Drug Delivery Systems for Intraperitoneal Therapy
- 476 Downloads
Disorders associated with the peritoneal cavity include peritoneal adhesions and intraperitoneal (IP) malignancies. To prevent peritoneal adhesions, physical barrier devices are used to prevent organs from contacting other structures in the abdomen and forming adhesions, or pharmacological agents that interfere with adhesion formation are administered intraperitoneally. IP malignancies are other disorders confined to the peritoneal cavity, which are treated by combination of surgical removal and chemotherapy of the residual tumor. IP drug delivery helps in the regional therapy of these disorders by providing relatively high concentration and longer half-life of a drug in the peritoneal cavity. Various studies suggest that IP delivery of anti-neoplastic agents is a promising approach for malignancies in the peritoneal cavity compared to the systemic administration. However, IP drug delivery faces several challenges, such as premature clearance of a small molecular weight drug from the peritoneal cavity, lack of target specificity, and poor drug penetration into the target tissues. Previous studies have proposed the use of micro/nanoparticles and/or hydrogel-based systems for prolonging the drug residence time in the peritoneal cavity. This commentary discusses the currently used IP drug delivery systems either clinically or experimentally and the remaining challenges in IP drug delivery for future development.
KEY WORDShydrogels intraperitoneal drug delivery intraperitoneal malignancies micro/nanoparticles peritoneal adhesion
This study was supported by a grant from the Lilly Endowment, Inc. to the School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Purdue University, and the NIH R21 CA135130.
- 8.DiZerega GS. Use of adhesion prevention barriers in pelvic reconstructive and gynecologic surgery. In: diZerega GS, editor. Peritoneal surgery. New York: Springer; 2000.Google Scholar
- 14.Ozols RF, Bundy BN, Greer BE, Fowler JM, Clarke-Pearson D, Burger RA, et al. Phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3194–200.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Gadducci A, Carnino F, Chiara S, Brunetti I, Tanganelli L, Romanini A, et al. Intraperitoneal versus intravenous cisplatin in combination with intravenous cyclophosphamide and epidoxorubicin in optimally cytoreduced advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a randomized trial of the Gruppo Oncologico Nord-Ovest. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;76:157–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Markman M, Bundy BN, Alberts DS, Fowler JM, Clark-Pearson DL, Carson LF, et al. Phase III trial of standard-dose intravenous cisplatin plus paclitaxel versus moderately high-dose carboplatin followed by intravenous paclitaxel and intraperitoneal cisplatin in small-volume stage III ovarian carcinoma: an intergroup study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group, Southwestern Oncology Group, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1001–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Polyzos A, Tsavaris N, Kosmas C, Giannikos L, Katsikas M, Kalahanis N, et al. A comparative study of intraperitoneal carboplatin versus intravenous carboplatin with intravenous cyclophosphamide in both arms as initial chemotherapy for stage III ovarian cancer. Oncology 1999;56:291–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.NCI clinical announcement for Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer http://ctep.cancer.gov/highlights/docs/clin_annc_010506.pdf.