1. Introduction
Despite many efforts, cancer remains a major challenge for medicine professionals and scientists around the world. According to data published by University of Oxford in cooperation with Global Change Data Lab, cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide [
1]. Therefore, there is a constant need for new therapeutic and diagnostic modalities which can improve the current situation. Nanomedicine is believed to bring about change in the field of oncology and revolutionize current cancer management strategies. Markedly, targeted delivery of biologically active compounds is gaining momentum due to the high hopes they raise concerning improved therapeutic efficacy, convenient imaging and staging of malignancies, and minimized side effects on patients. Many molecular targets have been discovered to date and most of the currently developed targeting strategies can be assigned to one of the three general categories: uncontrolled cell proliferation targeting, angiogenesis-associated targeting, and specific tumor cells targeting [
2]. Due to the fact that the majority of cancer-associated deaths are caused by five particular cancer types (tracheal, bronchus, and lung; colon and rectum; stomach; breast; pancreatic), targeting the specific tumor cells is becoming particularly interesting. It can be successfully accomplished due to the specific receptors that are present or overexpressed in malignant, but not healthy cells. It is noteworthy, that as low as threefold overexpression of a receptor on cancer cells already allows exploitation of the targeted delivery mechanism and successful delivery of the cargo [
3]. Examples of receptors that were found to be overexpressed in malignant tissues are epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), folate receptor (FR), somatostatin receptors (SSTRs), or gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRPR). The latter was found to be overexpressed in most of the abovementioned cancers that are rising the biggest death toll. Therefore, GRPR is attracting the particular attention of numerous research groups dealing with targeted nanomedicines, including those gathered in the Coordinated Research Project “Nanosized delivery systems for radiopharmaceuticals” by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 2014-2019 [
4]. They have developed various strategies to exploit the potential of GRPR targeting with nanoformulations aiming at either cancer treatment, imaging, and diagnosis, or the combination of those two modalities. In their research, myriad of targeting ligands leading to different biological responses upon the interaction with the receptor is accompanied by nanoparticles of diverse shape, origin, and composition. Acknowledging the significant interest in GRPR targeting, hereby we have reviewed recent advances in the field of synthesis, characterization, and applications of various nanoplatforms which are able to reach the cells and tissues expressing gastrin-releasing peptide receptor- both
in vitro and
in vivo.
2. Gastrin-releasing peptide receptor - overview
Gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRPR, also known as the BB2 receptor,
Figure 1) is a member of the mammalian bombesin receptor family, comprising three distinct heptahelical receptors, having a wide range of physiological and pathophysiological effects. The human
GRPR gene is located on the X chromosome, and the GRPR protein contains 384 amino acids of an estimated molecular weight of 43 kDa [
5,
6]. It is a member of the G-protein-coupled-receptors (GPCR) family, being a class of transmembrane proteins responsible for regulating a wide range of functions through ligand-receptor interactions. The interactions are based on the activation of heterotrimeric G protein subunits α and β/γ, which bind to target proteins, thus initiating respective cellular signaling pathways. The regions responsible for agonist binding have been found to be Gln120, Pro198, Arg287, and Ala307 [
7], while the antagonist binding is possible due to the presence of Thr296, Phe301 and Ser304 [
8]. Endogenous ligand of GRPR is gastric-releasing peptide (GRP).
Because GRPRs are known to be coupled with phospholipase C, they have the ability to induce the breakdown of phosphoinositides and the subsequent generation of diacylglycerol. This stimulates the mobilization of cellular calcium and the activation of protein kinases C (PKC), triggering a variety of cellular changes (e.g., membrane and cytosolic proteins or indirect regulation of cell proliferation). The stimulation of the receptor is also responsible for the activation of phospholipases β1 and β2 as well as tyrosine kinases or phosphorylation of some proteins, leading to processes such as the appearance of focal adhesion plaques or actin proliferation. The kinases belonging to the Src family are also rapidly activated, which has been found to be strongly influential on the invasion and growth of certain types of cancer. It is worth noting that chronic stimulation of GRPR receptors was found to strongly impact a variety of processes, such as internalization of receptor-ligand complexes, own-regulation of cell surface receptors or receptor desensitization, all arising from a range of external or cellular stimuli [
6].
GRPR activation entails the activation of phospholipases D and A2 as well as cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) increase in some tissues. It can also stimulate arresting translocation to the plasma membrane and has been found to enhance the growth of normal and neoplastic tissues. Moreover, the receptor activation has been found to stimulate the tumor cells to invade and migrate to healthy tissues via one of the Gα proteins or transesterification of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which is said to influence the GRPR-stimulated DNA synthesis in tumor cells [
6]. An overview of the molecular events upon activation of GRPR is depicted in
Figure 2.
3. GRPR targeting and nanosystems
As GRPR is well acknowledged to be overexpressed in cancers, it attracts the attention of scientists dealing with novel delivery systems based on active targeting, where GRPR ligands are used as moieties able to lead to preferential accumulation of the nanoparticles in the sites of interest. These nanoparticles may act as drug delivery vehicles, so they deliver cytotoxic biological activity in the tumor site. On the other hand, detectable nanoparticles can be tracked in the human body using different imaging modalities, hence helping with cancer localization and staging. Finally, both these activities can be incorporated into one construct and act as theranostic, the idea derived from the personalized medicine approach, which connects oncological diagnostics and treatment at the same time. During the design of a targeted nanoformulation, fundamentally three vital points need to be initially considered: choice of the proper targeting ligand, type of nanoparticles, and the means of bringing those together (
Figure 3). These three aspects need to be fine-tuned to allow the successful development of nanosystems with anticipated properties and activity, particularly with respect to the desired mode of operation: therapeutic, diagnostic, or combining both theranostic (
Figure 3).
There are certain trends that are noticeable in GRPR nanotargeting research. This receptor is overexpressed in numerous cancers, i.e., breast, colon, glioblastoma, head and neck squamous cell, lung, neuroblastoma, pancreatic, and prostate [
3]. However, the vast majority (ca. 70%) of the published studies concerning the use of nanosystems, focuses on applications in prostate or breast cancer research. It seems coherent, though, with the public health data pointing out that those malignancies are (next to the colon and rectum) in the top 3 of cancer prevalence by type worldwide [
1]. However, when considering the type of nanoparticles exploited in the GRPR targeting research, almost half of the formulations are based on either gold nanostructures or liposomal/micellar vesicles, which are predominantly exploited in imaging and therapy, respectively. Those trends also seem well-grounded since out of 25 clinically approved nanoformulations (U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and/or European Medicines Agency (EMA)), ten were based on liposomes, proving the clinical potential of those structures [
10]. Gold nanostructures maybe have not reached such clinical success yet, but the combination of relatively simple, cheap, and well-understood synthesis, beneficial biological half-life, convenient and stable modification due to universal gold-sulfur interactions, and wide range of activity (photothermal therapy, contrasting agent for photoacoustic imaging, radiosensitization, etc.) make them appear very promising and worth exploring.
3.1. Targeting ligands
Ligands of GRPR can fall into one of two groups: agonists and antagonists. Agonists share the receptor activation sequence (Trp-Ala-Val-Gly-His-Leu-Met-NH
2) with GRP and activate the GRPR signaling pathways, leading to downstream effects such as cell growth, proliferation, increased motility, and invasiveness. It was pointed out though that these effects are not desired in clinically viable formulations. Moreover, some body of evidence suggests that antagonists may perform better as targeting ligands [
11]. Despite those flaws, surprisingly, most of the research published in the field of nanostrategies for targeting this receptor concerns the use of agonists. One of the possible reasons might be that internalization of the nanoparticle delivering the cargo, together with the receptor upon its activation, may be beneficial for some drug delivery applications and is convenient to track
in vitro. However, actual reasons for this state of the matter remain to be elucidated and may be much more trivial, e.g., easy access and broad awareness of bombesin (BBN), the best known GRPR ligand, which happens to be an agonist.
The wide range of agonistic ligands has been shown in the literature. The relatively easiest approach is to use the commercially available native sequence of bombesin [
12] (
Figure 4. a). Kulhari and co-workers exploited it in combination with biodegradable poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanoparticles to successfully target both breast and prostate cancer cells and improve docetaxel (DTX) anticancer activity [
13,
14,
15]. The same ligand was also used to target the [
64Cu]CuS nanoparticles toward prostate cancer by Cai et al [
16]. Interestingly, using native bombesin, Du and Li investigated if the synthetic strategy, namely pre/post-functionalization of nanostructured lipid carriers, affects the performance of the nanosystem for targeted lung cancer combination therapy [
17].
Variations on the ligand structures start with exchanging single amino acids to engineer the sequence towards facilitated conjugation, for example, replacing the third amino acid from the native sequence with lysin [
18,
19,
20], therefore providing additional -NH
2 groups – such ligands are also commercially available [
21] (
Figure 4.b).
Nevertheless, much more sophisticated structures were also developed. One of the most prominent alterations in the bombesin architecture is to shorten the peptide chain down to an essential receptor binding sequence: Trp-Ala-Val-Gly-His-Leu-Met-NH
2, which can lower the price of the custom peptide synthesis. These short peptide chains can also be further engineered to provide convenient means of condensation with nanoparticles [
22,
23,
24], which will be discussed in more detail in the next subchapter. Frequently, the ligand is combined with poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) to improve the pharmacokinetics of the construct and minimize the reticuloendothelial system uptake upon
in vivo administration [
25,
26].
Adding extra functionality to the structure represents a very attractive strategy for bombesin structure alterations. An example of such modifications is introducing the radioisotope chelation functionality to the ligand. Two main chelators used in such research are 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid (DOTA) and hydrazinonicotinic acid (HYNIC) and the isotopes used are
177Lu and
99mTc, respectively [
27,
28]. Other interesting idea is to combine bombesin binding motif with another peptide, creating heteromultimeric ligands, which can improve the construct targeting ability (e.g., RGD sequence against integrin α
υβ
3 [
29,
30]
, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) inhibiting peptides for targeting of prostate cancer) or cellular penetration (e.g., Tat(49–57), HIV-1 derived sequence [
31,
32]).
Regarding the antagonistic ligands, GRPR antagonists can be categorized into six classes, out of which five are peptides/peptoids while the last class comprises low molecular flavone derivatives [
6]. Classes 2, 3, and 4 (in contrast to classes 1 and 5) are based on the modifications of the binding region of BBN. Class 2 are
d-Phe12 analogs; class 3 focuses on modifications in positions 13-14 (or 26-27 when considering GRP sequence), while class 4 comprises analogs devoid of Met14 (desMet14). Among almost 100 papers hereby reviewed, only six dealt with the antagonist ligands. Lahooti and colleagues used a class 2 antagonist with
d-Phe12 substitution to successfully target their ultrasmall paramagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (USPION) to GRPR-positive breast cancer xenograft
in vivo [
33]. Particular attention was given to class 3 antagonist
d-Phe-Gln-Trp-Ala-Val- NMeGly-His-Sta-Leu-NH
2 (BBN-AA1) by the group of Accardo. They successfully incorporated this sequence into amphiphilic derivative monomer, which was used to form liposomes loaded with doxorubicin (DOX) [
34]. The same monomer was also used to form sterically stabilized micelles as a targeted carrier of poorly water-soluble anticancer drug - gold(III) dithiocarbamate [
35]. The BBN-AA1 sequence with some spacer and maleimide-reactive cysteine was used to obtain the kit for targeted DOX-loaded liposomes compliant with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), with satisfactory stability [
36]. Li and co-workers exploited another class 3 antagonist sequence: [
d-Phe6-Sta13-Leu14-NH
2]bombesin(6-14) [
37]. In their research, this sequence was further modified with Alexa Fluor 750 to obtain a carrier system for molecular imaging of oral squamous cell carcinoma. Tagliviani and co-workers exploited Demobesin-1 – GRPR peptide antagonist that falls into the class 4 analogs [
38]. They have shown that upon adding a trioxatridecan-succinamic acid spacer, Demobesin-1 provided successful cell recognition functionality to the polyoxometalate clusters.
Accardo et al. analyzed the performance of seven different GRPR antagonists based on DOTA, and BBN derivatives coupled with PEG – formulations with a very simple design but offering an insight into the mechanisms by which they interact with GRPRs and hence provide varying targeting yield and diagnosis options [
26]. From their systematic analysis, they concluded that most of the examined BBN derivatives serve equally well for targeting purposes (which was confirmed with gamma camera recordings), but those with NMeGly11 and Sta13-Leu14 would be most suitable for imaging
in vivo since their plasma half-lives are over 15 days and the latter also provides a favorable absorption mostly into the tumor tissues and no other organs of the body.
As mentioned above, GRPR is the mammalian bombesin receptor family member, comprising three distinct receptors. Basically, each of these receptors is expressed in different neoplastic conditions and has its own set of ligands, however, there was the universal binding sequence discovered (
d-Tyr6-Gln7-Trp8-Ala9-Val10-βAla11-His12- Phe13-Nle14) sometimes referred to as pan-bombesin. This finding is particularly attractive because with such a ligand it is possible to target tumors expressing various bombesin receptors patterns while improving the construct’s tumor-targeting efficiency and applicability. Heidari and co-workers used the peptide based on a universal binding sequence (Lys-Gly-Gly-Cys-Asp-Phe-Gln-Trp-Ala-Val-bAla-His-Phe-Nle) to target breast cancer
in vitro and
in vivo with gold nanorods for photothermal therapy [
39] as well as imaging [
40] and they pointed out its several advantages in comparison to native bombesin sequence, such as overcoming the issues related with receptor heterogeneity in tumors and ameliorating renal clearance due to the negatively charged hydrophilic aspartic acid residue. Similarly, Salouti et al. [
41] and Jafari et al. [
42] proposed the application of this peptide in breast cancer imaging using gold and superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles, respectively. Pan-bombesin was also shown to improve prostate cancer imaging [
43,
44].
3.2. Ligand incorporation
One of the biggest challenges in the synthesis of particles targeting GRPR or any other receptor is the incorporation of the targeting ligand in the structure of the vehicle. Various approaches can be found in the literature. A state-of-the-art technique based on the formation of amide linkage between the ligand and the nanoparticle is most commonly used. Chemistry of 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethyl aminopropyl)carbodiimide (EDC, EDAC) in combination with N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS) [
20] or sulfo-N-hydroxysuccinimide (sulfo-NHS) [
39,
40] is most commonly used to create the bond. Usually, this amide is formed between the N-terminus of the peptide ligands and carboxyls on the nanoparticles (
Figure 5). Tang and co-workers successfully decorated their poly(acrylic acid)-functionalized lanthanide nanoparticles with BBN analog using EDC/sulfo-NHS chemistry [
45]. It was even shown to be feasible to prepare ready-to-use kits with, e.g., stable NHS esters. EDC/NHS reactions are usually led in water, which is beneficial in terms of biocompatibility and purification procedures. However, the reaction, for instance, in tetrahydrofuran (THF) or dimethylformamide (DMF) is also possible as shown by Du and Li [
17] and Mansour et al. [
46], respectively.
Nevertheless, with no carboxylic groups available on the surface of the nanoparticle, nanoparticle’s surface, or no amine group available in the ligand, the other way around can be equally efficient [
16,
47]. Poly(amidoamine) (PAMAM) dendrimers were conjugated with DOTA-modified BBN using the amine group on the dendrimer and carboxylic group of the DOTA moiety [
48,
49]. Hajiramezanali and co-workers used this approach to exploit amine groups on chitosan and conjugate succinylated BBN derivative [
50]. However, organic solvents and water-insoluble substrates are also used, such as 2-(1H-7-azabenzotriazol-1-yl)-1.1.3.3-tetramethyluroniumhexafluorophosphate) (HATU) [
49,
51,
52] or N,N′-dicyclohexyl carbodiimide (DCC) [
38,
53] in DMF with the addition of N,N-diisopropylethylamine (DIPEA) [
49]. Also, click chemistry such as thiol-maleimide [
36,
54,
55] or copper-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition was useful [
43,
44,
56,
57]. Dash and colleagues used cysteine groups incorporated in the peptide structure to click the GRPR-binding peptide with maleimide-containing PEGylated magnetic reduced graphene oxide [
58].
In some cases, the ligand can be incorporated into the structure of particle-forming substrates before the particle is formed [
59]. Accardo et al. have used solid-phase peptide synthesis with Fmoc/tBu chemistry to synthesize the ligand peptide [DOTA-bAla]BBN(7-14) and combine it with the amphiphilic monomers [
60]. Subsequently, these monomers were cleaved from the Rink amide resin, purified, and assembled into targeted supramolecular aggregates. A similar approach was adopted by Accardo and co-workers to prepare DOX-loaded targeted liposomes [
34]. Kanazawa et al. used this approach to combine bombesin with stearic acid directly in solid-phase peptide synthesis, and they used it for polymeric micelles [
61]. Yang and co-workers incorporated the GRPR binding motif of BBN into the structure of their engineered peptides able to form a stable coiled-coil nanostructure [
62]. An interesting approach was also presented by Zhang and colleagues – they have genetically engineered
Escherichia coli bacteria to express elastin-like peptides capable of coassembly into micelles [
63]. One of the peptides was engineered to contain a GRP-derived binding sequence (
Figure 6).
In some instances, the application of a linker is necessary due to the configuration of functional groups present in both ligand and particle; both homo– and heterobifunctional linkers are available. For example, Achilli et al. used glutaraldehyde as a homobifunctional amine-reactive crosslinker to functionalize human serum albumin (HSA) protein corona of biohybrid gold nanoparticles with [Lys1-Lys3(DOTA)]BBN [
64]. Kim et al. tethered bombesin ligand to amine-modified poly(ethylene glycol) block of amphiphilic copolymer using a heterobifunctional linker, succinimidyl 4-(N-maleimidomethyl)cyclohexane-1-carboxylate (SMCC) [
65]. Montet et al. have used amine and thiol-reactive succinimidyl iodoacetic acid to ligate the BBN derivative with amine-containing iron oxide nanoparticles [
66]. Lee and co-workers used N-succinimidyl 3-(2-pyridyldithio)propionate (SPDP) to ligate cysteine-terminated derivative with glycol chitosan nanoparticles [
67].
Also, noncovalent bonding may be useful in this context (
Figure 7). Successful attachment of the BBN analog to gold nanoparticles can be achieved by exploiting the interaction between nitrogen atoms in free amine groups and gold surface [
19,
41]. Ocampo-Garcia et al. have developed a shelf-storage stable kit based on gold nanoparticles operating on this principle [
18]. On the other hand, Chanda and co-workers used the thioctic-acid-modified bombesin derivative to exploit thiol-gold interactions for stable functionalization (stable even in a reducing environment of dithiothreitol). Hosta-Rigau et al. used additional cysteine to provide thiol for interaction with gold [
69]. Combining functional linkers such as N-succinimidyl 3-(2-pyridyldithio)propionate (SPDP) and gold-sulfur interactions can be an interesting alternative for gold nanoparticles [
23,
67]. Li and colleagues exploited hydrogen bonds and π-π stacking to functionalize nano-graphene oxide with a Sta-BBN ligand [
37]. Interestingly, Trujillo-Benítez and co-workers used the DOTA moiety incorporated in BBN derivative structure to achieve stable chelation of Sm atoms and therefore ligation of the ligand with metal oxide nanoparticles [
30]. Young et al. have used one of the strongest known noncovalent interactions systems, biotin-streptavidin, to bind biotinylated bombesin to quantum dots decorated with streptavidin, resulting in efficient GRPR-selective fluorescent label operating
in vivo [
70].
Finally, a ligand can also be protected inside the nanoparticle. De Barros et al. postulate that due to natural plasma and tissue peptidases, peptides should be protected inside the nanocarrier, therefore they have encapsulated radiolabeled bombesin derivatives inside the long-circulating pH-sensitive liposomes (
Figure 8). This approach led to the successful targeting of GRPR-positive breast cancer and Ehrlich tumor cells [
71,
72,
73].
6. Multifunctional particles for theranostic interventions
As already mentioned, theranostic interventions rely on the combination of therapeutic and diagnostic utilities in one nanosystem, as summarized in
Table 3, based on the contemporary (c.a. 2009 to date) advances in this field.
Currently, the easiest (but not the only) way to achieve such an effect is to employ radiation derived from radioactive nuclides. Radionanomedicine [
81] has become a brand-new field of medical science and is continuously gaining more attention, despite sophisticated requirements associated with appropriate facilities assuring radiation safety. Radionanomedicine takes advantage of already established fundamentals of nuclear medicine and simultaneously exploits the achievements of nanomedicine to deliver maximized performance for contemporary cancer management demands. In theranostic formulations, radioisotopes can play different roles, but practically, in GRPR targeting research one will find mostly two approaches. γ-emitting nuclides, such as
111In or
67Ga, provide means for nanocarrier tracking by SPECT-CT. On the other hand, there are isotopes such as
188Re or, commonly used,
177Lu, which can emit relevant doses of both β
- (can cause significant radiobiological effects and lead to cell death) and γ radiation, which makes it the perfect radionuclide for theragnosis.
Usually, the incorporation of radionuclides requires the application of proper complexing moiety. One of the most frequently used chelators is DOTA and its derivatives. Silva et al. designed and synthesized AuNPs tethered with thiolated DOTA (TDOTA) to coordinate Gd
3+ and
67Ga
3+, potentially useful for MRI and SPECT, respectively [
23]. For prostate cancer cells targeting, thioctic acid terminated bombesin (TA-BBN) was ligated to the AuNPs surface. Experiments with PC-3 cell line proved a significant influence of targeting ligands on the construct internalization
in vitro during up to 3 hours of incubation. Moreover, upon exposition to 2 Gy of external gamma irradiation clear radiosensitization effect was found, as PC-3 cells incubated with targeted nanoparticles exhibited a significant decrease in cell viability. Biodistribution studies of construct, which was additionally radiolabeled with
67Ga, have shown excellent retention (nearly 80%) of the formulation in BALB/c mice PC-3 xenograft even up to 24 h upon direct intratumoral administration. Authors conclude their research with a remark about the possibility of customizing their Au-based system using other radioisotopes such as
68Ga,
90Y,
177Lu, or
165Er with known anticancer properties, which would improve the system efficacy.
Among Au-systems tested for cancer detection and treatment, some have been developed based on PAMAM dendrimers, with gold particles embedded in the dendritic cavities. For example, Mendoza-Nava et al. effectively prepared [
177Lu]Lu-DOTA-PAMAM dendrimers with Au nanoparticles synthesized in situ. Subsequently, they have functionalized their hybrid nanosystem with breast cancer-targeting bombesin, but also with folate, to improve the targeting efficacy ([
177Lu]Lu-DenAuNP-folate-bombesin) [
48,
51]. The
in vitro studies performed on T47D breast cancer cell line, rich in both GRPR and folate receptor (FR), clearly showed specificity of the conjugates towards the receptors and presented better cellular uptake for the dendrimeric system as compared to free [
177Lu]Lu-folate-bombesin, highlighting the beneficial effect of the carrier. Moreover, upon laser irradiation, DenAuNP-folate-bombesin led to a significant decrease in cell viability (down to 16%), thus exposing an efficient plasmonic photothermal effect.
In vivo, in athymic mice breast cancer xenograft model, [
177Lu]Lu-DenAuNP-folate-bombesin presented satisfactory radioactivity retention up to 96 h after intratumoral injection and allowed high-quality optical imaging. A similar approach was reported later by Wang and colleagues who also encapsulated AuNPs in the dendrimeric cavity of [
177Lu]Lu-PAMAM-bombesin-folate conjugates and used them in the context of lung cancer [
49]. Likewise, the presence of gold allowed a great enhancement of the bioimaging results, but also provided an opportunity for photothermal treatment in combination with the radiotoxicity of
177Lu. The researchers found selective absorption into the HEL-299 lung tumor cells overexpressing FRs and GRPRs, a greater carrier uptake than free peptides, and good retention even after 96 h post intratumoral injection.
Owing to their remarkable loading capacity, dendrimers were also the object of interest of Gibbens-Bandala and colleagues, who used them as carriers for a potent anticancer drug, hydrophobic paclitaxel (PTX) [
53]. They exploited [
177Lu]Lu-DOTA-PAMAM-bombesin for the theranostic delivery of PTX (
Figure 19) to GRPR-positive T47D breast cancer cells. Combined radio- and chemotherapy resulted in satisfactory tumor eradication
in vivo in athymic mice xenograft model- at the 120 h mark tumor size decreased by 15.6%. Furthermore, upon intratumoral administration, the construct is selectively bound to the receptor-bearing cells, with as much as 36.25% of the formulation retained at the tumor site and only small amounts accumulated in the pancreas and liver. Moreover, the carrier performed very well in terms of micro-SPECT/CT imaging, providing clear images of malignant tissues.
To further explore theranostic PTX delivery, Gibbens-Bandala and colleagues also evaluated PLGA nanocarriers, equipped with BBN and DOTA [
52]. Even simple nanoformulation of PTX outperformed free drug in
in vitro cytotoxicity assessment, yet its targeted and radioactive counterpart, [
177Lu]Lu-BBN-PLGA(PTX), led to the highest observed viability decrease. Authors postulate that PTX delivered to the cells together with radiation led to radiosensitization, and thus the synergistic effect of radio- and chemotherapy can be seen. Biodistribution studies in athymic mice with subcutaneous xenograft of MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells have shown very promising tumor uptake despite notable liver accumulation. In the pulmonary model of the same malignancy, clear SPECT images of lesions were acquired 72 h post-injection. Most importantly, however, eight days after administration of 3 MBq of [
177Lu]Lu-BBN-PLGA(PTX), a more than 10-fold decrease in the tumor volume compared to the control (0.136 cm
3 vs 1.83 cm
3) was found. All the results taken together confirm the theranostic potential of the proposed PTX formulation.
Targeted delivery of the antineoplastic drug together with radionuclides can be a very promising strategy. It was also exploited by the Accardo team, who, as already mentioned, intensely worked on liposomal formulations. They examined several supramolecular aggregates based on their custom-designed amphiphilic peptide derivative containing both (7-14) BBN targeting moiety and DTPA chelator [
34]. Their liposomes were loaded with DOX for prostate cancer treatment and radiolabeled with
111In for diagnostic nuclear medicine applications. Authors have found that they are able to bind to the GRPR receptors of PC-3 prostate cancer cells efficiently and selectively. In the former case, the aggregate retention in the carcinoma after 48 h is higher than for the control, but the improvement is rather minor (2.4% ID/g vs 1.6% ID/g), while the latter formulation provided a substantial carcinoma growth prevention (35%) compared with BBN-free liposomes, pointing to the importance of the targeting effect of the peptide. Furthermore, the DOTA-based liposomes were detectable under a clinical gamma camera, making them potentially applicable for theranostic purposes if the cytotoxicity to cancer cells was to be improved.
Chang et al. established a very different BBN-conjugated liposome system with DSPE-PEG as the base,
188Re radionuclide and DOX [
99]. The effects of the [
188Re]Re-DOX-liposome-BBN intravenous injection were clearly traceable with micro-SPECT/CT imaging which demonstrated successful targeting of the GRPR in AR42J pancreatic cancer cells and significantly reduced tumor growth rate, hence increasing the mice lifespan by as much as 86.96% compared to individuals treated with [
188Re]Re-liposome-BBN or liposome-DOX-BBN whose lifespans were extended by 75% and 3.61% respectively. This is a promising result, particularly because, similarly to other nanocarriers that were not administered directly into the malignancy, some accumulation was also found in the spleen and liver.
Although radioisotopes are very useful in theranostic formulations, they are not the only solution. Last but not least, hybrid nanomaterials containing IONPs may provide convenient means for diagnostic imaging – as already mentioned, they produce efficient contrast in T
2-weighted MRI. Bleul et al. reported Pluronic
® L-121 delivery vehicles loaded with camptothecin (CPT) and magnetic IONPs with BBN targeting ligands covalently bound to the surface (
Figure 20) [
20]. The resulting formulation exhibited anticancer properties greatly increased compared to the free drug - MTT viability assay has reduced cell viability to around 20% compared to 40-45% for the free drug. Moreover, the applied polymer allowed for a sustained release of the drug [
100]. In addition, the IONPs-containing carriers have shown very promising values of transverse relaxivity: despite the fact that loading with the CPT lowered this parameter in comparison to drug-free nanosystem, the value was still higher than commercially available contrast agent Feridex
® (682 s
-1 mM
-1 vs 394 s
-1 mM
-1 vs. 111.5 s
-1 mM
-1, respectively). Unfortunately, the study was not followed-up with an
in vivo protocol to assess the bioaccumulation in other organs or tissues and the tumor-targeting effect of these formulations.
7. Summary and conclusions
Cancer continues to be a major challenge for scientists and medical professionals around the world, therefore further development in the field of cancer detection and management remains a constant need. Oncological GRPR targeting represents a promising direction of research, from which the modern cancer management battlefield can benefit a lot. Keeping those facts in mind, this review article gives a general overview of gastrin-releasing peptide receptors, their expression, and biology in malignancies. Further, we have outlined the trends in GRPR targeting research, particularly those concerning the most frequently applied types of nanoparticles and most commonly addressed conditions. Furthermore, we have discussed the types of targeting ligands able to bind with GRPR and the possible rationale behind the current state of the art. It suggests that the future in this field might belong to engineered peptides which confer more than just a binding motif. Moreover, we have elaborated on strategies enabling combining the targeting ligand with the nanoparticle carrier, both covalently and noncovalently.
Last but not least, we have reviewed many research articles reporting cutting-edge methodologies for developing advanced nanoformulations. Described strategies were designed for the treatment, diagnosis as well as simultaneous treatment and diagnosis of various cancers. In both in vitro and in vivo preclinical animal models, most of the presented nanosystems have shown promising performance, i.e., successful targeting of GRPR-expressing cells and delivery of a variety of cargoes. However, one cannot also overlook a very important issue, typical for nanosystems in general, not only GRPR-targeting nanoplatforms, which is accumulation in the liver and spleen in vivo. The extent to which the carrier is retained in those organs differs among the systems, however, is omnipresent once the formulation is administered intravenously. Strategies such as PEGylation significantly ameliorate this issue but do not eliminate it completely. This fact requires further studies and should be kept in mind while developing new nanostrategies for therapeutic and diagnostic targeting of gastrin-releasing peptide receptor or any other molecular targets.