A Design-Conversed Strategy Establishes the Performance Safe Space for Doxorubicin Nanosimilars.

Nanomedicines exhibit multifaceted performances, yet their biopharmaceutics remain poorly understood and present several challenges in the translation from preclinical to clinical research. To address this issue and promote the production of high-quality nanomedicines, a systematic screening of the design space and in vivo performance is necessary. Establishing formulation performance specifications early on enables an informed selection of candidates and promotes the development of nanosimilars. The deconvolution of the pharmacokinetics enables the identification of key characteristics that influence their performances and disposition. Using an in vitro-in vivo rank-order relationship for doxorubicin nanoformulations, we defined in vitro release specifications for Doxil/Caelyx-like follow-on products. Additionally, our model predictions were used to establish the bioequivalence of Lipodox, a nanosimilar of Doxil/Caelyx. Furthermore, a virtual safe space was established, providing crucial insights into expected disposition kinetics and informing formulation development. By addressing bottlenecks in biopharmaceutics and formulation screening, our research advances the translation of nanomedicine from bench to bedside.

Injectable drug delivery systems of doxorubicin revisited: In vitro-in vivo relationships using human clinical data.

A growing number of nanomedicines entered the clinical trials and improved our understanding of the in vivo responses expected in humans. The in vitro drug release represents an important critical quality attribute involved in pharmacokinetics. Establishing in vitro-in vivo relationships for nanomedicines requires a careful analysis of the clinical data with respect to the unique differences between drugs and nanomedicines. Also, the biorelevant assay must reflect the release mechanism of the carrier. Four drug delivery systems of doxorubicin were evaluated for their in vitro release behavior under biorelevant conditions using the dispersion releaser. The pharmacokinetics observed during the first-in-men clinical trials were analyzed using a custom-made physiologically-based nanocarrier biopharmaceutics model. The drug product Lipodox® and the clinical candidate NanoCore-7.4 were evaluated to validate the model. Afterward, the in vivo performances of the preclinical candidates NanoCore-6.4 and doxorubicin-loaded nano-cellular vesicle technology systems (an extracellular vesicle preparation) were predicted. In vitro and in vivo release were in good correlation as indicated by the coefficients of determination of 0.98648 (NanoCore-7.4) and 0.94107 (Lipodox®). The predictions required an estimation of the carrier half-life in blood circulation leading to considerable uncertainty. Still, the simulations narrow down the possible scenarios in the clinical evaluation of nanomedicines and provide a valuable addition to animal studies.

Triple negative breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer: Clinical challenges and nano-formulation approaches.

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are amongst the most aggressive forms of solid tumors. TNBC is highlighted by absence of genetic components of progesterone receptor, HER2/neu and estrogen receptor in breast cancer. NSCLC is characterized by integration of malignant carcinoma into respiratory system. Both cancers are associated with poor median and overall survival rates with low progression free survival with high incidences of relapse. These cancers are characterized by tumor heterogeneity, genetic mutations, generation of cancer-stem cells, immune-resistance and chemoresistance. Further, these neoplasms have been reported for tumor cross-talk into second primary cancers for each other. Current chemotherapeutic regimens include usage of multiple agents in tandem to affect tumor cells through multiple mechanisms with various such combinations being clinically tested. However, lack of controlled delivery and effective temporospatial presence of chemotherapeutics has resulted in suboptimal therapeutic response. Consequently, passive targeted albumin bound paclitaxel and PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin have been clinically used and tested with newer drugs for improved therapeutic efficacy in these cancers. Active targeting of nanocarriers against surface overexpressed proteins in both neoplasms have been explored. However, use of single agent nanoparticulate formulations against both cancers have failed to elicit desired outcomes. This review aims to identify clinical unmet need in these cancers while establishing a correlation with tested nano-formulation approaches and issues with preclinical to clinical translation. Lipid and polymer-based drug-drug and drug-gene combinatorial nanocarriers delivering multiple chemotherapeutics simultaneously to desired site of action have been detailed. Finally, emerging opportunities such as pharmacological targets (immune check point and epigentic modulators) as well as gene-based modulation (siRNA/CRISPR/Cas9) and the nano-formulation challenges for effective treatment of both cancers have been explored.

Synergistic co-loading of vincristine improved chemotherapeutic potential of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin against triple negative breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer.

The current work aims to explore the biological characteristics of vincristine synergistic co-loading into pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in non-indicated modalities of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). The combinatorial liposome prepared by active co-loading of the drugs against modified ammonium ion gradient exhibited 95% encapsulation of both drugs. The cellular uptake studies using confocal microscopy and flow cytometry showed significantly increased uptake of dual drug formulation as against liposomal doxorubicin. The co-loaded liposome formulation had significantly increased cell cycle arrest in G2/M phase with subsequent apoptosis and reduced cell viability in both tumor cell lines than doxorubicin liposome. This carrier exhibited similar acute toxicity, pharmacokinetic and tissue distribution profiles with significant increase in tumor regression as compared to liposomal doxorubicin. These results indicate that co-encapsulation of vincristine into clinically used pegylated liposomal doxorubicin significantly improved in-vitro and in-vivo therapeutic efficacy against NSCLC and TNBC.

Optimization and efficacy study of synergistic vincristine coloaded liposomal doxorubicin against breast and lung cancer.

Aim: To improve the efficacy of poly-ethylene glycol (PEG)ylated liposomes coloaded with doxorubicin and vincristine against triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: The combinatorial index of the drugs was established using the Chou-Talalay method in MDA-MB-231 and A549 cell lines. The most effective ratio was co-encapsulated in factorial design optimized nanoliposomes which were characterized for similarity to clinical standard and evaluated in vitro and in vivo for therapeutic efficacy. Results & conclusion: The formulation exhibited more than 95% co-encapsulation, a size of 95.74 ± 2.65 nm and zeta potential of -9.17 ± 1.19 mV while having no significant differences in physicochemical and biochemical characteristics as compared with the clinical standard. Efficacy evaluation studies showed significantly improved cytotoxicity and tumor regression compared with liposomal doxorubicin indicating improvement in efficacy against TNBC and NSCLC.

Surface engineered liposomal delivery of therapeutics across the blood brain barrier: recent advances, challenges and opportunities.

Introduction: The delivery of drug payload to treat various brain diseases are met with various hindrances owing to the presence of the homeostasis regulatory gate, Blood-Brain Barrier (BBB). Although, pathogenesis and progression of the brain diseases alter the permeability of this barrier, effective delivery of agents is not achieved for the attainment of desired treatment outcomes. Liposomes with their salient properties have proven to be exciting options to navigate therapeutics across this barrier.Areas covered: This review tends to establish a correlation between the pathophysiology of disease affected barrier, with liposome-based passive and active delivery approaches for therapeutic agents, permitting their transport across the BBB. The potential of these carriers to present therapeutically effective agents' concentrations to the desired site of action have also been explored. Further, assessment of physicochemical, biopharmaceutical, and biological properties required for efficient translation of such carriers from bench to bedside has been made.Expert opinion: The encapsulation of the therapeutics in these structures enables suitable pro-brain delivery modifications of inherent pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic profiles along with appropriate surface engineering opportunities to deliver the drug cargo to the intended locations in the brain. However, a careful balance between the use of these surface-modified structures and toxicity potential needs to be ascertained for clinical safety and effectiveness.

Combinatorial nanocarriers against drug resistance in hematological cancers: Opportunities and emerging strategies.

Hematological cancers are a group of malignancies affecting human hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. Although the patients respond to treatment regimen during initial phases, the hematoma tumor heterogeneity results in the presence of some minimal disease residue thereby exhibiting remission, relapses or refractoriness in disease conditions leading to poor overall survival period. The current therapeutic standard practices involve blending of conventional agents with novel targeting agents or immune-therapeutics in a cocktail to effectively reap the benefits of drugs acting through multiple signaling pathways. Considerable evaluation of the risk benefit ratio on part of clinicians is necessitated to select the best optimum therapy considering the high incidences of drug resistance. This drug resistance may be attributed to faulty upregulation or mutation of multiple drug resistance regulating genes, increased tumor cell immune system cross talk, increased expression of drug efflux pump inducers and inhibition of apoptosis among others. Conventional single drug nanotherapeutics as modulators of drug resistance have already clinically exhibited their potential by passively delivering the active cargo to desired targets in hematological neoplasms. However, with the ever-growing clinical failures of such therapies, the landscape of hematological cancer treatment has seen a plethora of changes in the last few years. The two towering changes in the treatment has been the approval of combinatorial drug nanocarrier Vyxeos™ and chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy Kymriah™ as well as Yescarta™. The approval of CAR-T therapy not only resulted in a paradigm shift in the avenues of blood cancer treatment towards personalized approaches but also saddled it with questions of economic viability and effectiveness in the entire spectrum of such neoplasms. Under such conditions, combinatorial drug nanocarriers encompassing synergistic ratios of clinically effective drug combinations affording temporal and spatial control present an exciting approach to overcome these drug resistance modalities. This platform provides increased chances of therapeutic in-vitro in-vivo correlation along with minimization of drug resistance and associated disease relapse conditions. The present review intends to present the current preclinical and clinical advances in combinatorial nanocarrier mediated management of drug resistance in hematological cancers.

Two multicenter Phase I randomized trials to compare the bioequivalence and safety of a generic doxorubicin hydrochloride liposome injection with Doxil® or Caelyx® in advanced ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence and safety of a generic pegylated liposomal doxorubicin formulation (SPIL DXR hydrochloride liposome injection) with that of the reference products, Caelyx or Doxil. METHODS: Two open-label, two-way reference crossover studies were conducted in patients with ovarian cancer. Cmax, AUC0 - t, and AUC0-∞, Vd, and Cl for total, free, and encapsulated DXR were evaluated in 18 blood samples taken pre-dose (t = 0), at increasing time intervals over the following 14 days. A washout period of 28 days was observed before crossing over. RESULTS: Studies 1 and 2 were completed by 24/29 and 41/60 patients, respectively. Pharmacokinetic data from 24 patients from each study established bioequivalence for free DXR in study 2, and for total and encapsulated DXR in both studies. Data from 29 and 54 patients, respectively, were included in the safety evaluation. Of these, 37 patients experienced 81 post-dose adverse events (40 related to the test product and 41 related to the reference product). In study 1, four patients were withdrawn owing to adverse events. Eleven patients experienced serious adverse events and one death occurred in study 2. CONCLUSIONS: Bioequivalence between the test and the reference products was established for total and encapsulated DXR in both studies, and for free DXR in the study with the larger sample size (study 2). There were no significant differences between the safety profiles of the generic formulation and the reference products. No correlation was found between drug level and adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study 1 was registered retrospectively; registration number is NCT03055143, dated February 15, 2017. Study 2 registration number is NCT00862355, dated March 13, 2009.

Comparison of Physicochemical Properties of Generic Doxorubicin HCl Liposome Injection with the Reference Listed Drug.

BACKGROUND: Liposomal doxorubicin is widely used for treating ovarian cancer and Kaposi's sarcoma. Encapsulation of doxorubicin in highly complex polyethylene glycol-coated (stealth) liposomes prolongs residence time and avoids the systemic toxicity associated with administration of the free drug. Small variations in physicochemical properties introduced during manufacture of liposomes can influence the payload of encapsulated drug, stability of liposomes under physiological conditions, and release of drug at the target tissue. Accordingly, the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency have issued guidance for manufacturers of generic liposomal doxorubicin that is designed to ensure that more than 30 physicochemical parameters that influence its safety and efficacy should be similar in the generic and reference listed drugs. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the physicochemical characterization procedures used to ensure consistency between batches of generic liposomal doxorubicin and with the reference listed drug. METHODS: A range of spectroscopic, chromatographic, and other physicochemical tests was used to compare relative concentrations of liposome components, liposome morphology, ratios of free/entrapped doxorubicin, stability, and in vitro doxorubicin release rates in physiologically and clinically relevant media. RESULTS: The tests established that generic and reference liposomes contained similar concentrations of drug, lipids, and excipients and that their physical forms were also similar. CONCLUSION: The results of the tests demonstrate the physicochemical equivalence of generic liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride and the reference listed drug, Doxil®/Caelyx®. Biochemical and clinical equivalence must also be demonstrated to fully meet regulatory requirements for generic liposomal medicines, and these are the subjects of separate studies.

Lipodox® (generic doxorubicin hydrochloride liposome injection): in vivo efficacy and bioequivalence versus Caelyx® (doxorubicin hydrochloride liposome injection) in human mammary carcinoma (MX-1) xenograft and syngeneic fibrosarcoma (WEHI 164) mouse models.

BACKGROUND: Doxorubicin (DXR) hydrochloride (HCl) liposome injection is an important part of the treatment armamentarium for a number of cancers. With growing needs for affordable and effective anticancer treatments, the development of generics is becoming increasingly important to facilitate patient access to vital medications. We conducted studies in relevant mouse models of cancer to compare the preclinical antitumour efficacy and plasma pharmacokinetic profile of a proposed generic DXR HCl liposome injection developed by Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (SPIL DXR HCl liposome injection) with Caelyx® (reference DXR HCl liposome injection). METHODS: Syngeneic fibrosarcoma (WEHI 164)-bearing BALB/c mice and athymic nude mice transplanted with MX-1 human mammary carcinoma xenografts were treated with SPIL DXR HCl liposome injection, reference DXR HCl liposome injection or placebo, to compare tumour volume, antitumour activity (percentage test/control [%T/C] ratio, tumour regression, and specific tumour growth delay) and toxicity (survival and weight changes) in response to treatment. The pharmacokinetic profile of the SPIL and reference product was also studied in syngeneic fibrosarcoma-bearing mice. RESULTS: Treatment with either SPIL or reference DXR HCl liposome injection resulted in significant reduction in tumour volume from baseline in both models at all doses tested. High antitumour activity (%T/C ≤ 10) was seen from Day 21 and Day 14 onwards in SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injection-treated syngeneic fibrosarcoma-bearing mice, respectively, at 9 mg/kg. Moderate antitumour activity (%T/C ≤ 20) was seen from Day 17 and Day 24 onwards in SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injection-treated MX-1-bearing mice, respectively, at 6 mg/kg. No significant differences in tumour volume and %T/C were observed between SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injection-treated groups at any dose (p ≥ 0.05). Toxicity profiles were considered to be generally comparable. Evaluation of test/reference (A/B) ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for peak serum concentration (Cmax) and area under the curve (AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞) demonstrated bioequivalence of SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injections. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing similarity is of critical importance during the development of generic treatments. SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injections were shown to be comparable with regards to antitumour activity, toxicity and pharmacokinetics.

Comparative plasma and tissue distribution of Sun Pharma's generic doxorubicin HCl liposome injection versus Caelyx® (doxorubicin HCl liposome injection) in syngeneic fibrosarcoma-bearing BALB/c mice and Sprague-Dawley rats.

PURPOSE: The liposomal formulation of doxorubicin [doxorubicin (DXR) hydrochloride (HCl) liposome injection, Caelyx®] alters the tissue distribution of DXR as compared with nonliposomal DXR, resulting in an improved benefit-risk profile. We conducted studies in murine models to compare the plasma and tissue distribution of a proposed generic DXR HCl liposome injection developed by Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited (SPIL DXR HCl liposome injection) with Caelyx®. METHODS: The plasma and tissue distributions of the SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injections were compared in syngeneic fibrosarcoma-bearing BALB/c mice and Sprague-Dawley rats. Different batches and different lots of the same batch of the reference product were also compared with each other. RESULTS: The SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injections exhibited generally comparable plasma and tissue distribution profiles in both models. While minor differences were observed between the two products in some tissues, different batches and lots of the reference product also showed some differences in the distribution of various analytes in some tissues. The ratios of estimated free to encapsulated DXR for plasma and tissue were generally comparable between the SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injections in both models, indicating similar extents of absorption into the tissues and similar rates of drug release from liposomes. CONCLUSIONS: The plasma and tissue distribution profiles of the SPIL and reference DXR HCl liposome injections were shown to be generally comparable. Inconsistencies between the products observed in some tissues were thought to be due to biological variation.