Nanotechnology, a field concerned with the properties, dynamics, and functions of vectors ranging in size from 1-1000 nanometers, is a relatively young discipline but is already of significant interest to many fields of research (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019). The integration of nanotechnology and medicine is commonly referred to as nanomedicine, a new approach to medical science that has already begun to revolutionize modern healthcare. Nanomedicine has a diverse array of applications to oncology, ranging from disease diagnosis to targeted chemotherapy (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019). Such applications of nanomedicine yield the potential to improve disease prognosis, reduce deleterious side effects of treatment, and improve treatment efficacy (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019; Sinha et al., 2006; Albanese, Tang and Chan, 2012; Van der Meel et al., 2019).
Nanotechnology provides an opportunity to tailor in vivo drug delivery according to the desired biological target and effect (Sinha et al., 2006). This feature of nanotechnology is of great value when battling a heterogeneous disease capable of evolving to variable environmental conditions (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019; Sinha et al., 2006). Optical, electrical, and magnetic properties are customizable features of nanoparticles which can be altered through the manipulation of nanoparticle shell parameters, like size and shape (Albanese, Tang and Chan, 2012; Martinelli, Pucci and Ciofani, 2019). Organic and inorganic are two main classes of nanoparticles, the latter being of use to diagnostic and imaging procedures (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019). In Figure 1 below, dextran-coated iron oxide particles, an inorganic nanoparticle commonly used as a magnetic resonance contrast, are used to develop a clear visualization of the breast tumour due to preferential accumulation at the tumour site (Sinha et al., 2006).
Alternately, organic nanoparticles are most commonly used for drug delivery (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019). Oral and intravenous routes are conventional means of drug administration, yet they often result in unpredictable pharmacokinetics through interaction of the drug with metabolic pathways (Sinha et al., 2006). Due to low tissue specificity of several modern chemotherapeutic agents, the drug dosage is increased to compensate for the widespread distribution, often resulting in unintended toxicities (Sinha et al., 2006; Albanese, Tang and Chan, 2012). As a consequence of tumour vasculature, augmented pressures are found at the interior of tumour masses, presenting challenges for drug delivery (Martinelli, Pucci and Ciofani, 2019). As a result, chemotherapeutic agents delivered through traditional means are often only retained at the periphery of the mass, thus lessening their effect (Martinelli, Pucci and Ciofani, 2019).
In contrast, through the encapsulation of chemotherapeutic agents in nanoparticles, the bioavailability and concentration of the drug around tumour sites is increased, improving the drug efficiency and reducing the harmful effects of the drug on healthy tissues (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019; Sinha et al., 2006; Martinelli, Pucci and Ciofani, 2019; Van der Meel et al., 2019). This is shown above in Figure 1, as a micelle is used to transport hydrophobic drugs directly to tumour cells (Pucci, Martinelli and Ciofani, 2019; Albanese, Tang and Chan, 2012). Additionally, the biodegradability of organic nanoparticles lowers the deleterious toll of chemotherapy on our environment, as polymers can be metabolized and eliminated through previously existing biological pathways (Sinha et al., 2006).
While significant strides have already been made treating the disease, cancer remains ubiquitous in society. Nanomedicine presents a new weapon in our holster for cancer diagnosis and treatment. Although nanomedicine has already been applied to oncology in many clinical trials, more research needs to be done to further substantiate the results of such trials before nanotechnology becomes commonplace in chemotherapy wards. In spite of this, nanomedicine is on the horizon and should remain a source of hope for future advancements in oncology.
References
Albanese, A., Tang, P.S. and Chan, W.C.W., 2012. The Effect of Nanoparticle Size, Shape, and Surface Chemistry on Biological Systems. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 14(1), pp.1–16.
Martinelli, C., Pucci, C. and Ciofani, G., 2019. Nanostructured carriers as innovative tools for cancer diagnosis and therapy. APL Bioengineering, [online] 3(1). Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6481740/ [Accessed 3 Nov. 2020].
Van der Meel, R., Sulheim, E., Shi, Y., Kiessling, F., Mulder, W.J.M. and Lammers, T., 2019. Smart cancer nanomedicine. Nature Nanotechnology, 14(11), pp.1007–1017.
Pucci, C., Martinelli, C. and Ciofani, G., 2019. Innovative approaches for cancer treatment: current perspectives and new challenges. ecancermedicalscience, [online] 13. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6753017/ [Accessed 3 Nov. 2020].
Sinha, R., Kim, G.J., Nie, S. and Shin, D.M., 2006. Nanotechnology in cancer therapeutics: bioconjugated nanoparticles for drug delivery. Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, 5(8), pp.1909–1917.
Comments
7 Responses to “Nanotechnology and Cancer: Shifting the Scales of Oncology”
Hey everyone!
For my first blog post this year I decided to write about the integration of biology, physics, and chemistry in oncology through a discussion of nanomedicine. A bit of a throwback to RP4 last year but still relevant nonetheless. Seeing as oncology is a rapidly evolving field staying up to date on up and coming areas of research is pivotal.
I’d appreciate any and all suggestions on how I can further refine my post!
Cheers and thank-you for helping my editing!
Paige
Hi Paige,
This was an amazing blog post! I liked the application of nanoparticles to oncology, and thinking about how this could dramatically change cancer treatment. I especially liked how well your ideas were developed throughout the blog post, and how you came to a strong conclusion!
I have a few suggestions that I hope you will find helpful:
1. Perhaps you could have a transition between the first and second sentences in the paragraph, as it is a bit of an abrupt shift from nanotechnology to nano medicine.
2. In the second sentence you could replace “presents” with “has” as it may flow better and still have the same meaning.
3. In the first sentence of the second paragraph, the words “in vivo” should be italicized. On the other hand, the words “Figure 1”, in the last paragraph do not have to be italicized.
4. In the second paragraph, consider clarifying what shell parameters are.
5. The second last sentence of the second paragraph could be reworded to say “The two main classes of nanoparticles are inorganic and organic, the latter being of use to diagnostic and imaging procedures.” In the last sentence of this paragraph, I believe that you are talking about dextran-coated iron oxide as an application of inorganic nanoparticles, but perhaps you can state this explicitly for clarity, and to further add to your story.
6. Consider changing the phrase “unintended toxicities” to “multiple undesirable side effects” since this may put it in terms that allow for easier understanding of why higher doses may be unwanted. This is completely up to you, however, and what you’re trying to convey!
7. Remove the word “and” at the last sentence of the third paragraph.
8. You could phrase the first sentence in the fourth paragraph to say “In contrast, through the encapsulation of chemotherapeutic agents in nanoparticles, the bioavailability and concentration of the drug around tumour sites can be increased…” Additionally, there a lot of ideas introduced in this same sentence, so consider splitting It up after the word “increased” for readability purposes. As well, define what “release profile” means or phrase it differently for clarity purposes.
Overall, this was a great blog post. It was fascinating to learn more about nanoparticles. I hope that these suggestions are helpful in editing your post. Thanks for a great read!
Happy editing,
Keshikaa
Keshikaa
Thank you so much for your suggestions, Keshikaa! I incorporated most of them into my final draft and I really appreciate all your help! I think your comment has improved the clarity of my final draft and has helped me communicate some of the more difficult concepts about nanotechnology and nanomedicine.
Cheers and thanks again!
Paige
Hello Paige,
This was such an interesting blog post and such an innovative concept. Here are a few suggestions I have:
– In your first sentence, I would suggest adding a comma after nanometers so that there is a distinct separation between the definition and additional details.
– In the second sentence of your second paragraph, it was nice how you used commas to organize the lists, but I though there were too points. Maybe you could split it into different sentences.
– In you references, I would suggest turning it into a header for that section. Also, the websites should not be linked
Overall, this was such an interesting read and a well formatted post. Looking forward to the final product,
Happy Editing,
Dua
Hey Dua,
Thank you so much for your comment, I made the changes you suggested during my editing process and I think they improved the overall flow of the post.
Thanks!
Paige
Hi Paige,
This was a super interesting read on a subject that I’m not too familiar with, and I really enjoyed it! Just a few small comments:
1) The first two sentences of the second paragraph are quite long and complex. They seem to contain very important information, so trying to break up these points into smaller sentences might make the contents more digestible for the reader.
2) The second sentences of the third paragraph feels a bit clunky due to the “oral and intravenous” definition, which gets the point across but doesn’t flow very smoothly. It might help to include these types within the definition and connecting with “and” instead of separating with commas.
3) The last sentence of the third paragraph is very long. Breaking this up into smaller sections might help with formatting to benefit the reader’s comprehension!
4) Some of the comma placements break up your sentence flow in the last paragraph. Maybe try to avoid longer, run-on sentences and opt for more concise descriptions is possible!
5) Your links in the references don’t need to be hyperlinked, they can just be underlined.
Overall, this was such an interesting read and I loved the structure and phrasing of your writing! Great job, and I can’t wait to read the final version as well.
Good luck editing,
Taren
Hey Taren!
Thanks so much for your suggestions, and I’m glad to hear it made for a nice read. I personally think this is a fascinating topic and it gives me hope for the future of oncology. In saying that, I made all the changes you suggested and I think it really helped improve the flow of the piece. I definitely tend to use larger sentences as opposed to short sentences! Thanks again for all your help.
Cheers,
Paige