Frontiers of Materials Science

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 363–372 | Cite as

Glucose-conjugated chitosan nanoparticles for targeted drug delivery and their specific interaction with tumor cells

  • Jing LiEmail author
  • Fang-Kui Ma
  • Qi-Feng Dang
  • Xing-Guo Liang
  • Xi-Guang ChenEmail author
Research Article


A novel targeted drug delivery system, glucose-conjugated chitosan nanoparticles (GCNPs), was developed for specific recognition and interaction with glucose transporters (Gluts) over-expressed by tumor cells. GC was synthesized by using succinic acid as a linker between glucosamine and chitosan (CS), and successful synthesis was confirmed by NMR and elemental analysis. GCNPs were prepared by ionic crosslinking method, and characterized in terms of morphology, size, and zeta potential. The optimally prepared nanoparticles showed spherical shapes with an average particle size of (187.9 ± 3.8) nm and a zeta potential of (− 15.43 ± 0.31) mV. The GCNPs showed negligible cytotoxicity to mouse embryo fibroblast and 4T1 cells. Doxorubicin (DOX) could be efficiently entrapped into GCNPs, with a loading capacity and encapsulation efficiency of 20.11% and 64.81%, respectively. DOX-loaded nanoparticles exhibited sustained-release behavior in phosphate buffered saline (pH 7.4). In vitro cellular uptake studies showed that the GCNPs had better endocytosis ability than CSNPs, and the antitumor activity of DOX/GCNPs was 4–5 times effectiveness in 4T1 cell killing than that of DOX/CSNPs. All the results demonstrate that nanoparticles decorated with glucose have specific interactions with cancer cells via the recognition between glucose and Gluts. Therefore, Gluts-targeted GCNPs may be promising delivery agents in cancer therapies.


drug delivery target nanoparticle glucose transporter (Glut) chitosan (CS) 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Chen C, Yu C H, Cheng Y C, et al. Biodegradable nanoparticles of amphiphilic triblock copolymers based on poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) and poly(ethylene glycol) as drug carriers. Biomaterials, 2006, 27(27): 4804–4814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Haley B, Frenkel E. Nanoparticles for drug delivery in cancer treatment. Urologic Oncology, 2008, 26(1): 57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Malam Y, Loizidou M, Seifalian A M. Liposomes and nanoparticles: nanosized vehicles for drug delivery in cancer. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 2009, 30(11): 592–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Byrne J D, Betancourt T, Brannon-Peppas L. Active targeting schemes for nanoparticle systems in cancer therapeutics. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2008, 60(15): 1615–1626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Sudimack J, Lee R J. Targeted drug delivery via the folate receptor. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2000, 41(2): 147–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Hruz P W, Mueckler M M. Structural analysis of the GLUT1 facilitative glucose transporter. Molecular Membrane Biology, 2001, 18(3): 183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Olson A L, Pessin J E. Structure, function, and regulation of the mammalian facilitative glucose transporter gene family. Annual Review of Nutrition, 1996, 16(1): 235–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Warburg O, Wind F, Negelein E. The metabolism of tumors in the body. The Journal of General Physiology, 1927, 8(6): 519–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Cullinane C, Solomon B, Hicks R J. Imaging of molecular target modulation in oncology: challenges of early clinical trials. Clinical and Translational Imaging, 2014, 2(1): 5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Liu D Z, Sinchaikul S, Reddy P V G, et al. Synthesis of 2′-paclitaxel methyl 2-glucopyranosyl succinate for specific targeted delivery to cancer cells. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters, 2007, 17(3): 617–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Airley R, Evans A, Mobasheri A, et al. Glucose transporter Glut-1 is detectable in peri-necrotic regions in many human tumor types but not normal tissues: Study using tissue microarrays. Annals of Anatomy, 2010, 192(3): 133–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Jóźwiak P, Lipińska A. The role of glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1) in the diagnosis and therapy of tumors. Postępy Higieny i Medycyny Doświadczalnej, 2012, 66: 165–174 (in Polish)Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Ravi Kumar M N V. A review of chitin and chitosan applications. Reactive and Functional Polymers, 2000, 46(1): 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Li J, Kong M, Cheng X J, et al. A facile method for preparing biodegradable chitosan derivatives with low grafting degree of poly(lactic acid). International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2011, 49(5): 1016–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Yang K, Gao T, Bao Z, et al. Preparation and characterization of a novel thermosensitive nanoparticle for drug delivery in combined hyperthermia and chemotherapy. Journal of Materials Chemistry B, 2013, 1(46): 6442–6448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Li P, Wang Y, Zeng F, et al. Synthesis and characterization of folate conjugated chitosan and cellular uptake of its nanoparticles in HT-29 cells. Carbohydrate Research, 2011, 346(6): 801–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Chen X G, Li J, Cheng X J, et al. Process for preparing compounds of chitosan saccharified with aminosugar. US Patent, 8 202 971 B2, 2012-06-19Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Hansen M B, Nielsen S E, Berg K. Re-examination and further development of a precise and rapid dye method for measuring cell growth/cell kill. Journal of Immunological Methods, 1989, 119(2): 203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Dong Y, Feng S S. Methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(lactide) (MPEG-PLA) nanoparticles for controlled delivery of anticancer drugs. Biomaterials, 2004, 25(14): 2843–2849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Wang H, Zhao P, Su W, et al. PLGA/polymeric liposome for targeted drug and gene co-delivery. Biomaterials, 2010, 31(33): 8741–8748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Li J, Kong M, Cheng X J, et al. Preparation of biocompatible chitosan grafted poly(lactic acid) nanoparticles. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2012, 51(3): 221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Danhier F, Feron O, Préat V. To exploit the tumor microenvironment: Passive and active tumor targeting of nanocarriers for anticancer drug delivery. Journal of Controlled Release, 2010, 148(2): 135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Yoo J W, Doshi N, Mitragotri S. Adaptive micro and nanoparticles: Temporal control over carrier properties to facilitate drug delivery. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2011, 63(14–15): 1247–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Hashida M, Takemura S, Nishikawa M, et al. Targeted delivery of plasmid DNA complexed with galactosylated poly(L-lysine). Journal of Controlled Release, 1998, 53(1–3): 301–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Peer D, Karp J M, Hong S, et al. Nanocarriers as an emerging platform for cancer therapy. Nature Nanotechnology, 2007, 2(12): 751–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Choucair A, Soo P L, Eisenberg A. Active loading and tunable release of doxorubicin from block copolymer vesicles. Langmuir, 2005, 21(20): 9308–9313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Xun W, Wang H Y, Li Z Y, et al. Self-assembled micelles of novel graft amphiphilic copolymers for drug controlled release. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 2011, 85(1): 86–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Food Science and EngineeringOcean University of ChinaQingdaoChina
  2. 2.Freshwater Fisheries Research Institute of Shandong ProvinceJinanChina
  3. 3.College of Marine Life ScienceOcean University of ChinaQingdaoChina

Personalised recommendations