Abstract

Cancer remains hard to treat, partially due to the non-specificity of chemotherapeutics. Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are promising carriers for targeted chemotherapy, yet, to date, there have been few detailed studies to systematically enhance drug loading while maintaining controlled release. In this work, we investigate which molecular simulation methods best capture the experimental uptake and release of cisplatin from UiO-66 and UiO-66(NH2). We then screen a series of biocompatible, pH-sensitive zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIFs) for their ability to retain cisplatin in healthy parts of the patient and release it in the vicinity of a tumor. Pure-component GCMC simulations show that the maximum cisplatin loading depends on the pore volume. To achieve this maximum loading in the presence of water, either the pore size needs to be large enough to occupy both cisplatin and its solvation shell or the MOF-cisplatin interaction must be more favorable than the cisplatin-shell interaction. Both solvated and non-solvated simulations show that cisplatin release rates can be controlled by either decreasing the pore limiting diameters or by manipulating framework-cisplatin interaction energies to create strong, dispersed adsorption sites. The latter method is preferable if cisplatin loading is performed from solution into a pre-synthesized framework as weak interaction energies and small pore window diameters will hinder cisplatin uptake. Here, ZIF-82 is most promising. If it is possible to load cisplatin during crystallization, ZIF-11 would outcompete the other MOFs screened as cisplatin cannot pass through its pore windows; therefore, release rates would be purely driven by the pH triggered framework degradation.

Highlights

  • In 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that cancer is responsible for 17% of deaths globally,1 and the number of cases are expected to rise by 2030.2 Chemotherapy is one of the primary cancer treatment methods, during which cytotoxic drugs, such as cisplatin [cis-diaminedichloroplatinum (II) (CPT)], are usually administered intravenously

  • We assessed a variety of simulation methods for their suitability to provide information about cisplatin uptake and release by comparing the simulation results to available experimental results of cisplatin (CPT) uptake and release rates for UiO-66 and UiO-66(NH2)

  • Simulations in the presence of water reveal favorable interaction energies between cisplatin and its solvation shell, which might result in this theoretical loading not being achieved experimentally unless the pore size is large enough to occupy cisplatin with its solvation shell or the Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs)–cisplatin interaction energies are more favorable than the cisplatin-shell energy

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that cancer is responsible for 17% of deaths globally, and the number of cases are expected to rise by 2030.2 Chemotherapy is one of the primary cancer treatment methods, during which cytotoxic drugs, such as cisplatin [cis-diaminedichloroplatinum (II) (CPT)], are usually administered intravenously. Once incorporated into a cell, cisplatin activates and is able to form covalent bonds with nucleotides.. Intravenous administration is non-specific, and cisplatin (among other cytotoxic drugs) can have adverse impacts on normal healthy cells. This causes the harmful side effects of chemotherapy, such as hemorrhages, fatigue, damage to the nervous system, kidneys, bladder, and so on. Indirect administration reduces the dose reaching cancerous cells, increasing the chance of the tumor developing CPT resistance. To combat these issues, a non-toxic carrier can be used to deliver cisplatin directly to the tumor

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call