The lymph nodes are major sites of cancer metastasis and immune activity, and thus represent important clinical targets. Although not as well-studied compared to subcutaneous administration, intravenous drug delivery is advantageous for lymph node delivery as it is commonly practiced in the clinic and has the potential to deliver therapeutics systemically to all lymph nodes. However, rapid clearance by the mononuclear phagocyte system, tight junctions of the blood vascular endothelium, and the collagenous matrix of the interstitium can limit the efficiency of lymph node drug delivery, which has prompted research into the design of nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems. In this mini review, we describe the physiological and biological barriers to lymph node targeting, how they inform nanoparticle design, and discuss the future outlook of lymph node targeting.
RandolphGJInabaKRobbianiDFSteinmanRMMullerWA.Differentiation of phagocytic monocytes into lymph node dendritic cells in vivo. Immunity1999;
11:753–61
13.
RuddleNH.High endothelial venules and lymphatic vessels in tertiary lymphoid organs: characteristics, functions, and regulation. Front Immunol2016;
7:491
14.
SpurrellELLockleyM.Adaptive immunity in cancer immunology and therapeutics. Ecancermedicalscience2014;
8:441
15.
HollingsworthREJansenK.Turning the corner on therapeutic cancer vaccines. NPJ Vaccines2019;
4:7
16.
WennholdKShimabukuro-VornhagenAvon Bergwelt-BaildonMB. Cell-based cancer immunotherapy. Transfus Med Hemother2019;
46:36–46
17.
ChaplinDD.Overview of the immune response. J Allergy Clin Immunol2010;
125:S3–23
18.
JeanbartLBallesterMde TittaACorthesyPRomeroPHubbellJASwartzMA.Enhancing efficacy of anticancer vaccines by targeted delivery to tumor-draining lymph nodes. Cancer Immunol Res2014;
2:436–47
19.
YuXDaiYZhaoYQiSLiuLLuLLuoQZhangZ.Melittin-lipid nanoparticles target to lymph nodes and elicit a systemic anti-tumor immune response. Nat Commun2020;
11:1110
20.
WangPZhaoPDongSXuTHeXChenM.An albumin-binding polypeptide both targets cytotoxic T lymphocyte vaccines to lymph nodes and boosts vaccine presentation by dendritic cells. Theranostics2018;
8:223–36
21.
JonesDPereiraERPaderaTP.Growth and immune evasion of lymph node metastasis. Front Oncol2018;
8:36
22.
KawadaKTaketoMM.Significance and mechanism of lymph node metastasis in cancer progression. Cancer Res2011;
71:1214–8
23.
UlintzPJGreensonJKWuRFearonERHardimanKM.Lymph node metastases in colon cancer are polyclonal. Clin Cancer Res2018;
24:2214–24
24.
ChandrasekaranSKingMR.Microenvironment of tumor-draining lymph nodes: opportunities for liposome-based targeted therapy. Int J Mol Sci2014;
15:20209–39
25.
TrzewikJMallipattuSKArtmannGMDelanoFASchmid-SchonbeinGW.Evidence for a second valve system in lymphatics: endothelial microvalves. FASEB J2001;
15:1711–7
26.
ScallanJHuxleyVHKorthuisRJ.Capillary fluid exchange: regulation, functions, and pathology.
San Rafael, CA:
Morgan & Claypool Life Sciences, 2010
27.
BalukPFuxeJHashizumeHRomanoTLashnitsEButzSVestweberDCoradaMMolendiniCDejanaEMcDonaldDM.Functionally specialized junctions between endothelial cells of lymphatic vessels. J Exp Med2007;
204:2349–62
28.
SwartzMASkobeM.Lymphatic function, lymphangiogenesis, and cancer metastasis. Microsc Res Tech2001;
55:92–9
29.
MaiselKSassoMSPotinLSwartzMA.Exploiting lymphatic vessels for immunomodulation: rationale, opportunities, and challenges. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2017;
114:43–59
30.
GreenleeJDKingMR.Engineered fluidic systems to understand lymphatic cancer metastasis. Biomicrofluidics2020;
14:011502
31.
ChristiansenADetmarM.Lymphangiogenesis and cancer. Genes Cancer2011;
2:1146–58
32.
DixonJBGreinerSTGashevAACoteGLMooreJEZawiejaDC.Lymph flow, shear stress, and lymphocyte velocity in rat mesenteric prenodal lymphatics. Microcirculation2006;
13:597–610
AbdallahMMullertzOOStylesIKMorsdorfAQuinnJFWhittakerMRTrevaskisNL.Lymphatic targeting by albumin-hitchhiking: applications and optimisation. J Control Release2020;
327:117–28
35.
JafarnejadMWoodruffMCZawiejaDCCarrollMCMooreJEJr.Modeling lymph flow and fluid exchange with blood vessels in lymph nodes. Lymphat Res Biol2015;
13:234–47
36.
BlatterCMeijerEFNamASJonesDBoumaBEPaderaTPVakocBJ.In vivo label-free measurement of lymph flow velocity and volumetric flow rates using Doppler optical coherence tomography. Sci Rep2016;
6:29035
37.
KlarhoferMCsapoBBalassyCSzelesJCMoserE.High-resolution blood flow velocity measurements in the human finger. Magn Reson Med2001;
45:716–9
38.
ZhangXYLuWY.Recent advances in lymphatic targeted drug delivery system for tumor metastasis. Cancer Biol Med2014;
11:247–54
39.
XieYBagbyTRCohenMSForrestML.Drug delivery to the lymphatic system: importance in future cancer diagnosis and therapies. Expert Opin Drug Deliv2009;
6:785–92
40.
OussorenCStormG.Liposomes to target the lymphatics by subcutaneous administration. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2001;
50:143–56
41.
CabralHMakinoJMatsumotoYMiPWuHNomotoTTohKYamadaNHiguchiYKonishiSKanoMRNishiharaHMiuraYNishiyamaNKataokaK.Systemic targeting of lymph node metastasis through the blood vascular system by using size-controlled nanocarriers. ACS Nano2015;
9:4957–67
42.
WeisslederRElizondoGWittenbergJLeeASJosephsonLBradyTJ.Ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide: an intravenous contrast agent for assessing lymph nodes with MR imaging. Radiology1990;
175:494–8
43.
WorleyDRHansenRJWittenburgLAChubbLSGustafsonDL.Docetaxel accumulates in lymphatic circulation following subcutaneous delivery compared to intravenous delivery in rats. Anticancer Res2016;
36:5071–8
44.
ChenJWangLYaoQLingRLiKWangH.Drug concentrations in axillary lymph nodes after lymphatic chemotherapy on patients with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res2004;
6:R474–7
45.
FangCShiBPeiYYHongMHWuJChenHZ.In vivo tumor targeting of tumor necrosis factor-alpha-loaded stealth nanoparticles: effect of MePEG molecular weight and particle size. Eur J Pharm Sci2006;
27:27–36
46.
ChoiCHZuckermanJEWebsterPDavisME.Targeting kidney mesangium by nanoparticles of defined size. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2011;
108:6656–61
47.
AlexisFPridgenEMolnarLKFarokhzadOC.Factors affecting the clearance and biodistribution of polymeric nanoparticles. Mol Pharm2008;
5:505–15
48.
AramiHKhandharALiggittDKrishnanKM.In vivo delivery, pharmacokinetics, biodistribution and toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles. Chem Soc Rev2015;
44:8576–607
49.
XiaoKLiYLuoJLeeJSXiaoWGonikAMAgarwalRGLamKS.The effect of surface charge on in vivo biodistribution of PEG-oligocholic acid based micellar nanoparticles. Biomaterials2011;
32:3435–46
50.
MetzSBonaterraGRudeliusMSettlesMRummenyEJ,
Daldrup-Link HE. Capacity of human monocytes to phagocytose approved iron oxide MR contrast agents in vitro. Eur Radiol2004;
14:1851–8
51.
FrancaAAggarwalPBarsovEVKozlovSVDobrovolskaiaMAGonzalez-FernandezA.Macrophage scavenger receptor a mediates the uptake of gold colloids by macrophages in vitro. Nanomedicine2011;
6:1175–88
52.
PattenDAShettyS.More than just a removal service: scavenger receptors in leukocyte trafficking. Front Immunol2018;
9:2904
53.
ChaoYKarmaliPPMukthavaramRKesariSKouznetsovaVLTsigelnyIFSimbergD.Direct recognition of superparamagnetic nanocrystals by macrophage scavenger receptor SR-AI. ACS Nano2013;
7:4289–98
54.
GustafsonHHHolt-CasperDGraingerDWGhandehariH.Nanoparticle uptake: the phagocyte problem. Nano Today2015;
10:487–510
55.
ThomasOSWeberW.Overcoming physiological barriers to nanoparticle delivery-are we there yet?Front Bioeng Biotechnol2019;
7:415
56.
BlancoEShenHFerrariM.Principles of nanoparticle design for overcoming biological barriers to drug delivery. Nat Biotechnol2015;
33:941–51
57.
BaruaSMitragotriS.Challenges associated with penetration of nanoparticles across cell and tissue barriers: a review of current status and future prospects. Nano Today2014;
9:223–43
58.
TsengYCXuZGuleyKYuanHHuangL.Lipid-calcium phosphate nanoparticles for delivery to the lymphatic system and SPECT/CT imaging of lymph node metastases. Biomaterials2014;
35:4688–98
59.
FromenCARahhalTBRobbinsGRKaiMPShenTWLuftJCDeSimoneJM.Nanoparticle surface charge impacts distribution, uptake and lymph node trafficking by pulmonary antigen-presenting cells. Nanomedicine2016;
12:677–87
60.
WangJMasehi-LanoJJChungEJ.Peptide and antibody ligands for renal targeting: nanomedicine strategies for kidney disease. Biomater Sci2017;
5:1450–9
61.
YuanZXShangZGuJHeL.Renal targeting delivery systems. Future Med Chem2019;
11:2237–40
62.
LiangXWangHZhuYZhangRCoggerVCLiuXXuZPGriceJERobertsMS.Short- and Long-Term tracking of anionic ultrasmall nanoparticles in kidney. ACS Nano2016;
10:387–95
63.
HongYKShinJWDetmarM.Development of the lymphatic vascular system: a mystery unravels. Dev Dyn2004;
231:462–73
64.
SilvaMT.When two is better than one: macrophages and neutrophils work in concert in innate immunity as complementary and cooperative partners of a myeloid phagocyte system. J Leukoc Biol2010;
87:93–106
65.
SilvaMTCorreia-NevesM.Neutrophils and macrophages: the main partners of phagocyte cell systems. Front Immunol2012;
3:174
66.
van FurthRCohnZAHirschJGHumphreyJHSpectorWGLangevoortHL.The mononuclear phagocyte system: a new classification of macrophages, monocytes, and their precursor cells. Bull World Health Organ1972;
46:845–52
67.
FamSYCheeCFYongCYHoKLMariatulqabtiahARTanWS.Stealth coating of nanoparticles in drug-delivery systems. Nanomaterials2020;
10: 787
68.
SukJSXuQKimNHanesJEnsignLM.PEGylation as a strategy for improving nanoparticle-based drug and gene delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2016;
99:28–51
69.
Hoang ThiTTPilkingtonEHNguyenDHLeeJSParkKDTruongNP.The importance of poly(ethylene glycol) alternatives for overcoming PEG immunogenicity in drug delivery and bioconjugation. Polymers2020;
12:298
70.
SaptarshiSRDuschlALopataAL.Interaction of nanoparticles with proteins: relation to bio-reactivity of the nanoparticle. J Nanobiotechnology2013;
11:26
71.
SotnikovDVBerlinaANIvanovVSZherdevAVDzantievBB.Adsorption of proteins on gold nanoparticles: one or more layers?Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces2019;
173:557–63
72.
BissoPWGaglioneSGuimaraesPPGMitchellMJLangerR.Nanomaterial interactions with human neutrophils. ACS Biomater Sci Eng2018;
4:4255–65
73.
PerraultSDWalkeyCJenningsTFischerHCChanWC.Mediating tumor targeting efficiency of nanoparticles through design. Nano Lett2009;
9:1909–15
74.
FengQLiuYHuangJChenKHuangJXiaoK.Uptake, distribution, clearance, and toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles with different sizes and coatings. Sci Rep2018;
8:2082
75.
ChertokBDavidAEYangVC.Polyethyleneimine-modified iron oxide nanoparticles for brain tumor drug delivery using magnetic targeting and intra-carotid administration. Biomaterials2010;
31:6317–24
76.
CongXKongW.Endothelial tight junctions and their regulatory signaling pathways in vascular homeostasis and disease. Cell Signal2020;
66:109485
77.
RodriguesSFGrangerDN.Blood cells and endothelial barrier function. Tissue Barriers2015;
3:e978720
78.
ToyRHaydenEShoupCBaskaranHKarathanasisE.The effects of particle size, density and shape on margination of nanoparticles in microcirculation. Nanotechnology2011;
22:115101
79.
DecuzziPLeeSBhushanBFerrariM.A theoretical model for the margination of particles within blood vessels. Ann Biomed Eng2005;
33:179–90
80.
ThompsonAJMastriaEMEniola-AdefesoO.The margination propensity of ellipsoidal micro/nanoparticles to the endothelium in human blood flow. Biomaterials2013;
34:5863–71
81.
VuMNRajasekharPPooleDPKhorSYTruongNPNowellCJQuinnJFWhittakerMVeldhuisNADavisTP.Rapid assessment of nanoparticle extravasation in a microfluidic tumor model. ACS Appl Nano Mater2019;
2:1844–56
82.
KongGBraunRDDewhirstMW.Hyperthermia enables tumor-specific nanoparticle delivery: effect of particle size. Cancer Res2000;
60:4440–5
83.
SmithBRChengZDeARosenbergJGambhirSS.Dynamic visualization of RGD-quantum dot binding to tumor neovasculature and extravasation in multiple living mouse models using intravital microscopy. Small2010;
6:2222–9
84.
HansenAEPetersenALHenriksenJRBoerresenBRasmussenPElemaDRaf RosenscholdPMKristensenATKjaerAAndresenTL.Positron emission tomography based elucidation of the enhanced permeability and retention effect in dogs with cancer using copper-64 liposomes. ACS Nano2015;
9:6985–95
85.
WilhelmSTavaresAJDaiQOhtaSAudetJDvorakHFChanWCW.Analysis of nanoparticle delivery to tumours. Nat Rev Mater2016;
1:16014
86.
SmithBRKempenPBouleyDXuALiuZMeloshNDaiHSinclairRGambhirSS.Shape Matters: intravital microscopy reveals surprising geometrical dependence for nanoparticles in tumor models of extravasation. Nano Lett2012;
12:3369–77
87.
PanditSDuttaDNieS.Active transcytosis and new opportunities for cancer nanomedicine. Nat Mater2020;
19:478–80
88.
SindhwaniSSyedAMNgaiJKingstonBRMaiorinoLRothschildJMacMillanPZhangYRajeshNUHoangTWuJLYWilhelmSZilmanAGaddeSSulaimanAOuyangBLinZWangLEgebladMChanWCW.The entry of nanoparticles into solid tumours. Nat Mater2020;
19:566–75
89.
PulgarVM.Transcytosis to cross the blood brain barrier, new advancements and challenges. Front Neurosci2018;
12:1019
90.
ZhangLFanJLiGYinZFuBM.Transcellular model for neutral and charged nanoparticles across an in vitro blood-brain barrier. Cardiovasc Eng Technol2020;
11:607–20
91.
GilESLiJXiaoHLoweTL.Quaternary ammonium beta-cyclodextrin nanoparticles for enhancing doxorubicin permeability across the in vitro blood-brain barrier. Biomacromolecules2009;
10:505–16
92.
YueB.Biology of the extracellular matrix: an overview. J Glaucoma2014;
23:S20–3
93.
EnginABNikitovicDNeaguMHenrich-NoackPDoceaAOShtilmanMIGolokhvastKTsatsakisAM.Mechanistic understanding of nanoparticles' interactions with extracellular matrix: the cell and immune system. Part Fibre Toxicol2017;
14:22
94.
WillisALSabehFLiXYWeissSJ.Extracellular matrix determinants and the regulation of cancer cell invasion stratagems. J Microsc2013;
251:250–60
95.
WongCStylianopoulosTCuiJMartinJChauhanVPJiangWPopovicZJainRKBawendiMGFukumuraD.Multistage nanoparticle delivery system for deep penetration into tumor tissue. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2011;
108:2426–31
96.
GoodmanTTOlivePLPunSH.Increased nanoparticle penetration in collagenase-treated multicellular spheroids. Int J Nanomed2007;
2:265–74
97.
YohanDCrujeCLuXChithraniDB.Size-dependent gold nanoparticle interaction at nano-micro interface using both monolayer and multilayer (tissue-like) cell models. Nanomicro Lett2016;
8:44–53
98.
StylianopoulosTPohMZInsinNBawendiMGFukumuraDMunnLLJainRK.Diffusion of particles in the extracellular matrix: the effect of repulsive electrostatic interactions. Biophys J2010;
99:1342–9
99.
LielegOBaumgartelRMBauschAR.Selective filtering of particles by the extracellular matrix: an electrostatic bandpass. Biophys J2009;
97:1569–77
100.
Le GoasMTestardFTacheODebouNCambienBCarrotGRenaultJP.How do surface properties of nanoparticles influence their diffusion in the extracellular matrix? A model study in matrigel using polymer-grafted nanoparticles. Langmuir2020;
36:10460–70
101.
KimBHanGToleyBJKimCKRotelloVMForbesNS.Tuning payload delivery in tumour cylindroids using gold nanoparticles. Nat Nanotechnol2010;
5:465–72
102.
TchorykATarescoVArgentRHAshfordMGellertPRStolnikSGrabowskaAGarnettMC.Penetration and uptake of nanoparticles in 3D tumor spheroids. Bioconjug Chem2019;
30:1371–84
103.
ChidaTMiuraYCabralHNomotoTKataokaKNishiyamaN.Epirubicin-loaded polymeric micelles effectively treat axillary lymph nodes metastasis of breast cancer through selective accumulation and pH-triggered drug release. J Control Release2018;
292:130–40
104.
HuHWangJWangHTanTLiJWangZSunKLiYZhangZ.Cell-penetrating peptide-based nanovehicles potentiate lymph metastasis targeting and deep penetration for anti-metastasis therapy. Theranostics2018;
8:3597–610
QinLZhangFLuXWeiXWangJFangXSiDWangYZhangCYangRLiuCLiangW.Polymeric micelles for enhanced lymphatic drug delivery to treat metastatic tumors. J Control Release2013;
171:133–42
107.
KaminskasLMKotaJMcLeodVMKellyBDKarellasPPorterCJ.PEGylation of polylysine dendrimers improves absorption and lymphatic targeting following SC administration in rats. J Control Release2009;
140:108–16
108.
WilsonKDRaneySGSekirovLChikhGdeJongSDCullisPRTamYK.Effects of intravenous and subcutaneous administration on the pharmacokinetics, biodistribution, cellular uptake and immunostimulatory activity of CpG ODN encapsulated in liposomal nanoparticles. Int Immunopharmacol2007;
7:1064–75
109.
ElgrabliDBeaudouinRJbilouNFlorianiMPeryARogerieuxFLacroixG.Biodistribution and clearance of TiO2 nanoparticles in rats after intravenous injection. PLoS One2015;
10:e0124490
110.
HarisinghaniMGBarentszJHahnPFDesernoWMTabatabaeiSvan de KaaCHde la RosetteJWeisslederR.Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med2003;
348:2491–9
111.
RetyFClementOSiauveNCuenodCACarnotFSichMBuisineAFrijaG.MR lymphography using iron oxide nanoparticles in rats: pharmacokinetics in the lymphatic system after intravenous injection. J Magn Reson Imaging2000;
12:734–9
112.
LiuJLiHJLuoYLXuCFDuXJDuJZWangJ.Enhanced primary tumor penetration facilitates nanoparticle draining into lymph nodes after systemic injection for tumor metastasis inhibition. ACS Nano2019;
13:8648–58
113.
TojoAKinugasaS.Mechanisms of glomerular albumin filtration and tubular reabsorption. Int J Nephrol2012;
2012:481520
114.
MerlotAMKalinowskiDSRichardsonDR.Unraveling the mysteries of serum albumin-more than just a serum protein. Front Physiol2014;
5:299
115.
PetersT.Jr.,
Serum albumin. Adv Protein Chem1985;
37:161–245
116.
ChienSCChenCYLinCFYehHI.Critical appraisal of the role of serum albumin in cardiovascular disease. Biomark Res2017;
5:31
117.
YaoLXueXYuPNiYChenF.Evans blue dye: a revisit of its applications in biomedicine. Contrast Media Mol Imaging2018;
2018:7628037
118.
LiuHMoynihanKDZhengYSzetoGLLiAVHuangBVan EgerenDSParkCIrvineDJ.Structure-based programming of lymph-node targeting in molecular vaccines. Nature2014;
507:519–22
119.
HoogenboezemENDuvallCL.Harnessing albumin as a carrier for cancer therapies. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2018;
130:73–89
120.
ChatterjeeMBen-JosefERobbRVedaieMSeumSThirumoorthyKPalanichamyKHarbrechtMChakravartiAWilliamsTM.Caveolae-mediated endocytosis is critical for albumin cellular uptake and response to albumin-bound chemotherapy. Cancer Res2017;
77:5925–37
121.
WangLXiaZJ.Combination of albumin-bound paclitaxel and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is effective in treatment of heavily treated relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a case report. Leuk Lymphoma2013;
54:2553–5
122.
BowenRCHahnAWButlerTWKhongHT.Complete response to azacitidine priming and nab-paclitaxel in non-Hodgkin lymphoma resistant to biochemotherapy. Mol Clin Oncol2017;
6:122–4
123.
WangLChenXQXiaZJ.New tricks for old drugs: combination of rituximab and two nanoparticle-delivered chemotherapy drugs, albumin-bound paclitaxel and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, in the treatment of relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma.Leuk Lymphoma2020;
61:2502–6
124.
MurphyEAMajetiBKMukthavaramRAcevedoLMBarnesLAChereshDA.Targeted nanogels: a versatile platform for drug delivery to tumors. Mol Cancer Ther2011;
10:972–82
125.
YuXZhuWDiYGuJGuoZLiHFuDJinC.Triple-functional albumin-based nanoparticles for combined chemotherapy and photodynamic therapy of pancreatic cancer with lymphatic metastases. Int J Nanomed2017;
12:6771–85
126.
MieleESpinelliGPMieleETomaoFTomaoS.Albumin-bound formulation of paclitaxel (abraxane ABI-007) in the treatment of breast cancer. Int J Nanomed2009;
4:99–105
127.
KundrandaMNNiuJ.Albumin-bound paclitaxel in solid tumors: clinical development and future directions. Drug Des Devel Ther2015;
9:3767–77
128.
MartensRPermanyerMWerthKYuKBraunAHalleOHalleSPatzerGEBosnjakBKieferFJanssenAFriedrichsenMPoetzschJKohliKLuederYGutierrez JaureguiREckertNWorbsTGallaMForsterR.Efficient homing of T cells via afferent lymphatics requires mechanical arrest and integrin-supported chemokine guidance. Nat Commun2020;
11:1114
129.
SteinJVNombela-ArrietaC.Chemokine control of lymphocyte trafficking: a general overview. Immunology2005;
116:1–12
130.
HunterMCTeijeiraAHalinC.T cell trafficking through lymphatic vessels. Front Immunol2016;
7:613
131.
HuangBAbrahamWDZhengYBustamante LopezSCLuoSSIrvineDJ.Active targeting of chemotherapy to disseminated tumors using nanoparticle-carrying T cells.Sci Transl Med2015;
7:291ra94
132.
SchmidDParkCGHartlCASubediNCartwrightANPuertoRBZhengYMaiaranaJFreemanGJWucherpfennigKWIrvineDJGoldbergMS.T cell-targeting nanoparticles focus delivery of immunotherapy to improve antitumor immunity. Nat Commun2017;
8:1747
133.
UhlMAulwurmSWischhusenJWeilerMMaJYAlmirezRMangaduRLiuYWPlattenMHerrlingerUMurphyAWongDHWickWHigginsLSWellerM.SD-208, a novel transforming growth factor beta receptor I kinase inhibitor, inhibits growth and invasiveness and enhances immunogenicity of murine and human glioma cells in vitro and in vivo. Cancer Res2004;
64:7954–61
134.
SimonSLabarriereN.PD-1 expression on tumor-specific T cells: friend or foe for immunotherapy?Oncoimmunology2017;
7:e1364828
135.
AhnEArakiKHashimotoMLiWRileyJLCheungJSharpeAHFreemanGJIrvingBAAhmedR.Role of PD-1 during effector CD8 T cell differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2018;
115:4749–54
136.
SauceDAlmeidaJRLarsenMHaroLAutranBFreemanGJAppayV.PD-1 expression on human CD8 T cells depends on both state of differentiation and activation status. Aids2007;
21:2005–13
137.
EgawaGKabashimaK.Skin as a peripheral lymphoid organ: revisiting the concept of skin-associated lymphoid tissues. J Invest Dermatol2011;
131:2178–85
138.
BalanSSaxenaMBhardwajN.Dendritic cell subsets and locations. Int Rev Cell Mol Biol2019;
348:1–68
139.
BrandCUHunzikerTBraathenLR.Studies on human skin lymph containing langerhans cells from sodium lauryl sulphate contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol1992;
99:109S–10S
140.
GranucciFFerreroEFotiMAggujaroDVettorettoKRicciardi-CastagnoliP.Early events in dendritic cell maturation induced by LPS. Microbes Infect1999;
1:1079–84
141.
AlvarezDVollmannEHvon AndrianUH.Mechanisms and consequences of dendritic cell migration. Immunity2008;
29:325–42
142.
SehgalKDhodapkarKMDhodapkarMV.Targeting human dendritic cells in situ to improve vaccines. Immunol Lett2014;
162:59–67
143.
TackenPJde VriesIJTorensmaRFigdorCG.Dendritic-cell immunotherapy: from ex vivo loading to in vivo targeting. Nat Rev Immunol2007;
7:790–802
144.
CruzLJTackenPJRuedaFDomingoJCAlbericioFFigdorCG.Targeting nanoparticles to dendritic cells for immunotherapy. Methods Enzymol2012;
509:143–63
145.
JiaJZhangYXinYJiangCYanBZhaiS.Interactions between nanoparticles and dendritic cells: from the perspective of cancer immunotherapy. Front Oncol2018;
8:404
146.
SanchoDMourao-SaDJoffreOPSchulzORogersNCPenningtonDJCarlyleJR.Reis e sousa C. Tumor therapy in mice via antigen targeting to a novel, DC-restricted C-type lectin. J Clin Invest2008;
118:2098–110
147.
SteadSOKiretaSMcInnesSJPKetteFDSivanathanKNKimJCueto-DiazEJCuninFDurandJODrogemullerCJCarrollRPVoelckerNHCoatesPT.Murine and non-human primate dendritic cell targeting nanoparticles for in vivo generation of regulatory T-cells. ACS Nano2018;
12:6637–47
148.
MullerWA.New mechanisms and pathways for monocyte recruitment. J Exp Med2001;
194:F47–51
149.
PalframanRTJungSChengGWeningerWLuoYDorfMLittmanDRRollinsBJZweerinkHRotAvon AndrianUH.Inflammatory chemokine transport and presentation in HEV: a remote control mechanism for monocyte recruitment to lymph nodes in inflamed tissues. J Exp Med2001;
194:1361–73
150.
JanatpourMJHudakSSatheMSedgwickJDMcEvoyLM.Tumor necrosis factor-dependent segmental control of MIG expression by high endothelial venules in inflamed lymph nodes regulates monocyte recruitment. J Exp Med2001;
194:1375–84
151.
GretzJENorburyCCAndersonAOProudfootAEShawS.Lymph-borne chemokines and other low molecular weight molecules reach high endothelial venules via specialized conduits while a functional barrier limits access to the lymphocyte microenvironments in lymph node cortex. J Exp Med2000;
192:1425–40
152.
TehYCDingJLNgLGChongSZ.Capturing the fantastic voyage of monocytes through time and space. Front Immunol2019;
10:834
153.
JakubzickCGautierELGibbingsSLSojkaDKSchlitzerAJohnsonTEIvanovSDuanQBalaSCondonTvan RooijenNGraingerJRBelkaidYMa'ayanARichesDWYokoyamaWMGinhouxFHensonPMRandolphGJ.Minimal differentiation of classical monocytes as they survey steady-state tissues and transport antigen to lymph nodes. Immunity2013;
39:599–610
154.
TracNChenLYZhangALiaoCPPoonCWangJAndoYJooJGarriCShenKKaniKGrossMEChungEJ.CCR2-targeted micelles for anti-cancer peptide delivery and immune stimulation. J Control Release2021;
329:614–23
155.
ChungEJMlinarLBNordKSugimotoMJWonderEAlenghatFJFangYTirrellM.Monocyte-targeting supramolecular micellar assemblies: a molecular diagnostic tool for atherosclerosis. Adv Healthc Mater2015;
4:367–76
156.
PoonCChowdhuriSKuoCHFangYAlenghatFJHyattDKaniKGrossMEChungEJ.Protein mimetic and anticancer properties of monocyte-targeting peptide amphiphile micelles. ACS Biomater Sci Eng2017;
3:3273–82
157.
ChinDDPoonCTracNWangJJooJJiangZJYMariaNSSJacobsREChungEJCookJ.Collagenase-cleavable peptide amphiphile micelles as a novel theranostic strategy in atherosclerosis. Adv Ther2020;
3:1900196
158.
JooJPoonCYooSPChungEJ.Shape effects of peptide amphiphile micelles for targeting monocytes. Molecules2018;
23:2786
159.
JonesDMinW.An overview of lymphatic vessels and their emerging role in cardiovascular disease. J Cardiovasc Dis Res2011;
2:141–52
160.
SchwartzNChalasaniMLSLiTMFengZShipmanWDLuTT.Lymphatic function in autoimmune diseases. Front Immunol2019;
10:519
161.
TangYWangXLiJNieYLiaoGYuYLiC.Overcoming the reticuloendothelial system barrier to drug delivery with a “Don't-Eat-Us” strategy. ACS Nano2019;
13:13015–26
162.
SinghA.Eliciting B cell immunity against infectious diseases using nanovaccines. Nat Nanotechnol2021;
16:16–24
163.
SchudelAFrancisDMThomasSN.Material design for lymph node drug delivery. Nat Rev Mater2019;
4:415–28
164.
WangFLiYShenYWangAWangSXieT.The functions and applications of RGD in tumor therapy and tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci2013;
14:13447–62
165.
RuoslahtiE.Tumor penetrating peptides for improved drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev2017;
110-111:3–12
166.
GuoQLiuYXuKRenKSunW.Mouse lymphatic endothelial cell targeted probes: anti-LYVE-1 antibody-based magnetic nanoparticles. Int J Nanomed2013;
8:2273–84
167.
LouieDAPLiaoS.Lymph node subcapsular sinus macrophages as the frontline of lymphatic immune defense. Front Immunol2019;
10:347
168.
ChowALucasDHidalgoAMendez-FerrerSHashimotoDScheiermannCBattistaMLeboeufMPropheteCvan RooijenNTanakaMMeradMFrenettePS.Bone marrow CD169+ macrophages promote the retention of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells in the mesenchymal stem cell niche. J Exp Med2011;
208:261–71
169.
HarwoodNEBatistaFD.Antigen presentation to B cells. F1000. Biol Rep2010;
2:87
170.
ChenWCKawasakiNNycholatCMHanSPilotteJCrockerPRPaulsonJC.Antigen delivery to macrophages using liposomal nanoparticles targeting sialoadhesin/CD169. PLoS One2012;
7:e39039
171.
AgerA.High endothelial venules and other blood vessels: critical regulators of lymphoid organ development and function. Front Immunol2017;
8:45
