Search

The purpose of this study was to review the use of the magnetic targeting technique, characterized by magnetic driving compounds based on superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs), as drug delivery for a specific brain locus in gliomas. We reviewed a process mediated by the application of an external static magnetic field for targeting SPIONs in gliomas. A search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases identified 228 studies, 23 of which were selected based on inclusion criteria and predetermined exclusion criteria. The articles were analyzed by physicochemical characteristics of SPIONs used, cell types used for tumor induction, characteristics of experimental glioma models, magnetic targeting technical parameters, and analysis method of process efficiency. The study shows the highlights and importance of magnetic targeting to optimize the magnetic targeting process as a therapeutic strategy for gliomas. Regardless of the intensity of the patterned magnetic field, the time of application of the field, and nanoparticle used (commercial or synthesized), all studies showed a vast advantage in the use of magnetic targeting, either alone or in combination with other techniques, for optimized glioma therapy. Therefore, this review elucidates the preclinical and therapeutic applications of magnetic targeting in glioma, an innovative nanobiotechnological method.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive tumor type whose resistance to conventional treatment is mediated, in part, by the angiogenic process. New treatments involving the application of nanoformulations composed of encapsulated drugs coupled to peptide motifs that direct drugs to specific targets triggered in angiogenesis have been developed to reach and modulate different phases of this process. We performed a systematic review with the search criterion (Glioblastoma OR Glioma) AND (Therapy OR Therapeutic) AND (Nanoparticle) AND (Antiangiogenic OR Angiogenesis OR Anti-angiogenic) in Pubmed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, in which 312 articles were identified; of these, only 27 articles were included after selection and analysis of eligibility according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data of the articles were analyzed in five contexts: the characteristics of the tumor cells; the animal models used to induce GBM for antiangiogenic treatment; the composition of nanoformulations and their physical and chemical characteristics; the therapeutic anti-angiogenic process; and methods for assessing the effects on antiangiogenic markers caused by therapies. The articles included in the review were heterogeneous and varied in practically all aspects related to nanoformulations and models. However, there was slight variance in the antiangiogenic effect analysis. CD31 was extensively used as a marker, which does not provide a view of the effects on the most diverse aspects involved in angiogenesis. Therefore, the present review highlighted the need for standardization between the different approaches of antiangiogenic therapy for the GBM model that allows a more effective meta-analysis and that helps in future translational studies.