Adaptive Design of mRNA-Loaded Extracellular Vesicles for Targeted Immunotherapy of Cancer

The recent success of mRNA therapeutics against pathogenic infections has increased interest in their use for other human diseases including cancer. However, the precise delivery of the genetic cargo to cells and tissues of interest remains challenging. Here, we show an adaptive strategy that enables the docking of different targeting ligands onto the surface of mRNA-loaded small extracellular vesicles (sEVs). This is achieved by using a microfluidic electroporation approach in which a combination of nano- and milli-second pulses produces large amounts of IFN-γ mRNA-loaded sEVs with CD64 overexpressed on their surface. The CD64 molecule serves as an adaptor to dock targeting ligands, such as anti-CD71 and anti-programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies. The resulting immunogenic sEVs (imsEV) preferentially target glioblastoma cells and generate potent antitumour activities in vivo, including against tumours intrinsically resistant to immunotherapy. Together, these results provide an adaptive approach to engineering mRNA-loaded sEVs with targeting functionality and pave the way for their adoption in cancer immunotherapy applications

Engineering a Tunable Micropattern-Array Assay To Sort Single Extracellular Vesicles and Particles To Detect RNA and Protein In Situ

The molecular heterogeneity of extracellular vesicles (EVs) and the co-isolation of physically similar particles, such as lipoproteins (LPs), confounds and limits the sensitivity of EV bulk biomarker characterization. Herein, we present a single-EV and particle (siEVP) protein and RNA assay (siEVPPRA) to simultaneously detect mRNAs, miRNAs, and proteins in subpopulations of EVs and LPs. The siEVPPRA immobilizes and sorts particles via positive immunoselection onto micropatterns and focuses biomolecular signals in situ. By detecting EVPs at a single-particle resolution, the siEVPPRA outperformed the sensitivities of bulk-analysis benchmark assays for RNA and protein. To assess the specificity of RNA detection in complex biofluids, EVs from various glioma cell lines were processed with small RNA sequencing, whereby two mRNAs and two miRNAs associated with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) were chosen for cross-validation. Despite the presence of single-EV-LP co-isolates in serum, the siEVPPRA detected GBM-associated vesicular RNA profiles in GBM patient siEVPs. The siEVPPRA effectively examines intravesicular, intervesicular, and interparticle heterogeneity with diagnostic promise

Checkpoint Signaling, Base Excision Repair, and PARP Promote Survival of Colon Cancer Cells Treated with 5-Fluorodeoxyuridine but Not 5-Fluorouracil

The fluoropyrimidines 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and FdUrd (5-fluorodeoxyuridine; floxuridine) are the backbone of chemotherapy regimens for colon cancer and other tumors. Despite their widespread use, it remains unclear how these agents kill tumor cells. Here, we have analyzed the checkpoint and DNA repair pathways that affect colon tumor responses to 5-FU and FdUrd. These studies demonstrate that both FdUrd and 5-FU activate the ATR and ATM checkpoint signaling pathways, indicating that they cause genotoxic damage. Notably, however, depletion of ATM or ATR does not sensitize colon cancer cells to 5-FU, whereas these checkpoint pathways promote the survival of cells treated with FdUrd, suggesting that FdUrd exerts cytotoxicity by disrupting DNA replication and/or inducing DNA damage, whereas 5-FU does not. We also found that disabling the base excision (BER) repair pathway by depleting XRCC1 or APE1 sensitized colon cancer cells to FdUrd but not 5-FU. Consistent with a role for the BER pathway, we show that small molecule poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1/2 (PARP) inhibitors, AZD2281 and ABT-888, remarkably sensitized both mismatch repair (MMR)-proficient and -deficient colon cancer cell lines to FdUrd but not to 5-FU. Taken together, these studies demonstrate that the roles of genotoxin-induced checkpoint signaling and DNA repair differ significantly for these agents and also suggest a novel approach to colon cancer therapy in which FdUrd is combined with a small molecule PARP inhibitor

Cervical epidural steroid injections in the management of cervical radiculitis: interlaminar versus transforaminal. A review

There has been recent concern regarding the safety of cervical epidural steroid injections. The decision to proceed with treatment requires balancing the risk and benefits. This article is an in depth review of the efficacy, complications, and technique of both interlaminar and transforaminal cervical epidural steroid injections in the management of cervical radiculitis

Complications and pitfalls of lumbar interlaminar and transforaminal epidural injections

Lumbar interlaminar and transforaminal epidural injections are used in the treatment of lumbar radicular pain and other lumbar spinal pain syndromes. Complications from these procedures arise from needle placement and the administration of medication. Potential risks include infection, hematoma, intravascular injection of medication, direct nerve trauma, subdural injection of medication, air embolism, disc entry, urinary retention, radiation exposure, and hypersensitivity reactions. The objective of this article is to review the complications of lumbar interlaminar and transforaminal epidural injections and discuss the potential pitfalls related to these procedures. We performed a comprehensive literature review through a Medline search for relevant case reports, clinical trials, and review articles. Complications from lumbar epidural injections are extremely rare. Most if not all complications can be avoided by careful technique with accurate needle placement, sterile precautions, and a thorough understanding of the relevant anatomy and contrast patterns on fluoroscopic imaging