Injectable matrices and scaffolds for drug delivery in tissue engineering

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2007.03.013Get rights and content

Abstract

Injectable matrices and depots have been the subject of much research in the field of drug delivery. The classical tissue engineering paradigm includes a matrix or scaffold to facilitate tissue growth and provide structural support, cells, and the delivery of bioactive molecules. As both tissue engineering and drug delivery techniques benefit from the use of injectable materials due to the minimal invasiveness of an injection, significant crossover should be observed between injectable materials in both fields. This review aims to outline injectable materials and processing techniques used in both tissue engineering and drug delivery and to describe methods by which current injectable materials in the field of drug delivery can be adapted for use as injectable scaffolds for tissue engineering.

Introduction

Injectable biomaterials are widely researched and hold great promise in both the fields of drug delivery and tissue engineering, largely due to the minimally invasive nature with which they can be delivered. Injectable systems in drug delivery can be used both for parenteral drug delivery or localized injection to an affected site. Drug release kinetics can be varied via altering the character and processing of the injectable biomaterial matrix or depot, and the properties (size, hydrophobicity, etc.) of the drug to be released often have a large effect on release kinetics. For a patient, injectable delivery systems offer the advantage of avoiding surgical procedures and the host of potential complications thereof to implant the drug depot or, in the case of long term drug delivery, an elimination of the need for repeated doctors visits or potentially dangerous indwelling percutaneous lines. Thus a long term drug delivery system deliverable via a simple injection holds multiple benefits for patient safety and quality of life.

Tissue engineering is a relatively new field that seeks to regenerate human tissues through the use of some combination of cells, bioactive molecules such as drugs or growth factors, and a biomaterial support system or scaffold. The need for such technology is readily apparent — with the continued aging of the population, the current shortage in donor organ availability will likely only grow, and strategies to address the shortage through increased donation are fraught with medical [1], [2] and ethical concerns [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. The ability to regenerate damaged tissues and organs to a healthy and functional state using the body's own healing capabilities and without the need for long term immune suppression represents a near ideal solution to this growing problem. Injectable materials for use in tissue engineering share the same advantages as those used in drug delivery. Additionally, in tissue engineering applications, injectable biomaterials that form scaffolds in situ have the advantage of being able to take the shape of a tissue defect, avoiding the need for patient specific scaffold prefabrication. There are, however, additional considerations necessary when developing injectable systems for tissue engineering; for many applications the system must also able to support a suspended cell population prior to injection and throughout the solidification process.

With these considerations in mind, an examination of injectable systems for both drug delivery and tissue engineering is warranted, including an overview of necessary characteristics for tissue engineering scaffolds and how current injectable systems for drug delivery applications could be modified to facilitate their use as injectable tissue engineering scaffolds.

Section snippets

Injectable scaffolds: requirements for tissue engineering

The classical tissue engineering paradigm relies on a scaffold that can be used as a space filling material and for cell and therapeutic agent delivery. Injectable materials hold promise for tissue engineering applications as they offer some advantages over prefabricated scaffolds for certain indications. Injectable scaffolds eliminate the need for surgical interventions for delivery, and the minimally invasive procedure of injection reduces discomfort and complications for the patient.

In situ chemical polymerization and crosslinking

Solidification for a series of polymers is achieved in situ with a thermally activated polymerization or crosslinking. An initiator creates free radicals which react with functional groups, often unsaturated bonds, of the monomers or macromers and the reaction or crosslinking is propagated. This initiation system provides the advantage of being activated with temperature change and can be used in areas of limited light penetration as opposed to the photoinitiated systems which will be analyzed

Current injectable materials for drug delivery

Although not specifically designed for tissue engineering or cell based applications, many injectable materials used in drug delivery bear resemblance to injectable scaffolds. As such, a brief examination of the processing parameters and techniques used in the design and fabrication of injectable drug delivery formulations is warranted. Focus will be directed to composite materials, including those utilizing degradable particles for controlled release of bioactive molecules, and materials that

How to modify existing materials

Having these prerequisites in mind, how can one adapt an injectable material that has been successfully used for drug delivery to a tissue engineering scaffold?

Concluding remarks

Significant research towards injectable materials and systems exists in both the field of drug delivery and tissue engineering. The rationale for developing injectable materials and systems is the same across both fields, and, as drug delivery comprises one of the three tenets of the tissue engineering paradigm, many currently researched drug delivery matrices hold promise as tissue engineering scaffolds. Because the requirements for successful application are different in these fields, a

Acknowledgements

Work in tissue engineering with drug delivery has been funded by the National Institutes of Health (R01 AR48756 and R01 DE15164). JDK also acknowledges support by the National Institutes of Health under Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award 2T32-GM008362 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. JDK is a student in the Medical Scientist Training Program and was supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32 GM07330).

References (134)

  • K.A. Davis et al.

    Photoinitiated crosslinked degradable copolymer networks for tissue engineering applications

    Biomaterials

    (2003)
  • C.G. Williams et al.

    Variable cytocompatibility of six cell lines with photoinitiators used for polymerizing hydrogels and cell encapsulation

    Biomaterials

    (2005)
  • K.T. Nguyen et al.

    Photopolymerizable hydrogels for tissue engineering applications

    Biomaterials

    (2002)
  • M.H.M. Oudshoorn et al.

    Synthesis and characterization of hyperbranched polyglycerol hydrogels

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • D.-A. Wang et al.

    Synthesis and characterization of a novel degradable phosphate-containing hydrogel

    Biomaterials

    (2003)
  • Q. Li et al.

    Biodegradable and photocrosslinkable polyphosphoester hydrogel

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • J.H. Cho et al.

    Chondrogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells using a thermosensitive poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) and water-soluble chitosan copolymer

    Biomaterials

    (2004)
  • J.M. Dang et al.

    Temperature-responsive hydroxybutyl chitosan for the culture of mesenchymal stem cells and intervertebral disk cells

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • K.E. Crompton et al.

    Polylysine-functionalised thermoresponsive chitosan hydrogel for neural tissue engineering

    Biomaterials

    (2007)
  • K. Na et al.

    Delivery of dexamethasone, ascorbate, and growth factor (TGF-beta 3) in thermo-reversible hydrogel constructs embedded with rabbit chondrocytes

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • F. Cellesi et al.

    Towards a fully-synthetic substitute of alginate: development of a new process using thermal gelation and chemical cross-linking

    Biomaterials

    (2004)
  • K.-H. Park et al.

    Morphology of spheroidal hepatocytes within injectable, biodegradable, and thermosensitive poly(organophosphazene) hydrogel as cell delivery vehicle

    J. Biosci. Bioeng.

    (2006)
  • J.A. Rowley et al.

    Alginate hydrogels as synthetic extracellular matrix materials

    Biomaterials

    (1999)
  • C.K. Kuo et al.

    Ionically crosslinked alginate hydrogels as scaffolds for tissue engineering: part 1. Structure, gelation rate and mechanical properties

    Biomaterials

    (2001)
  • M.M. Stevens et al.

    A rapid-curing alginate gel system: utility in periosteum-derived cartilage tissue engineering

    Biomaterials

    (2004)
  • E. Westhaus et al.

    Triggered release of calcium from lipid vesicles: a bioinspired strategy for rapid gelation of polysaccharide and protein hydrogels

    Biomaterials

    (2001)
  • A. Hatefi et al.

    Biodegradable injectable in situ forming drug delivery systems

    J. Control. Release

    (2002)
  • M.J. Kipper et al.

    Design of an injectable system based on bioerodible polyanhydride microspheres for sustained drug delivery

    Biomaterials

    (2002)
  • F.K. Kasper et al.

    In vivo release of plasmid DNA from composites of oligo(poly(ethylene glycol)fumarate) and cationized gelatin microspheres

    J. Control. Release

    (2005)
  • R.A. Jain

    Manufacturing techniques of various drug loaded biodegradable poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) devices

    Biomaterials

    (2000)
  • W. Jiang et al.

    Biodegradable poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) microparticles for injectable delivery of vaccine antigens

    Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.

    (2005)
  • S. Young et al.

    Gelatin as a delivery vehicle for the controlled release of bioactive molecules

    J. Control. Release

    (2005)
  • S.T. Reddy et al.

    In vivo targeting of dendritic cells in lymph nodes with poly(propylene sulfide) nanoparticles

    J. Control. Release

    (2006)
  • J. Cheng et al.

    Formulation of functionalized PLGA–PEG nanoparticles for in vivo targeted drug delivery

    Biomaterials

    (2007)
  • E.L. Hedberg et al.

    Controlled release of an osteogenic peptide from injectable biodegradable polymeric composites

    J. Control. Release

    (2002)
  • M. Stanczyk et al.

    Thermal analysis of bone cement polymerisation at the cement–bone interface

    J. Biomech.

    (2004)
  • F.K. Kasper et al.

    In vitro release of plasmid DNA from oligo(poly(ethylene glycol) fumarate) hydrogels

    J. Control. Release

    (2005)
  • T.J. Sanborn et al.

    In situ crosslinking of a biomimetic peptide–PEG hydrogel via thermally triggered activation of factor XIII

    Biomaterials

    (2002)
  • A. Chilkoti et al.

    Targeted drug delivery by thermally responsive polymers

    Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.

    (2002)
  • A. Chilkoti et al.

    Design of thermally responsive, recombinant polypeptide carriers for targeted drug delivery

    Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.

    (2002)
  • B. Jeong et al.

    Thermosensitive sol–gel reversible hydrogels

    Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.

    (2002)
  • X.-Z. Zhang et al.

    Fabrication and characterization of microgel-impregnated, thermosensitive PNIPAAm hydrogels

    Polymer

    (2005)
  • A. Sosnik et al.

    Ethoxysilane-capped PEO–PPO–PEO triblocks: a new family of reverse thermo-responsive polymers

    Biomaterials

    (2004)
  • A. Sosnik et al.

    Reverse thermo-responsive poly(ethylene oxide) and poly(propylene oxide) multiblock copolymers

    Biomaterials

    (2005)
  • D. Cohn et al.

    Improved reverse thermo-responsive polymeric systems

    Biomaterials

    (2003)
  • D. Cohn et al.

    PEO–PPO–PEO-based poly(ether ester urethane)s as degradable reverse thermo-responsive multiblock copolymers

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • I.M. El-Sherbiny et al.

    Preparation, characterization, swelling and in vitro drug release behaviour of poly[N-acryloylglycine-chitosan] interpolymeric pH and thermally-responsive hydrogels

    Eur. Polym. J.

    (2005)
  • D. Gupta et al.

    Fast-gelling injectable blend of hyaluronan and methylcellulose for intrathecal, localized delivery to the injured spinal cord

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • H. Betre et al.

    A thermally responsive biopolymer for intra-articular drug delivery

    J. Control. Release

    (2006)
  • D.Y. Furgeson et al.

    Structural optimization of a “smart” doxorubicin–polypeptide conjugate for thermally targeted delivery to solid tumors

    J. Control. Release

    (2006)
  • Cited by (0)

    This review is part of the Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews theme issue on "Matrices and Scaffolds for Drug Delivery in Tissue Engineering".

    1

    These two authors contributed equally to this work.

    View full text