Severe morphology changes and necrosis were obtained by H&E staining compared to the control group

Severe morphology changes and necrosis were obtained by H&E staining compared to the control group. strong class=”kwd-title” Keywords: Nanoparticles, Radiotherapy, Immunotherapy, Immune checkpoint blockade therapy Introduction Nanotechnology has occupied worldwide attention in medical, chemistry, biology, and materials fields. In the oncology landscape, nanoparticles (NPs) were implicated in three main applications: drug vectorization, radiation-sensitization and medical imaging [1, 2]. The most popular and exceedingly used NP platforms are Decitabine micelles, liposomes, polymeric NPs, and inorganic NPs [3C6]. Accordingly, nanomaterials have the properties to transport chemotherapeutic brokers, radiosensitizers, oxygen storage brokers and phototherapy brokers, etc. Modified-NPs can successfully transport drugs across physiological barriers due to their high surface area, facile tunability and stability. Through enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect, NPs increases the accumulation of drugs in the tumor foci, including the classic radiosensitizers [7]. Radiotherapy (RT) is usually a mainstay strategy used to most tumor eradication or Decitabine control. However, there is still a large challenge to enhance the therapeutic effects and reduce side effects [8]. In last decades, RT emerged as one of the most primary cancer treatment strategies, more than 50% of cancer patients have been participated in this treatment [9]. In the context of RT, the ultimate therapeutic benefit is usually to impede the tumor progression, while decreasing the additional risk of healthy tissue [9]. Moreover, NPs distribution and accumulation were up-regulated by the conversation between RT and tumor microenvironment (TME), which showed the exciting opportunity to enhance therapeutic benefit [10]. More recently, intensity modulated RT (IMRT), image guided RT (IGRT) and Rabbit Polyclonal to MB stereotactic ablative RT Decitabine (SABR) have been considered as modern RT technologies, which are guideline-recommended accurate treatments to patients with mature and acceptable outcome [11, 12]. Besides, with a century of research on RT biological basis, 5 crucial factors were involved in determining the net effect of RT on tumors, including (1) cellular damage repairing; (2) repopulation ability of cells; (3) cell cycle redistribution; (4) cell reoxygenation; (5) radiosensitivity [13]. Modern therapy schemes are based on orchestrating these factors to boost tumor eradication, while reducing normal regions side effects. However, the cooperation radiobiological mechanisms were yet clear. NPs showed the positive ability to modulate these factors in tumor suppression treatment [14C16]. Furthermore, with appropriate radiosensitivity, NPs can control cells repopulation by ameliorating the immune responses in tumor milieu [17C19]. Owing to the development of nanotechnology, nanomaterials with heavy-metal showed a promising radiosensitization to enhance the favorable RT outcomes, such as gold and silver NPs, which can efficiently absorb, scatter, and emit radiation energy and were easily eliminated by metabolism [20, 21]. In addition, mesoporous silica, liposomes, bovine serum albumin (BSA) protein and polymeric were also used to deliver radiosensitizers to enhance RT effect [22C25]. Meanwhile, the delivery of certain chemical radiosensitizers by nanomaterials can improve their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics, thereby promoting them to reach the tumor foci and enhance their anti-tumor responses [8]. Although the flourishing development of the NPs and RT, clinical translation remains a challenge, such as influence of nanoformulation properties, radiation sources selection, and complex tumor foci microenvironment [8]. Nevertheless, the strategy of combining RT and nanotechnology for cancer treatment still has a considerable promise in the future. Therefore, combining RT and nanotechnology has broad prospects in cancer treatment. After RT, inevitable recurrence is still noted in 10C38% of patients and exhibits a higher risk of metastasis, which contributes to worse clinical outcome Decitabine [26]. Strategies to prevent tumor recurrence.