Review

Nanomedicines in oral cancer: inspiration comes from extracellular vesicles and biomimetic nanoparticles

The State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Basic Science of Stomatology (Hubei-MOST) & Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China

Search for more papers by this author

Xue-Qiong Zhang

School of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering & Life Sciences, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, 430070, China

Search for more papers by this author

Xiao-Jie Chen

**Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: chenxiaojie-whu@whu.edu.cn

Department of Oral Medicine, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China

Search for more papers by this author

Gang Zhou

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: zhougang@whu.edu.cn

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4988-0814

Department of Oral Medicine, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:17 Jan 2023https://doi.org/10.2217/nnm-2022-0142

View article

Abstract

Oral cancer is a common life-threatening malignancy having high mortality and morbidity rates. During the treatment process, individuals unavoidably experience severe side effects. It is essential to develop safer and more effective strategies. Currently, extracellular vesicles (EVs) and biomimetic nanoparticles are nanomedicines with long-term blood circulation and lower off-target toxicity that orchestrate immune responses and accumulate specifically in tumor sites. EVs create a synergetic effect by encapsulating drugs and collaborating with naturally loaded elements in the EVs. Biomimetic nanoparticles retain the characteristic features of the synthetic nanocarriers and inherit the intrinsic cell membrane functionalities. This review outlines the properties, applications, challenges, pros and cons of EVs and biomimetic nanoparticles, providing novel perspectives on oral cancer.

Plain language summary

This review explains how extracellular vesicles (EVs) and biomimetic nanoparticles are emerging as nanomedicines applied in oral cancer. EVs are phospholipid bilayer vesicles, mainly including exosomes and microvesicles, responsible for intercellular communication and cargo transport. EVs can carry RNA, metabolites and other molecular payloads. Biomimetic nanomedicines are synthetic nanoparticles coated with the parent or host cell membrane to escape the immune system and elevate targeting ability. Various cell membranes have been used for camouflaging nanoparticles, such as red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, mesenchymal stem cells and cancer cell membranes. During the treatment process, individuals unavoidably experience severe side effects. It is essential to develop safer and more effective strategies. Currently, EVs and biomimetic nanoparticles are nanomedicines with long-term blood circulation and lower off-target toxicity that orchestrate immune responses and accumulate specifically in tumor sites. EVs create a synergetic effect by encapsulating drugs and collaborating with naturally loaded elements in the EVs. Biomimetic nanoparticles retain the characteristic features of the synthetic nanocarriers and inherit the intrinsic cell membrane functionalities. This review outlines the properties, applications, challenges, pros and cons of EVs and biomimetic nanoparticles, providing novel perspectives on oral cancer.

Graphical abstract

Outlines of extracellular vesicles and biomimetic nanomedicines in oral cancer.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

1. Burtness B, Haddad R, Dinis J et al. Afatinib vs placebo as adjuvant therapy after chemoradiotherapy in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 5(8), 1170–1180 (2019). • Summarizing the occurrence, development and treatment status of oral cancer.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J. Clin. 70(1), 7–30 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Morris LGT, Chandramohan R, West L et al. The molecular landscape of recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancers: insights from a precision oncology sequencing platform. JAMA Oncol. 3(2), 244–255 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
4. Papillon-Cavanagh S, Lu C, Gayden T et al. Impaired H3k36 methylation defines a subset of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Nat. Genet. 49(2), 180–185 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
5. Chi AC, Day TA, Neville BW. Oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma – an update. CA Cancer J. Clin. 65(5), 401–421 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6. Chow LQM. Head and neck cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 382(1), 60–72 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7. Castellsagué X, Alemany L, Quer M et al. HPV involvement in head and neck cancers: comprehensive assessment of biomarkers in 3680 patients. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 108(6), djv403 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8. Marcazzan S, Varoni EM, Blanco E, Lodi G, Ferrari M. Nanomedicine, an emerging therapeutic strategy for oral cancer therapy. Oral Oncol. 76, 1–7 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9. Bau DT, Lippman SM, Xu E et al. Short telomere lengths in peripheral blood leukocytes are associated with an increased risk of oral premalignant lesion and oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer 119(24), 4277–4283 (2013). • Intractable issues and solutions in oral cancer management.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
10. Raza F, Zafar H, You X et al. Cancer nanomedicine: focus on recent developments and self-assembled peptide nanocarriers. J. Mater. Chem. B 7(48), 7639–7655 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
11. Johnson DE, Burtness B, Leemans CR et al. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers 6(1), 92 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12. Vermorken JB, Trigo J, Hitt R et al. Open-label, uncontrolled, multicenter phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of cetuximab as a single agent in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who failed to respond to platinum-based therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 25(16), 2171–2177 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13. Cohen RB. Current challenges and clinical investigations of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)- and ErbB family-targeted agents in the treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Cancer Treat. Rev. 40(4), 567–577 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14. Shi J, Kantoff PW, Wooster R, Farokhzad OC. Cancer nanomedicine: progress, challenges and opportunities. Nat. Rev. Cancer 17(1), 20–37 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Jain V, Kumar H, Anod HV et al. A review of nanotechnology-based approaches for breast cancer and triple-negative breast cancer. J. Control. Rel. 326, 628–647 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16. Chen XJ, Zhang XQ, Liu Q, Zhang J, Zhou G. Nanotechnology: a promising method for oral cancer detection and diagnosis. J. Nanobiotechnol. 16(1), 52 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
17. Shi X, Zhang CY, Gao J, Wang Z. Recent advances in photodynamic therapy for cancer and infectious diseases. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 11(5), e1560 (2019). • Summarizing the properties, applications and disadvantages of nanomedicine in oral cancer.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
18. Neville BW, Day TA. Oral cancer and precancerous lesions. CA Cancer J. Clin. 52(4), 195–215 (2002).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
19. Rosenblum D, Joshi N, Tao W, Karp JM, Peer D. Progress and challenges towards targeted delivery of cancer therapeutics. Nat. Commun. 9(1), 1410 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
20. Birrer MJ, Moore KN, Betella I, Bates RC. Antibody-drug conjugate-based therapeutics: state of the science. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 111(6), 538–549 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
21. Liu J, Huang Y, Kumar A et al. pH-sensitive nano-systems for drug delivery in cancer therapy. Biotechnol. Adv. 32(4), 693–710 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22. Zeng Y, Ma J, Zhan Y et al. Hypoxia-activated prodrugs and redox-responsive nanocarriers. Int. J. Nanomed. 13, 6551–6574 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Raza F, Zafar H, Khan MW et al. Recent advances in the targeted delivery of paclitaxel nanomedicine for cancer therapy. Mater. Adv. 3(5), 2268–2290 (2022). • Necessity of extracellular vesicles and biomimetic nanomedicines for oral cancer treatment.
CASGoogle Scholar
24. Bie N, Yong T, Wei Z, Gan L, Yang X. Extracellular vesicles for improved tumour accumulation and penetration. Adv. Drug. Deliv. Rev. 188, 114450 (2022).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25. Kim OY, Lee J, Gho YS. Extracellular vesicle mimetics: novel alternatives to extracellular vesicle-based theranostics, drug delivery, and vaccines. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 67, 74–82 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26. Hussain Z, Rahim MA, Jan N et al. Cell membrane cloaked nanomedicines for bio-imaging and immunotherapy of cancer: improved pharmacokinetics, cell internalization and anticancer efficacy. J. Control. Rel. 335, 130–157 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Cao H, Dan Z, He X et al. Liposomes coated with isolated macrophage membrane can target lung metastasis of breast cancer. ACS Nano. 10(8), 7738–7748 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Cheng Y, Chen Q, Guo Z et al. An intelligent biomimetic nanoplatform for holistic treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer via photothermal ablation and immune remodeling. ACS Nano 14(11), 15161–15181 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
29. Ma W, Zhu D, Li J et al. Coating biomimetic nanoparticles with chimeric antigen receptor T cell-membrane provides high specificity for hepatocellular carcinoma photothermal therapy treatment. Theranostics 10(3), 1281–1295 (2020). • Evolution of extracellular vesicle nanoparticles for oral cancer.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
30. Eguchi T, Taha EA, Calderwood SK, Ono K. A novel model of cancer drug resistance: oncosomal release of cytotoxic and antibody-based drugs. Biology (Basel) 9(3), 47 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
31. Song W, Musetti SN, Huang L. Nanomaterials for cancer immunotherapy. Biomaterials 148, 16–30 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Ono K, Eguchi T, Sogawa C et al. HSP-enriched properties of extracellular vesicles involve survival of metastatic oral cancer cells. J. Cell. Biochem. 119(9), 7350–7362 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Kosaka N. Decoding the secret of cancer by means of extracellular vesicles. J. Clin. Med. 5(2), 22 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Lombardi M, Parolisi R, Scaroni F et al. Detrimental and protective action of microglial extracellular vesicles on myelin lesions: astrocyte involvement in remyelination failure. Acta Neuropathol. 138(6), 987–1012 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
35. Wang L, Yin P, Wang J et al. Delivery of mesenchymal stem cells-derived extracellular vesicles with enriched miR-185 inhibits progression of OPMD. Artif. Cells Nanomed. Biotechnol. 47(1), 2481–2491 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36. Qiu Y, Sun J, Qiu J et al. Antitumor activity of cabazitaxel and MSC-TRAIL derived extracellular vesicles in drug-resistant oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Manag. Res. 12, 10809–10820 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Li L, Lu S, Liang X et al. γδTDEs: an efficient delivery system for miR-138 with anti-tumoral and immunostimulatory roles on oral squamous cell carcinoma. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 14, 101–113 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38. Zhu G, Cao B, Liang X et al. Small extracellular vesicles containing miR-192/215 mediate hypoxia-induced cancer-associated fibroblast development in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Lett. 506, 11–22 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Yang Z, Liu D, Zhou H et al. A new nanomaterial based on extracellular vesicles containing chrysin-induced cell apoptosis through let-7a in tongue squamous cell carcinoma. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9, 766380 (2021). • Summarizing the properties and applications of exosome nanoparticles for oral cancer.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
40. Li S, Yi M, Dong B et al. The roles of exosomes in cancer drug resistance and its therapeutic application. Clin. Transl. Med. 10(8), e257 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41. Peng Q, Yang JY, Zhou G. Emerging functions and clinical applications of exosomes in human oral diseases. Cell Biosci. 10, 68 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42. Jin J, Li X, Hu B et al. Foxo1 deficiency impairs proteostasis in aged T cells. Sci. Adv. 6(17), eaba1808 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
43. Tai YL, Chen KC, Hsieh JT, Shen TL. Exosomes in cancer development and clinical applications. Cancer Sci. 109(8), 2364–2374 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44. Yin Z, Yu M, Ma T et al. Mechanisms underlying low-clinical responses to PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies in immunotherapy of cancer: a key role of exosomal PD-L1. J. Immunother. Cancer 9(1), e001698 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
45. Chen G, Huang AC, Zhang W et al. Exosomal PD-L1 contributes to immunosuppression and is associated with anti-PD-1 response. Nature 560(7718), 382–386 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
46. Wu M, Chen Z, Xie Q et al. One-step quantification of salivary exosomes based on combined aptamer recognition and quantum dot signal amplification. Biosens. Bioelectron. 171, 112733 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
47. Sharma S, Masud MK, Kaneti YV et al. Extracellular vesicle nanoarchitectonics for novel drug delivery applications. Small 17(42), e2102220 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
48. Li YY, Tao YW, Gao S et al. Cancer-associated fibroblasts contribute to oral cancer cells proliferation and metastasis via exosome-mediated paracrine miR-34a-5p. EBioMedicine 36, 209–220 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
49. Ludwig N, Yerneni SS, Razzo BM, Whiteside TL. Exosomes from HNSCC promote angiogenesis through reprogramming of endothelial cells. Mol. Cancer Res. 16(11), 1798–1808 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
50. Qin X, Guo H, Wang X et al. Exosomal miR-196a derived from cancer-associated fibroblasts confers cisplatin resistance in head and neck cancer through targeting CDKN1B and ING5. Genome Biol. 20(1), 12 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
51. Xie C, Du LY, Guo F, Li X, Cheng B. Exosomes derived from microRNA-101-3p-overexpressing human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells suppress oral cancer cell proliferation, invasion, and migration. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 458(1-2), 11–26 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
52. Sun LP, Xu K, Cui J et al. Cancer-associated fibroblast-derived exosomal miR-382-5p promotes the migration and invasion of oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oncol. Rep. 42(4), 1319–1328 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
53. Chen JH, Wu ATH, Bamodu OA et al. Ovatodiolide suppresses oral cancer malignancy by down-regulating exosomal miR-21/STAT3/β-catenin cargo and preventing oncogenic transformation of normal gingival fibroblasts. Cancers (Basel) 12(1), 56 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
54. Li L, Li C, Wang S et al. Exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma cells deliver miR-21 to normoxic cells to elicit a prometastatic phenotype. Cancer Res. 76(7), 1770–1780 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
55. Sakha S, Muramatsu T, Ueda K, Inazawa J. Exosomal microRNA miR-1246 induces cell motility and invasion through the regulation of DENND2D in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Sci. Rep. 6, 38750 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
56. Wang Y, Qin X, Zhu X et al. Oral cancer-derived exosomal NAP1 enhances cytotoxicity of natural killer cells via the IRF-3 pathway. Oral Oncol. 76, 34–41 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
57. Wang X, Qin X, Yan M et al. Loss of exosomal miR-3188 in cancer-associated fibroblasts contributes to HNC progression. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 38(1), 151 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
58. Cai J, Qiao B, Gao N, Lin N, He W. Oral squamous cell carcinoma-derived exosomes promote M2 subtype macrophage polarization mediated by exosome-enclosed miR-29a-3p. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 316(5), c731–c740 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
59. Wang L, Song Y, Wang H et al. miR-210-3p-Ephrina3-PI3K/Akt axis regulates the progression of oral cancer. J. Cell Mol. Med. 24(7), 4011–4022 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
60. Higaki M, Shintani T, Hamada A, Rosli SNZ, Okamoto T. Eldecalcitol (ED-71)-induced exosomal miR-6887-5p suppresses squamous cell carcinoma cell growth by targeting heparin-binding protein 17/fibroblast growth factor-binding protein-1 (HBp17/FGFBP-1). In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Anim. 56(3), 222–233 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
61. Luo Y, Liu F, Guo J, Gui R. Upregulation of circ_0000199 in circulating exosomes is associated with survival outcome in OSCC. Sci. Rep. 10(1), 13739 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
62. Zhang Y, Tang K, Chen L, Du M, Qu Z. Exosomal circGDI2 suppresses oral squamous cell carcinoma progression through the regulation of miR-424-5p/SCAI axis. Cancer Manag. Res. 12, 7501–7514 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
63. Tong F, Mao X, Zhang S et al. HPV + HNSCC-derived exosomal miR-9 induces macrophage M1 polarization and increases tumour radiosensitivity. Cancer Lett. 478, 34–44 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
64. Cui J, Wang H, Zhang X et al. Exosomal miR-200c suppresses chemoresistance of docetaxel in tongue squamous cell carcinoma by suppressing TUBB3 and PPP2R1B. Aging 12(8), 6756–6773 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
65. Pang X, Wang SS, Zhang M et al. OSCC cell-secreted exosomal CMTM6 induced M2-like macrophages polarization via ERK1/2 signaling pathway. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 70(4), 1015–1029 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
66. Yan W, Wang Y, Chen Y et al. Exosomal miR-130b-3p promotes progression and tubular formation through targeting Pten in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 9, 616306 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
67. He S, Zhang W, Li X et al. Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)-derived exosomal miR-221 targets and regulates phosphoinositide-3-kinase regulatory subunit 1 (PIK3R1) to promote human umbilical vein endothelial cells migration and tube formation. Bioengineered 12(1), 2164–2174 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
68. Fujiwara T, Eguchi T, Sogawa C et al. Carcinogenic epithelial–mesenchymal transition initiated by oral cancer exosomes is inhibited by anti-EGFR antibody cetuximab. Oral Oncol. 86, 251–257 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
69. Kase Y, Uzawa K, Wagai S et al. Engineered exosomes delivering specific tumour-suppressive RNAi attenuate oral cancer progression. Sci. Rep. 11(1), 5897 (2021). • Summarizing the properties and applications of microvesicle nanoparticles for oral cancer.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
70. Chen G, Zhu JY, Zhang ZL et al. Transformation of cell-derived microparticles into quantum-dot-labeled nanovectors for antitumor siRNA delivery. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 54(3), 1036–1040 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
71. Huaitong X, Yuanyong F, Yueqin T et al. Microvesicles releasing by oral cancer cells enhance endothelial cell angiogenesis via Shh/RhoA signaling pathway. Cancer Biol. Ther. 18(10), 783–791 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
72. Zhu L, Dong D, Yu ZL et al. Folate-engineered microvesicles for enhanced target and synergistic therapy toward breast cancer. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 9(6), 5100–5108 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
73. Guo M, Xia C, Wu Y et al. Research progress on cell membrane-coated biomimetic delivery systems. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9, 772522 (2021). • Summarizing the properties and applications of immune cell membrane-coated biomimetic nanoparticles for oral cancer.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
74. Luk BT, Zhang L. Cell membrane-camouflaged nanoparticles for drug delivery. J. Control. Rel. 220(Pt B), 600–607 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
75. Rodriguez PL, Harada T, Christian DA et al. Minimal “self” peptides that inhibit phagocytic clearance and enhance delivery of nanoparticles. Science 339(6122), 971–975 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
76. Feng M, Jiang W, Kim BYS et al. Phagocytosis checkpoints as new targets for cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 19(10), 568–586 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
77. Ye X, Zhang J, Lu R, Zhou G. Signal regulatory protein associated with the progression of oral leukoplakia and oral squamous cell carcinoma regulates phenotype switch of macrophages. Oncotarget 7(49), 81305–81321 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
78. Kang T, Zhu Q, Wei D et al. Nanoparticles coated with neutrophil membranes can effectively treat cancer metastasis. ACS Nano 11(2), 1397–1411 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
79. Krishnamurthy S, Gnanasammandhan MK, Xie C et al. Monocyte cell membrane-derived nanoghosts for targeted cancer therapy. Nanoscale 8(13), 6981–6985 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
80. Song K, Zhu F, Zhang HZ, Shang ZJ. Tumour necrosis factor-α enhanced fusions between oral squamous cell carcinoma cells and endothelial cells via VCAM-1/VLA-4 pathway. Exp. Cell Res. 318(14), 1707–1715 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
81. He H, Guo C, Wang J et al. Leutusome: a biomimetic nanoplatform integrating plasma membrane components of leukocytes and tumour cells for remarkably enhanced solid tumour homing. Nano Lett. 18(10), 6164–6174 (2018). • Summarizing the properties and applications of erythrocyte membrane-coated biomimetic nanoparticles for oral cancer.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
82. Castro F, Martins C, Silveira MJ et al. Advances on erythrocyte-mimicking nanovehicles to overcome barriers in biological microenvironments. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 170, 312–339 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
83. Chen S, Zhong Y, Fan W et al. Enhanced tumour penetration and prolonged circulation in blood of polyzwitterion-drug conjugates with cell-membrane affinity. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5(9), 1019–1037 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
84. Li Y, Raza F, Liu Y et al. Clinical progress and advanced research of red blood cells based drug delivery system. Biomaterials 279, 121202 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
85. Raza F, Zafar H, Zhang S et al. Recent advances in cell membrane-derived biomimetic nanotechnology for cancer immunotherapy. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 10(6), e2002081 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
86. Zhao Y, Wang J, Cai X et al. Metal-organic frameworks with enhanced photodynamic therapy: synthesis, erythrocyte membrane camouflage, and aptamer-targeted aggregation. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12(21), 23697–23706 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
87. Chen H, Deng J, Yao X et al. Bone-targeted erythrocyte-cancer hybrid membrane-camouflaged nanoparticles for enhancing photothermal and hypoxia-activated chemotherapy of bone invasion by OSCC. J. Nanobiotechnol. 19(1), 342 (2021). • Summarizing the properties and applications of cancer cell membrane-coated biomimetic nanoparticles for oral cancer.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
88. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 144(5), 646–674 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
89. O'Donnell JS, Teng MWL, Smyth MJ. Cancer immunoediting and resistance to T cell-based immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 16(3), 151–167 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
90. Ye X, Wang X, Lu R et al. CD47 as a potential prognostic marker for oral leukoplakia and oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oncol. Lett. 15(6), 9075–9080 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
91. Ye XJ, Yang JG, Tan YQ, Chen XJ, Zhou G. Targeting CD47 inhibits tumour development and increases phagocytosis in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Anticancer Agents Med. Chem. 21(6), 766–774 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
92. Sultan AS, Xie J, LeBaron MJ et al. STAT5 promotes homotypic adhesion and inhibits invasive characteristics of human breast cancer cells. Oncogene 24(5), 746–760 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
93. Rao L, Bu LL, Cai B et al. Cancer cell membrane-coated upconversion nanoprobes for highly specific tumour imaging. Adv. Mater. 28(18), 3460–3466 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
94. Rao L, He Z, Meng QF et al. Effective cancer targeting and imaging using macrophage membrane-camouflaged upconversion nanoparticles. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 105(2), 521–530 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
95. Rao L, Yu GT, Meng QF et al. Cancer cell membrane-coated nanoparticles for personalized therapy in patient-derived xenograft models. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29(51), 1905671 (2019). • Summarizing the properties and applications of platelet-coated biomimetic nanoparticles for oral cancer.
CASGoogle Scholar
96. Versteeg HH, Heemskerk JW, Levi M, Reitsma PH. New fundamentals in hemostasis. Physiol. Rev. 93(1), 327–358 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
97. Harker LA, Roskos LK, Marzec UM et al. Effects of megakaryocyte growth and development factor on platelet production, platelet life span, and platelet function in healthy human volunteers. Blood 95(8), 2514–2522 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
98. Geranpayehvaghei M, Dabirmanesh B, Khaledi M et al. Cancer-associated platelet-inspired nanomedicines for cancer therapy. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 13(5), e1702 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
99. Hu Q, Sun W, Qian C et al. Anticancer platelet-mimicking nanovehicles. Adv. Mater. 27(44), 7043–7050 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
100. Li J, Ai Y, Wang L et al. Targeted drug delivery to circulating tumour cells via platelet membrane-functionalized particles. Biomaterials 76, 52–65 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
101. Dehaini D, Wei X, Fang RH et al. Erythrocyte-platelet hybrid membrane coating for enhanced nanoparticle functionalization. Adv. Mater. 29(16), 1606209 (2017).
Google Scholar
102. Rao L, Bu LL, Ma L et al. Platelet-facilitated photothermal therapy of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 57(4), 986–991 (2018). • Summarizing the properties and applications of mesenchymal stem cell-coated biomimetic nanoparticles for oral cancer.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
103. Friedenstein AJ, Deriglasova UF, Kulagina NN et al. Precursors for fibroblasts in different populations of hematopoietic cells as detected by the in vitro colony assay method. Exp. Hematol. 2(2), 83–92 (1974).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
104. Wu HH, Zhou Y, Tabata Y, Gao JQ. Mesenchymal stem cell-based drug delivery strategy: from cells to biomimetic. J. Control. Rel. 294, 102–113 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
105. Bu L-L, Rao L, Yu G-T et al. Cancer stem cell-platelet hybrid membrane-coated magnetic nanoparticles for enhanced photothermal therapy of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29(10), 1807733 (2019).
Google Scholar
106. Zhou D, Chen Y, Bu W et al. Modification of metal-organic framework nanoparticles using dental pulp mesenchymal stem cell membranes to target oral squamous cell carcinoma. J. Colloid. Interface Sci. 601, 650–660 (2021). • Speculating about other potential extracellular vesicles and biomimetic nanoparticles.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
107. Alanazi SA, Alanazi F, Haq N et al. Lipoproteins-nanocarriers as a promising approach for targeting liver cancer: present status and application prospects. Curr. Drug Deliv. 17(10), 826–844 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
108. Angsantikul P, Thamphiwatana S, Zhang Q et al. Coating nanoparticles with gastric epithelial cell membrane for targeted antibiotic delivery against Helicobacter pylori infection. Adv. Ther. (Weinh) 1(2), 1800016 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
109. Chen Z, Wang Z, Gu Z. Bioinspired and biomimetic nanomedicines. Acc. Chem. Res. 52(5), 1255–1264 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
110. Wang Y, Zhou XM, Ma X et al. Construction of nanodroplet/adiposome and artificial lipid droplets. ACS Nano 10(3), 3312–3322 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar

Vol. 17, No. 23

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 428 times

History

Received 3 June 2022

Accepted 28 November 2022

Published online 17 January 2023

Published in print October 2022

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/nnm-2022-0142

Author contributions

YT Bai designed the experiment and drafted the manuscript. XJ Chen and G Zhou helped with manuscript editing. XJ Chen, XQ Zhang and G Zhou reviewed the manuscript drafts. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation (no. 82101023) to XJ Chen and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 81970949 and 82270983) to G Zhou. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

Writing disclosure

Medical writing support was provided by MogoEdit.

PDF download