first understand the molecular reasons behind disease development.
1.3 NANOMATERIALS FOR UNDERSTANDING DISEASE PATHWAYS
Biological machinery is known for its perfect balance, and runs within a complex network, which enables it to tolerate irregularities up to a certain level. Diseases occur when these irregularities cannot be tolerated, and several reasons might cause this, which are generally classified as hereditary or environmental reasons. In most cases, both of these components are the culprits behind medical problems, and it is always important to understand the changes in molecular level to decide the most appropriate treatment. For example, when an irregular activity of a protein, which can result in a disease, is detected, the necessary precautions can be taken or developed for the appropriate treatment. In some cases, protein production mechanism can be targeted to discontinue the disease-related activity. In other cases, the specific protein could be targeted and blocked; therefore the protein can be inactivated to stop the undesired activity. Since biological machinery works at the molecular level, these mechanisms can be best understood by using techniques that provide the highest sensitivity. Many of the current techniques that are used in biomedical research utilize microtechnology, which not only require higher amounts of biomolecules for analyses but also are only sensitive at microscale. On the other hand, techniques that utilize nanotechnology have recently been introduced in biomedical research and have revolutionized particular research areas. Developing DNA sequencing strategies for personalized medicine, biosensors with higher sensitivity that can be used for detection of low levels, or biomolecules and even nanoparticles that can be used for isolation for biomacromolecules such as DNA, RNA, or proteins are some of the examples of recent use of nanotechnology in understanding disease pathophysiology. On the other hand, there is an enormous amount of research in the recently published literature on developing better technologies for understanding biological events and pathways including nanomaterials for biocompatible labeling of biomolecules and cells for more efficient monitoring of activity, for tailoring nanomaterials for enhanced targeting ability (compared to regularly used antibodies), and for targeted blocking of biomolecular activity to understand their functionality in more detail. Application of these methods to biomedical research will yield in gaining more knowledge in the working mechanisms of biological machinery, and pathophysiology of diseases, and for enhancing diagnostic capabilities, all of which will in turn provide more opportunities for therapy.
1.4 NANOMATERIALS FOR THERAPY
To cure diseases with synthetic materials, the materials should be able to interact with specific biological actors in their natural environment. These biological actors can be cell surface receptors, which are mostly composed of proteins and carbohydrates; extracellular elements, such as growth factors, cytokines, or structural components like collagens; or intracellular elements, such as DNA, ribosomes, RNA, enzymes, etc. The optimal venue of interaction with biomolecules would be similar to the way they interact with their natural binding partners, so that the balance of the biological machinery can be reinstated. Therefore, the materials to be used should carry physical properties to meet the requirements for appropriate interactions. In addition to these, the materials should be functionalized with bioactive molecules. The interaction between the bioactive domain of the material and the target protein determines the stability of the complex and determines the fate of the biological activity.
Nanomaterials are used for therapy of diseases through several ways such as targeted drug/gene delivery approaches and induction of regeneration of damaged tissues by using nanomaterials. For targeted drug delivery, nanomaterials can be used as targeting molecules, as carrier systems, or as the bioactive drug itself. Aptamers, for example, are one example of how tailored nanomaterials can be used for targeting purposes. On the other hand, most of the research on nanomaterials for drug delivery has focused on developing carrier systems such as liposomes, polymeric nanoparticles, or metal-based nanoparticles. Although small-molecule drugs are the most commonly used therapeutics used for drug delivery approaches, there have been serious advances in producing tailored nanomaterial drugs, mostly in the form of small peptides or their conjugates.
The nanomaterials can be also used in regenerative medicine applications. To regenerate the tissue defects caused by diseases, materials can form an artificial three-dimensional environment to fill the gap with the bioactive signals derived from the natural healing process. The soluble factors can diffuse inside this network, and the cells in the proximity can migrate to the defect side. If correct signals and the optimum environment are provided, the tissue defect can be healed and function of the tissue can be recovered. Many polymeric materials have previously been tailored to mimic the natural biomacromolecules both physically and chemically. These materials have also been further functionalized through addition of natural biological molecules such as growth factors. On the other hand, there is a growing area of nanomaterials that are synthesized by using natural biomaterials such as peptide nanofiber systems, which can be produced through bottom-up approaches. These nanomaterials can be specifically designed to mimic natural proteins and carbohydrates to distinctively interact with particular biomacromolecules so that they induce differentiation of stem cells into specific lineages and induce functional tissue regeneration.
1.5 CHALLENGES AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
Although there have been extensive advances in developing nanomaterials for biomedical purposes, only few of them have been translated into clinics. The major limitations behind this delay are about the biocompatibility and biodegradability of nanomaterials.
One of the desired properties of the nanomaterials in the biological environment is their physicochemical stability. When a nanomaterial is injected into the blood vessels, there are several biological macromolecules that can interact with it in the environment. The noncovalent interactions including hydrogen bonds, electrostatic interactions, and van der Waals forces cause the undesired interactions in the blood. These may cause problems in the blood flow, or simply the nanomaterials cannot travel in the blood vessels, and they fail to reach to the target. In some cases, the interaction of these random molecules in the blood changes the surface chemistry or bioactivity of the nanomaterials, and they may cause undesired side reactions.
Undesired accumulation of the nanomaterials in the body and side products produced by degradation of the nanomaterials is another drawback in the use of nanomaterials for therapeutic purposes since these may cause side effects. Major areas where nanomaterials are accumulated in the body are the liver, spleen, and kidneys, which might result in metabolic problems associated with these organs, which eventually can cause organ failure.
Beyond many advances in the field of molecular biology and medicine, most molecular interactions between biomacromolecules are unknown, and our knowledge pathophysiology of diseases and the mechanisms of tissue regeneration are limited. Thus, one of the major challenges in developing and using nanomaterials for therapeutic purposes lies in the lack information on appropriate target molecular mechanisms or pathways. With more advancement in understanding of these interactions and better control on production of nanomaterials, biocompatible and bioactive nanomaterials with tightly regulated characteristics can be developed to interact with biomolecules to correct and regulate the natural biological interactions to cure diseases in the future. Beyond diagnosis, these advances can also be used to design and fabricate nanomaterials that can deliver drugs or trigger natural key reactions for regeneration purposes.
It is important to stay up to date on how nanomaterials can be used for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes by presenting specific examples from the literature. The research on biomedical nanomaterials can be classified according to their medical applications. Since nanotechnology is a fairly new technology with many unknowns, several examples of nanomaterial–biological organism interactions in terms of nanotoxicology research were demonstrated in order to stress that although nanomaterials provide a vast array of opportunities for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases, the consequences of using these new types of materials should be carefully weighed prior to their use in medical practice.
2NANOSIZED DELIVERY SYSTEMS FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
Goksu Cinar, Didem Mumcuoglu, Ayse B. Tekinay, and Mustafa O. Guler
Institute of Materials Science and Nanotechnology, National Nanotechnology Research Center (UNAM), Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Repair and regeneration of damaged tissue is an important clinical need since millions of people all over the world are suffering from tissue and organ failure (Rice et al., 2013; Wei and Ma, 2008). Although tissue regeneration processes and components are quite different depending on tissue properties, the fundamentals of regeneration process involves cells, cellular microenvironment, and biological signals. Hence, the strategies in tissue regeneration focus on cell-based therapies, regenerative biomaterials as scaffolds, and delivery of biological signals to regenerating site. The integration of these strategies and the components with natural tissue healing stages is important to achieve successful therapies in clinical applications (Howard et al., 2008).
Controlled delivery of biologics such as growth factors (GFs), cytokines, nucleic acids, or siRNA is the focus of growing interest in tissue regeneration applications since these biomacromolecules serve highly specific and complex functions in cellular processes compared to small-molecule synthetic drugs (McCall et al., 2011; Vermonden et al., 2012). Although therapeutic approaches in tissue regeneration focus on biologics, the clinical applications are highly limited due to the fragile nature and instabilities of the molecules. Delivery systems can increase therapeutic applicability of biologics sustaining a suitable environment for three-dimensional conformations and protection from enzymatic degradation during transportation to the regenerating site. In addition, these systems aim to mimic natural release mechanisms, conditions, and therapeutic dosage of biologics, which are controlled by distinct patterns and enzymatic reactions in cellular microenvironment (Tessmar and Göpferich, 2007). Stimuli–response of the nanosized carriers is also an important property to decrease side effects and effective dosage of the molecules necessary for the regeneration in tissue-specific conditions (Alvarez-Lorenzo and Concheiro, 2014).
Advances in material science and integration with nanotechnology provide us a new generation of biodegradable and biocompatible nanosized delivery systems with control over size, shape, and multifunctionality (Panyam and Labhasetwar, 2003; Zhang et al., 2013). Nanosized delivery systems can be designed as lipid-based, inorganic, polymeric, or multifunctional hybrid systems including liposomes, polymeric micelles, mesoporous silica nanoparticles, nanogels, or nanocomplexes with sizes varying between 1 and 200 nm (Khandare et al., 2012). Nanosized delivery systems provide tissue penetrating ability, reduced toxicity, and enhanced permeation and retention (EPR) in regenerating tissues (Gu et al., 2011). These systems can be injected to the bloodstream and extend the release of biologics protecting them from proteolytic cleavage and chemical degradation. EPR effect also provides passive targeting for the nanosized carriers increasing circulation time in the bloodstream. Improved solubility of hydrophobic compounds can be obtained via nanosized delivery systems (Mishra et al., 2010). In addition, nanosized delivery systems can be integrated into three-dimensional scaffolds sustaining controlled release and biocompatible microenvironment for regenerating cells (Wei and Ma, 2008).
Multifunctional nanosized delivery systems for biologics have been developed using both natural and synthetic polymers. Synthetic polymers enable sustained release of biologics over a period of days to several weeks based on different release mechanisms including concentration, degradation, affinity or stimuli controlled, and also combinations of them. FDA-approved synthetic polymers such as poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) have been used for developing nanosized delivery systems due to their biocompatibility and tunable physical and chemical properties (Golub et al., 2010). PLGA nanoparticles can be hydrolyzed into biodegradable metabolites: lactic and glycolic acid at acidic conditions (Kumari et al., 2010). In addition, there are examples of polymeric nanoparticles developed as biological delivery systems using poly(lactic acid) (PLA), poly(D,L-glycolide) (PLG), poly-ε-caprolactone (PCL), and poly(alkyl cyanoacrylates) for tissue regeneration (Kim et al., 2014). Although some of these synthetic nanosized polymeric systems reveal biodegradable properties, degradation products can be toxic compounds, and degradation process takes longer time periods. Moreover, formulation conditions and encapsulation steps may require organic solvents and high ionic strength, creating a harsh environment for biologics.
On the other hand, natural polymers can form biodegradable polymeric nanostructures for biomacromolecule delivery at mild conditions, and these nanostructures are functionalized with different delivery strategies for targeting and internalization. For these purposes, both protein-based natural polymers such as gelatin, collagen, albumin, and elastin and hydrophilic polysaccharides including alginate or chitosan have been used to obtain colloidal nanostructures. Compared to synthetic polymeric nanostructures, natural nanocarriers can be easily degraded by digestive enzymes and degradation products not harmful. However, the hydrophilic nature of these nanosized carriers leads to burst release of biologics when biologics are immobilized within the system via noncovalent interactions or short-term release profiles can be obtained due to easier biodegradability compared to synthetic polymeric nanosized delivery systems. In addition, contamination risk is higher since the sources of these compounds are natural organisms.
Molecular assemblies of both synthetic and natural compounds are intriguing nanosized delivery structures for biologics. Colloidal nanostructures such as liposomes, polymeric nanoparticles, block copolymer micelles, and dendrimers can be designed as stimuli responsive, and delivery mechanisms can be enhanced via internal and external factors including pH, temperature, or redox microenvironment (Fleige et al., 2012; Ganta et al., 2008). Intravenous administration of these colloidal nanosized systems also makes them suitable carriers for tissue regeneration applications (Alyautdin et al., 2014). In addition, the stimulated effects of gold nanoparticles between 20 and 50 nm size on osteogenic differentiation of stem cells and osteoblast-like cells have been showed in different studies (Heo et al., 2014; Ko et al., 2015).
In this chapter, we focus on advanced delivery of biologics including GFs, cytokines, genes, or siRNAs using a variety of nanosized systems for different regeneration applications focusing on bone, cartilage, nervous system, and muscle regeneration strategies. The limitations of biologics delivery and alternative strategies for overcoming recent problems are underlined presenting recent examples from the literature. In addition, specific targeting and cellular internalization strategies of biologics delivery for tissue regeneration are discussed for providing future perspectives to the readers in this field.
2.2 DELIVERY OF PROTEIN THERAPEUTICS WITH NANOCARRIERS FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.2.1 GFs and Cytokines
As biological regulatory signals in variety of cellular responses, GFs are important components for controlling and directing tissue formation, maintenance, and regeneration. In addition, these biological signals direct crucial tissue regeneration processes such as angiogenesis and bone or granulation tissue formation (Eichmann and Simons, 2012; Laurencin et al., 2014; Ponte et al., 2007). Although the functions and importance of many GFs in tissue regeneration are well known, the clinical applications and therapeutic efficiency of these biologics are limited due to their short lifetime, production costs, and safety concerns for immunogenic responses (Martino et al., 2014; Rice et al., 2013). To increase their lifetime and facilitate controlled release of biologically active GFs over an extended time period for therapeutic applications, nanosized delivery strategies have been developed using different materials.
In living organisms, GFs are stabilized in extracellular matrix (ECM) via interactions of highly sulfated ECM components such as glycosaminoglycan (GAG) side chains. GFs can be immobilized on nanosized carriers by either noncovalent or covalent interactions (Chen et al., 2010). Polymeric nanoparticles with functional groups can be designed by sustaining these specific interactions for immobilization and affinity-controlled GF delivery (Wang and von Recum, 2011). Natural polyanionic polysaccharides such as heparin and chondroitin sulfate can form nanocomplexes with natural or synthetic polycationic polymers, and polyelectrolyte complex nanoparticles are used to deliver heparin-binding GFs including fibroblast growth factor (FGF) family and transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) superfamily (Place et al., 2014). Natural polymers including proteins and polysaccharides can be modified with several functional groups and form colloidal nanostructures, which are also suitable candidates for delivering GFs via noncovalent interactions or covalent crosslinking. Gelatin is a well-known natural protein-based polymer with excellent biocompatibility and controllable biodegradability. It can be modified as either negatively or positively charged and enable polyion complexation with several GFs (Young et al., 2005).
Angiogenesis is a critical process in tissue restoration and constitutes of establishing a vascular system to supply required oxygen and nutrition to the regenerating site. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which is a member of the cystine knot family, is an important biological factor for mediating angiogenesis in wound healing and myocardial ischemia treatments (Crafts et al., 2015). Different delivery strategies are developed for sustained release of bioactive VEGF to the regenerating site. In one study (Golub et al., 2010), VEGF-loaded PGLA nanoparticles enhanced blood vessel growth via sustained delivery for cardiovascular medicine applications. Polyelectrolyte nanosized complexes formed by coacervation of VEGF-bound dextran sulfate with different polycations such as chitosan, polyethylenimine, or poly-L-lysine were shown to have high encapsulation efficiency for the regeneration applications (Huang et al., 2007). In addition, it was shown that GAG-based polyelectrolyte nanocomplexes are quiet stable delivery systems at physiological conditions and show resistance to high ionic strength for in vivo applications (Novoa-Carballal et al., 2014). In another example, in vivo therapeutic revascularization was obtained via VEGF-loaded heparin-functionalized nanoparticle–fibrin complexes in a rabbit ischemic hind limb model (Chung et al., 2010).
Bone regeneration consists of cascades of complex biochemical processes that are coordinated via cells, ECM, and bioactive molecules such as osteogenic, angiogenic, inflammatory, and systemic GFs (Vo et al., 2012). The enhanced therapeutic effects of different GFs such as osteoinductive bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) and mitogenic platelet-derived growth factor-BB (PDGF-BB) have been shown in clinical trials for bone defect treatments (Nevins et al., 2013; Shah et al., 2014). BMP-2 is an important member of TGF-β superfamily that includes major modulators of osteogenesis, which play important roles in the commitment and differentiation of osteoprogenitors. BMP-2 loaded 2-N,6-O-sulfated chitosan-based nanoparticles (S-NPs) were developed via complex coacervation of oppositely charged polyelectrolyte solutions as a delivery system for bone regeneration applications (Cao et al., 2014). In another study (Gan et al., 2015), pH-responsive chitosan-functionalized mesoporous silica nanoparticles were used for dual delivery of BMP-2 and dexamethasone (Dex) for osteoblast differentiation and bone regeneration at in vitro and in vivo conditions.
Neurotrophic factors (NF) including nerve growth factor (NGF), glial-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF), brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), or basic FGF-2 are regulatory biological signals for promoting the development, survival, and regeneration of neurons (Harvey et al., 2014; Ziv-Polat et al., 2014). The alterations in cellular structure and metabolism of damaged neurons lead to impaired regeneration (Sivak et al., 2014). Biological factors can induce endogenous repair, enhance neural regeneration, and hinder inhibitor signals for the regeneration process (Donaghue et al., 2014). Delivery of these factors to the central nervous system (CNS) is a developing approach for treatments of traumatic brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerve injuries and neural degenerative disorders (Mohtaram et al., 2013).
Different strategies have been developed for therapeutic delivery of biologics into the CNS such as liposomes, nanospheres, nanocapsules, dendrimers, and polymeric micelles (Orive et al., 2009). The design of nanosized delivery systems for the CNS focus on two important requirements: long circulation time of the nanocarrier systems consisting regenerating signals and ability to penetrate blood–brain barrier (BBB), which is formed by tight junctions preventing crossing of large neurotrophic protein molecules (Thorne and Frey II, 2001; Zhong and Bellamkonda, 2008). BDNF-bound magnetically guided nanoparticles overcame impermeability of BBB and decreased morphine-induced apoptosis in the CNS restoring the spine density and promoting regeneration of synaptic connections (Pilakka-Kanthikeel et al., 2013). In another study, bFGF-loaded PEG–PLGA nanoparticles were functionalized with Solanum tuberosum lectin (STL) for targeted delivery to brain tissue and enhanced spatial learning and memory of rats with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) promoting the survival and neurite growth of neurons (Zhang et al., 2014).
The delivery systems loaded with multiple GFs can mimic complex in vivo conditions releasing different therapeutic biologics for effective tissue regeneration (Chen et al., 2010). Time-dependent controlled releases of multiple GFs at different stages of tissue regeneration via nanosized delivery systems enhance the biochemical processes sequentially. In one study (Perez et al., 2013), bone regeneration was induced by initial release of the angiogenic factors like VEGF or bFGF and then supported via BMP-2 release as an osteogenic factor.
Platelet-rich plasma consist of biologically active proteins including several GFs, such as the isoforms of platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), transforming growth factor (TGF), and FGF (Intini, 2009). The lysates of platelet-rich plasma are natural sources of multiple GFs that are important in bone regeneration (Visser et al., 2009). Hence, controlled delivery of plasma lysates via chitosan–chondroitin sulfate nanoparticles prepared by polyelectrolyte complexation was intriguing for bone tissue engineering applications promoting osteogenic differentiation via multiple factors (Santo et al., 2012).
Cytokines are small signaling molecules with sizes ranging between 8 and 40 kDa and are responsible for regulating the immune response, inflammation, neoangiogenic processes, and cellular differentiation (Ioannidou, 2006). Cytokines are also important biochemical factors in tissue regeneration controlling cellular activity (Gelain et al., 2010). However, short half-lives and serum-mediated degradation of cytokines prevent therapeutic applications and lead to developing different strategies for delivery of these small biologics. Cytokine delivery to injury site by controlled delivery systems can direct tissue regeneration in the absence of the transplanted cells (Roche et al., 2013).
Inflammation process is one of the critical steps of regeneration, and this complex step is controlled by secretion of GFs and pro- or anti-inflammatory cytokines. Cytokine-mediated signaling of inflammation involving activation and proliferation of satellite cells is an essential component of muscle repair, regeneration, and growth (Tidball, 2005). Delivery of cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) (Chen et al., 2007), interferon-γ (Cheng et al., 2008), or interleukin-6 (IL-6) (Serrano et al., 2008) mediating inflammation in muscle regeneration processes can be an alternative approach for the treatments of acute or chronic muscle damages.
2.3 GENE AND SIRNA DELIVERY WITH NANOCARRIERS FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.3.1 Gene Delivery
Gene therapy provides sustained expression of bioactive molecules including GFs and cytokines required for tissue regeneration (Bonadio et al., 1999) and can assist stem cells to differentiate into a variety of different lineages and cells types for regenerative medicine (Chen et al., 2011b). Low uptake across the cell membrane, limited stability of DNA molecules, and lack of nuclear targeting are the main difficulties in DNA delivery (Luo and Saltzman, 2000). Controlled delivery of DNA using nanosized carriers promotes gene delivery and extended transgene expression. In addition, targeted nanosized carriers for gene delivery can avoid side effects including immune response or distribution to the nontargeted tissue and cells (Pannier and Shea, 2004).
Delivery of DNA encoding for inductive biologics can spatially influence on cellular behavior and enhance the formation of complex architectures for tissue regeneration (De Laporte and Shea, 2007). Although viral and retroviral vectors have been showed to be highly efficient transfection agents for in vivo, nonviral systems provide lower immune response and controllable chemical and biological properties for gene delivery (Elangovan et al., 2014; Leong et al., 1998). Nonviral delivery nanocarriers for DNA are developed using a variety of synthetic and natural polymers such as PLL, PLG, PVA, PEG, poly(ethyleneimine) (PEI), collagen, hyaluronic acid, gelatin, or chitosan (Pannier and Shea, 2004).
Cationic lipids consisting of a positively charged head group, a hydrophobic chain, and a linker that joins the polar and nonpolar regions can interact with negatively charged DNA molecules and form complexes called “lipoplexes” (Bhattacharya and Bajaj, 2009; Gao and Hui, 2001; Tros de Ilarduya et al., 2010). Similar to cationic lipids, cationic polymers can also form complexes with DNA and form “polyplexes,” which are capable of gene delivery into targeted cells (Zhang et al., 2004). PEI is a highly cationic polymer due to the presence of amino groups, and it can form nanoparticles by complexation with negatively charged plasmid DNA (pDNA) and prevents pDNA from lysosomal nuclease degradation (Pérez-Martínez et al., 2011). Chondrogenic differentiation of hMSCs was facilitated by the delivery of Sox9 gene, an important transcription factor in the process of chondrogenesis, complexed with PEI on PLGA nanoparticles (Jeon et al., 2012). In another study, pDNA encoding Runt-related transcription factor 2 (RUNX2) was delivered in liposomes, which were immobilized at the surface of polycaprolactone (PCL) nanofiber meshes sustaining physical support for hMSCs during osteogenic differentiation (Monteiro et al., 2014). Bone regeneration in rat cranial defects was also enhanced via localized delivery of PEI/pDNA nanocomplexes inducing expression of bone morphogenetic protein-4 (BMP-4) (Huang et al., 2005). On the other hand, cationic DNA/polymer nanocomplexes have some drawbacks including instabilities in physiological conditions and aggregations due to binding of serum proteins on the surfaces. Also cationic lipids and polymers (PEI) can be toxic. To eliminate these drawbacks, targeted delivery and internalization strategies have been developed for enhanced therapeutic activities.
Dendritic nanostructures are also promising gene delivery systems due to their highly branched structure, shape, and multivalency. These structures can be designed using biodegradable polymers providing nontoxicity and efficiency for gene delivery (Luo et al., 2014). Especially, polycationic dendrimers such as polyamidoamine (PAMAM) were shown to be particularly interesting in nucleic acid delivery providing high multivalent surface moiety, biocompatibility, and low cytotoxicity (Lee et al., 2014). Human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (hBMP-2) gene-containing PAMAM dendrimers were used as gene transfer carriers for inducing osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for bone regeneration applications (Santos et al., 2009).
2.3.2 siRNA Delivery
Short interfering RNAs (siRNA) are a short double-stranded biomacromolecules that silence target gene expression as a consequence of binding to the corresponding messenger RNA. Gene therapy provides permanent genetic alteration, but only transient actions of protein therapeutics can be needed for tissue regeneration applications. Hence, siRNA-based strategies provide a safer alternative compared to the gene therapy. Delivery systems are required for siRNA due to siRNA’s inability to diffuse easily to cell membrane related with its polyanionic nature, poor solubility, and readily degradation by enzymes (Yoo et al., 2011). Similar to DNA nanocarriers, different nonviral nanosized carriers have been developed for siRNAs using liposomes, lipoplexes, polymers, and also peptides (Gao and Huang, 2008).
Similar to pDNA/PEI complexation, siRNA can also interact with cationic polymers and form stable nonviral nanosized delivery systems. PEG-PEI/siRNA nanoparticles were used for suppressing the expression of Nogo receptor (NgR), which has an important role in CNS controlling neural inflammation, arresting the neurite growths of injured neurons, and the differentiation of NSCs for CNS regeneration (Liang et al., 2012). Another siRNA delivery-based regeneration strategy was developed to increase the endogenous BMP levels through RNA silencing to downregulate BMP-2 antagonist NOGGIN glycoprotein using different nanosized carriers (Bassit et al., 2015).
2.4 SYSTEMIC TARGETING AND CELLULAR INTERNALIZATION STRATEGIES FOR TISSUE REGENERATION
2.4.1 Targeted Delivery
When small molecules or peptide/protein ligands bind to a receptor, they generally start a cascade of signaling events in cellular microenvironment. Systemic targeting of delivery systems can be sustained by ligand–receptor mediated or locally activated delivery via internal factors (specific enzymes or pH change) and external forces such as light or temperature (Bae and Park, 2011). There are specific ligands that can only bind to one type of receptor on a specific cell or tissue, and these specific ligands render the targeting of that specific tissue or cell type. The specificity also depends on the presence and expression of receptors on certain cells. In the natural process of regeneration, GFs bind to certain receptors on the cell surface and initiate a cellular response such as inflammation, recruitment of stem cells to the tissue, or angiogenesis. In addition, proteins take part in cell-to-cell signaling, which is crucial for a synchronized regeneration process. This receptor–protein interaction is so specific that only a certain protein or a protein family can recognize and bind to its receptor. Therefore, it is important to understand the natural regeneration process and have the knowledge of the expression patterns in each tissue at different regeneration stages to be able to engineer materials presenting specific ligands. These ligands will bind to certain target cells only, making it possible to induce a unique specific response of the body. As another advantage, the localization of the biologics in the target site will decrease the side effects of the treatment. One general concern about administration of biomacromolecules such as GFs is the induction of proliferation of cells and formation of benign tumors. This risk would be decreased via targeted delivery approaches, which can mimic the release of the natural GFs at therapeutic dosage and localization. Chemical ligands, antibodies, specific peptide sequences, and proteins are common strategies to target specific cells or microenvironments for sustained delivery of biomacromolecules via nanosized carriers.
2.4.1.1Chemical Ligands
There has been an intense effort to explore and synthesize chemical ligands that will target a specific tissue, and the knowledge of ECM composition in different tissues is invaluable for targeting. For example, bone tissue contains mineralized matrix in the form of hydroxyapatite, differently from other tissues, whereas cartilage contains high amounts of polysaccharides such as hyaluronic acid. Skin tissue contains elastin and fibrin for the formation of elastic fibers (Uitto et al., 1989). Using the knowledge about ECM composition, chemical molecules are synthesized to target different tissues. In one of the efforts, researchers synthesized a fullerene molecule that will target calcium phosphate mineral in hydroxyapatite of the bone. The synthesized molecule demonstrated high affinity to hydroxyapatite, and it was proposed as a potential chemical targeting ligand in bone regeneration (Gonzalez et al., 2002).
For cartilage targeting, derivatives of quaternary ammonium (QA) have been investigated in different studies. When the biodistribution of QA–glucosamine (antirheumatic drug) conjugates was investigated, the conjugate of glucosamine demonstrated specificity for cartilage in a short time after injection (Giraud et al., 2000). Moreover, QA has been proposed to be effective for cartilage targeting of naproxen and ibuprofen in the treatment of arthritis (Pawar et al., 2012). Based on these studies, cartilage-targeting molecules might have an application in tissue engineering for the specific delivery of molecules.
The proteins upregulated or exposed to cell surface after myocardial infarction (MI) were investigated for a potential in targeting the infarct area (Sy and Davis, 2010) for cardiac regeneration. p38 MAPK inhibitor, the chemical substance designed to bind p38, was delivered with polymeric microspheres to target p38 protein overexpressed after MI. The delivery system was shown to be effective in inhibiting cardiac dysfunction (Sy et al., 2008).
2.4.1.2Antibodies
Antibodies designed to bind a specific cell surface receptor hold great promise in the delivery of biologics for tissue regeneration. Antibody-targeted delivery is one of the focuses in drug delivery due to the specificity of antigen–antibody binding. There are many monoclonal antibody-based pharmaceutics in the market, but most of them were developed for cancer treatment (i.e., trastuzumab, bevacizumab, ibritumomab tiuxetan). On the other hand, their applications in tissue engineering are also expanding due to the several advantages of antibody targeting.
One of these approaches is the immobilization of an antibody to a scaffold for enhanced GF binding. With this strategy, not only cell-specific targeting but also spatiotemporal regulation of endogenous GFs can be mimicked. To mimic the spatial property, the local injection of the growth factor might be a basic strategy. On the other hand, a better strategy is to modulate the presence of the GF in the target tissue for a certain period of time. In a recent study, anti-BMP-2 monoclonal antibody was immobilized on different biomaterials for the purpose of capturing endogenous BMP-2 and inducing bone regeneration at the graft site (Ansari et al., 2014).
2.4.1.3Peptides and Proteins
Peptide ligands are also specific in terms of binding and might be more advantageous than protein ligands due to ease of synthesis and conjugation to the nanosized delivery systems. Peptide phage screening libraries provide the exploration of targeting peptides for a specific molecule and more specific purposes of use. Arginine–glycine–aspartic acid (RGD) is one of the common ligands that have been used in tissue regeneration, which can increase the adhesion of cells by interacting with integrins on the cell surface.
Collagen-binding domain (CBD) is a promising peptide sequence for targeted delivery of nanosized carriers to collagen. GFs that are conjugated to CBD can be used to promote specific binding of GF to collagen. CBD-fused basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) was used for the regeneration of abdominal wall defects, and it was demonstrated to promote vascularization for 30 days after surgery (Shi et al., 2011). Similar to CBD, heparin-binding domain is used for targeted delivery purposes. The abundance of heparin in cartilage provides the targetability of cartilage with heparin-binding domain. In one study (Loffredo et al., 2014), IGF-1 was targeted to cartilage with heparin-binding domain and shown to be effective in osteoarthritis treatment in vivo.
Delivery of protein therapeutics such as NF to the CNS is highly limited due to BBB preventing diffusion of the macromolecules through the brain tissue. Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) can also be used as a brain-targeting strategy. 39-amino acid peptide derived from the rabies virus glycoprotein (RDP) containing specific nerve binding region was shown as an efficient protein carrier for targeting and delivering macromolecular proteins across the BBB (Fu et al., 2012).
Carbohydrate-binding proteins such as lectins are highly specific to monosugars or oligosaccharide structures (Wu et al., 2009). Lectin-conjugated nanosized delivery systems can bind to glycosylated cell membrane components, and lectin–cell membrane interactions improve vesicular transport of the delivery systems enhancing penetration through biological barriers such as BBB, nasal mucosa, lung, buccal cavity, or eye (Bies et al., 2004). The surface modification of PEG–PLA nanoparticles with lectins enhanced the brain uptake after nasal administrations of the delivery system (Gao et al., 2007).
2.4.2 Cellular Internalization Strategies
Controlled delivery of biologics such as GFs, cytokines, nucleic acids, or siRNA is a promising approach in tissue engineering due to several advantages. However, the delivered biomacromolecules with nanosized carriers need to be internalized, and desired internal or external stimuli should be expressed from the target cell only after the internalization. A variety of internalization strategies have been developed since the internalization of biologics into cells is difficult due to electrostatic repulsion and the low uptake efficiencies of the nonviral carriers. The internalization strategies for nonviral carriers can be designed focusing on multiple uptake mechanisms including macropinocytosis, clathrin-mediated endocytosis, or caveolae-mediated endocytosis to promote transduction of the specific genes (Pérez-Martínez et al., 2011) required for the regeneration processes. Cellular internalization is also important for the delivery of the biologics into specific intracellular organelles such as the nucleus.
Peptide domains containing positively charged amino acids such as arginine and lysine have been reported to enhance uptake and cellular internalization of nanosized carriers including PAMAM dendrimers conjugated with L-arginine (Choi et al., 2004), arginine-chitosan/DNA self-assembled nanoparticles (Gao et al., 2008), arginine-grafted bioreducible poly(disulfide amine) polymers (ABP) for siRNA delivery (Beloor et al., 2012), oligoarginine-modified liposomes (Furuhata et al., 2006), and self-assembled oligoarginine–PEG–lipids for gene delivery (Maitani and Hattori, 2009). In addition, integration of CPP to the vectors or peptide nucleic acid conjugates can be used for internalization (Jung et al., 2011). Recently, CPP-decorated self-assembled peptide amphiphile (PA) nanospheres complexed with antisense oligonucleotides increased the internalization of the nanosized delivery system compared to nonbioactive PA nanostructures (Mumcuoglu et al., 2015).
Therapeutic proteins delivered with CPPs can be internalized in cells in the scope of tissue regeneration. Low molecular weight protamine was used as a CPP for the delivery of a transcription factor, transcriptional coactivator with PDZ-binding motif (TAZ). TAZ transcription factor was used for osteogenic differentiation of MSCs, and CPP-conjugated protein could translocate the cell membrane and conserved the functionality (Suh et al., 2014). In addition, production of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) was shown to be possible with induction of CPP-conjugated proteins (Kim et al., 2009).
Cell-penetrating proteins also facilitate delivery of antisense oligonucleotides, which are designed for the modulation of expression levels of a specific gene. Antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering RNA (siRNA) have a great potential in tissue engineering since they can be engineered to target any gene. One antisense oligonucleotide was shown to accelerate the rate of wound healing by modulating expression of connexin 43 (Qiu et al., 2003). GFs can also be targeted by antisense oligonucleotides (Uchio et al., 2004), and the modulation of their expression might provide another way to control the presence of GFs during different stages of regeneration. CPP antisense oligonucleotide conjugates provide higher cellular internalization compared to naked oligonucleotides, and therefore, CPPs would render the antisense oligonucleotide-based therapy more successful. Antisense oligonucleotide designed to alter dystrophin transcript was delivered with arginine-rich CPPs, and the conjugate was systemically administered to restore muscle and cardiac dystrophin expression for promoting muscle and cardiac function (Yin et al., 2008). The peptides containing nuclear localization sequence (NLS) can be used as an alternative internalization strategy for nonviral nucleic acid delivery systems. Incorporation of the self-assembling SV40 peptide having T-antigen NLS with cationic liposomes for nuclear delivery promoted internalization and nuclear accumulation of the DNA (Rea et al., 2009).
2.5 FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
Integration of nanotechnology, material science, and engineering has pioneered developments in advanced targeted and sustained nanosized delivery systems with enhanced therapeutic efficacies for tissue regeneration purposes. Targeted delivery, reduction in therapeutic dosage of biologics, controlled release, and multifunctionality are ultimate goals of developing nanosized delivery systems. The nanosized carriers for tissue regeneration provide significant health benefits including elimination of surgery or requirements of transplantations and low risks of immune responses.
Although different strategies and formulations have been examined for nanosized delivery systems in the preclinical studies, successful regeneration using external factors for different types of tissues in clinical applications is still challenging. There are different aspects that prevent the progress in clinical applicability of the designed nanosized delivery systems for tissue regeneration purposes. Manufacturing costs and problems with reproducible and scale-up production of advanced delivery systems prevent commercialization (Kearney and Mooney, 2013; Zhang et al., 2013) and clinical usage of the carriers for tissue engineering. Moreover, although chemical and physical properties of the nanosized delivery systems are characterized in detail, behavior of nanoscale carriers in in vivo conditions cannot be controlled effortlessly due to complex and dynamic nature of the cellular microenvironment (Ruenraroengsak et al., 2010). Successful regeneration can be induced via orchestrated neural, vascular, biochemical, and biophysical components of the tissues (Discher et al., 2009). On the other hand, the inadequate knowledge on repair processes and connections between overall signaling pathways delays the progress of sustained regeneration strategies using delivery systems (Rice et al., 2013).
To eliminate these drawbacks, different strategies have been studied to increase efficacy, stability, and targeting of the nanosized carriers. Since the release of single biologics is not sufficient to sustain continuous regeneration for complex tissues, the combined use of multiple factors synergistically provides a strategic advantage for overcoming the limitations (Borselli et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2010, 2011a; Hwang and Kloner, 2010; Shah et al., 2014). In addition, the delivery of multiple factors and developments of the multicomponent systems including delivering the cells and biologics together using suitable scaffolds promote therapeutic effectiveness and tissue regeneration capacity (Donaghue et al., 2014; Park et al., 2013).
Further improvement can be prolonged via incorporation of ECM-mimetic scaffolds with nanosized delivery systems of biologics sustaining both biochemical and physical factors required for tissue repair and regeneration (Chung et al., 2007). Combination of the biological factor-loaded nanocarriers with three-dimensional networks provides long-term controlled release of the bioactive molecules required for regeneration (Jeon et al., 2008). The incorporation of GF-loaded nanoparticles or nanosized delivery systems with three-dimensional scaffolds also enhances the efficiency of the released molecules for in vivo applications, preventing initial high burst release and enhancing bioactivity. For example, VEGF-encapsulated nanoparticles incorporated into three-dimensional delivery systems such as PLGA scaffolds and Matrigel™ hydrogels enhanced angiogenesis in vivo (des Rieux et al., 2011). In another application, VEGF-loaded chitosan/heparin polyelectrolyte nanocomplexes immobilized into decellularized scaffolds promoted vascularization in mouse subcutaneous implantation model (Tan et al., 2011). Acidic FGF (aFGF)-loaded mesoporous silica nanospheres shelled by PLA were embedded into collagen scaffold, and the nanocarriers containing scaffold implanted in a rat subcutaneous tissue induced significant proliferation of osteoblast cells (Kim et al., 2014). In addition to the GFs, BMP-2 pDNA/chitosan nanoparticles were encapsulated into the fibrous network for slower release rate and enhanced biological activity (He et al., 2014; Nie and Wang, 2007). Furthermore, engineering of the bioactive molecules such as GFs with superaffinity to the scaffolds or carriers can be an alternative approach to prolonged delivery and increased efficacy and reducing the dosage required for the regenerative medicine applications (Martino et al., 2014).
Developments in fabrication techniques, understanding of tissue regeneration processes, and the roles of biological factors in detail will contribute to progress in this field. Combination of advantages of advanced nanosized delivery systems with the power of biological factors has also great potential to solve the recent problems in tissue regeneration applications. Industrial collaboration with scientific community can synergize the commercialization of the developed systems for therapeutic applications. Overall, it is believed that advanced nanosized delivery systems integrated with multicomponent designs will open new opportunities in delivery technologies and strategies for tissue regeneration.
REFERENCES
Alvarez-Lorenzo, C. and Concheiro, A. (2014). Smart drug delivery systems: from fundamentals to the clinic.
Chemical Communications
50
, 7743–7765.
Alyautdin, R., Khalin, I., Nafeeza, M.I., Haron, M.H., and Kuznetsov, D. (2014). Nanoscale drug delivery systems and the blood–brain barrier.
International Journal of Nanomedicine
9
, 795.
Ansari, S., Freire, M.O., Pang, E.-K., Abdelhamid, A.I., Almohaimeed, M., and Zadeh, H.H. (2014). Immobilization of murine anti-BMP-2 monoclonal antibody on various biomaterials for bone tissue engineering.
BioMed Research International
2014
, 940860.
Bae, Y.H. and Park, K. (2011). Targeted drug delivery to tumors: myths, reality and possibility.
Journal of Controlled Release
153
, 198.
Bassit, A., Moffatt, P., Gaumond, M., and Hamdy, R. (2015). The potential use of nanoparticles for noggin siRNA delivery to accelerate bone formation in distraction osteogenesis.
Journal of Nanomedicine and Nanotechnology
6
, 2.
Beloor, J., Choi, C.S., Nam, H.Y., Park, M., Kim, S.H., Jackson, A., Lee, K.Y., Kim, S.W., Kumar, P., and Lee, S.-K. (2012). Arginine-engrafted biodegradable polymer for the systemic delivery of therapeutic siRNA.
Biomaterials
33
, 1640–1650.
Bhattacharya, S. and Bajaj, A. (2009). Advances in gene delivery through molecular design of cationic lipids.
Chemical Communications
, 4632–4656.
Bies, C., Lehr, C.-M., and Woodley, J.F. (2004). Lectin-mediated drug targeting: history and applications.
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
56
, 425–435.
Bonadio, J., Smiley, E., Patil, P., and Goldstein, S. (1999). Localized, direct plasmid gene delivery in vivo: prolonged therapy results in reproducible tissue regeneration.
Nature Medicine
5
, 753–759.
