Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 6;11(6):573.
doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11060573.

Modeling of Magnetic Scaffolds as Drug Delivery Platforms for Tissue Engineering and Cancer Therapy

Matteo B Lodi  1   2 , Eleonora M A Corda  1 , Francesco Desogus  3 , Alessandro Fanti  1   2 , Giuseppe Mazzarella  1   2
Affiliations

Modeling of Magnetic Scaffolds as Drug Delivery Platforms for Tissue Engineering and Cancer Therapy

Matteo B Lodi et al. Bioengineering (Basel). .

Abstract

Magnetic scaffolds (MagSs) are magneto-responsive devices obtained by the combination of traditional biomaterials (e.g., polymers, bioceramics, and bioglasses) and magnetic nanoparticles. This work analyzes the literature about MagSs used as drug delivery systems for tissue repair and cancer treatment. These devices can be used as innovative drugs and/or biomolecules delivery systems. Through the application of a static or dynamic stimulus, MagSs can trigger drug release in a controlled and remote way. However, most of MagSs used as drug delivery systems are not optimized and properly modeled, causing a local inhomogeneous distribution of the drug's concentration and burst release. Few physical-mathematical models have been presented to study and analyze different MagSs, with the lack of a systematic vision. In this work, we propose a modeling framework. We modeled the experimental data of drug release from different MagSs, under various magnetic field types, taken from the literature. The data were fitted to a modified Gompertz equation and to the Korsmeyer-Peppas model (KPM). The correlation coefficient (R2) and the root mean square error (RMSE) were the figures of merit used to evaluate the fitting quality. It has been found that the Gompertz model can fit most of the drug delivery cases, with an average RMSE below 0.01 and R2>0.9. This quantitative interpretation of existing experimental data can foster the design and use of MagSs for drug delivery applications.

Keywords: cancer therapy; drug delivery; electromagnetic fields; magnetic nanoparticles; magnetic scaffolds; tissue engineering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Graphical representation of the concept of magnetic scaffolds as the combination of magnetic nanoparticles and biomaterials, and their use for drug delivery applications.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Release profile data for methylene blue in the cases of (a) non-magnetic and magnetic materials. Docetaxel release over time (b) for a non-magnetic membrane and in the presence of an external MF.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Cumulative release of (a) BSA and (b) DOX from hollow alginate non-magnetic (blue curve) and magnetic scaffolds (red) under the actions of a magnetic field being turned on and off.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Cumulative release from magnetic poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) embedding 25% wt. of Fe3O4 MNPs triggered by magneto-thermal conversion using a dynamic MF.
Figure 5
Figure 5
(a) Cumulative release from different MBG/PCL scaffolds with loadings from 5% to 15% of Fe3O4 MNPs [51]. (b) Released drug as a function of MagS saturation magnetization. (c) Variation in the undissolved proportion and the dissolution rate as a function of MagS saturation magnetization.
Figure 6
Figure 6
(a) Cumulative release from a bare and an iron-doped mesoporous bioglass triggered by an RF MF [50]. (b) Variation in the KPM parameters as a function of MagS saturation magnetization.
Figure 7
Figure 7
(a) Release of mitoxantrone for the non-magnetic (blue curve) and magnetic scenarios (red curve). (b) Release of chemokine SDF-1α from a ferrogel MagS. (c) Release of DNA material over time from the MagS.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gu L., Mooney D.J. Biomaterials and emerging anticancer therapeutics: Engineering the microenvironment. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2016;16:56–66. doi: 10.1038/nrc.2015.3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li X., Su X. Multifunctional smart hydrogels: Potential in tissue engineering and cancer therapy. J. Mater. Chem. B. 2018;6:4714–4730. doi: 10.1039/C8TB01078A. - DOI - PubMed
    1. de Sousa Victor R., Marcelo da Cunha Santos A., Viana de Sousa B., de Araújo Neves G., Navarro de Lima Santana L., Rodrigues Menezes R. A review on Chitosan’s uses as biomaterial: Tissue engineering, drug delivery systems and cancer treatment. Materials. 2020;13:4995. doi: 10.3390/ma13214995. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nour S., Baheiraei N., Imani R., Rabiee N., Khodaei M., Alizadeh A., Moazzeni S.M. Bioactive materials: A comprehensive review on interactions with biological microenvironment based on the immune response. J. Bionic Eng. 2019;16:563–581. doi: 10.1007/s42235-019-0046-z. - DOI
    1. Roach P., Eglin D., Rohde K., Perry C.C. Modern biomaterials: A review—Bulk properties and implications of surface modifications. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2007;18:1263–1277. doi: 10.1007/s10856-006-0064-3. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources