Physiological and Pathological Bases for Designing High Performance Drug Delivery Carriers

  • Jin ChenEmail author
  • Ling Chen
  • Fengwei Xie
  • Xiaoxi Li


The strategy of using drug delivery systems (DDSs) to deliver drugs will confront different physiological environments in the human body. A better understanding of the physiological base is the key step for the success of advanced starch-based DDSs with high performance. For example, various biological stimuli, such as temperature, pH, and hypoxia at the organ, tissue, and cell levels can be exploited to trigger the stimulus-responsive delivery of therapeutics. Besides, external stimuli such as electric/magnetic fields or light have been developed to construct stimulus responsiveness of drug carriers. On the other hand, when it comes to clinical application, DDS will confront different physiological environments along with various administration routes, such as oral cavity mucosa or blood circulation. The drug carriers will interact with these physiological environments at tissues, cell, and molecular levels. With a deeper understanding of these physiological bases, further advances have been introduced by DDSs endowed with target-specific and bioadhesive properties to various sites in the body to reduce the side effects and enhance the bioavailability of drugs at the diseased site. Regarding this, the physiological and pathological hallmarks of the organ or cell levels and the interactions between the physiological structure and materials are highlighted in this section.


Physiological and pathological bases Biological stimuli Physical stimuli Interactions with mucosa Interactions with cells Interactions with biomacromolecules 


  1. Aderem A, Underhill DM (1999) Mechanisms of phagocytosis in macrophages. Annu Rev Immunol 17:593–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arora S, Ali J, Ahuja A, Khar RK, Baboota S (2005) Floating drug delivery systems: a review. AAPS PharmSciTech 6:E372–E390. Scholar
  3. Bark DL, Ku DN (2010) Wall shear over high degree stenoses pertinent to atherothrombosis. J Biomech 43:2970–2977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Behzadi S et al (2017) Cellular uptake of nanoparticles: journey inside the cell. Chem Soc Rev 46:4218–4244. Scholar
  5. Bernhardt H, Knoke M (1997) Mycological aspects of gastrointestinal microflora. Scand J Gastroenterol 32:102–106. Scholar
  6. Bernkop-Schnürch A (1998) The use of inhibitory agents to overcome the enzymatic barrier to perorally administered therapeutic peptides and proteins. J Controlled Release 52:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernkop-Schnürch A, Gabor F, Szostak MP, Lubitz W (1995) An adhesive drug delivery system based on K99-fimbriae. Eur J Pharm Sci 3:293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boddupalli BM, Mohammed ZNK, Nath RA, Banji D (2010) Mucoadhesive drug delivery system: an overview. J Adv Pharm Technol Res 1:381–387. Scholar
  9. Bradfield JB (1974) Control of spillover: the importance of kupffer-cell function in clinical medicine. The Lancet 304:883–886. Scholar
  10. Brown CM, Petersen NO (1999) Free clathrin triskelions are required for the stability of clathrin-associated adaptor protein (AP-2) coated pit nucleation sites. Biochem Cell Biol 77:439–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown D, Gluck S, Hartwig J (1987) Structure of the novel membrane-coating material in proton-secreting epithelial cells and identification as an H+ATPase. J Cell Biol 105:1637–1648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bures P, Huang Y, Oral E, Peppas NA (2001) Surface modifications and molecular imprinting of polymers in medical and pharmaceutical applications. J Controlled Release 72:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buxton ILO, Benet LZ (1996) Pharmacokinetics: the dynamics of drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination. In: Brunton LL, Chabner BA, Knollmann BC (eds) Goodman & Gilman’s: the pharmacological basis of therapeutics, 12th edn. pp 3–27Google Scholar
  14. Bye W, Allan C, Trier J (1984) Structure, distribution, and origin of M cells in Peyer’s patches of mouse ileum. Gastroenterology 86:789–801Google Scholar
  15. Clark MA, Jepson MA, Hirst BH (2001) Exploiting M cells for drug and vaccine delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 50:81–106. Scholar
  16. Cole AJ, David AE, Wang J, Galban CJ, Hill HL, Yang VC (2011) Polyethylene glycol modified, cross-linked starch-coated iron oxide nanoparticles for enhanced magnetic tumor targeting. Biomaterials 32:2183–2193. Scholar
  17. Devasagayam T, Tilak J, Boloor K, Sane KS, Ghaskadbi SS, Lele R (2004) Free radicals and antioxidants in human health: current status and future prospects. J Assoc Physicians India Japi 52:794–804PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Doherty GJ, McMahon HT (2009) Mechanisms of endocytosis. Annu Rev Biochem 78:857–902. Scholar
  19. Edidin M (2003) Lipids on the frontier: a century of cell-membrane bilayers. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 4:414. Scholar
  20. Ermak TH, Dougherty EP, Bhagat HR, Kabok Z, Pappo J (1995) Uptake and transport of copolymer biodegradable microspheres by Rabbit Peyer’s patch M cells. Cell Tissue Res 279:433–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gao Z-G, Fain HD, Rapoport N (2005) Controlled and targeted tumor chemotherapy by micellar-encapsulated drug and ultrasound. J Controlled Release 102:203–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Göppert TM, Müller RH (2005) Protein adsorption patterns on poloxamer-and poloxamine-stabilized solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN). Eur J Pharm Biopharm 60:361–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grabe M, Oster G (2001) Regulation of organelle acidity. J Gen Physiol 117:329–344. Scholar
  24. Guskiewicz KM, Mihalik JP (2011) Biomechanics of sport concussion: quest for the elusive injury threshold. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 39:4–11. Scholar
  25. Han G, You CC, Kim BJ, Turingan RS, Forbes NS, Martin CT, Rotello VM (2006) Light-regulated release of DNA and its delivery to nuclei by means of photolabile gold nanoparticles. Angewandte Chemie 118:3237–3241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hannigan GE et al (1996) Regulation of cell adhesion and anchorage-dependent growth by a new β1-integrin-linked protein kinase. Nature 379:91. Scholar
  27. Harris D, Robinson JR (1992) Drug delivery via the mucous membranes of the oral cavity. J Pharm Sci 81:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffman AS (2013) Stimuli-responsive polymers: biomedical applications and challenges for clinical translation. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 65:10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hu X, Zhou Q (2013) Health and ecosystem risks of graphene. Chem Rev 113:3815–3835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jovic M, Sharma M, Rahajeng J, Caplan S (2010) The early endosome: a busy sorting station for proteins at the crossroads. Histol Histopathol 25:99–112PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Karimi M et al (2016) Smart micro/nanoparticles in stimulus-responsive drug/gene delivery systems. Chem Soc Rev 45:1457–1501. Scholar
  32. Karmali PP, Simberg D (2011) Interactions of nanoparticles with plasma proteins: implication on clearance and toxicity of drug delivery systems. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 8:343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kim YS, Ho SB (2010) Intestinal goblet cells and mucins in health and disease: recent insights and progress. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 12:319–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Koçer A, Walko M, Meijberg W, Feringa BL (2005) A light-actuated nanovalve derived from a channel protein. Science 309:755–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kuhn DA, Vanhecke D, Michen B, Blank F, Gehr P, Petri-Fink A, Rothen-Rutishauser B (2014) Different endocytotic uptake mechanisms for nanoparticles in epithelial cells and macrophages Beilstein. J Nanotechnol 5:1625Google Scholar
  36. Kumari S, Mg S, Mayor S (2010) Endocytosis unplugged: multiple ways to enter the cell. Cell Res 20:256. Scholar
  37. Lacerda SHDP, Park JJ, Meuse C, Pristinski D, Becker ML, Karim A, Douglas JF (2009) Interaction of gold nanoparticles with common human blood proteins. ACS Nano 4:365–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Laurent S, Dutz S, Häfeli UO, Mahmoudi M (2011) Magnetic fluid hyperthermia: focus on superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles. Adv Coll Interface Sci 166:8–23. Scholar
  39. Lee SH, Gupta MK, Bang JB, Bae H, Sung HJ (2013) Current progress in reactive oxygen species (ROS)-responsive materials for biomedical applications. Adv Healthc Mater 2:908–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Likhitkar S, Bajpai AK (2014) An in vitro experimental approach to study magnetically targeted release of methotrexate from superparamagnetic starch nanocarriers. Int J Polym Mater Polym Biomater 63:941–950. Scholar
  41. Liu G et al (2003) Investigations of 99mTc morpholino pretargeting in mice. Nucl Med Commun 24:697–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Longer M, Robinson J (1986) Fundamental-aspects of bioadhesion. Pharm Int 7:114–117Google Scholar
  43. Lu Y, Sun W, Gu Z (2014) Stimuli-responsive nanomaterials for therapeutic protein delivery. J Controlled Release 194:1–19. Scholar
  44. Lundqvist M, Stigler J, Elia G, Lynch I, Cedervall T, Dawson KA (2008) Nanoparticle size and surface properties determine the protein corona with possible implications for biological impacts. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:14265–14270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Madhav NS, Shakya AK, Shakya P, Singh K (2009) Orotransmucosal drug delivery systems: a review. J Controlled Release 140:2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Meng F, Cheng R, Deng C, Zhong Z (2012) Intracellular drug release nanosystems. Mater Today 15:436–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Meyer DE, Shin B, Kong G, Dewhirst M, Chilkoti A (2001) Drug targeting using thermally responsive polymers and local hyperthermia. J Controlled Release 74:213–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mikos A, Peppas N (1990) Scaling concepts and molecular theories of adhesion of synthetic polymers to glycoproteinic networks. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  49. Milani S, Baldelli Bombelli F, Pitek AS, Dawson KA, Rädler J (2012) Reversible versus irreversible binding of transferrin to polystyrene nanoparticles: soft and hard corona. ACS Nano 6:2532–2541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Monopoli MP, Åberg C, Salvati A, Dawson KA (2012) Biomolecular coronas provide the biological identity of nanosized materials. Nat Nanotechnol 7:779–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mura S, Nicolas J, Couvreur P (2013) Stimuli-responsive nanocarriers for drug delivery. Nat Mater 12:991–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Murdan S (2003) Electro-responsive drug delivery from hydrogels. J Controlled Release 92:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nabi IR (2009) Cavin fever: regulating caveolae. Nat Cell Biol 11:789–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nesbitt WS et al (2009) A shear gradient–dependent platelet aggregation mechanism drives thrombus formation. Nat Med 15:665–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Neutra MR, Frey A, Kraehenbuhl J-P (1996) Epithelial M cells: gateways for mucosal infection and immunization. Cell 86:345–348. Scholar
  56. Nomura R (2005) Caveolar endocytosis and virus entry. Uirusu 55:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Norbury CC, Hewlett LJ, Prescott AR, Shastri N, Watts C (1995) Class I MHC presentation of exogenous soluble antigen via macropinocytosis in bone marrow macrophages. Immunity 3:783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Owens DE, Peppas NA (2006) Opsonization, biodistribution, and pharmacokinetics of polymeric nanoparticles. Int J Pharm 307:93–102. Scholar
  59. Parton RG, Simons K (2007) The multiple faces of caveolae. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:185. Scholar
  60. Pelkmans L, Helenius A (2002) Endocytosis via caveolae. Traffic 3:311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Petelin M, Šentjurc M, Stolič Z, Skalerič U (1998) EPR study of mucoadhesive ointments for delivery of liposomes into the oral mucosa. Int J Pharm 173:193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Racanelli V, Rehermann B (2006) The liver as an immunological organ. Hepatology 43:S54–S62. Scholar
  63. Reinhold AK, Rittner HL (2017) Barrier function in the peripheral and central nervous system—a review. Pflug Arch Eur J Phy 469:123–134. Scholar
  64. Rescigno M et al (2001) Dendritic cells express tight junction proteins and penetrate gut epithelial monolayers to sample bacteria. Nat Immunol 2:361–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rijcken C, Soga O, Hennink W, Van Nostrum C (2007) Triggered destabilisation of polymeric micelles and vesicles by changing polymers polarity: an attractive tool for drug delivery. J Controlled Release 120:131–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ritschel W (1991) Targeting in the gastrointestinal tract: new approaches. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 13:313–336PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Saito G, Swanson JA, Lee K-D (2003) Drug delivery strategy utilizing conjugation via reversible disulfide linkages: role and site of cellular reducing activities. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 55:199–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Salcedo I et al (2012) In vitro biocompatibility and mucoadhesion of montmorillonite chitosan nanocomposite: a new drug delivery. Appl Clay Sci 55:131–137. Scholar
  69. Sandra K (2009) Polysaccharides in oral drug delivery—recent applications and future perspectives. In: Edgar KJ, Heinze T, Buchanan CM (eds) Polysaccharide materials: performance by design, vol 1017. ACS symposium series, 1 edn. American Chemical Society, Washington DC, pp 13–30. Scholar
  70. Savill J, Dransfield I, Gregory C, Haslett C (2002) A blast from the past: clearance of apoptotic cells regulates immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol 2:965–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Scheline RR (1973) Metabolism of foreign compounds by gastrointestinal microorganisms. Pharmacol Rev 25:451–523PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Sellers LA, Carroll NJH, Allen A (1986) Misoprostol-induced increases in adherent gastric mucus thickness and luminal mucus output. Dig Dis Sci 31:91S–95S. Scholar
  73. Shi Y, Massagué J (2003) Mechanisms of TGF-β signaling from cell membrane to the nucleus. Cell 113:685–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Simon GL, Gorbach SL (1984) Intestinal flora in health and disease. Gastroenterology 86:174–193PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Squier C, Rooney L (1976) The permeability of keratinized and nonkeratinized oral epithelium to lanthanum in vivo. J Ultrastruct Res 54:286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Storm G, Belliot SO, Daemen T, Lasic DD (1995) Surface modification of nanoparticles to oppose uptake by the mononuclear phagocyte system. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 17:31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Swanson JA (2008) Shaping cups into phagosomes and macropinosomes. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 9:639., Scholar
  78. Torchilin VP (2000) Drug targeting. Eur J Pharm Sci 11:S81–S91. Scholar
  79. Tsukita S, Furuse M, Itoh M (2001) Multifunctional strands in tight junctions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2:285–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Ungewickell E, Branton D (1981) Assembly units of clathrin coats. Nature 289:420. Scholar
  81. Ventura A, Jacks T (2009) MicroRNAs and cancer: short RNAs go a long way. Cell 136:586–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wang W, Bao L, Lei J, Tu W, Ju H (2012) Visible light induced photoelectrochemical biosensing based on oxygen-sensitive quantum dots. Anal Chim Acta 744:33–38. Scholar
  83. Wang H et al (2013) Redox-responsive, core-cross-linked micelles capable of on-demand, concurrent drug release and structure disassembly. Biomacromolecules 14:3706–3712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Watts P, Smith A (2005) TARGIT technology: coated starch capsules for site-specific drug delivery into the lower gastrointestinal tract. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2:159–167. Scholar
  85. Wootton DM, Ku DN (1999) Fluid mechanics of vascular systems, diseases, and thrombosis. Ann Rev Biomed Eng 1:299–329. Scholar
  86. Xia T et al (2008) Comparison of the mechanism of toxicity of zinc oxide and cerium oxide nanoparticles based on dissolution and oxidative stress properties. ACS Nano 2:2121–2134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Yang L, Chu JS, Fix JA (2002) Colon-specific drug delivery: new approaches and in vitro/in vivo evaluation. Int J Pharm 235:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Yang Y-H, Aloysius H, Inoyama D, Chen Y, Hu L-Q (2011) Enzyme-mediated hydrolytic activation of prodrugs. Acta Pharm Sin B 1:143–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Yi Q, Sukhorukov GB (2014) UV light stimulated encapsulation and release by polyelectrolyte microcapsules. Adv Coll Interface Sci 207:280–289. Scholar
  90. Yousuf MA et al (2013) Caveolin-1 associated adenovirus entry into human corneal cells. PLOS ONE 8:e77462. Scholar
  91. Zhang Y, Yu J, Bomba HN, Zhu Y, Gu Z (2016) Mechanical force-triggered drug delivery. Chem Rev 116:12536–12563. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Guangdong Province Key Laboratory for Green Processing of Natural Products and Product Safety, School of Food Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education Engineering Research Center of Starch and Protein ProcessingSouth China University of TechnologyGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.International Institute for Nanocomposites Manufacturing (IINM), WMGUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations