Nano-Based Approved Pharmaceuticals for Cancer Treatment: Present and Future Challenges

Abstract

Cancer is one of the main causes of death worldwide. To date, and despite the advances in conventional treatment options, therapy in cancer is still far from optimal due to the non-specific systemic biodistribution of antitumor agents. The inadequate drug concentrations at the tumor site led to an increased incidence of multiple drug resistance and the appearance of many severe undesirable side effects. Nanotechnology, through the development of nanoscale-based pharmaceuticals, has emerged to provide new and innovative drugs to overcome these limitations. In this review, we provide an overview of the approved nanomedicine for cancer treatment and the rationale behind their designs and applications. We also highlight the new approaches that are currently under investigation and the perspectives and challenges for nanopharmaceuticals, focusing on the tumor microenvironment and tumor disseminate cells as the most attractive and effective strategies for cancer treatments.

Keywords: approved nanopharmaceuticals; cancer therapy; nanomedicine; nanotechnology; targeted therapy.

Figure 1

Lipid-based approved and marketed nanopharmaceuticals FDA and/or EMA-approved nanomedicines from 1995 to 2022 (last accessed May 2022), cataloged by their nature, encapsulated drug, their mechanism of action, and their induced effects.

Figure 2

Protein- and metallic-based approved and marketed nanopharmaceuticals. FDA and/or EMA-approved nanomedicines from 1995 to 2022 (last accessed May 2022), cataloged by their nature, encapsulated drug, their mechanism of action, and their induced effects.

Figure 3

The status of clinical trials using nano–based formulations for cancer therapy. The number of the total and complete clinical trials, currently registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (accessed on 28 April 2022), undergoing nano-based drugs treatment alone or in combination with other therapeutics during the periods 1995–2015 and 2015–2021. The results are expressed as the number of clinical trials divided by the number of years per period. In the last 10 years, second-generation DDS using active targeting have been the most widely tested systems in clinical trials.