Esther Kneepkens1, Adriana Fernandes2, Klaas Nicolay3, and Holger Grüll3,4
1Biomedical NMR, Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal, 3Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 4Philips Research, Eindhoven, Netherlands
Synopsis
The aim of this study was to investigate the potential
of Fe(III) N-succinyl deferoxamine (Fe-SDFO) as a safe T1 contrast
agent for encapsulation in temperature
sensitive liposomes (TSLs) in order to visualize drug release from TSLs when
using Magnetic Resonance-guided High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (MR-HIFU). Two TSLs were developed that contained either
Fe-SDFO or doxorubicin. Both TSLs showed suitable release and stability
characteristics in vitro. An in
vivo proof-of-concept study was carried out in tumor-bearing rats treated
with MR-HIFU. Treated tumors showed an increase in R1 and future
work aims to correlate the R1 change with tumor drug
concentrations.Introduction
For malignant lesions, the combination of a local temperature increase
inflicted by High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) and temperature sensitive
liposomes (TSL) enables a triggered drug release confined to the disease site,
thereby limiting side effects. Co-release of an MR
contrast agent (CA) allows for indirect imaging of the drug release with MR, providing
an indirect assessment of the HIFU treatment.
1 However, liposome encapsulation of commonly used Gd-based MR-CA leads
to prolonged retention times in the liver and spleen, increasing the risk on nephrogenic
systemic fibrosis.
2 In this study an Fe-deferoxamine
derivative is proposed as a safe alternative T
1- CA for TSL
encapsulation.
Materials and Methods
In vitro: TSLs were prepared using
DPPC, DSPC, cholesterol, DPPE-PEG2000 (61:14:15:3 molar
ratio). They were either actively loaded with
doxorubicin (dox) or passively loaded with Fe(III) N-succinyl Deferoxamine (Fe-SDFO, synthetized by SyMO-Chem, the Netherlands)3. TSLs were characterized by Dynamic Light Scattering, Differential
Scanning Calorimetry and Inductive Coupled Plasma-Optical Emission Spectroscopy.
Release assays were carried out in Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS) at 37, 40 and 42˚C either fluorometrically (dox) or by measuring the longitudinal
relaxivity r1 at 1.41T (Fe-SDFO).
In vivo: 9L glioma tumors were
inoculated subcutaneously on the hind limb of Fisher 344 rats. The
tumor-bearing animals were placed into a rat MR-HIFU setup in a clinical Philips
3T Sonalleve® MR-HIFU system4. Animals were divided
into a MR-HIFU treatment group (n = 4) and a non-treated control group (n = 3).
All animals were injected i.v. with a mixture of TSLs encapsulating dox and Fe-SDFO (5 mg/kg and 79 μg/kg respectively) just prior
to MR-HIFU or control treatment. The MR-HIFU treatment consisted of two
sonication periods of 10-15 minutes each (acoustic power 9 – 15 W, acoustic
frequency 1.44 MHz) to reach and maintain
a tumor temperature of 42˚C. Tumor temperature changes were monitored by proton
resonance frequency shift MR thermometry. T1 maps were acquired
before and after the two hyperthermia treatments or at corresponding time
points for the control animals, using a single slice Look Locker sequence (Figure 1).
Results
The characteristics of both dox TSLs and Fe-SDFO TSLs are
summarized in Figure 2 and were considered comparable and suitable for in vivo application. Both TSLs showed a fast release at 42˚C (Figure 3). 90 ± 4 % of the dox was released within 2 min,
compared to a release of 80 ± 4% of the Fe-SDFO. At 37 ˚C, the dox TSLs
showed no release over 1.5 h, while the Fe-SDFO TSLs showed a slight release
of 15 ± 11%. At 1.41T, unheated Fe-SDFO TSLs displayed an longitudinal relaxation rate r1
of 0.80 ± 0.01 mM-1s-1. After 60 min at 42 ˚C, r1
increased to 1.35 ± 0.02 mM-1s-1.
T1 maps obtained before and at various time points after TSL
injection are shown in Figure 4. All treated tumors showed a contrast change upon the heat treatment (Figure 4, ΔR1 = 0.18 ± 0.10
s-1). In the non-treated tumors, the average change in R1
change was much smaller (Figure 4, ΔR1
= 0.028 ± 0.007 s-1). Strikingly, the R1 change
across the treated tumors was homogeneous
in some (animal 2, animal 4, Figure 4), while very inhomogeneous in others
(animals 1 and 3, Figure 4), suggesting untreated tumor areas in the latter.
Discussion and Conclusion
Dox-loaded TSLs and Fe-SDFO loaded TSLs were characterized in vitro,
showing the potential of this combined system for MR-guided triggered drug
release, even though the r
1 of the proposed CA is around a factor 3
lower than that of more commonly used Gd-based CA.
1 An in vivo proof-of-concept study was
conducted to assess the feasibility of monitoring drug release using the newly
designed drug and CA loaded TSL systems. Treated tumors showed an increase in R
1
while the R
1 of the untreated control tumors remained essentially
unchanged. Moreover, the pattern of R
1 change could elucidate the
pattern of drug release across the tumor. Future work aims to correlate the dox delivery to the tumors with the observed R
1
changes.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by NanoNextNL, a micro and nanotechnology
consortium of the Government of the Netherlands and 130 partners.
References
1.Smet, M. De, et al. J.
Control. Release 150, 102–110 (2011), 2.MacNeil, S. et al. Invest.
Radiol. 46, 711–7 (2011), 3.
Muetterties, K. a. et al. Magn. Reson. Med. 22, 88–100
(1991). 4.Hijnen, N. M. et al. Int. J. Hyperthermia 28, 141–55 (2012).