Numerous types of nanoparticles are being designed for systemic and targeted drug delivery. However, keeping nanoparticles in blood for sufficiently long times so as to allow them to reach their therapeutic target is a major challenge. Upon administration into blood, nanoparticles are quickly opsonized and cleared by the macrophages, thereby limiting their circulation times. Surface-modification of nanoparticles by PEG was developed as the first strategy to prolong nanoparticles circulation. While PEGylation has helped prolong particle circulation, it has several limitations including transient nature of the effect and compromised particle-target interactions. Accordingly, several other approaches have been developed to prolong nanoparticle circulation in blood. These include modification with CD47, modulation of mechanical properties, engineering particle morphology and hitchhiking on red blood cells. In this review, we discuss the factors that affect nanoparticles circulation time and discuss recent progress in development of strategies to prolong circulation time.
RECOMMENDATIONS regarding opioid use in renal impairment and cancer pain are made on the basis of pharmacokinetic data, extrapolation from non-cancer pain studies and from clinical experience. The risk of opioid use in renal impairment is stratified according to the activity of opioid metabolites, potential for accumulation and reports of successful or harmful use. Fentanyl, alfentanil and methadone are identified, with caveats, as the least likely to cause harm when used appropriately. Morphine may be associated with toxicity in patients with renal impairment. Unwanted side effects with morphine may be satisfactorily dealt with by either increasing the dosing interval or reducing the 24 hour dose or by switching to an alternative opioid.
Improvement in end-of-life-care is required for patients dying with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The UK government now recommends that tools such as the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient (LCP) be used to enhance the care of those patients dying with CKD. The LCP was originally developed for patients dying with terminal cancer, however has been shown to be transferable to patients dying with heart failure or stroke. On this background, in 2005 a UK National Renal LCP Steering Group was formed. The aim was to determine whether or not the generic LCP was transferable to patients dying with CKD. An Expert Consensus sub-group was established to produce evidence-based prescribing guidelines to allow safe and effective symptom control for patients dying with renal failure. These guidelines were finalised by the Expert Consensus group in August 2007 and endorsed by the Department of Health in March 2008. A literature search on symptom control and end-of-life care in renal failure was performed. A summary of the evidence was presented at a National Steering Group meeting. Opinions were given and provisional guidelines discussed. A first draft was produced and individually reviewed by all members of the Expert Group. Following review, amendments were made and a second draft written. This was presented to the entire National Steering Group and again individual comments were taken into consideration. A third and fourth draft were written and individually reviewed, before the guidelines were finalised by the Expert Consensus group. Patients dying with advanced CKD suffer symptoms similar to patients dying of cancer. The Renal LCP prescribing guidelines aim to control the same symptoms as the generic LCP: pain, dyspnoea, terminal restlessness and agitation, nausea and respiratory tract secretions. The evidence for the production of the guidelines is discussed and how a consensus was reached. A summary of the guidelines is given and the complete guidelines document is available via the Marie Curie Palliative Care Institute, Liverpool website.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.