Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2018 Nov - Dec;136-137:82-96. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2018.09.012. Epub 2018 Sep 29.

Animal models for analysis of immunological responses to nanomaterials: Challenges and considerations.

Author information

1
UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States. Electronic address: zamboni@email.unc.edu.
2
Nanomedicine Research and Education Center, Institute of Pathophysiology, Semmelweis University and SeroScience Ltd, Nagyvárad tér 4, 1089 Budapest, Hungary; Department of Nanobiotechnology and Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Health, Miskolc University, Miskolc, Hungary.
3
Laboratory of Animal Sciences Program, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, United States.
4
UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.
5
Nanotechnology Characterization Laboratory, Cancer Research Technology Program, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, United States. Electronic address: marina@mail.nih.gov.

Abstract

Nanotechnology provides many solutions to improve conventional drug delivery and has a unique niche in the areas related to the specific targeting of the immune system, such as immunotherapies and vaccines. Preclinical studies in this field rely heavily on the combination of in vitro and in vivo methods to assess the safety and efficacy of nanotechnology platforms, nanoparticle-formulated drugs, and vaccines. While certain types of toxicities can be evaluated in vitro and good in vitro-in vivo correlation has been demonstrated for such tests, animal studies are still needed to address complex biological questions and, therefore, provide a unique contribution to establishing nanoparticle safety and efficacy profiles. The genetic, metabolic, mechanistic, and phenotypic diversity of currently available animal models often complicates both the animal choice and the interpretation of the results. This review summarizes current knowledge about differences in the immune system function and immunological responses of animals commonly used in preclinical studies of nanomaterials. We discuss challenges, highlight current gaps, and propose recommendations for animal model selection to streamline preclinical analysis of nanotechnology formulations.

KEYWORDS:

Allergy; Anaphylaxis; Animals; Complement; Cytokine storm; Inflammation; MPS; Macrophages; Nanoparticles

PMID:
30273617
DOI:
10.1016/j.addr.2018.09.012

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center