Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 27, 2026.

Transcytosis - An effective targeting strategy that is complementary to “EPR effect” for pancreatic cancer nano drug delivery

Xiangsheng Liu, Jinhong Jiang, Huan Meng

Theranostics · 2019 · Review

doi:10.7150/thno.38587

Abstract

Numerous nano drug delivery systems have been developed for preclinical cancer research in the past 15 years with the hope for a fundamental change in oncology.The robust nanotherapeutic research has yielded early-stage clinical products as exemplified by the FDA-approved nano formulations (Abraxane ® for paclitaxel and Onyvide ® for irinotecan) for the treatment of solid tumors, including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).It is generally believed that enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) plays a key role in nanocarriers' accumulation in preclinical tumor models and is a clinically relevant phenomenon in certain cancer types.However, use of EPR effect as an across-the-board explanation for nanoparticle tumor access is likely over-simplified, particularly in the stroma rich solid tumors such as PDAC.Recently, ample evidences including our own data showed that it is possible to use transcytosis as a major mechanism for PDAC drug delivery.In this mini-review, we summarize the key studies that discuss how transcytosis can be employed to enhance EPR effect in PDAC, and potentially, other cancer malignancies.We also mentioned other vasculature engineering approaches that work beyond the classic EPR effect.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 27, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Introduction

Most nanocarriers currently being tested in clinical trials rely on passive delivery, which conceptually depends on the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect,. While, the EPR effect is often explained as the presence of “leaky” tumor vasculature, the size-controlled delivery of nanoparticles varies dramatically among different cancer types-. In cancer patients, it is encouraging to see the incremental evidences of EPR using liposome and polymeric nanocarriers, which suggests that EPR is a clinically relevant phenomenon in certain cancer types or patient populations. However, another suggestion is that the abnormal vascular fenestrations and leakiness of highly vascular human xenografts in mice may represent an experimental artifact,. Accordingly, “EPR effect in patients” and “targeting principle beyond EPR” become “hot” topics for research and translational nanomedicine study. In fact, there is a major debate on the effectiveness of EPR effect in cancer animal models and ultimately patients,,. In a meta-analysis based on 10 years nanomedicine literature, the authors concluded that ~0.7% (median) of the injected nanoparticle dose accumulated in solid tumors. Other experts indicated that the EPR effect of 0.7% was an unfair and unconventional calculation in determining nanomedicine tumor homing efficiency. A recent literature further pointed out the key aspects that were overlooked in the aforementioned meta-analysis, such as sophisticated nanocarrier physicochemical properties, experimental errors from unstable particle labeling, neglected contributions from circulation half-life, tumor type, weight, interstitial fluid pressure (IFP), etc,. In the setting of solid tumors with a thick dysplastic stroma, the putative EPR effect is governed by the factors that are way beyond enlarged tumor fenestrations because these tumor types (including PDAC) may develop vasculature that are structurally collapsed or obstructed by tumor-associated fibroblasts or pericytes that adhere tightly to the endothelial cells (Figure 1). The cellular and non-cellular heterogeneity in the tumor microenvironment (TME), which is incompletely understood, collectively determines the fate of nanoparticle tumor access. In this manuscript, we mainly focus on nano drug delivery in PDAC with a view to discuss transcytosis-mediated tumor targeting, an EPR-independent targeting approach without the need of tumor vasculature leakiness.

PDAC is the 4th leading cause of cancer death. According to the American Cancer Society's estimation, there were 56,770 new PDAC cases and 45,750 patient death cases in the US in 2019,. This accounts for approximately 3% of all cancer cases in the US and about 7% of all cancer deaths,. Unlike other cancer malignancies, chemotherapy is the most frequently used treatment for the majority PDAC patients because of the late diagnosis that leads to advanced disease. At this stage, the standard treatment includes gemcitabine (GEM) and classic or modified FOLFIRINOX (a 4-drug regimen). Recently, the FDA approved the use of GEM plus Albumin-bound paclitaxel nanocomplex (Abraxane) and liposomal irinotecan nanocarrier (Onivyde) plus fluorouracil for PDAC treatment, which lead to an improvement of overall survival of ~2 months,. The lack of a robust response to these first-generation nano formulations is in part due to the unfavorable PDAC TME that prevents drug delivery. In addition to cancer cells, a major pathological feature is the presence of thick tumor stroma, which lowers the putative EPR effect and nanoparticle access. In PDAC, the stroma barrier contains a variety of cellular and non-cellular components, such as pericytes, endothelial cells, fibroblasts, tumor associate macrophage, T cells, NK cells, collagen deposition, etc,. The complexity in the TME also comes from the biophysical components, such as acidity, hypoxia, high tumor IFP, etc.,. Collectively, fibrotic stroma and abnormal vasculature negatively impact drug delivery in PDAC.

Instead of relying the enlarged tumor fenestration that may not dominate in PDAC, we are asking how the nanoparticles can cross PDAC vasculature. This turns out to be a technically challenging question to answer for multiple reasons. First, due to logistic limitation, most preclinical studies rely on observations at empirically selected late time points. This experimental design leads to “endpoint” observations, which answer the question about whether the injected nanoparticle can reach the tumor site, but not necessarily how the nanoparticles reach the tumor site. Second, ultrastructural visualization of nano particulates in heterogeneous TME requires high operational standards in terms of sample preparation, imaging condition and equipment status. By considering these challenges, it would be ideal to make an in situ observation with ultrastructural resolution to answer the question about if the enlarged tumor fenestration is the solo factor that determines nanoparticle tumor access. Alternatively stated, does nanoparticle extravasation primarily rely on “leakiness” (Figure 1A, lower panel) or there is other mechanism that operates complementarily, i.e. through a transendothelial transport pathway (a.k.a. transcytosis) that assists nanoparticle tumor homing effectiveness (Figure 1B, lower panel).

A very interesting observation that appeared in old ultrastructural literatures was the demonstration that ovarian tumor vascular endothelial cells displayed a network of tubular vesicles (a.k.a. the vesico-vacuolar organelle or VVO) (Figure 2A)-. VVOs were described as “grape-like” clusters of interconnecting vesicles and vacuoles, which span the entire thickness of vascular endothelium. The authors suggested that these VVOs may provide a potential trans-endothelial path between the vascular lumen and the extravascular space, facilitating macromolecule transcytosis even without the need of vasculature leakiness. Our own observation showed that VVO-like structures can be found in an orthotopic PDAC model using Kras mutant PDAC cells (derived from a spontaneous PDAC tumor from a transgenic KrasLSL-G12D/+Trp53LSL-R172H/+Pdx1-Cre mouse) (Figure 2B). Previous studies also showed an endocytic transcytosis pathway that can be therapeutically elevated by tumor-penetrating iRGD peptides (CRGD[K/R]GP[D/E]C),. iRGD is capable of homing to the tumor-specific integrins expressed on the endothelial cells on tumor vasculature (but not normal cells),. In iRGD, the CendR motif is not C-terminal, but an active CendR motif that can be generated through proteolytic cleavage (Figure 3A),. The exposed CendR motif interacts with a multifunctional, VEGF-binding, non-tyrosine kinase receptor, neuropilin-1 (NRP-1). NRP-1 binding triggers a mass transcytosis pathway that mimics macropinocytosis (except that NRP-1 receptor is involved), and is similar in concept to the VVO's-. Moreover, NRP-1 expression correlates with tumor progression and poor prognosis in various cancers, including PDAC. Accordingly, the iRGD peptide is capable of promoting the penetration and tumor cell entry of a wide range of therapeutics in tumor models, including BxPC-3 and PC-09 PDAC models. The therapeutics includes free drugs, macromolecules (dextran), dyes (Evans blue), peptide, antibodies, liposomes, and Abraxane,,,. Recently, we showed that the anti-cancer efficacy of an irinotecan loaded silicasome nanocarrier can be significantly improved by the co-administration of free iRGD peptide even without the requirement of covalent attachment. This led to a ~4-fold nanoparticle uptake increase at the orthotopic KPC PDAC site, leading to enhanced efficacy at primary and metastatic sites. Moreover, through the use of transmission electron microscopy (TEM), we obtained ultrastructural in situ evidence showing the appearance of grouped vesicles in PDAC endothelial cells, with the ability to carry gold nanoparticle labeled silicasomes from the blood vessel lumen to the PDAC matrix, without the requirement of tumor fenestration (Figure 3B).

In addition, it was also demonstrated that albumin can mediate a transcytosis process in endothelial cells by targeting the 60-kDa glycoprotein (gp60) receptor, which binds to caveolin-1 by forming transcytotic vesicles-. Based on this caveolae-mediated transcytosis mechanism, many albumin-based drug delivery nanoparticles were developed for cancer treatment including PDAC-. One well-known example is the albumin-bound nanoparticle (nab) paclitaxel (Abraxane®), which achieved efficient delivery of the drug to the PDAC and other tumor sites by taking the advantage of caveolae-mediated transcytosis mechanism,. Besides the albumin, another impressive example of receptor-mediated transcytosis of nanoparticles in PDAC is the development of urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) targeting imaging nanoparticles. The association of uPAR with caveolae first facilitates nanoparticles crossing the endothelium via transcytosis. This allows the particle entry into perivascular tumor areas, followed by the binding to uPAR-expressing PDAC tumor cells and tumor-associated stromal cells. This approach has resulted in highly selective delivery of imaging probes into primary and metastatic pancreatic cancer lesions. In addition to surface modification, recent data suggested that surface charge may also play an important role during the transcytosis process-. A macropinocytosis-mediated transcytosis was observed in cationic nanoparticles which exhibit efficient tumor penetration when compared to the treatment using anionic and neutral particles-. Zhou et al., designed a γ-glutamyl transpeptidase-responsive camptothecin-polymer conjugate. The idea was to use γ-glutamyl transpeptidase that was overexpressed on the endothelial cell membrane to cleave the γ-glutamyl moieties, leading to the positive primary amines on the particle surface. The resulting cationic conjugate actively infiltrated throughout the tumor tissue through caveolae-mediated (not macropincytosis) endocytosis and transcytosis, which enable deep tumor penetration with effective anticancer drug delivery. A brief summary of transcytosis mediated nanocarrier delivery examples in PDAC was provided in Table 1.

Transcytosis is a type of transcellular transport across the interior of a cell which extensively studied initially for macromolecules delivery through the blood-brain barrier (BBB), -. Actually, transcytosis-based mechanism has been used to achieve efficient delivery of drugs and genes by nanocarriers to various tissues-. In addition to PDAC, transcytosis is also involved in variety of solid tumor cancers, such as breast cancer,,, -, lung cancer,, prostate cancer,, brain cancer-, melanoma,, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer,,,,, and other cancers. One of the most recognized cases is drug delivery in brain cancers (e.g., glioma and glioblastoma) using transferrin (Tf) modification with the hope to across BBB,,,. For example, Chang et al. demonstrated that Tf-coated PLGA-NPs entered massively within brain-developed F98 glioma tumors. Porru et al. also developed zoledronic acid loaded nanoparticles with Tf-conjugation for transcytosis mediated BBB access and efficacy improvement in an orthotopic glioblastoma model. Since tumor formation in brain may interfere BBB integrity, these observations, in our opinion, may be the combined effect of pathological vasculature leakiness and transcytosis-mediated nanoparticle brain access. Interestingly, Williams et al. found a type of PLGA-PEG mesoscale nanoparticles (~400 nm) selectively target to kidney via transcytosis mechanism across depend predominantly on size and surface functionalization (non-opsonizing surface) but is independent of moderate surface charges. It becomes a very promising strategy of nanomedicines for kidney diseases. Impressively, Leng et al. design a series of linear and branched histidine-lysine (HK) peptide carriers as nonviral vectors for gene and siRNA delivery, this type of HK polyplexes can target neuropilin-1 receptor on endothelial cells and tumor cells which mediated the transcytosis through the tumor endothelium and lead high tumor distribution and efficient transfection in MDA-MB-435 breast cancer model,. The study further proved that the NRP-1 mediated transcytosis can be interfered by NRP-1 antibody blocking or enhanced using the approach of restricting nutrients with a glucose-transport inhibitor.

While the use of transcytosis to improve drug delivery is still not fully understood yet, ample evidences strongly suggested that physicochemical characteristics of nanocarriers may determine the effectiveness of transcytosis at tumor site. This includes the early-stage observations on particle chemical composition, size, shape, charge, surface modification, which may alter the rate and abundance of transcytosis-. However, it is too early to summarize a consensus to reproducibly activate transcytosis-mediated particle tumor access because these physicochemical parameters may collectively impact the process, which is further complicated by non-material factors, such as fibrotic status and IFP. Since favorable systemic circulation feature and intratumoral access may have different requirements with the respect to material properties, interesting strategies, such as the stimuli-responsive nanocarriers that may alter size/charge in circulation vs tumor have generated promising preclinical outcome,, -.

Another example to broaden the EPR concept is increased stromal vascular access by reducing pericyte coverage in PDAC-. While pericyte interference exhibits distinct mechanism as compared to transcytosis activation, it provides an alternative approach to improve drug delivery in non-leaky tumor, which may function beyond EPR effect. This challenge was met by designing a PEI/PEG-coated mesoporous silica nanoparticle that can be used for attaching a small molecule TGF-β receptor kinase inhibitor, LY364947. This drug interferes with the dominant signaling pathway for pericyte recruitment and adherence to endothelial cells. This carrier was derived through iterative design to achieve monodisperse particles of optimal size (~50 nm), stable copolymer attachment, maximum colloidal stability, and biocompatible polymer size selection (e.g., PEI 1.8 kD), and through choosing from a range of small molecule inhibitors to find a TGF-β inhibitor prototype with stable, pH-sensitive and high affinity binding. Ultimately, we obtained a nanocarrier containing high wt% LY364947. When tested in a human BxPC3 PDAC xenograft, this carrier could effectively interfere in pericyte adhesion to endothelial cells within 2 hours of intravenous injection. This allowed the development of a “two-wave” approach, in which the LY364947 nanocarrier was used as the 1st wave to open the stromal vascular gate, thereby allowing rapid tumor entry by 2nd wave drug carriers. This is in the line with nano-enabled engineered approach, which uses a multistage/multistep combination treatment to provide an impact on PDAC stroma, such as augmented blood vessel permeability, inhibition of drug inactivating enzymes and/or target specific biological factors, -.

From the translational nanomedicine aspect, there is a clear agenda to predict and quantify the EPR effect in cancer patients. This notion holds true to explore new mechanism(s) such as transcytosis to facilitate nanocarriers' tumor access, especially in non-leaky tumor types. It is noteworthy to dissect the complexity of each cancer indication as well as the differences among each individual with the same cancer indication. In fact, MRI imaging (using fluorescently labeled iron oxide nanoparticles) followed by quantitative intravital fluorescence visualization can identify “responder” for nanomedicine therapy. To effectively discern the heterogeneous nanoparticle tumor access in preclinical study, it is critical to consider stringent tumor models as compared to data generation using the convenient but highly artificial subcutaneous xenograft model. It is generally agreed upon in the field that new therapies (which is true for PDAC nano therapeutics) should be tested in the advanced models (Figure 4), which closely mimics disease characteristics. This includes primary human patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models, which can be implanted subcutaneously and orthotopically in NSG mice immediately after surgical resection. In this regard, the selection of a tumor PDX pair with differential NRP-1 expression on the tumor vasculature demonstrated differences in carrier uptake and irinotecan delivery during iRGD-mediated transcytosis activation. Our data indicated that it is necessary to contemplate the usage of a personalized approach to PDAC chemotherapy to enhance the efficacy of the irinotecan silicasome carrier by iRGD co-administration.

In summary, it is not surprising that major efforts are underway to study drug delivery using nano-enable approach for PDAC treatment. It becomes clear that transcytosis (perhaps with other unknown mechanisms) may coexist with the so-called EPR effect, which may not be a dominate factor in the case of PDAC. Further investigations are still required to fully understand this emerging approach, which may allow nanoparticle tumor targeting with major augment with respect to homing abundance, efficiency and time kinetics.

References 94

  1. 1.

    The EPR effect: unique features of tumor blood vessels for drug delivery, factors involved, and limitations and augmentation of the effect. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2011;63:136-51.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.addr.2010.04.009

  2. 2.

    Polyester micelles for drug delivery and cancer theranostics: current achievements, progresses and future perspectives. Mater Sci Eng C. 2018;83:218-32.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.msec.2017.10.004

  3. 3.

    Tumor targeting via EPR: Strategies to enhance patient responses. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2018;130:17-38.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.addr.2018.07.007

  4. 4.

    Positron emission tomography based elucidation of the enhanced permeability and retention effect in dogs with cancer using copper-64 liposomes. ACS Nano. 2015;9:6985-95.

    Not in our library10.1021/acsnano.5b01324

  5. 5.

    64Cu-MM-302 positron emission tomography quantifies variability of enhanced permeability and retention of nanoparticles in relation to treatment response in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:4190-202.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-3193

  6. 6.

    Challenges and key considerations of the enhanced permeability and retention effect for nanomedicine drug delivery in oncology. Cancer Res. 2013;73:2412-7.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-12-4561

  7. 7.

    Bridging bio-nano science and cancer nanomedicine. ACS Nano. 2017;11:9594-613.

    Not in our library10.1021/acsnano.7b04855

  8. 8.

    Integrating Nanotechnology into Cancer Care. ACS Nano. 2019;13:7370-6.

    Not in our library10.1021/acsnano.9b04266

  9. 9.

    Analysis of nanoparticle delivery to tumours. Nat Rev Mater. 2016;1:16014.

    Not in our library

  10. 10.

    Evaluation of nanomedicines: stick to the basics. Nat Rev Mater. 2016;1:16073.

    Not in our library

  11. 11.

    Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394-424.

    Not in our library10.3322/caac.21492

  12. 12.

    Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:7-34.

    Not in our library10.3322/caac.21551

  13. 13.

    Nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid in metastatic pancreatic cancer after previous gemcitabine-based therapy (NAPOLI-1): a global, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2016;387:545-57.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(15)00986-1

  14. 14.

    Increased survival in pancreatic cancer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1691-703.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1304369

  15. 15.

    Overcoming the stromal barrier: technologies to optimize drug delivery in pancreatic cancer. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2012;4:271-9.

    Not in our library10.1177/1758834012446008

  16. 16.

    The pancreas cancer microenvironment. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:4266-76.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-11-3114

  17. 17.

    The vesiculo-vacuolar organelle (VVO): a distinct endothelial cell structure that provides a transcellular pathway for macromolecular extravasation. J Leukoc Biol. 1996;59:100-15.

    Not in our library

  18. 18.

    Vesiculo-vacuolar organelles and the regulation of venule permeability to macromolecules by vascular permeability factor, histamine, and serotonin. J Exp Med. 1996;183:1981-6.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.183.5.1981

  19. 19.

    Pathways of macromolecular extravasation across microvascular endothelium in response to VPF/VEGF and other vasoactive mediators. Microcirculation. 1999;6:23-44.

    Not in our library

  20. 20.

    Tumor-penetrating peptide enhances transcytosis of silicasome-based chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer. J Clin Invest. 2017;127:2007-18.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci92284

  21. 21.

    Coadministration of a tumor-penetrating peptide enhances the efficacy of cancer drugs. Science. 2010;328:1031-5.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1183057

  22. 22.

    Tissue-penetrating delivery of compounds and nanoparticles into tumors. Cancer Cell. 2009;16:510-20.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ccr.2009.10.013

  23. 23.

    Targeted drug delivery using iRGD peptide for solid cancer treatment. Mol Syst Des Eng. 2017;2:370-9.

    Not in our library10.1039/c7me00050b

  24. 24.

    Major effect of transcytosis on nano drug delivery to pancreatic cancer. Mol Cell Oncol. 2017;4:e1335273.

    Not in our library10.1080/23723556.2017.1335273

  25. 25.

    An endocytosis pathway initiated through neuropilin-1 and regulated by nutrient availability. Nat Commun. 2014;5:4904.

    Not in our library10.1038/ncomms5904

  26. 26.

    A free cysteine prolongs the half-life of a homing peptide and improves its tumor-penetrating activity. J Control Release. 2014;175:48-53.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jconrel.2013.12.006

  27. 27.

    Anticancer effects of gemcitabine are enhanced by co-administered iRGD peptide in murine pancreatic cancer models that overexpressed neuropilin-1. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:1481.

    Not in our library10.1038/bjc.2014.49

  28. 28.

    Co-administration of iRGD with peptide HPRP-A1 to improve anticancer activity and membrane penetrability. Sci Rep. 2018;8:2274.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-018-20715-4

  29. 29.

    gp60 is an albumin-binding glycoprotein expressed by continuous endothelium involved in albumin transcytosis. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 1992;262:H246-H54.

    Not in our library10.1152/ajpheart.1992.262.1.h246

  30. 30.

    Albumin uptake and transcytosis in endothelial cells in vivo induced by albumin-binding protein. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2001;281:L1512-L22.

    Not in our library10.1152/ajplung.2001.281.6.l1512

  31. 31.

    Albumin mediates the transcytosis of myeloperoxidase by means of caveolae in endothelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101:7699-704.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0401712101

  32. 32.

    Preparation and characterization of water-soluble albumin-bound curcumin nanoparticles with improved antitumor activity. Int J Pharm. 2011;403:285-91.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijpharm.2010.10.041

  33. 33.

    Doxorubicin-loaded human serum albumin nanoparticles surface-modified with TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand and transferrin for targeting multiple tumor types. Biomaterials. 2012;33:1536-46.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.10.050

  34. 34.

    Albumin-based nanoparticles as potential controlled release drug delivery systems. J Control Release. 2012;157:168-82.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jconrel.2011.07.031

  35. 35.

    Albumin-bound nanoparticle (nab) paclitaxel exhibits enhanced paclitaxel tissue distribution and tumor penetration. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2015;76:699-712.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00280-015-2833-5

  36. 36.

    An in vitro and in vivo study of gemcitabine-loaded albumin nanoparticles in a pancreatic cancer cell line. Int J Nanomedicine. 2015;10:6825.

    Not in our library10.2147/ijn.s93835

  37. 37.

    Increased antitumor activity, intratumor paclitaxel concentrations, and endothelial cell transport of cremophor-free, albumin-bound paclitaxel, ABI-007, compared with cremophor-based paclitaxel. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:1317-24.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-05-1634

  38. 38.

    Molecular imaging of pancreatic cancer in an animal model using targeted multifunctional nanoparticles. Gastroenterology. 2009;136:1514-25.

    Not in our library10.1053/j.gastro.2009.01.006

  39. 39.

    Surface charge of nanoparticles determines their endocytic and transcytotic pathway in polarized MDCK cells. Biomacromolecules. 2008;9:435-43.

    Not in our library10.1021/bm700535p

  40. 40.

    A multilayered cell culture model for transport study in solid tumors: Evaluation of tissue penetration of polyethyleneimine based cationic micelles. Nano Today. 2014;9:695-704.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.nantod.2014.10.003

  41. 41.

    Evaluation of drug penetration with cationic micelles and their penetration mechanism using an in vitro tumor model. Biomaterials. 2016;98:120-30.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.04.037

  42. 42.

    Surface charge critically affects tumor penetration and therapeutic efficacy of cancer nanomedicines. Nano Today. 2016;11:133-44.

    Not in our library

  43. 43.

    Enzyme-activatable polymer-drug conjugate augments tumour penetration and treatment efficacy. Nat Nanotechnol. 2019;14:799-809.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41565-019-0485-z

  44. 44.

    Transcytosis. Cell. 1985;43:389-90.

    Not in our library10.1016/0092-8674(85)90166-7

  45. 45.

    Receptor-mediated transcytosis of transferrin across the blood-brain barrier. J Neurosci Res. 1987;18:299-304.

    Not in our library10.1002/jnr.490180206

  46. 46.

    Transcytosis of albumin in capillary endothelium. J Cell Biol. 1987;105:2603-12.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.105.6.2603

  47. 47.

    Comparison of in vitro and in vivo models of drug transcytosis through the blood-brain barrier. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1990;253:884-91.

    Not in our library

  48. 48.

    Human insulin receptor monoclonal antibody undergoes high affinity binding to human brain capillaries in vitro and rapid transcytosis through the blood-brain barrier in vivo in the primate. Pharm Res. 1995;12:807-16.

    Not in our library10.1023/a:1016244500596

  49. 49.

    Transcytosis: crossing cellular barriers. Physiol Rev. 2003;83:871-932.

    Not in our library10.1152/physrev.00001.2003

  50. 50.

    Mechanisms of TfR-mediated transcytosis and sorting in epithelial cells and applications toward drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2003;55:1439-66.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.addr.2003.07.004

  51. 51.

    Blood-brain barrier transcytosis of insulin in developing rabbits. Brain Res. 1987;420:32-8.

    Not in our library10.1016/0006-8993(87)90236-8

  52. 52.

    Brain drug delivery of small molecules using immunoliposomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996;93:14164-9.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.93.24.14164

  53. 53.

    The blood-brain barrier: bottleneck in brain drug development. NeuroRx. 2005;2:3-14.

    Not in our library10.1602/neurorx.2.1.3

  54. 54.

    Blood-brain barrier delivery. Drug Discov Today. 2007;12:54-61.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.drudis.2006.10.013

  55. 55.

    Transcytosis of nanoparticle and dendrimer delivery systems: evolving vistas. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2001;50:S69-S89.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0169-409x(01)00184-3

  56. 56.

    Targeted therapy for brain tumours. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004;3:499.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrd1414

  57. 57.

    Delivery of nanoparticle-complexed drugs across the vascular endothelial barrier via caveolae. IUBMB life. 2011;63:659-67.

    Not in our library10.1002/iub.485

  58. 58.

    Receptor-mediated transcytosis: a mechanism for active extravascular transport of nanoparticles in solid tumors. J Control Release. 2012;161:959-66.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.05.014

  59. 59.

    Enhanced antiproliferative activity of transferrin-conjugated paclitaxel-loaded nanoparticles is mediated via sustained intracellular drug retention. Mol Pharm. 2005;2:373-83.

    Not in our library10.1021/mp050032z

  60. 60.

    Albumin-bound formulation of paclitaxel (Abraxane® ABI-007) in the treatment of breast cancer. Int J Nanomedicine. 2009;4:99.

    Not in our library10.2147/ijn.s3061

  61. 61.

    Cationic albumin nanoparticles for enhanced drug delivery to treat breast cancer: preparation and in vitro assessment. J Drug Deliv. 2012;2012:686108.

    Not in our library10.1155/2012/686108

  62. 62.

    Enhanced transcellular penetration and drug delivery by crosslinked polymeric micelles into pancreatic multicellular tumor spheroids. Biomater Sci. 2015;3:1085-95.

    Not in our library10.1039/c4bm00323c

  63. 63.

    The influence of the penetrating peptide iRGD on the effect of paclitaxel-loaded MT1-AF7p-conjugated nanoparticles on glioma cells. Biomaterials. 2013;34:5138-48.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.03.036

  64. 64.

    Transferrin adsorption onto PLGA nanoparticles governs their interaction with biological systems from blood circulation to brain cancer cells. Pharm Res. 2012;29:1495-505.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11095-011-0624-1

  65. 65.

    Medical treatment of orthotopic glioblastoma with transferrin-conjugated nanoparticles encapsulating zoledronic acid. Oncotarget. 2014;5:10446.

    Not in our library10.18632/oncotarget.2182

  66. 66.

    Integrin-facilitated transcytosis for enhanced penetration of advanced gliomas by poly (trimethylene carbonate)-based nanoparticles encapsulating paclitaxel. Biomaterials. 2013;34:2969-79.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.12.049

  67. 67.

    Cyclic RGD-linked polymeric micelles for targeted delivery of platinum anticancer drugs to glioblastoma through the blood-brain tumor barrier. ACS Nano. 2013;7:8583-92.

    Not in our library10.1021/nn402662d

  68. 68.

    Emerging blood-brain-barrier-crossing nanotechnology for brain cancer theranostics. Chem Soc Rev. 2019;48:2967-3014.

    Not in our library10.1039/c8cs00805a

  69. 69.

    iRGD peptide conjugation potentiates intraperitoneal tumor delivery of paclitaxel with polymersomes. Biomaterials. 2016;104:247-57.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.07.023

  70. 70.

    Transferrin receptor-mediated endocytosis: a useful target for cancer therapy. J Membr Biol. 2014;247:291-307.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00232-014-9637-0

  71. 71.

    Transcytosis and brain uptake of transferrin-containing nanoparticles by tuning avidity to transferrin receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:8662-7.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1307152110

  72. 72.

    Mesoscale nanoparticles selectively target the renal proximal tubule epithelium. Nano Lett. 2015;15:2358-64.

    Not in our library10.1021/nl504610d

  73. 73.

    Nanomedicines for kidney diseases. Kidney Int. 2016;90:740-5.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.kint.2016.03.041

  74. 74.

    The neuropilin-1 receptor mediates enhanced tumor delivery of H2K polyplexes. J Gene Med. 2016;18:134-44.

    Not in our library10.1002/jgm.2886

  75. 75.

    Targeted delivery of siRNA therapeutics to malignant tumors. J Drug Deliv. 2017;2017:6971297.

    Not in our library10.1155/2017/6971297

  76. 76.

    Enhancing tumor penetration of nanomedicines. Biomacromolecules. 2017;18:1449-59.

    Not in our library10.1021/acs.biomac.7b00068

  77. 77.

    Physico-Chemical Strategies to Enhance Stability and Drug Retention of Polymeric Micelles for Tumor-Targeted Drug Delivery. Macromol Biosci. 2017;17:1600160.

    Not in our library10.1002/mabi.201600160

  78. 78.

    Cationic albumin conjugated pegylated nanoparticle with its transcytosis ability and little toxicity against blood-brain barrier. Int J Pharm. 2005;295:247-60.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijpharm.2005.01.043

  79. 79.

    Enhanced retention and cellular uptake of nanoparticles in tumors by controlling their aggregation behavior. ACS Nano. 2013;7:6244-57.

    Not in our library10.1021/nn402201w

  80. 80.

    Surface charge switchable nanoparticles based on zwitterionic polymer for enhanced drug delivery to tumor. Adv Mater. 2012;24:5476-80.

    Not in our library10.1002/adma.201202296

  81. 81.

    Rational design of cancer nanomedicine for simultaneous stealth surface and enhanced cellular uptake. ACS Nano. 2019;13:954-77.

    Not in our library10.1021/acsnano.8b07746

  82. 82.

    Hierarchical targeting strategy for enhanced tumor tissue accumulation/retention and cellular internalization. Adv Mater. 2016;28:7340-64.

    Not in our library10.1002/adma.201601498

  83. 83.

    Improvement of cancer-targeting therapy, using nanocarriers for intractable solid tumors by inhibition of TGF-β signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:3460-5.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0611660104

  84. 84.

    Comparison of the effects of the kinase inhibitors imatinib, sorafenib, and transforming growth factor-β receptor inhibitor on extravasation of nanoparticles from neovasculature. Cancer Sci. 2009;100:173-80.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.2008.01003.x

  85. 85.

    Accumulation of sub-100 nm polymeric micelles in poorly permeable tumours depends on size. Nat Nanotechnol. 2011;6:815.

    Not in our library10.1038/nnano.2011.166

  86. 86.

    TGF-β blockade improves the distribution and efficacy of therapeutics in breast carcinoma by normalizing the tumor stroma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:16618-23.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1117610109

  87. 87.

    Two-wave nanotherapy to target the stroma and optimize gemcitabine delivery to a human pancreatic cancer model in mice. ACS Nano. 2013;7:10048-65.

    Not in our library10.1021/nn404083m

  88. 88.

    Improving conventional enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effects; what is the appropriate target? Theranostics. 2014;4:81.

    Not in our library10.7150/thno.7193

  89. 89.

    Nanomedicine strategies to overcome the pathophysiological barriers of pancreatic cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016;13:750.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.119

  90. 90.

    Current status of biomarker and targeted nanoparticle development: The precision oncology approach for pancreatic cancer therapy. Cancer Lett. 2017;388:139-48.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.canlet.2016.11.030

  91. 91.

    nab-Paclitaxel potentiates gemcitabine activity by reducing cytidine deaminase levels in a mouse model of pancreatic cancer. Cancer Discov. 2012;2:260-9.

    Not in our library10.1158/2159-8290.cd-11-0242

  92. 92.

    Predicting therapeutic nanomedicine efficacy using a companion magnetic resonance imaging nanoparticle. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7:314ra183.

    Not in our library10.1126/scitranslmed.aac6522

  93. 93.
  94. 94.

    Five primary human pancreatic adenocarcinoma cell lines established by the outgrowth method. J Surg Res. 2012;172:29-39.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jss.2011.04.021

Cited by papers we hold 2

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.