TY - JOUR
AU1 - Wang, Yingshuai
AU2 - Yang, Tian
AU3 - He, Qianjun
AB - Abstract As an emerging and promising treatment method, gas therapy has attracted more and more attention for treatment of inflammation-related diseases, especially cancer. However, therapeutic/therapy-assisted gases (NO, CO, H2S, H2, O2, SO2 and CO2) and most of their prodrugs lack the abilities of active intratumoral accumulation and controlled gas release, resulting in limited cancer therapy efficacy and potential side effects. Therefore, development of nanomedicines to realize tumor-targeted and controlled release of therapeutic/therapy-assisted gases is greatly desired, and also the combination of other therapeutic modes with gas therapy by multifunctional nanocarrier platforms can augment cancer therapy efficacy and also reduce their side effects. The design of nanomedicines with these functions is vitally important, but challenging. In this review, we summarize a series of engineering strategies for construction of advanced gas-releasing nanomedicines from four aspects: (1) stimuli-responsive strategies for controlled gas release; (2) catalytic strategies for controlled gas release; (3) tumor-targeted gas delivery strategies; (4) multi-model combination strategies based on gas therapy. Moreover, we highlight current issues and gaps in knowledge, and envisage current trends and future prospects of advanced nanomedicines for gas therapy of cancer. This review aims to inspire and guide the engineering of advanced gas-releasing nanomedicines. nanomedicine, gas therapy, drug delivery, controlled release, cancer treatment INTRODUCTION Cancer is a major disease endangering human health because of its high heterogeneity and complexity. Simple elimination of cancer cells with cytotoxic radio-/chemo-therapeutic drugs is often not very efficient, and can even be adverse because of stimulated drug resistance, metastasis and recurrence. In recent years, with advances in knowledge of cancer, the tumor microenvironment (TME) has been discovered to be of vital importance for occurrence and evolution of tumors. The TME has some unique pathological characteristics including hypoxia, high reducibility, slight acidity, over-expression of hydrogen peroxide and increased vascular permeability, mainly resulting from the rapid energy metabolism of cancer cells. Signaling molecules in the TME have indispensable roles in the communication among various cancer-associated cells, which ensures the orderly running of cancer growth, proliferation, resistance and metastasis. Functional damage to one or two TME factors often causes compensatory self-repair or even resistance and circumvention, but the interdiction of signalling pathways can efficiently destroy the TME [1]. Among signalling molecules, some endogenous gasotransmitters including NO, CO and H2S have important roles in promoting growth, proliferation and metastasis of cancer-associated cells in the TME [2]. A small amount of endogenous gasotransmitter can regulate vasodilatation, neurotransmission, anti-inflammatory and antioxidative reactions. The commonly accepted mechanism is that NO, CO and H2S gasotransmitters solidly bind to haem iron centres in various proteins, especially haemoglobin in mitochondria, to regulate cellular bioenergetics (Table 1) with a ‘Janus-faced’ pharmacological character [3]. Low concentrations (below nM level) of these gases in the TME mediate antioxidant, signalling and positive bioenergetic mechanisms for protection of cancer cells in favour of tumor cell proliferation, growth and metastasis, while high concentrations (at or above nM level) of these gases are toxic to cancer cells by inhibiting mitochondrial respiratory metabolism. Both complete inhibition of their expressions in the TME and distinct enhancement of their concentrations by stimulation or delivery will seriously affect the behaviours of cancer cells, including impairment of cell protection and self-repair functions, and quick exhaustion of cancer cell energy. In addition, these gasotransmitters can sensitize and enhance other traditional therapies, and can also reduce the toxic side effects of traditional therapies by protecting normal cells from non-specific damage [4]. Such a selective cancer-killing and normal-protecting effect is highly desirable, and the application of these therapeutic gases for cancer treatment (termed ‘gas therapy of cancer’) is therefore drawing increasing attention. Table 1. Key concentration parameters and cancer therapeutic mechanisms of gases. Gas . Aqueous solubility (RT, 1 atm) . Cancer therapeutic concentration . Blood poisoning concentration . Anticancer mechanisms . NO 1.8 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 25 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsImpairs cellular bioenergetics after conversion to peroxynitrite CO 0.93 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 100 ppm gas inhalation concentrationCarboxyhaemoglobin level ≥10%30 nM (0.84 ppm) in heart tissue Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteins H2S 0.11 M ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 10 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsBe toxic by forming persulfides and polysulphides H2 0.8 mM Works in the nM∼mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear No obvious toxicity in spite of high concentration Induces oxidation stress and ROS production O2 0.26 mM Most experiments used μM∼mM level as hypoxic fraction in tumor ranges from 10 to 30% Highly biocompatible but toxic at the partial pressure of oxygen >0.5 atm Blocks tumor angiogenesis and metastasis by abrogating hypoxia in the TME CO2 34 mM Above solubility to form gas bubbles for assisting imaging and drug release Toxic under the explosion of air with high CO2 concentration (>5%) No visible therapeutic function SO2 1.47 M Works in the mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear Negligible haemolytic activity (haemolysis <4%) at 15.8 mg/L SO2 Does oxidative damage to tissues/cellsDepletes intratumoral over-expressed GSH, generating oxidative stress Gas . Aqueous solubility (RT, 1 atm) . Cancer therapeutic concentration . Blood poisoning concentration . Anticancer mechanisms . NO 1.8 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 25 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsImpairs cellular bioenergetics after conversion to peroxynitrite CO 0.93 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 100 ppm gas inhalation concentrationCarboxyhaemoglobin level ≥10%30 nM (0.84 ppm) in heart tissue Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteins H2S 0.11 M ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 10 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsBe toxic by forming persulfides and polysulphides H2 0.8 mM Works in the nM∼mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear No obvious toxicity in spite of high concentration Induces oxidation stress and ROS production O2 0.26 mM Most experiments used μM∼mM level as hypoxic fraction in tumor ranges from 10 to 30% Highly biocompatible but toxic at the partial pressure of oxygen >0.5 atm Blocks tumor angiogenesis and metastasis by abrogating hypoxia in the TME CO2 34 mM Above solubility to form gas bubbles for assisting imaging and drug release Toxic under the explosion of air with high CO2 concentration (>5%) No visible therapeutic function SO2 1.47 M Works in the mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear Negligible haemolytic activity (haemolysis <4%) at 15.8 mg/L SO2 Does oxidative damage to tissues/cellsDepletes intratumoral over-expressed GSH, generating oxidative stress Open in new tab Table 1. Key concentration parameters and cancer therapeutic mechanisms of gases. Gas . Aqueous solubility (RT, 1 atm) . Cancer therapeutic concentration . Blood poisoning concentration . Anticancer mechanisms . NO 1.8 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 25 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsImpairs cellular bioenergetics after conversion to peroxynitrite CO 0.93 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 100 ppm gas inhalation concentrationCarboxyhaemoglobin level ≥10%30 nM (0.84 ppm) in heart tissue Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteins H2S 0.11 M ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 10 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsBe toxic by forming persulfides and polysulphides H2 0.8 mM Works in the nM∼mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear No obvious toxicity in spite of high concentration Induces oxidation stress and ROS production O2 0.26 mM Most experiments used μM∼mM level as hypoxic fraction in tumor ranges from 10 to 30% Highly biocompatible but toxic at the partial pressure of oxygen >0.5 atm Blocks tumor angiogenesis and metastasis by abrogating hypoxia in the TME CO2 34 mM Above solubility to form gas bubbles for assisting imaging and drug release Toxic under the explosion of air with high CO2 concentration (>5%) No visible therapeutic function SO2 1.47 M Works in the mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear Negligible haemolytic activity (haemolysis <4%) at 15.8 mg/L SO2 Does oxidative damage to tissues/cellsDepletes intratumoral over-expressed GSH, generating oxidative stress Gas . Aqueous solubility (RT, 1 atm) . Cancer therapeutic concentration . Blood poisoning concentration . Anticancer mechanisms . NO 1.8 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 25 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsImpairs cellular bioenergetics after conversion to peroxynitrite CO 0.93 mM ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 100 ppm gas inhalation concentrationCarboxyhaemoglobin level ≥10%30 nM (0.84 ppm) in heart tissue Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteins H2S 0.11 M ≥nM levelMost experiments used μM level 10 ppm gas inhalation concentration Gasotransmitter similar to NO, inhibits the mitochondrial respiratory metabolism of cancer cells by solidly binding to haem iron centres of many proteinsBe toxic by forming persulfides and polysulphides H2 0.8 mM Works in the nM∼mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear No obvious toxicity in spite of high concentration Induces oxidation stress and ROS production O2 0.26 mM Most experiments used μM∼mM level as hypoxic fraction in tumor ranges from 10 to 30% Highly biocompatible but toxic at the partial pressure of oxygen >0.5 atm Blocks tumor angiogenesis and metastasis by abrogating hypoxia in the TME CO2 34 mM Above solubility to form gas bubbles for assisting imaging and drug release Toxic under the explosion of air with high CO2 concentration (>5%) No visible therapeutic function SO2 1.47 M Works in the mM level but the lowest effective concentration is unclear Negligible haemolytic activity (haemolysis <4%) at 15.8 mg/L SO2 Does oxidative damage to tissues/cellsDepletes intratumoral over-expressed GSH, generating oxidative stress Open in new tab Compared with NO, CO and H2S gases, H2 has similar anticancer functions and mechanisms, but is much safer because there is no blood poisoning risk at high concentrations and no pro-tumor effects in spite of hydrogen concentration (Table 1). O2, SO2 and CO2 have different anticancer mechanisms. The intratumoral delivery of O2 mainly aims to abrogate hypoxia in the TME for blockage of tumor angiogenesis and metastasis, and also to sensitize other oxygen-mediated therapies such as photodynamic therapy and radiotherapy (Table 1). CO2 gas has no obvious therapeutic effect but is usually used to mediate contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of tumor and controlled release of therapeutic agents (Table 1). In addition, NO and SO2 gases can cause oxidative damage to various organelles of cancer cells and deplete intratumoral over-expressed glutathione (GSH), generating oxidative stress (Table 1). In general, most therapeutic gases (NO, CO, H2S, H2, and O2) can sensitize and enhance other traditional therapy methods and also reduce the toxic side effects of traditional therapies. Therapeutic gases are aimlessly diffusible everywhere in the body, and it is difficult for them to effectively accumulate in target tissues, leading to limited gas therapy efficacy and even potential blood poisoning risk for NO, CO and H2S. Therefore, gas-releasing nanomedicines with controlled size and suitable surface properties are being developed to achieve tumor-targeted delivery of gases by integrating gases or gas-releasing molecules (GRMs, or termed gas prodrugs) with nanocarriers by active and passive targeting routes. Moreover, a range of stimuli-responsive GRMs has been developed to realize controlled gas release for enhanced efficacy of gas therapy, which is also assisted by multifunctional nanocarriers. Furthermore, versatile nanomedicines based on multifunctional nanocarriers provide a platform for combination of gas therapy with other traditional therapy modes such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Based on the important roles of nanomedicines in gas therapy, this review proposes a series of strategies for engineering advanced nanomedicines for augmented gas therapy of cancer from the following four aspects: (1) stimuli-responsive strategies for controlled gas release; (2) catalytic strategies for controlled gas release; (3) tumor-targeted gas delivery strategies; and (4) multi-model combination strategies based on gas therapy (Fig. 1). Figure 1. Open in new tabDownload slide Strategies for engineering advanced nanomedicines for augmented gas therapy of cancer. Figure 1. Open in new tabDownload slide Strategies for engineering advanced nanomedicines for augmented gas therapy of cancer. Two stimuli-responsive strategies are introduced for controlled gas release from the view of nanomedicine structure, including engineering of stimuli-responsive prodrugs and stimuli-responsive nanocarriers. Responsive prodrugs and nanocarriers are classed in terms of stimuli sources including external and internal stimuli. We then summarize three types of catalytic strategies for constructing catalytic gas-releasing nanomedicines from the viewpoint of catalytic methods, including photocatalysis, chemical catalysis and enzyme catalysis. We propose a series of tumor-targeted gas delivery strategies for transport nanomedicine, from blood to tumor tissue to tumor cell to intracellular lysosome and then to mitochondrion and nucleus, as well as external magnet-guided delivery. Various combination strategies for enhancing therapy outcome are summarized, by integrating gas therapy with other therapy modes, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, photothermal therapy, photodynamic therapy and sonodynamic therapy, into a single nanomedicine. Finally, the potential inspiration and application of proposed engineering strategies for gas-releasing nanomedicine development are envisaged. The current trends and future prospects on advanced nanomedicines for gas therapy of cancer are also envisaged. The technical challenges and difficulties are also discussed. STRATEGIES FOR ENGINEERING STIMULI-RESPONSIVE GAS-RELEASING NANOMEDICINES Controlled release of therapeutic gases at the tumor site is one of important routes to enhance gas therapy efficacy and to avoid potential blood poisoning from CO, NO and H2S. Here, we summarize two effective strategies for controlled gas release: stimuli-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines and catalytic gas generation. In terms of nanomedicine structure, stimuli-responsive nanomedicines could be designed by developing responsive GRMs and/or responsive nanocarriers. We review strategies for engineering stimuli-responsive prodrugs and nanocarriers for construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines. Engineering of stimuli-responsive GRMs for construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines Stimuli sources can be divided into two types: exogenous and endogenous stimuli. Exogenous stimuli include light, X-ray, ultrasound, magnet field and heat, while over-expressed chemicals in the TME including H2O2, lactic acid, glucose and enzymes can be used as endogenous stimuli for stimuli-responsive gas release. Exogenous stimuli-responsive release is easy to manipulate externally, and it is also easy to control the rate and amount of release by adjusting the power and irradiation time of exogenous stimuli. By comparison, endogenous stimuli-responsive release is not limited to tissue depth. Both exogenous and endogenous stimuli-responsive strategies have been widely used to design responsive GRMs and nanocarriers. The following two sections describe strategies for designing exogenous and endogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs and nanocarriers by taking some typical examples. Exogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs for nanomedicines Light stimuli-responsive GRMs have attracted great interest for their high spatiotemporal resolution and non-invasive nature. The optical focus enables accurate location and facile control to light. Metal carbonyls (MeCO) are a type of general CO donors (GRMs), which are stabilized by coordination attraction between transition metals and carbonyls and thus are sensitive to UV and/or visible light for photochemical degradation into CO. The coordination feature of MeCO-type GRMs can be used to conjugate them onto functional nanocarriers which are able to coordinate with transition metal ions. In addition, some excellent nanocarriers can be used to improve the dispersion and biocompatibility of GRMs as well as their bioavailability. According to this principle, T. Ueno et al. used biocompatible ferritin to coordinate and load manganese and ruthenium carbonyl complexes (MnCO and RuCO) [5,6]. They found that the MnCO-loaded ferritin nanomedicine (Fr-MnCO) maintained the UV/visible light responsiveness of MnCO (Fig. 2A). The amount of CO release was well regulated by light irradiation intensity and time [5]. Ferritin is an excellent nanocarrier with high biocompatibility, small size, large cavity for drug loading and plentiful surface groups which can be used for coordination with many transition metal ions. Therefore, it is especially useful for loading and delivery of transition metal-contained prodrugs such as MeCO. In addition, the active spots inside the internal surface of ferritin can be used for in situ growth of various size-controllable metal-contained functional nanoparticles, for example, CuS and Fe3O4, useful for the integration of imaging with therapy. Figure 2. Open in new tabDownload slide Typical gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed with exogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs. (A) Visible light-responsive Fr-MnCO nanomedicine for controlled CO release. Adapted with permission from [5]. (B) NIR light-responsive MnCO-GO nanomedicine for controlled CO release. Reprinted with permission from [7]. (C) US-responsive BNN6‐SPION@hMSN (left) and hMSN-LA-CO2 (right) nanomedicines for controlled NO and CO2 release, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [8] and [9]. (D) X-ray-responsive PEG-USMSs-SNO nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [10]. (E) NIR photothermal-responsive SPION@PDA@MSN-SNO and FeCO@MCN-PEG nanomedicines for controlled NO/CO release, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [11] and [12]. (F) Magnetothermal-responsive IONP-MCO nanomedicine for controlled CO release. Reprinted with permission from [13]. Figure 2. Open in new tabDownload slide Typical gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed with exogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs. (A) Visible light-responsive Fr-MnCO nanomedicine for controlled CO release. Adapted with permission from [5]. (B) NIR light-responsive MnCO-GO nanomedicine for controlled CO release. Reprinted with permission from [7]. (C) US-responsive BNN6‐SPION@hMSN (left) and hMSN-LA-CO2 (right) nanomedicines for controlled NO and CO2 release, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [8] and [9]. (D) X-ray-responsive PEG-USMSs-SNO nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [10]. (E) NIR photothermal-responsive SPION@PDA@MSN-SNO and FeCO@MCN-PEG nanomedicines for controlled NO/CO release, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [11] and [12]. (F) Magnetothermal-responsive IONP-MCO nanomedicine for controlled CO release. Reprinted with permission from [13]. However, most GRMs are only sensitive to UV and visible light, leading to limited therapy depth and high phototoxicity. By comparison, the use of near-infrared (NIR) light as a stimulus to design NIR-responsive nanomedicine undoubtedly provides a better choice because of higher tissue penetrability and lower phototoxicity. In this review, we propose two strategies for design and construction of NIR-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines, including direct synthesis of NIR-responsive GRMs and use of photochemical energy conversion between NIR-absorbed nanocarriers and GRMs for NIR-responsive gas release. Based on the strategy, we constructed MnCO-coordinated and bis-N-nitroso compounds (BNN)-stacked graphene oxide nanomedicines (MnCO-GON and BNN-GON) by conjugation of MnCO onto bipyridyl-modified graphene oxide nanosheet (GON) and by π−π stacking between BNN and GON, respectively (Fig. 2B) [7,14]. By virtue of the NIR absorption and photoelectronic characteristics of GON and the photochemical energy conversion between GON and MnCO/BNN, CO/NO were released from the MnCO-GON/BNN-GON nanomedicines under NIR light irradiation with good responsiveness and high ability for controlled release. Besides GON, other NIR-absorbed nanocarriers with GRM-bonded capacity such as black phosphorus nanosheet (BPN) and metal borides could be exploited in future for NIR-responsive gas release. In addition, the NIR-photothermal effect of GON and BPN could also be developed for combination of photothermal therapy with gas therapy. Ultrasound (US) has high tissue penetration depth (up to 20 cm deep, 1 MHz US wave) and can easily be focused on a small area of the body. Most US-controlled gas-releasing nanomedicines were constructed by encapsulating gas into liposome, and gas release was achieved through the US destruction of liposome. Low gas-loading capacity, poor structural stability, easy gas leakage and one-time/unrepeatable gas release have restricted further application of liposome-based nanomedicines. One solution is encapsulation of US-responsive GRMs into hollow mesoporous silica nanoparticles (hMSN) to construct an US-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicine. It was found that US can stimulate decomposition of N,N'-di-sec-butyl-N,N'-dinitroso-1,4-phenylenediamine (BNN6) into NO free radical, and can also accelerate decomposition of carbonate into CO2 gas under intratumoral acidic conditions by the ultrasound cavitation effect (Fig. 2C). Therefore, BNN6 and carbonate-adsorbed L-arginine (LA-CO2) were encapsulated into hMSN to construct two kinds of US-responsive nanomedicines, realizing US-responsive NO and CO2 release, respectively [8,9]. Such nanomedicines demonstrated high gas release controllability and repeatability. Furthermore, low intensity US (1.0 W/cm2) can cause effective generation and instant explosion of CO2 bubbles, inducing immediate necrosis of panc-1 cells and vascular destruction within panc-1 tumors and thus inhibiting growth of panc-1 tumor. Long-term stabilization of gases within nanocarriers is challenging, but it is much easier for solid GRMs compared with gases. Moreover, triggered gas release from gas-encapsulated nanomedicine is often one-off/unrepeatable, whereas that from GRMs-loaded nanomedicine is repeatable multiple times. The relatively higher stability of hMSN also plays an important role in avoiding leakage of gas prodrugs. In addition, hMSN is a versatile theranostic platform with high specific surface area, adjustable pore size and large central cavity in great support of loading/encapsulating large amounts of various agents including hydrophilic and hydrophobic drugs, imaging molecules/nanoparticles, genes and proteins. X-ray has high tissue penetration capability and can be used for controlled gas release. We discovered that S-nitrosothiols (SNO) were sensitive to X-ray for decomposition into NO. Therefore, an X-ray-responsive nanomedicine was constructed by loading SNO into MSN to successfully realize X-ray-responsive NO release in vivo (Fig. 2D) [10]. However, the mechanism of X-ray-triggered NO release from SNO is unclear. X-ray-sensitive GRMs are rarely reported and should be exploited, and their mechanisms for X-ray-responsive gas release are also worthy of in-depth research. In addition, radiotherapy can be easily integrated with gas therapy because both are based on X-ray irradiation. Some GRMs are relatively stable at normal body temperature but sensitive to high heat for thermal decomposition, such as SNO and MeCO. Therefore, thermally responsive gas release is possibly chased by combination of thermal-sensitive GRMs and stimuli-responsive heat-generating nanocarriers, such as polydopamine (PDA) nanoparticle, mesoporous carbon nanoparticle (MCN) and iron oxide nanoparticle (ION). Light and magnetic fields are two of the most useful exogenous stimuli sources for heat generation. The constructed PDA@MSN-SNO and FeCO@MCN-PEG nanomedicines showed NIR-photothermal-responsive NO and CO release behaviours because of the NIR-photothermal effect of PDA and MCN platforms (Fig. 2E) [11,12]. Similarly, the ION-MCO nanomedicine achieved magnetothermal-responsive CO release from the magnetothermal effect of ION (Fig. 2F) [13]. Such a strategy using thermal energy conversion between stimuli-responsive heat-generating nanocarriers and thermal-sensitive GRMs provides a good route for engineering and constructing thermal-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines. Endogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs for nanomedicines The level of H2O2 in the TME is significantly higher than in normal cells/tissues, which can be used for intratumoral H2O2-responsive gas release to enhance the efficacy of gas therapy in tumor. Therefore, it is of practical significance to achieve responsive gas release using H2O2 in the TME. It was found that L-arginine (Arg) and MeCO could be oxidized by strong oxidants such as ·OH to generate NO and CO, and H2O2 can be decomposed into ·OH through US stimulation and MeCO-mediated Fenton-like reaction. Therefore, Arg@hMSN and MnCO@hMSN nanomedicines were constructed to realize H2O2-responsive NO and CO release, respectively (Fig. 3A) [15,16]. High H2O2-responsiveness enabled the nanomedicines to release NO/CO in H2O2-over-expressed cancer cells rather than in normal cells, exhibiting high anticancer selectivity. It should be noted that the level of H2O2 in the TME is still limited (generally < 20 μM) and is also easily exhausted during reaction with gas prodrugs, probably limiting the amount of gas production. However, on the other hand, depletion of intratumoral H2O2 can also induce apoptosis of tumor cells because H2O2 is a necessary signalling molecule in tumor mediating the pro-survival and pro-proliferative pathways and the metabolic adaption of tumor cells to the TME [17]. Therefore, the anticancer effect of H2O2-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines can result from two aspects, gas generation and H2O2 depletion, which was rarely recognized before. Figure 3. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed by endogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs. (A) The H2O2-responsive Arg@MSN and MnCO@MSN nanomedicines for controlled NO and CO release, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [15] and [16]. (B) The acid-responsive AB@MSN and MBN nanomedicines for controlled H2 release. Reproduced with permission from [18] and [19]. (C) The glucose-responsive Arg@hMON-GOx nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [20]. (D) The GSH-responsive p(GD-Az-JSK)/DOX nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [21]. (E) The enzyme-responsive CO and NO delivery systems. Reproduced with permission from [22] and [23]. Figure 3. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed by endogenous stimuli-responsive GRMs. (A) The H2O2-responsive Arg@MSN and MnCO@MSN nanomedicines for controlled NO and CO release, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [15] and [16]. (B) The acid-responsive AB@MSN and MBN nanomedicines for controlled H2 release. Reproduced with permission from [18] and [19]. (C) The glucose-responsive Arg@hMON-GOx nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [20]. (D) The GSH-responsive p(GD-Az-JSK)/DOX nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [21]. (E) The enzyme-responsive CO and NO delivery systems. Reproduced with permission from [22] and [23]. Weak acidity (pH = 6.5−6.8) in the TME, which is caused by a large proportion of anaerobic glycolysis, is an important characteristic of malignant tumors, and therefore this difference in pH value can be used as a stimulus to design responsive nanomedicines. Ammonia borane (AB) is a hydrogen prodrug with superhigh hydrogen content but poor stability. By amounts of hydrogen bonding interaction between AB and MSN, AB was loaded and stabilized within MSN (AB@MSN) with a superhigh hydrogen loading capacity (130.6 mg H2/g MSN), 1370 times higher than that of traditional H2 gas@liposome nanomedicine [18]. The constructed AB@MSN nanomedicine can release H2 in response to the intratumoral acidic environment (Fig. 3B left). Similarly, Zhang et al. used polydopamine (PDA) nanoparticles to encapsulate and stabilize AB through the attraction of hydrogen bonding, and to integrate H2 therapy with photothermal therapy (PTT) by virtue of the excellent photothermal effect of PDA [24]. Moreover, we developed a new ultrasound-assisted chemical etching method to synthesize MgB2 nanosheet (MBN) and found that MBN can be decomposed by acid to generate H2 (Fig. 3B right) [19]. We have discovered that direct nanocrystallization of GRMs is another strategy to construct gas-releasing nanomedicines. In addition, strong gastric acid can be used as an acidic stimulus source for oral administration of acid-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines for gastric cancer therapy because gas diffusion from the stomach to gastric tumor is relatively quick and easy. Glucose is a main nutrient and energy source for tumor growth, and tumor consumes more glucose than normal tissues to maintain its rapid growth. Therefore, glucose is often used as an endogenous stimulus for controlled drug release. The content of H2O2 in the TEM is limited, but glucose oxidase (GOx) can catalyse oxidation of glucose to produce gluconic acid and H2O2, which could further oxidize Arg to generate NO. Based on this principle, Fan et al. constructed a glucose-responsive Arg@hMON-GOx nanomedicine by co-loading GOx and Arg into hollow mesoporous organic silica nanoparticles (hMON) for controlled NO release, as shown in Fig. 3C [20]. The results showed that higher intracellular glucose concentration caused more NO release, and thus a more significant anti-tumor effect. This nanomedicine had high responsiveness to glucose for NO release but poor ability for controlled release. The design and development of novel glucose-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicine with higher performance deserve further study. GSH is over-expressed and accumulated in the TME and therefore can be used as endogenous stimulus source to control gas release. Meanwhile, glutathione-S-transferase (GST) is also selectively over-expressed in some cancer cells such as glioma, and mainly catalyses the covalent reaction in vivo between many chemicals and GSH. Therefore, GSH and GST are often combined to trigger controlled drug release for cancer therapy. JSK (O2-(2,4-dinitrophenyl)-1-[(4-ethoxycarbonyl)piperazin-1-yl]diazen-1-ium-1,2-diolate) is a typically GSH/GST-responsive NO prodrug, which can react with GSH under catalysis of GST to yield NO. Kong et al. conjugated JSK onto a copolymer that could self-assemble into nanoparticles, realizing responsive NO release in HepG2 cells (Fig. 3D) [21]. A number of GSH-responsive gas prodrugs have been developed but their nanoformulations are rarely reported. As the intratumoral level of GSH (mM level) is remarkably higher than that of H2O2 (μM level), GSH should be a plentiful stimulus source to trigger generation of enough gas for cancer therapy. Therefore, development of GSH-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines is promising. Some enzymes over-expressed in tumor can also be used as endogenous stimuli to trigger gas release from responsive nanomedicines. Release of gases is achieved using different types or concentrations of enzymes. Carbonxyloxy-/phosphoryloxy-substituted (η4-cyclohexadiene)Fe(CO)3 complexes reacted with esterase/phosphatase to generate a (dienol)Fe(CO)3 intermediate, which was further oxidized to produce CO (Fig. 3E left) [22]. Such an esterase-/phosphatase-responsive strategy has been reported for controlled CO release. However, neither esterase nor phosphatase is specific in the TME, and the consecutive reactions require oxidative conditions, which are also lacking in the TME. Zhao et al. caged unstable diazeniumdiolate (NONOate) with glucose and hydrogel to form a stable galactosyl-caged NONOate hydrogel, which can be decoded by galactosidase for responsive NO release (Fig. 3E right) [23]. However, galactosidase is not specifically expressed in tumor, and therefore they further designed a specific galactose, which is indigestible in the body but can be digested by the designed galactosidase, to cage/stabilize NONOate and developed a ‘bump-and-hole’ strategy to realize customized galactosidase-controlled NO release [25]. Such a ‘bump-and-hole’ strategy provides a new route for enzyme-responsive gas release. In addition, there are many enzymes such as matrix metalloproteases (MMPs) over-expressed in the tumor, which can be used to trigger gas release. Design of enzyme-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines is worth further attention. Engineering of stimuli-responsive nanocarriers for construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines Most GRMs are either easy to spontaneously decompose or only sensitive to some unfavourable stimuli sources such as UV/visible light and high heat, causing limited gas release controllability and bioavailability. Nanocarriers can be designed to be responsive to stimuli for controlled gas release, which could shield the deficit of GRMs. Ideal stimuli-responsive nanocarriers should be engineered to be destructible, degradable, decomposable or convertible. Destructible and degradable nanocarriers can be used to encapsulate spontaneously decomposable GRMs, while convertible nanocarriers can transfer the carrier-absorbing energy to sensitive GRMs for indirectly responsive gas release. Multifunctional nanomaterials play a vitally important role in construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines based on stimuli-responsive nanocarriers. Engineering strategies of destructible/convertible nanocarriers for construction of stimuli-responsive gas-releasing nanomedicines are introduced according to the type of stimuli source. Exogenous stimuli-responsive destructible/convertible nanocarriers for construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines Among various light sources, NIR is most desirable to be used as exogenous stimulus. However, most light-sensitive GRMs are only sensitive to UV/visible light for photochemical degradation into gases. Fortunately, large numbers of NIR-absorbing nanomaterials have been developed as nanocarriers. The key problem here is how to fill the gap between nanocarrier and GRM. We propose two strategies based on convertible nanocarriers to solve the problem: (1) photochemical energy transfer from NIR-absorbing nanocarrier to gas/GRM and (2) NIR-to-UV-to-chemical energy transfer from upconversion nanocarrier to UV-sensitive GRM. Based on the photochemical energy transfer strategy, we incorporated hydrogen into Pd nanocubes and stacked BNN6 (a NO prodrug) between GONs to form a solid solution PdH structure and a sandwich BNN6@GON structure (Fig. 4A), respectively, realizing NIR-photochemical energy transfer and thus NIR-responsive H2 and NO release [14,26]. Based on the NIR-to-UV-to-chemical energy transfer strategy, Liu and Yang et al. encapsulated UV-sensitive propane-2,2-diylbis((1-(4,5-dimethoxy-2-nitrophenyl) ethyl)-sulphane) (SP, a H2S prodrug) and 1-(2,5-dimethylthien-1,1-dioxide-3-yl)-2-(2,5-dimethylthien-3-yl)-hexafluorocyclopentene (DM, a SO2 prodrug) into upconversion nanoparticles (UCNP)-based nanocarriers to achieve NIR-responsive H2S and SO2 release, respectively (Fig. 4A) [27,28]. In addition to reported GON and UCNP, other functional nanoparticles such as BPN and upconversion dyes could possibly be used to realize NIR-responsive gas release based on the proposed energy transfer strategy. Moreover, some disregarded UV-sensitive GRMs could find new applications. Figure 4. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed by exogenous stimuli-responsive breakable/convertible carriers. (A) NIR-responsive PdH, BNN6@GON, SP@UCNP-PEG and UCNP@hMSN-DM nanomedicines for controlled release of H2, NO, H2S and SO2, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [14,26–28]. (B) NIR-/UV-responsive breakable nanomedicines for controlled release of 1O2 and NO. Reproduced with permission from [29] and [30]. (C) UV-responsive decomposable DEACM-PEG nanomedicine for controlled release of CO2. Reproduced with permission from [31]. (D) Photothermal-responsive breakable GSNO/Cu1.6S-PLGA nanomedicine for controlled release of NO. Reproduced with permission from [32]. (E) Magnetic-thermal breakable nanomedicine for controlled release of NO. Reproduced with permission from [33]. Figure 4. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed by exogenous stimuli-responsive breakable/convertible carriers. (A) NIR-responsive PdH, BNN6@GON, SP@UCNP-PEG and UCNP@hMSN-DM nanomedicines for controlled release of H2, NO, H2S and SO2, respectively. Reproduced with permission from [14,26–28]. (B) NIR-/UV-responsive breakable nanomedicines for controlled release of 1O2 and NO. Reproduced with permission from [29] and [30]. (C) UV-responsive decomposable DEACM-PEG nanomedicine for controlled release of CO2. Reproduced with permission from [31]. (D) Photothermal-responsive breakable GSNO/Cu1.6S-PLGA nanomedicine for controlled release of NO. Reproduced with permission from [32]. (E) Magnetic-thermal breakable nanomedicine for controlled release of NO. Reproduced with permission from [33]. Besides convertible nanocarriers, destructible and decomposable nanocarriers can also be designed. Enough flexible nanocarrier enables generated insoluble gas to burst its structure in support of gas release, while GRM-conjugated decomposable nanocarrier can generate gas under stimulation while its nanostructure is destroyed in favour of gas release. According to the flexible nanocarrier strategy, lipid nanomicelle and monomethoxy(polyethylene glycol)-poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (mPEG-PLGA) block copolymer nanoparticles as flexible nanocarriers were developed to encapsulate O2-rich perfluorohexane/IR780 and BNN6, realizing NIR-/UV-responsive 1O2/NO release, respectively (Fig. 4B) [29,30]. Based on the nanocarrier decomposition strategy, (7-diethylaminocoumarin-4-yl)methyl carbonate (DEACM, a CO2 prodrug) was conjugated on PEG to self-assemble into a prodrug-encapsulated micelle, the structure of which was destroyed under UV light irradiation, which caused CO2 release (Fig. 4C) [31]. In addition to mechanical force from gas expansion, flexible nanocarrier can also be engineered to be destructible by thermal expansion of encapsulated functional nanoparticles, such as photothermal and magnetothermal nanoparticles. According to this strategy, Yeh and Gu et al. encapsulated Cu1.6S nanoparticles and superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticle (SPION) together with GSNO and Arg (two kinds of NO prodrugs) into PLGA and liposome nanocarriers, respectively (Fig. 4D, E) [32,33]. By virtue of the photothermal and magnetothermal effects of Cu1.6S and SPION, NIR and alternating magnetic field irradiations induced thermal expansion and destruction of PLGA and liposome nanocarriers, then caused NO prodrug release and decomposition into NO. The design and construction of flexible and destructible nanocarriers are key, and integration of flexible organic nanocarrier with heat-generating inorganic nanoparticle into a single nanoparticle is also important and challenging. Endogenous stimuli-responsive destructible/convertible nanocarriers for construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines Based on the above-mentioned carrier decomposition/destruction strategy, gas nanocarriers can also be engineered to be decomposable/destructible in response to both exogenous and endogenous stimuli. Disulphide bridging is a conventional route to construction of GSH-responsive nanomedicines because intratumoral over-expressed GSH detach the disulphide linkage within the framework of building unit. Li et al. constructed a PEGylated disulphide-doped hybrid nanocarrier (PDHN) and loaded NPQ (a hydrophobic NO prodrug) into the nanocarrier (Fig. 5A) [34]. The disulphide-linking shell was decomposed under GSH stimulation in HCC cells, causing release of NPQ (O2-(2,4-dinitro-5-{[2-(β-d-galactopyranosyl olean-12-en-28-oate-3-yl)-oxy-2-oxoethyl] piperazine-1-yl}phenyl) 1-(methylethanolamino)diazen-1-ium-1,2-dilate) which subsequently decomposed into NO under catalysis of GSTπ. We developed mesoporous organosilica nanoparticles (MON) with a disulphide framework to load 2,4-dinitrobenzenesulphonylchloride (DN, a SO2 prodrug) for GSH-responsive carrier degradation and SO2 release [35]. Chen et al. conjugated N-(3-azidopropyl)-2,4-dinitrobenzenesulphonamide (AP-DNs, a SO2 prodrug) onto the side chain of methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(g-propargyl-L-glutamate) (mPEG-PPLG) block copolymer micelle to achieve GSH-responsive decomposition of micelles and sequential release of DN and SO2 [36]. With the same strategy, Matson et al. constructed a cystine-responsive decomposable micelle carrier by conjugating cystine-responsive s-aryl thioxime (SATO, a hydrophobic H2S prodrug) onto a block copolymer (Fig. 5B) [37]. Supplementary cystine triggered both the decomposition of SATO and the disassembly of micelle, causing the responsive release of H2S. It has not been found that cystine is over-expressed in cancer cells and in the TME, and therefore responsive H2S release needs excessive addition of cystine into tumor to trigger. Figure 5. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed by endogenous stimuli-responsive decomposable/breakable carriers. (A) GSH-responsive decomposable QM-NPQ@PDHN nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [34]. (B) Cystine-responsive decomposable H2S-releasing nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [37]. (C) Acid-responsive decomposable DETANONOate@PLGA, GSNO@PEG-PAsp-CaCO3 and Ce6&DOX@HMnO-PEG nanomedicines for controlled NO and O2 release. Reproduced with permission from [38–40]. (D) Enzyme-responsive decomposable KHA-NG nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [41]. Figure 5. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines constructed by endogenous stimuli-responsive decomposable/breakable carriers. (A) GSH-responsive decomposable QM-NPQ@PDHN nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [34]. (B) Cystine-responsive decomposable H2S-releasing nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [37]. (C) Acid-responsive decomposable DETANONOate@PLGA, GSNO@PEG-PAsp-CaCO3 and Ce6&DOX@HMnO-PEG nanomedicines for controlled NO and O2 release. Reproduced with permission from [38–40]. (D) Enzyme-responsive decomposable KHA-NG nanomedicine for controlled NO release. Reproduced with permission from [41]. Based on the above-mentioned carrier destruction strategy, Sung et al. used flexible PLGA nanocarrier to encapsulate irinotecan (CPT-11) and acid-responsive diethylenetriamine diazeniumdiolate (DETA NONOate, a NO prodrug) [38]. Intratumoral acid-responsive NO release from DETA NONOate caused destruction of PLGA nanocarrier in support of the co-release of NO and CPT-11 (Fig. 5C left). In addition, amorphous calcium carbonate is highly sensitive to acid, and was therefore used as an acid-decomposable nanocarrier which was stabilized by PEG-PAsp polymer when GSNO was encapsulated (GSNO@PEG-PAsp-CaCO3, Fig. 5C centre) [39]. In the acidic TME, acid decomposed/resolved the CaCO3-based nanocarrier and subsequently released GSNO, which further reacted with added ascorbic acid (AA) to decompose into NO. Liu et al. used hollow MnO2 nanoparticle (HMN) as an acid-breakable carrier/prodrug to achieve acid-responsive O2 release through carrier decomposition (Fig. 5C right) [40]. Based on the carrier decomposition strategy, a number of stimuli-responsive decomposable nanocarriers such as various metal oxides and phosphates can be developed for construction of gas-releasing nanomedicines. Expression of specific enzymes such as trypsin and protease-activated receptor-2 (PAR-2) is abnormal in many tumor cells, and is closely related to the biological characteristics and malignancy of tumor cells. Trypsin can cleave the lysine and arginine residues in the polypeptide chain. According to this feature, Li et al. constructed a nanogel (KHA-NG) by cross-linking human hair keratin and hyaluronic acid (Fig. 5D) [41]. The KHA-NG was stable under the physiological conditions but could be broken down by trypsin/GSH. The produced fragments stimulated intracellular GSNO to produce NO. In other words, the enzyme-responsive break of constructed nanocarrier finally caused the NO release, realizing the enzyme-responsive NO release. Enzyme-responsive decomposable nanocarriers for gas prodrugs are of value to be developed for gas therapy. STRATEGIES FOR CATALYTIC GAS-RELEASING NANOMEDICINES The concept of catalysis originates from chemistry, but has been transplanted to the biomedical field in recent years. Shi and Chen first proposed the concept of catalytic nanomedicine [42,43], opening a window for nanomedicine-mediated gas therapy of cancer. Both high responsiveness and good controllability of gas release are desired, which is different from the main pursuit of high catalysis efficacy in the chemical industry because the effective dose of therapeutic gases is relatively low (nM level or higher). Therefore, the catalytic methodology could be the same or similar, but the standards of screening catalyst and catalysis condition are often different or even opposite between catalytic nanomedicine and industrial catalysis, which provides many important inspirations for nanomedicine. As mentioned above, stimuli-responsive gas release from nanomedicines mainly depends on chemical decomposition of sensitive GRMs and nanocarriers. Such chemical reaction efficiency greatly affects the response rate and the gas release amount. Therefore, to improve gas therapy efficacy by enhancing chemical reaction efficiency, we propose a catalysis strategy for controlled gas release, which is divided into three types, namely photocatalysis, chemical catalysis and enzymocatalysis (Fig. 6). Catalytic gas-releasing nanomedicines can be constructed with only nanocatalyst with endogenous chemicals as substrates, or play a role of catalytic nanoreactor consisting of catalyst and GRM as substrate. Exogenous and endogenous stimulation or combined individual administration of catalyst and GRM can cause catalytic reactions for controlled gas release. These catalysis strategies are introduced in the following sections. Figure 6. Open in new tabDownload slide Three catalysis strategies for construction of representative catalytic gas-releasing nanomedicines. (A) Photocatalytic H2-releasing HisAgCCN (above) and Chlα-AA-AuNPs@liposome (below) nanomedicines. Reprinted with permission from [44] and [45]. (B) Chemically catalytic ROS-releasing Fe nanomedicine (above), CO-releasing MnCO@Ti-MOF nanomedicine (centre) and AuNP nanomedicine (below). Reproduced with permission from [46–48]. (C) Enzymocatalytic catalase@MON (above) and β-gal-NONOate@ liposome nanomedicines (below). Reprinted with permission from [49] and [50]. Figure 6. Open in new tabDownload slide Three catalysis strategies for construction of representative catalytic gas-releasing nanomedicines. (A) Photocatalytic H2-releasing HisAgCCN (above) and Chlα-AA-AuNPs@liposome (below) nanomedicines. Reprinted with permission from [44] and [45]. (B) Chemically catalytic ROS-releasing Fe nanomedicine (above), CO-releasing MnCO@Ti-MOF nanomedicine (centre) and AuNP nanomedicine (below). Reproduced with permission from [46–48]. (C) Enzymocatalytic catalase@MON (above) and β-gal-NONOate@ liposome nanomedicines (below). Reprinted with permission from [49] and [50]. Photocatalytic generation of therapeutic gases Photocatalysis can transform light energy into chemical energy using a photosensitive catalyst to accelerate the chemical reaction, and is widely applied in the field of hydrogen evolution. Zheng et al. constructed a Z-scheme-type heterogeneous nanocatalyst by co-loading histidine-rich peptide (CHHHHGRGD) and Ag3PO4 nanoparticles onto the carbon-dot-decorated C3N4 nanoparticle (HisAgCCN), which was used for photocatalytic reduction of endogenous CO2 into CO (Fig. 6A above) [44]. In this work, CO2 as one of the catalytic substrates was plentiful in the body, but the loaded histidine-rich peptide as another substrate, reductant and CO2 collector was limited, which restricted the amount of CO generation. Moreover, the absorption band of HisAgCCN was located in the UV and visible region, and 630 nm LED light at the power density of 4 W/cm2 was used to irradiate tumor-bearing rice for 30 min. Limited tissue penetration depth of visible light and high photothermal effect of irradiated skin tissues affected the outcome of therapy to a certain extent. In the field of solar energy, a broad absorption spectrum of photocatalyst is highly desirable, while strong NIR absorption is purchased by NIR-photocatalytic medicines to obtain high tissue penetration depth and low phototoxicity. Therefore, the development of NIR-photocatalytic gas-releasing medicines is preferred, but still challenging. By virtue of the photocatalytic hydrolysis strategy, Sung et al. prepared a multi-component nanoreactor (NR) where chlorophyll α (Chlα), L-ascorbic acid (L-AA) and gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) were co-encapsulated into a liposome nanoparticle (Fig. 6A below) [45]. Zhang and Wu et al. also constructed a similar liposome nanoreactor co-encapsulating with Chlα, AA and semiconductive polymer dots (Pdots) [51]. These two nanoreactors used the visible light-photocatalytic property of AuNPs and Pdots to realize the photocatalytic generation of H2. Similar to the above-mentioned HisAgCCN nanomedicine, these two hydrogen-generating nanomedicines also had drawbacks in the limited amount of sacrificial agent and the irradiation of visible light rather than NIR light. In addition, there was a lack of stability in liposome during hydrogen production [52], which could possibly cause leakage of encapsulated catalyst and substrate. Repeatable on-demand controlled generation of H2in vivo is worth further investigation. Chemically catalytic generation of therapeutic gases A variety of chemically catalytic and enzymocatalytic reactions occur in the body, including the transport and catalytic oxidation of O2 by haem, the enzymocatalytic hydrolysis of protein by metalloproteases, the superoxide dismutase-catalytic disproportion decomposition of O2−, the Fe2+-catalytic decomposition of H2O2 into ·OH by the Fenton reaction, the catalase-catalytic decomposition of H2O2 into O2, the NADPH oxidase-catalytic formation of ROS, the GSH reductase-catalytic reduction of GSSH into GSH, etc. These necessary catalytic processes ensure the normal function of the body. Such catalytic methods are worth learning about and using to engineer advanced gas-releasing nanomedicines. Chemically catalytic generation of therapeutic gases could improve the responsiveness and efficiency of gas generation. In the TME, both H2O2 and acid are highly expressed compared with normal tissues. Therefore, according to the Fenton catalysis strategy, intratumoral delivery of Fenton or Fenton-like catalyst could decompose H2O2 into highly cytotoxic ·OH for cancer therapy, which is defined as chemodynamic therapy (CDT). Shi et al. prepared a kind of amorphous iron (AFe) nanoparticle within the hydrophobic zone of F-127 bilayer, and delivered the nanoparticles as Fenton-like agents to tumor to execute the Fenton catalytic reaction, achieving effective CDT (Fig. 6B above) [47]. Furthermore, ·OH, a strong oxidant generated from the Fenton reaction, can be used as indirect stimulus for controlled gas release. We discovered that MnCO had a dual role as a CO prodrug and a Fenton-like agent, being oxidized by ·OH to generate CO. Therefore, hydrophobic MnCO was encapsulated into hMSN and metal organic framework (MOF) to construct nanomedicines for CO generation by the Fenton catalysis route (Fig. 6B centre) [16,46]. MnCO within the nanomedicines catalysed the decomposition of intratumoral H2O2 into ·OH, which further oxidized MnCO to release CO, realizing responsive CO release. In normal tissues, lack of Fenton reaction conditions would not lead to decomposition of nanomedicines into CO, causing high tumor selectivity of CO release. AuNP is a widely applied catalyst, with high surface area and strong capability for coordination with hydrosulphide group. Hervés et al. found that AuNP can catalyse low molecular weight of S-nitrosothiols (RSNOs) such as s-nitrosopenicillamine (SPEN) [48]. Based on the difference in the dissociation energy, the gold−thiol (RS−Au) bond energy is much higher than that of the RS−NO bond, and the S−N bond is therefore easily cleaved by AuNP, favouring formation of RS−AuNP and subsequent release of NO (Fig. 6B below). This catalytic reaction exhibited high efficacy of NO generation. However, how to protect the surface of AuNP from non-specific adsorption of proteins until contact with SNO-type NO prodrug is a question worth considering. Enzymocatalytic generation of therapeutic gases According to the principle of catalase catalysis, intratumoral H2O2 can be decomposed into O2. However, catalase is relatively insufficient in tumor, causing the intratumoral excessive accumulation of H2O2. Shi et al. proposed delivery of catalase to tumor for supplement of O2. Based on this strategy, they prepared a catalytic nanoreactor by loading catalase into mesoporous organic silica nanoparticles (catalase@MONs) for tumor-targeted delivery and controlled generation of O2 (Fig. 6C above) [49]. This nanoreactor exhibited a high catalytic activity and high sensitivity for the decomposition of H2O2 even at a low concentration of 10 μM, and it could continuously generate O2 gas in a relatively moderate manner, thereby achieving long-lasting contrast enhancement of ultrasound imaging and high efficacy of tumor ablation. Compared with MSN, MON has a faster degradation rate, which is controllable by adjusting the component and amount of incorporated organic/metal compounds, and also exhibits high biocompatibility. In addition to the use of intratumoral enzymes and substrates as gas prodrugs such as H2O2, site-targeted individual delivery of specific enzyme and corresponding substrate/GRM is also optional. Stevens et al. designed a poly(methacrylic acid) (PMA) capsule to encapsulate β-galactosidase, and also prepared a POPC liposome to encapsulate galactose-caged NONOate (β-gal-NONOate, a stable NO prodrug) [50]. After reaching the targeted site, the degradation of liposome led to slow leakage of β-gal-NONOate, which further catalytically decomposed into NO (Fig. 6C below). High specificity of customized enzyme and substrate promised high selectivity of gas release. Moreover, such a multistep delivery strategy can provide plentiful gas on demand by simply adjusting the administered dosages of enzyme and substrate/GRM. But the activity of biological enzymes is greatly affected by environmental factors, so development of alternative artificial biomimetic enzymes is a direction for future exploration. STRATEGIES FOR TUMOR-TARGETED DELIVERY OF GAS-RELEASING NANOMEDICINES In addition to controlled gas release, tumor-targeted gas delivery is another strategy for augmenting gas therapy efficacy. In this review, the term ‘target’ has two different roles dependent on specific aims, and thus has two different concepts: drug therapeutic target and target for drug delivery. The therapeutic target of NO/CO/H2S/H2 gases is the mitochondria, and these gases have a specific anti-Warburg function of regulating cellular energy metabolism, consequently exhibiting unique selectivity of killing cancer cells and protecting normal cells from radio/chemotherapeutic damages. On the other hand, the target for drug delivery means the target-mediated (termed ‘targeted’) delivery of drug, and tumor-targeted gas delivery represents the delivery of gas (or its prodrug) towards tumor. The lack of active intratumoral accumulation capability of gases and their small-molecular prodrugs mean that only a small fraction can actually act at the tumor spot after entering the body, which restricts cancer treatment efficacy and might even lead to side effects on normal tissues and blood, especially for highly toxic NO, CO, H2S and SO2. By virtue of nanotechnology, construction of nanomedicines with tumor-targeting function can resolve this issue. Multitudinous nanomedicines with diverse targeting functions have been developed to realize precision tumor-targeted drug delivery. According to different mechanisms, tumor-targeted delivery strategies can be divided into three types: passive targeting, active targeting and physical targeting. Passive tumor targeting is closely related to intratumoral retention of nanoparticles of suitable size 10−200 nm based on the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect. Active targeting mainly uses tumor-specific targeting agents grafted onto the surface of nanocarriers to recognize tumor tissues/cells/organelles. In addition, physical fields can also be used to guide intratumoral accumulation of functional nanoparticles. Moreover, nanomedicines also favour cellular uptake and intracellular release of gas. The various anticancer mechanisms of gases require different tumor-targeted gas delivery strategies. First tumor tissue-targeting is necessary, which is a prerequisite for further accumulation into tumor cellular organelles including cellular membranes, mitochondria, lysosome and nuclei. Further, tumor cellular organelle targeting could enhance efficiency of gas delivery in favour of high-efficacy gas therapy (Fig. 7). Figure 7. Open in new tabDownload slide Schematic illustration of the tissue-targeted (A) and organelle-targeted (B) delivery strategies with gas-releasing nanomedicines. Figure 7. Open in new tabDownload slide Schematic illustration of the tissue-targeted (A) and organelle-targeted (B) delivery strategies with gas-releasing nanomedicines. Tumor tissue-targeted gas delivery Tumor tissue-targeted delivery of nanomedicine can be achieved by passive intratumoral retention through leaky blood vessels (the EPR effect), active recognition/attachment to tumor blood vessels (such as integrin αvβ3) and artificially enhanced retention by locally manipulating the nanomedicine size. Based on a retention enhancement strategy, Zhang et al. modified Arg-encapsulated MSN nanomedicine (Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G) with cyclic decapeptide (CGLIIQKNEC), which could specifically bind fibrinogen in the extracellular matrix (Fig. 8A) [15]. Such strong binding induced steady retention of the nanomedicine once leaking into tumor, realizing high-efficacy tumor-targeted delivery of NO. Figure 8. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines with various targeted functions. (A) Tumor tissue-targeted Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [15]. (B) Tumor cellular membrane-targeted DOX@KHA-NGs (left), N-GQDs/CDs/TiO2@Gal/FA-RuNO (centre) and O2@liposome-RGD (right) nanomedicines. Reproduced with permission from [41,53,54]. (C) Lysosome-targeted C-TiO2/CDs@FA-/RuNO-Lyso nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [55]. (D) Mitochondrion-targeted RuNO-N-GQD-TPP (left) and SNO-Cdot-TPP (right) nanomedicines. Reproduced with permission from [56] and [57]. (E) Magnet-targeted Fe2O3-ADT@DPPC-DSPE-PEG2K nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [58]. Figure 8. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative gas-releasing nanomedicines with various targeted functions. (A) Tumor tissue-targeted Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [15]. (B) Tumor cellular membrane-targeted DOX@KHA-NGs (left), N-GQDs/CDs/TiO2@Gal/FA-RuNO (centre) and O2@liposome-RGD (right) nanomedicines. Reproduced with permission from [41,53,54]. (C) Lysosome-targeted C-TiO2/CDs@FA-/RuNO-Lyso nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [55]. (D) Mitochondrion-targeted RuNO-N-GQD-TPP (left) and SNO-Cdot-TPP (right) nanomedicines. Reproduced with permission from [56] and [57]. (E) Magnet-targeted Fe2O3-ADT@DPPC-DSPE-PEG2K nanomedicine. Reproduced with permission from [58]. NO is a type of highly reactive molecular free radical, which is able to solidly coordinate with many transition metal ions and directly oxidize DNA, proteins, lipid and GSH. Therefore, the administration/stimulation of excessive NO could induce cellular apoptosis by directly causing oxidative damage to cellular membranes, lysosome and nuclei, and by indirectly inhibiting cellular respiration and energy metabolism through strong coordination with ferroheme. Targeted delivery of NO-releasing nanomedicine to these organelles of cancer cells or to extracellular matrix in the TME could kill cancer cells more effectively. Tumor cell membrane-targeted gas delivery Some specific markers are over-expressed on the membranes of cancer cells, such as integrin αvβ3, CD44 and receptors of transferrin, folic acid and galactose, the ligands of which could be grafted onto the surface of gas-releasing nanomedicines to recognize cancer cells. Based on this strategy, Liu et al. used a variety of multifunctional nanoplatforms (N-doped graphene quantum dots N-GQDs, carbon dots CDs, and TiO2 nanoparticles) to co-conjugate RuNO-type NO prodrugs and varied ligands (galactose and folic acid receptors), achieving 4T1 tumor cellular membrane-targeted delivery of NO (Fig. 8B centre) [54]. These inorganic nanocarriers for tumor cell membrane-targeted delivery are easily modified with ligands, and also have various imaging and therapeutic functions in favour of multi-model integration. Similarly, Sun et al. incorporated HA (a CD44 ligand) into the KHA-NG nanomedicine to recognize CD44-over-expressed 4T1 cells for tumor cell-targeted NO delivery (Fig. 8B left) [41]. In other typical work, Guo et al. modified O2-releasing nanomedicine with c(RGDfK) peptide to recognize integrin αvβ3 over-expressed on U8-MG tumor cells, realizing tumor-targeted O2 delivery (Fig. 8B right) [53]. These ligands for tumor cell membrane-targeted delivery enabled more intratumoral accumulation of nanomedicines to a certain extent, but their specificities are not so high. Development of ligands with higher tumor specificity is key to enhance targeted efficacy for gas therapy. Lysosome-targeted gas delivery Lysosome is an important organelle in which nanoparticles are frequently endocytosed. Therefore, lysosome-targeted delivery and release of toxic agents could do damage to lysosome and thus induce cellular apoptosis. High levels of NO, SO2 and ROS (especially highly oxidative ·OH and ·O2) can cause oxidation damage to the lipid bilayers of tumor cells and their lysosomes. Thus, we proposed a tumor cellular lysosome-targeted NO/SO2 delivery strategy for cancer therapy. Based on this strategy, Liu et al. conjugated a lysosome-targetable molecule (morpholine) and folic acid (FA) on the surface of NO-releasing nanoplatforms (C-TiO2 or CDs@FA-/RuNO-Lyso, Fig. 8C) [55]. This nanoplatform firstly targeted the cellular membrane of FR-over-expressed cancer cells by FA−FR recognition, and then specifically located within the lysosome by the lysosome-targeted morpholine group, where co-release of NO and ROS was triggered by irradiation of NIR light. The lysosome-targeted NO/ROS delivery exhibited outstanding anticancer efficacy compared to non-targeting control groups. In addition, NO can be oxidized by ·O2− and stimuli-activable nanocarriers into ONOO− to demonstrate higher oxidation and cytotoxicity for enhanced gas therapy efficacy. Mitochondrion-targeted gas delivery The mitochondrion is the most important target site where many gaseous signalling molecules, including NO, CO, H2S and H2, have roles in modulating cellular energy to induce cancer cell apoptosis and to protect normal cells from damage. Mitochondrion-targeted delivery of these gases can maximize the efficacy of cancer gas therapy. Some mitochondrion-targeted GRMs had been developed, but they do not prefer to accumulate in tumor cells, causing a large amount of drug loss before arriving at intratumoral cellular mitochondria. The nanomedicine-mediated enhancement of intracellular uptake of gas/GRM favours its further accumulation into/onto intracellular mitochondria. We propose that mitochondrion-targeted gas delivery can be realized by two strategies: (1) grafting of mitochondrion-targetable molecule on the surface of GRM-encapsulated nanocarrier and (2) conjugation of mitochondrion-targeted molecule onto GRM, which is then encapsulated into nanocarrier. Based on the first strategy, Xu et al. modified the Cdot nanocarrier with triphenylphosphonium (TPP, a typical mitochondrion-targeted molecule) and visible light-responsive SNO-type NO prodrug to construct a mitochondrion-targeted NO-releasing nanomedicine, which exhibited efficient mitochondria-targeted NO delivery [57]. Similarly, Liu et al. also conjugated TPP and RuNO onto the N-GQD nanocarrier (RuNO-N-GQD-TPP) to realize mitochondria-targeted NO delivery [56]. However, the intracellular release of NO from the RuNO-N-GQD-TPP nanomedicine can be stimulated by irradiation of NIR light. It is unclear whether nanomedicines lie on the surface of mitochondria or inside mitochondria, which would possibly affect the mitochondrion-targeted efficacy of released gas. We envisage that gas prodrug is endowed with mitochondrion-targeted function and can more easily enter into mitochondria for high-efficacy mitochondrion-targeted therapy, but this is not yet reported. From tumor tissue to tumor cells to their membranes, to their lysosome and mitochondria, gas-releasing nanomedicines have a very long way to go, especially for mitochondria-targeted gases. Therefore, multistep targeted delivery might be necessary for maximal outcome of targeted gas therapy. Magnetic targeting for gas delivery External fields such as magnetic, ultrasound and electric fields can be used to manipulate nanomedicines to accumulate in tumor, where responsive nanoplatforms play an important role for field control. Liu et al. synthesized a magnetic liposome of diameter ∼200 nm by encapsulating anethole dithiolethione (ADT, a hydrophobic H2S prodrug) and Fe2O3 nanoparticles into the hydrophobic shell layer and hydrophilic core of liposome (AMLs), respectively (Fig. 8E) [58]. A high magnetic field induced the transvascular convective movement of AMLs and intratumoral accumulation, enabling intratumoral H2S delivery. In addition, magnetic nanoparticles and H2S gas could be used for MRI and bubble-assisted ultrasound imaging (USI), respectively, which can be used to monitor tumor-targeted drug delivery. It is worth noting that magnetic field has high tissue penetrability as well as good biocompatibility and various magnetic nanoplatforms are potential candidates, greatly favouring nanomedicine-mediated magnetic targeting for gas delivery. However, precision three-dimensional focalization and manipulation of magnetic field are still challenging and the magnetic responsiveness of existing magnetic nanoplatforms is not high enough, which limits the in vivo application of magnetic manipulation to a certain extent. COMBINATION STRATEGIES BASED ON GAS THERAPY In recent years, diverse therapy methods including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, thermal therapy, dynamic therapy, immunotherapy, gene therapy and gas therapy have been developed for cancer treatment. The use of a sole treatment mode is inevitably accompanied by some challenges such as side effects, induction of drug resistance and metastasis, and limited therapy efficacy. Combination of different therapy modes, for example, typical integration of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, has been accepted clinically. Gas therapy as an emerging method is found to have remarkably different anticancer mechanisms and targets from other traditional therapy methods, and can be used to assist many other therapy modes to improve therapy effects [51,59]. It is important to understand the roles of gas alone and in combination with other therapies, so here we analyse the targets of most treatment modalities in depth (Fig. 9). CO, H2S and H2 mainly act on mitochondria, and cause tumor cell apoptosis by disordering mitochondrial functions. Mitochondria, nuclei and membranes of tumor cells can be set as targets for NO. Chemotherapy mainly acts on mitochondria and nuclei, and causes cell death by affecting mitochondrial metabolism and causing damage to nuclei and nuclear substances. The targets of hyperthermia are endoplasmic reticulum, cell membranes, nuclei, lysosome and mitochondria. When combined with radiotherapy, O2 and NO act on the nuclei and mitochondria, while when combined with dynamic therapy (photodynamic, acoustic, and chemical dynamic therapies), the organelles acted on are endoplasmic reticulum, cell membranes, nuclei and mitochondria. To make the combined therapy more effective, it is necessary to design a reasonable combination of gas and other treatment methods according to the targets of different treatment modes. Secondly, how to use a single platform to achieve the combined use of different treatment modes and the analysis of their molecular mechanisms is an important and promising direction. Versatile nanomaterials provide a useful platform for integration of varied therapy modes with gas therapy functions into a single particle, accelerating development of multimodal combination therapy of cancer. The following sections summarize a series of engineering strategies for construction of multimodal nanomedicines, with some representative examples. Figure 9. Open in new tabDownload slide Schematic illustration of target points of various cancer therapy methods. Figure 9. Open in new tabDownload slide Schematic illustration of target points of various cancer therapy methods. Combination of gas therapy and chemotherapy (gasochemotherapy) Chemotherapy is one of most commonly used cancer treatment methods, but most chemotherapeutic drugs are not specific to cancer cells, leading to inevitable side effects on normal tissues and blood. Chemotherapy also often induces multidrug resistance (MDR) and metastasis, causing the final failure of cancer treatment. It has been found that some gas molecules such as H2, NO, CO, H2S and SO2 can assist chemotherapy for anti-MDR by suppressing the over-expression of MDR-associated proteins, and can also reduce toxic side effects of chemotherapeutic drugs to normal tissues through their normal cell protection effects. Combination of gas therapy with chemotherapy could solve the issues and challenges of chemotherapy. Min et al. encapsulated doxorubicin (DOX) in situ into CaCO3 nanoparticles to construct a DOX-CaCO3 nanomedicine (Fig. 10A right), which achieved intratumoral acid-responsive co-release of CO2 gas and DOX, realizing the facile combination of gas therapy and chemotherapy [60]. The CO2 bubbles formed during decomposition of CaCO3 exhibit USI imaging function and the hollow structure could also be used to load various drugs and act as an excellent theranostic platform. In addition, calcicoptosis from decomposition of CaCO3 possibly makes a contribution to combined therapy of tumor [61]. Zhao et al. constructed a DOX-RBS-UCNP@MSN nanomedicine by co-encapsulating doxorubicin (DOX, a chemotherapeutic drug) and Roussin's black salt (RBS, a UV-responsive NO prodrug) into MSN nanocarrier (Fig. 10A left), realizing co-release of DOX and NO in cancer cells and consequently overcoming MDR by inhibiting over-expression of P-glycoprotein (P-gp, a drug-transporting protein) [62]. Furthermore, we and Zhang et al. proved that combination of CO/NO/H2 gas therapy and chemotherapy remarkably reduced side effects of chemotherapy by protecting normal cells and also improved the outcome of cancer therapy, and even restricted the tumor metastasis [19,44]. Figure 10. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative multimodal combination therapy strategies based on gas-releasing nanomedicines. (A) The DOX-RBS-UCNP@MSN (left) and DOX-CaCO3 (right) nanomedicines for gasochemotherapy. Reproduced with permission from [62] and [60]. (B) The SNO@UCNP-MSN (above) and O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG (below) nanomedicines for gasoradiotherapy. Reproduced with permission from [10] and [63]. (C) The PdH0.2 (left) and FeCO-mPB-PEG (right) nanomedicines for gasophotothermal therapy. Reproduced with permission from [26] and [64]. (D) The FeCO-MnO2@MSN nanomedicine for gasochemodynamic therapy. Reproduced with permission from [65]. (E) The HSA-Ce6@MnO2 nanomedicine for gasophotodynamic therapy. Reproduced with permission from [66]. (F) The TPZ@HMTN-SNO (left) and HMME@MCC-HA (right) nanomedicines. Reproduced with permission from [67] and [68]. Figure 10. Open in new tabDownload slide Representative multimodal combination therapy strategies based on gas-releasing nanomedicines. (A) The DOX-RBS-UCNP@MSN (left) and DOX-CaCO3 (right) nanomedicines for gasochemotherapy. Reproduced with permission from [62] and [60]. (B) The SNO@UCNP-MSN (above) and O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG (below) nanomedicines for gasoradiotherapy. Reproduced with permission from [10] and [63]. (C) The PdH0.2 (left) and FeCO-mPB-PEG (right) nanomedicines for gasophotothermal therapy. Reproduced with permission from [26] and [64]. (D) The FeCO-MnO2@MSN nanomedicine for gasochemodynamic therapy. Reproduced with permission from [65]. (E) The HSA-Ce6@MnO2 nanomedicine for gasophotodynamic therapy. Reproduced with permission from [66]. (F) The TPZ@HMTN-SNO (left) and HMME@MCC-HA (right) nanomedicines. Reproduced with permission from [67] and [68]. Toxic side effects of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, thermal therapy and dynamic therapy mainly involve non-specific impairment of off-target drugs to normal tissues, mainly reflected in oxidative damage and inflammation. CO/NO/H2S/H2 gases are found to have significant anti-inflammation effects at quite low concentrations by activating anti-inflammation signalling pathways of normal cells. As to gas-releasing nanomedicines, cytotoxic therapeutic agents and gas molecules can be gradually and simultaneously leaked from off-target nanomedicines in normal tissues during nanomedicine degradation, where gas can locally play a detoxification role to reduce the toxic side effects of other therapeutic agents. On the other hand, simultaneously released multiple therapeutic agents including gas molecules, all are toxic to varied organelles of cancer cells, with synergistic therapy effects to enhance anticancer outcomes of individual therapy. Combination of gas therapy and radiotherapy (gasoradiotherapy) In addition to chemotherapy, radiotherapy is an important method to treat tumors by damaging DNA in cancer cells. The most obvious limitation of radiotherapy is the radio-resistance caused by hypoxia in the TME. O2 and NO as radiosensitizers can capture ionizing radiation-inducing free radicals to form hyperoxide radicals such as ROO·, ONOO− and RNOO, which can stably destroy DNA. However, the intratumoral levels of these two gases are remarkably lower by comparison with normal tissues, with the consequence that cancer cells are not sensitive to ionizing radiation (defined as radio-resistance). Therefore, the most important solution is the supplement of O2 and NO to sensitize radiotherapy, bringing about the anticancer strategy of combination of gas therapy and radiotherapy. X-ray is one of most important ionizing radiation routes to radiotherapy and can also be used for responsive gas release in favour of the facile combination of radiotherapy and gas therapy functions. Based on this strategy, Shi et al. constructed SNO-UCNP@MSN nanomedicine by loading X-ray-sensitive SNO into MSN to realize X-ray-responsive release of NO for combination of NO gas therapy and radiotherapy (Fig. 10B above) [10]. MSN is an excellent nanocarrier platform with high surface area for SNO loading, enabling encapsulation of UCNP for theranostic integration. Moreover, Liu et al. prepared O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG nanomedicine by encapsulating O2-loaded perfluorocarbon (PFC) into hollow Bi2Se3 nanoparticles (Fig. 10B below), which can not only act as a radio-sensitizer but also release O2 under NIR irradiation by the photothermal effect of Bi2Se3 nanocarrier, overcoming the hypoxia-associated radio-resistance of tumors by a combination of O2 gas therapy and radiotherapy [63]. The loading amount of O2 was limited because of its low solubility in PFC, and it is necessary to avoid leakage of O2. Combination of gas therapy and thermal therapy (gasothermal therapy) Thermal therapy is based on differing thermal tolerance between normal cells (47°C) and cancer cells (42°C) because tumor tissue has a remarkably lower capability of heat dissipation than normal tissues. Hyperpyrexia is able to cause damage to multiple organelles, including cell membranes, mitochondria, nuclei, lysosome and endoplasmic reticulum, inducing cellular apoptosis. To enhance the thermal selectivity to tumor tissue, a number of photothermal and magnetothermal nanomaterials have been developed to specifically accumulate in tumor and in situ generate heat intensively by focused irradiation of external light/magnetic fields, even though the irregular thermal dissemination often exceeds the boundary of tumor and damages adjacent normal tissues. Therefore, it is of importance to reduce side effects of thermal therapy. We discovered that some gases such as H2, NO and CO which have cellular protection capability, can protect normal cells from non-specific thermal damage [2]. Therefore, we proposed combining gas therapy and thermal therapy into a nanomedicine to avoid the potential side effects of thermal therapy. Based on this strategy, we developed hydrogenated Pd (PdH0.2) nanocubes to deliver hydrogen to tumor in a passively targeted and NIR-controlled way and locally generate heat for hydrogenothermal therapy (Fig. 10C) [26]. It was found that H2 enhanced efficacy of thermal therapy and also reduced thermal damage to normal cells. Li et al. coordinated FeCO within PEGylated mesoporous Prussian blue (mPB-PEG) to construct FeCO-mPB-PEG nanomedicine for NIR-controlled generation of heat and release of CO, achieving a synergy effect of combined CO gas/thermal therapy [64]. Heat-generating functional nanocarriers play an important role in the combination of gas therapy with thermal therapy, and meanwhile thermal-responsive gas prodrugs can also be facilely integrated with such nanocarriers. Research into this is rare, but it is expected there will be development of advanced nanomedicines for gasothermal therapy. In addition, the concept of gasothermal therapy is emerging and could be extended to treatment of other diseases such as bacterial infection and wound healing [69]. Combination of gas therapy and photo-/sono-/microwave-/chemo-dynamic therapy (gasophoto-/sono-/microwave-/chemo-dynamic therapy) Photo-/sono-/microwave-dynamic therapy is a type of recently developed cancer treatment, which uses photo-/sono-/microwave-sensitizers to activate O2 into singlet oxygen (1O2) under irradiation of light/sound/microwave, which impairs the organelles of tumor cells including membranes, mitochondria, nuclei and endoplasmic reticulum, and consequently causes their apoptosis. Therefore, the intratumoral supplement of O2 by the O2-releasing nanomedicines can ameliorate hypoxia in the TME and enhance the efficacy of photo-/sono-/microwave-dynamic therapy of cancer, integrating O2 gas therapy and dynamic therapy. Lin et al. used MnO2 nanoparticles as a carrier of Ce6 (a NIR-photosensitizer), as a source of H2O2 for intratumoral acid-decomposable generation of H2O2 and as a catalyst for decomposition of H2O2 into O2, realizing efficient O2 supplement and high-efficacy NIR-photodynamic therapy for bladder cancer (Fig. 10E) [66]. On the other hand, photo-/sono-/microwave-dynamic reactions can also be used to deprive O2 from tumor for oxidation/reduction-triggered drug release. Moreover, in a wide sense of the word, anticancer chemicals generated from photo-/sono-/microwave-/chemo-dynamic reactions involve ROS with no limitation to 1O2. Feng et al. constructed TPZ@HMTN-SNO nanomedicine by loading tirapazamine (TPZ, a reduction-responsive anticancer agent) into hollow mesoporous titanium dioxide nanoparticles (HMTN) with modification of S-nitrosothiol (SNO) [67]. Under the irradiation of ultrasound wave, HMTN as sonosensitizer generated ROS for sonodynamic therapy, the generated ROS could decompose SNO into NO for NO gas therapy and the sonodynamic therapy-induced hypoxia further activated TPZ to kill tumor cells (Fig. 10F left). Furthermore, stimuli sources such as light, sound and microwave can also be used to trigger generation of gas and ROS for the combination of gas therapy and dynamic therapy. Zhang et al. used the hyaluronic acid (HA) modified mesoporous calcium carbonate (MCC) nanoparticles to load hematoporphyrin monomethyl ether (HMME, a kind of sonosensitizer) to obtain the pH-/ultrasound-responsive HMME@MCC-HA nanomedicine (Fig. 10F right) [68]. Ultrasonication accelerated the intratumoral acid-responsive decomposition of MCC into CO2 gas for gas therapy and meanwhile induced the released HMME to generate ROS for sonodynamic therapy, resulting in a synergistic effect of gasosonodynamic therapy. Liu et al. constructed NIR-responsive C-TiO2@FA-/RuNO-Lyso nanomedicine for NIR-controlled generation of NO and ROS from RuNO and C-TiO2, respectively, realizing synergistic gasophotodynamic therapy [55]. In addition to exogenous stimuli sources, endogenous chemicals, especially in the TME, can be used to drive generation of ROS for cancer therapy, defined as chemodynamic therapy. Zhao et al. engineered FeCO-MnO2@MSN nanomedicine (Fig. 10D) for intratumoral acid-derived sequential release of ROS and CO [65]. A large amount of ·OH was produced from decomposition of MnO2 nanoparticles by a Fenton-like reaction for chemodynamic therapy, which then triggered decomposition of co-loaded FeCO into CO for gas therapy, achieving a synergistic effect of chemodynamic therapy and gas therapy. Gasochemodynamic therapy has higher therapeutic depth than gasophotodynamic therapy, and gasochemodynamic therapy is not limited in terms of depth as it uses endogenous TME as stimuli source. It is worth noting that a number of photosensitizers for photodynamic therapy, such as TiO2 and porphyrin, can also be developed as sonosensitizers, which provides a good platform for combination of gas therapy and sonodynamic therapy. CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK Gas therapy is an emerging and promising cancer treatment method, and the development of gas-releasing nanomedicines could provide some special solutions to the issues of cancer treatment. A number of gas-releasing nanomedicines have been developed using multifunctional nanoplatforms, but even so, there are still many gaps between gas therapy and nanomedicines. Here, we have summarized a series of strategies for engineering advanced gas-releasing nanomedicines to solve the issues of gas therapy of cancer, providing guidance for development of more new nanomedicines. Some advanced gas-releasing nanomedicines for cancer treatment reported in recent years are summarized in Table 2. It can be clearly seen that various gases have undergone unbalanced developments. Some gases such as H2 and SO2 are expected to exhibit their potential in cancer treatment. In addition to cancer, many other inflammation-related diseases including cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative diseases and stroke have similar issues with gas therapy. The proposed engineering strategies and developed nanomedicines could also provide inspiration in the treatment of these diseases. Besides the therapy methods involved in this review, some other therapy models such as immunotherapy and gene therapy could be combined with gas therapy by the nanomedicine route to improve cancer treatment outcomes, although these are unreported so far. Table 2. Structure-property relationship of representative gas-releasing nanomedicines for therapy. Gas . Nanomedicine formulation . Gas loading amount . Gas release efficiency . Trigger for gas release . Theranostic method . Targeted route . Tumor model . Reference . H2 AB@MSN 130.6 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [18] AB@PDA nanoparticle 31.9 mg/g 80% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2 therapy +PTT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [24] MBN 173.9 mg/g 100% Acid H2 therapy +chemotherapy In situ targeting by oral uptake BGC-823 tumor mice [19] Fe@CMC nanoparticle 19 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [73] PdH0.2 nanocube 1.9 mg/g 100% NIR H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1, B16-F10 tumor mice [26] PdH-MOF nanoparticle 9.4 mg/g 100% ·OH H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [74] Chlα-AA-Au@liposome / / Visible light catalysis H2 therapy / Inflammation [45] Pdot-AA@liposome / / Visible light catalytic H2 therapy / Inflammation [51] Mg@MSN 79 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / PC12 cells [75] Mg@PLGA microparticle 7 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / Osteoarthritis [76] H2-C3F8@DSPE-PEG microbubble / / Spontaneous release H2 therapy +USI / Myocardial ischemia [52] CO2 hMSN-Arg-CO2 50.6 mg/g / US CO2 therapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Panc-1 tumor mice [9] DEACM-PEG micelle / / UV CO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect Renca cells [31] DOX-CaCO3-Pasp-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid+US CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SCC-7 tumor mice [60] HMME@MCC-HA 333.6 mg/g 93% (pH = 5.8+US, 24 h) Acid+US CO2 therapy + SDT+USI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [68] CaCO3-DOX@PLG-RVG nanoparticle 207.3 mg/g / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Cell membrane targeting N2a tumor mice [77] DOX–HCO3@hMSN / / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 and MCF-7/ADR cells [78] ABC@HSPC liposome / / Thermal CO2 therapy+USI / HT1080 cells [79] ABC-DOX@DSPE-PEG liposome 55.7 mg/g / Thermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI / H460 cells [80] ABC-DOX-Au-@liposome-MUC1 aptamer / / NIR-photothermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +PTT+USI+FI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [81] SO2 UCNP@hMSN-DM 15.8 mg/g / NIR SO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect S180 tumor mice [28] DOX@DN-PLG-mPEG micelle 3.5 mg/g 90% (120 min) GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [36] MON-DN@PCBMA-DOX 11.4 mg/g / GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [35] O2 ROS O2-PFH-IR780@Lipid / / NIR O2 therapy +PDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect CT26 tumor mice [29] O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG nanoparticle 3.1 mg/g / NIR-photothermal O2 therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [63] DOX/CP-NI nanoparticle / / Vis/NIR PDT +chemotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [82] Ce6-MnO2@HSA / / Acid O2 therapy +PDT+MRI+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-49 tumor mice [66] Ce6-DOX@H-MnO2-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid CDT +chemotherapy +immunotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [40] MnO2@HA-Man nanoparticle / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +MRI Tumor/TAMs targeting 4T1 tumor mice [83] UCSD@SiO2@MnO2 / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +PDT +radiotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [84] GOD-Fe3O4@DMSN / / Fenton catalysis CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 and U87 tumor mice [43] AFe nanoparticle / / Fenton catalysis CDT+MRI Magnetic targeting 4T1 tumor mice [47] C dots-C3N4@-PpIX-PEG-RGD nanoparticle / 1.4 mg/L (630 nm, 20 min) Photocatalysis O2 therapy+PDT Tumor targeting 4T1 tumor mice [85] Catalase@MON / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy + HIFU thermal therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-231 tumor mice [49] Catalase@liposome-RGD / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy +PDT Tumor targeting U87-MG tumor mice [53] H2S SP@UCNP-PEG 1.92 × 10−18 g/particle / NIR H2S therapy / L929 cells [27] DATS@MSN 84.4 mg/g / GSH H2S therapy / Ischemic/reperfusion injury [86] PEG-b-poly(FBEMA-SATO) micelle / / Cystine H2S therapy / HCT116 cells [37] HA-JK1 hydrogel / / Acid H2S therapy / Cutaneous wound model [87] HS-ASP/PTX@PCL-PEG micelle 4.5 mg/g 88.2% HS-ASP (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2S therapy +chemotherapy / LL/2 cells [88] ADT-Fe2O3@Liposome / / CBS/CSE H2S therapy +USI+MRI Magnetic targeting HepG2 tumor mice [58] BSA/ALA/DADS nanoemulsion / / Spontaneous release H2S therapy / MCF-7 and HuT 78 cells [89] CO MnCO-GON 881 mg/g 100% NIR CO therapy / Raw264.7 cells [7] FeCO-mPB-PEG nanoparticle / 73% NIR CO therapy +PTT+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [64] MnCO-UCNP@PL-PEG / 91% NIR / / / [90] FeCO-DOX@MCN-PEG / / NIR-photothermal CO therapy +PTT +chemotherapy +PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [12] MnCO-Ferritin / / Visible light CO therapy / HEK-293 cells [5] QD-MnCO / / Visible light CO therapy / / [91] MnCO-WTPhC 7.8 mol/mol 96.7% Visible light CO therapy / HEK293 cells [92] MnCO-nanodiamond 7.1 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [93] MnCO@Al-MCM-41 nanoparticle 31.5 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [94] MnCO@SFN 1.2 mg/g 39.3% UV light / / / [95] MnCO@hMSN 337.4 mg/g 100% H2O2 CO therapy / 4T1 tumor mice [16] MnCO@Ti-MOF / / H2O2 CO therapy / AGS cells [46] IONP-RuCO / / Magnetothermal CO therapy / / [96] IONP-RuCO 28 mg/g / Magnetothermal / / / [13] C dots/Ag3PO4-C3N4-RGD nanoparticle / / Visible light catalysis CO therapy +chemotherapy Tumor targeting PC-3 tumor mice [44] FeCO-MnO2@MSN 118.7 mg/g 100% Acid CO therapy+CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [65] RuCO-DOPA-PBAN 3 mol/mol 40% (10 mM cysteine, 2 h) Cysteine CO therapy / RAW264.7 macrophages [97] PEG-bI-OrnRu-bI-nBu micelle 22.3 mg/g / Cysteine CO therapy / THP-1 Blue cells [98] CORM2@SMA micelle 18.0 mg/g / Spontaneous release CO therapy / KG-1 cell [99] NO BNN6‐SPION@hMSN 134.5 mg/g / US NO therapy +MRI / HeLa cell [8] TPZ@HMTN-SNO / / US NO therapy +SDT therapy +hypoxia-activated therapy+USI EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [67] Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G 29.3 mg/g / H2O2+US NO therapy Tumor targeting Panc-1 tumor mice [15] PEG-USMS-SNO / / X-Ray NO therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [10] BNN6-GON 259 mg/g 100% NIR NO therapy / 143B cells [14] C-TiO2@Lyso-RuNO/FA nanoparticle 19.5 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane-lysosome targeting HeLa cells [55] N-GQDs@RuNO/TPP 48 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PTT Mitochondria targeting HeLa tumor mice [56] RBS/DOX-UCNP@MSN 39 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +chemotherapy / HeLa and MCF-7 cells [62] SPION@PDA@MSN-SNO/DOX / / NIR-photothermal NO therapy +chemotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [11] GSNO/Cu1.6S@PLGA nanoparticle / / Visible Photothermal NO therapy +PTT / MRC-5 cells [32] RuNO-TiO2 nanoparticle 4.8 mg/g / Visible light NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane targeting HeLa cells [54] Cdot@SNO/TPP 0.96 mg/g / UV Light NO therapy Mitochondria targeting HepG2, A549 and HeLa cells [57] BNN6-DOX@mPEG-PLGA micelle / / UV light NO therapy +chemotherapy / OVCAR-8/ADR cells [30] Arg@MV-GOx / / Magnetothermal +glucose NO therapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Diabetic mice [33] DETANONOate-CPT11@PLGA / / Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [38] GSNO@CaCO3-PAsp nanoparticle 11.2 mg/g 85.3% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 cells [39] Arg@hMON-GOx 22.4 mg/g / Glucose NO therapy + starving therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect U87MG tumor mice [20] p(GD-Az-JSK)/DOX / 58.8% GSH/GST NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting HepG2 cells [21] DOX@KHA nanogel / / Tyrosine +GSH NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting 4T1 tumor mice [41] QM-NPQ@PDHN / / GSH+GSTπ NO therapy+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SMMC-7721 tumor mice [34] RSNO-Au nanoparticle / 100% Chemical catalysis / / / [48] β-gal-NONOate@PMA capsule / / Biocatalysis NO therapy / Glaucoma [50] Gas . Nanomedicine formulation . Gas loading amount . Gas release efficiency . Trigger for gas release . Theranostic method . Targeted route . Tumor model . Reference . H2 AB@MSN 130.6 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [18] AB@PDA nanoparticle 31.9 mg/g 80% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2 therapy +PTT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [24] MBN 173.9 mg/g 100% Acid H2 therapy +chemotherapy In situ targeting by oral uptake BGC-823 tumor mice [19] Fe@CMC nanoparticle 19 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [73] PdH0.2 nanocube 1.9 mg/g 100% NIR H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1, B16-F10 tumor mice [26] PdH-MOF nanoparticle 9.4 mg/g 100% ·OH H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [74] Chlα-AA-Au@liposome / / Visible light catalysis H2 therapy / Inflammation [45] Pdot-AA@liposome / / Visible light catalytic H2 therapy / Inflammation [51] Mg@MSN 79 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / PC12 cells [75] Mg@PLGA microparticle 7 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / Osteoarthritis [76] H2-C3F8@DSPE-PEG microbubble / / Spontaneous release H2 therapy +USI / Myocardial ischemia [52] CO2 hMSN-Arg-CO2 50.6 mg/g / US CO2 therapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Panc-1 tumor mice [9] DEACM-PEG micelle / / UV CO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect Renca cells [31] DOX-CaCO3-Pasp-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid+US CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SCC-7 tumor mice [60] HMME@MCC-HA 333.6 mg/g 93% (pH = 5.8+US, 24 h) Acid+US CO2 therapy + SDT+USI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [68] CaCO3-DOX@PLG-RVG nanoparticle 207.3 mg/g / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Cell membrane targeting N2a tumor mice [77] DOX–HCO3@hMSN / / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 and MCF-7/ADR cells [78] ABC@HSPC liposome / / Thermal CO2 therapy+USI / HT1080 cells [79] ABC-DOX@DSPE-PEG liposome 55.7 mg/g / Thermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI / H460 cells [80] ABC-DOX-Au-@liposome-MUC1 aptamer / / NIR-photothermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +PTT+USI+FI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [81] SO2 UCNP@hMSN-DM 15.8 mg/g / NIR SO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect S180 tumor mice [28] DOX@DN-PLG-mPEG micelle 3.5 mg/g 90% (120 min) GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [36] MON-DN@PCBMA-DOX 11.4 mg/g / GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [35] O2 ROS O2-PFH-IR780@Lipid / / NIR O2 therapy +PDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect CT26 tumor mice [29] O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG nanoparticle 3.1 mg/g / NIR-photothermal O2 therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [63] DOX/CP-NI nanoparticle / / Vis/NIR PDT +chemotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [82] Ce6-MnO2@HSA / / Acid O2 therapy +PDT+MRI+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-49 tumor mice [66] Ce6-DOX@H-MnO2-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid CDT +chemotherapy +immunotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [40] MnO2@HA-Man nanoparticle / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +MRI Tumor/TAMs targeting 4T1 tumor mice [83] UCSD@SiO2@MnO2 / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +PDT +radiotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [84] GOD-Fe3O4@DMSN / / Fenton catalysis CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 and U87 tumor mice [43] AFe nanoparticle / / Fenton catalysis CDT+MRI Magnetic targeting 4T1 tumor mice [47] C dots-C3N4@-PpIX-PEG-RGD nanoparticle / 1.4 mg/L (630 nm, 20 min) Photocatalysis O2 therapy+PDT Tumor targeting 4T1 tumor mice [85] Catalase@MON / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy + HIFU thermal therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-231 tumor mice [49] Catalase@liposome-RGD / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy +PDT Tumor targeting U87-MG tumor mice [53] H2S SP@UCNP-PEG 1.92 × 10−18 g/particle / NIR H2S therapy / L929 cells [27] DATS@MSN 84.4 mg/g / GSH H2S therapy / Ischemic/reperfusion injury [86] PEG-b-poly(FBEMA-SATO) micelle / / Cystine H2S therapy / HCT116 cells [37] HA-JK1 hydrogel / / Acid H2S therapy / Cutaneous wound model [87] HS-ASP/PTX@PCL-PEG micelle 4.5 mg/g 88.2% HS-ASP (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2S therapy +chemotherapy / LL/2 cells [88] ADT-Fe2O3@Liposome / / CBS/CSE H2S therapy +USI+MRI Magnetic targeting HepG2 tumor mice [58] BSA/ALA/DADS nanoemulsion / / Spontaneous release H2S therapy / MCF-7 and HuT 78 cells [89] CO MnCO-GON 881 mg/g 100% NIR CO therapy / Raw264.7 cells [7] FeCO-mPB-PEG nanoparticle / 73% NIR CO therapy +PTT+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [64] MnCO-UCNP@PL-PEG / 91% NIR / / / [90] FeCO-DOX@MCN-PEG / / NIR-photothermal CO therapy +PTT +chemotherapy +PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [12] MnCO-Ferritin / / Visible light CO therapy / HEK-293 cells [5] QD-MnCO / / Visible light CO therapy / / [91] MnCO-WTPhC 7.8 mol/mol 96.7% Visible light CO therapy / HEK293 cells [92] MnCO-nanodiamond 7.1 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [93] MnCO@Al-MCM-41 nanoparticle 31.5 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [94] MnCO@SFN 1.2 mg/g 39.3% UV light / / / [95] MnCO@hMSN 337.4 mg/g 100% H2O2 CO therapy / 4T1 tumor mice [16] MnCO@Ti-MOF / / H2O2 CO therapy / AGS cells [46] IONP-RuCO / / Magnetothermal CO therapy / / [96] IONP-RuCO 28 mg/g / Magnetothermal / / / [13] C dots/Ag3PO4-C3N4-RGD nanoparticle / / Visible light catalysis CO therapy +chemotherapy Tumor targeting PC-3 tumor mice [44] FeCO-MnO2@MSN 118.7 mg/g 100% Acid CO therapy+CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [65] RuCO-DOPA-PBAN 3 mol/mol 40% (10 mM cysteine, 2 h) Cysteine CO therapy / RAW264.7 macrophages [97] PEG-bI-OrnRu-bI-nBu micelle 22.3 mg/g / Cysteine CO therapy / THP-1 Blue cells [98] CORM2@SMA micelle 18.0 mg/g / Spontaneous release CO therapy / KG-1 cell [99] NO BNN6‐SPION@hMSN 134.5 mg/g / US NO therapy +MRI / HeLa cell [8] TPZ@HMTN-SNO / / US NO therapy +SDT therapy +hypoxia-activated therapy+USI EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [67] Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G 29.3 mg/g / H2O2+US NO therapy Tumor targeting Panc-1 tumor mice [15] PEG-USMS-SNO / / X-Ray NO therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [10] BNN6-GON 259 mg/g 100% NIR NO therapy / 143B cells [14] C-TiO2@Lyso-RuNO/FA nanoparticle 19.5 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane-lysosome targeting HeLa cells [55] N-GQDs@RuNO/TPP 48 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PTT Mitochondria targeting HeLa tumor mice [56] RBS/DOX-UCNP@MSN 39 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +chemotherapy / HeLa and MCF-7 cells [62] SPION@PDA@MSN-SNO/DOX / / NIR-photothermal NO therapy +chemotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [11] GSNO/Cu1.6S@PLGA nanoparticle / / Visible Photothermal NO therapy +PTT / MRC-5 cells [32] RuNO-TiO2 nanoparticle 4.8 mg/g / Visible light NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane targeting HeLa cells [54] Cdot@SNO/TPP 0.96 mg/g / UV Light NO therapy Mitochondria targeting HepG2, A549 and HeLa cells [57] BNN6-DOX@mPEG-PLGA micelle / / UV light NO therapy +chemotherapy / OVCAR-8/ADR cells [30] Arg@MV-GOx / / Magnetothermal +glucose NO therapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Diabetic mice [33] DETANONOate-CPT11@PLGA / / Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [38] GSNO@CaCO3-PAsp nanoparticle 11.2 mg/g 85.3% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 cells [39] Arg@hMON-GOx 22.4 mg/g / Glucose NO therapy + starving therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect U87MG tumor mice [20] p(GD-Az-JSK)/DOX / 58.8% GSH/GST NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting HepG2 cells [21] DOX@KHA nanogel / / Tyrosine +GSH NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting 4T1 tumor mice [41] QM-NPQ@PDHN / / GSH+GSTπ NO therapy+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SMMC-7721 tumor mice [34] RSNO-Au nanoparticle / 100% Chemical catalysis / / / [48] β-gal-NONOate@PMA capsule / / Biocatalysis NO therapy / Glaucoma [50] AA, ascorbic acid; AP-DN, n-(3-azidopropyl)-2,4-dinitrobenzenesulphonamide; Arg, L-arginine; ALA, α-linolenic acid; ADT, anethole dithiolethione; ASP, aspirin; BSA, bovine serum albumin; CBS, cystathionine-β synthase; CSE, cystathionine-γ-lyase; CPT-11, irinotecan; CDT, chemodynamic therapy; CMC, carboxymethyl cellulose; Chlα, chlorophylla; CP-NI, 2-nitroimidazole-grafted conjugated polymer; DOX, doxorubicin; DSPE-PEG, 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine-N-[methoxy(polyethylene glycol)]; DETANONOate, diethylenetriamine diazeniumdiolate; DEACM, (7-diethylaminocoumarin-4-yl)methyl; DADS, diallyl disulphide; DM, 1-(2,5-dimethylthien-1,1-dioxide-3-yl)-2-(2,5-dimethylthien-3-yl)-hexafluorocyclopentene; DMSN, dendritic mesoporous silica nanoparticle; EPR effect, enhanced permeability and retention effect; FBEMA, 2-(4-formylbenzoyloxy)ethyl methacrylate; FA, folic acid; FeCO, carbonyl iron compounds; FI, fluorescence imaging; GSH, glutathione; GST, glutathione S-transferase; GOD, glucose oxidase; HA, hyaluronic acid; HSPC, hydrogenated soy phosphatidylcholine; HA, hyaluronic acid; HMTN, hollow mesoporous titanium dioxide nanoparticle; HMME, hematoporphyrin monomethyl ether; HIFU, high intensity focused ultrasound; IONP, iron oxide nanoparticle; JSK, O2-(2,4-dinitrophenyl) 1-[(4-ethoxycarbonyl) piperazin-1yl]diazen-1-ium-1,2-diolate; JK1, hydrogen sulphide donor (C8H8Li3NO3PS); KHA, keratin-hyaluronic acid; Lyso, lysosome; MCC, mesoporous calcium carbonate; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; mPB, mesoporous Prussian blue; MBN, magnesium boride nanosheet; Man, mannan; MV, magnetic microvesicle; NPQ, O2-(2,4-dinitro-5-{[2-(β-d-galactopyranosyl olean-12-en-28-oate-3-yl)-oxy-2-oxoethyl] piperazine-1-yl}phenyl) 1-(methylethanolamino)diazen-1-ium-1,2-dilate; N-GQDs, N-doped graphene quantum dots; NIR, near-infrared light; PpIX, protoporphyrin; PDHN, PEGylated disulphide-doped hybrid nanocarrier; PTX, paclitaxel; PFH, perfluorohexane; p(GD-Az-JSK), nitric oxide prodrug molecule copolymer; PFC, perfluorocarbon; PCL, polycaprolactone; PAI, photoacoustic imaging; PTI, photothermal imaging; PTT, photothermal therapy; PDT, photodynamic therapy; PEG-bI-OrnRu-bI-nBu, poly(ethylene glycol)-bpoly[Ru(CO)3Cl(ornithinate acrylamide)]-b-poly(n-butylacrylamide); PDA, polydopamine; Pdot, polymer dot; PEG-PAsp, poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(L-aspartic acid) copolymer; PLG, poly(D, L-lactide-co-glycolide); QM, quinolone-malononitrile derivative; QD, quantum dot; RuCO, ruthenium carbonyl compounds; RGD, arg-gly-asp; RVG, rabies virus glycoprotein; SFN, silk fibroin nanoparticle; SDT, sonodynamic therapy; SPION, superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticle; SPCD, silicon phthalocyanine dihydroxide; TPP, triphenylphosphonium; TPZ, tirapazamine; USMS, UCNP@mSiO2; UCSD, UCNP&SPCD; US, ultrasound; UV, ultraviolet light; Vis, visible light; WTPhC, wild-type polyhedral crystal. Open in new tab Table 2. Structure-property relationship of representative gas-releasing nanomedicines for therapy. Gas . Nanomedicine formulation . Gas loading amount . Gas release efficiency . Trigger for gas release . Theranostic method . Targeted route . Tumor model . Reference . H2 AB@MSN 130.6 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [18] AB@PDA nanoparticle 31.9 mg/g 80% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2 therapy +PTT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [24] MBN 173.9 mg/g 100% Acid H2 therapy +chemotherapy In situ targeting by oral uptake BGC-823 tumor mice [19] Fe@CMC nanoparticle 19 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [73] PdH0.2 nanocube 1.9 mg/g 100% NIR H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1, B16-F10 tumor mice [26] PdH-MOF nanoparticle 9.4 mg/g 100% ·OH H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [74] Chlα-AA-Au@liposome / / Visible light catalysis H2 therapy / Inflammation [45] Pdot-AA@liposome / / Visible light catalytic H2 therapy / Inflammation [51] Mg@MSN 79 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / PC12 cells [75] Mg@PLGA microparticle 7 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / Osteoarthritis [76] H2-C3F8@DSPE-PEG microbubble / / Spontaneous release H2 therapy +USI / Myocardial ischemia [52] CO2 hMSN-Arg-CO2 50.6 mg/g / US CO2 therapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Panc-1 tumor mice [9] DEACM-PEG micelle / / UV CO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect Renca cells [31] DOX-CaCO3-Pasp-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid+US CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SCC-7 tumor mice [60] HMME@MCC-HA 333.6 mg/g 93% (pH = 5.8+US, 24 h) Acid+US CO2 therapy + SDT+USI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [68] CaCO3-DOX@PLG-RVG nanoparticle 207.3 mg/g / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Cell membrane targeting N2a tumor mice [77] DOX–HCO3@hMSN / / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 and MCF-7/ADR cells [78] ABC@HSPC liposome / / Thermal CO2 therapy+USI / HT1080 cells [79] ABC-DOX@DSPE-PEG liposome 55.7 mg/g / Thermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI / H460 cells [80] ABC-DOX-Au-@liposome-MUC1 aptamer / / NIR-photothermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +PTT+USI+FI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [81] SO2 UCNP@hMSN-DM 15.8 mg/g / NIR SO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect S180 tumor mice [28] DOX@DN-PLG-mPEG micelle 3.5 mg/g 90% (120 min) GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [36] MON-DN@PCBMA-DOX 11.4 mg/g / GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [35] O2 ROS O2-PFH-IR780@Lipid / / NIR O2 therapy +PDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect CT26 tumor mice [29] O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG nanoparticle 3.1 mg/g / NIR-photothermal O2 therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [63] DOX/CP-NI nanoparticle / / Vis/NIR PDT +chemotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [82] Ce6-MnO2@HSA / / Acid O2 therapy +PDT+MRI+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-49 tumor mice [66] Ce6-DOX@H-MnO2-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid CDT +chemotherapy +immunotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [40] MnO2@HA-Man nanoparticle / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +MRI Tumor/TAMs targeting 4T1 tumor mice [83] UCSD@SiO2@MnO2 / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +PDT +radiotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [84] GOD-Fe3O4@DMSN / / Fenton catalysis CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 and U87 tumor mice [43] AFe nanoparticle / / Fenton catalysis CDT+MRI Magnetic targeting 4T1 tumor mice [47] C dots-C3N4@-PpIX-PEG-RGD nanoparticle / 1.4 mg/L (630 nm, 20 min) Photocatalysis O2 therapy+PDT Tumor targeting 4T1 tumor mice [85] Catalase@MON / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy + HIFU thermal therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-231 tumor mice [49] Catalase@liposome-RGD / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy +PDT Tumor targeting U87-MG tumor mice [53] H2S SP@UCNP-PEG 1.92 × 10−18 g/particle / NIR H2S therapy / L929 cells [27] DATS@MSN 84.4 mg/g / GSH H2S therapy / Ischemic/reperfusion injury [86] PEG-b-poly(FBEMA-SATO) micelle / / Cystine H2S therapy / HCT116 cells [37] HA-JK1 hydrogel / / Acid H2S therapy / Cutaneous wound model [87] HS-ASP/PTX@PCL-PEG micelle 4.5 mg/g 88.2% HS-ASP (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2S therapy +chemotherapy / LL/2 cells [88] ADT-Fe2O3@Liposome / / CBS/CSE H2S therapy +USI+MRI Magnetic targeting HepG2 tumor mice [58] BSA/ALA/DADS nanoemulsion / / Spontaneous release H2S therapy / MCF-7 and HuT 78 cells [89] CO MnCO-GON 881 mg/g 100% NIR CO therapy / Raw264.7 cells [7] FeCO-mPB-PEG nanoparticle / 73% NIR CO therapy +PTT+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [64] MnCO-UCNP@PL-PEG / 91% NIR / / / [90] FeCO-DOX@MCN-PEG / / NIR-photothermal CO therapy +PTT +chemotherapy +PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [12] MnCO-Ferritin / / Visible light CO therapy / HEK-293 cells [5] QD-MnCO / / Visible light CO therapy / / [91] MnCO-WTPhC 7.8 mol/mol 96.7% Visible light CO therapy / HEK293 cells [92] MnCO-nanodiamond 7.1 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [93] MnCO@Al-MCM-41 nanoparticle 31.5 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [94] MnCO@SFN 1.2 mg/g 39.3% UV light / / / [95] MnCO@hMSN 337.4 mg/g 100% H2O2 CO therapy / 4T1 tumor mice [16] MnCO@Ti-MOF / / H2O2 CO therapy / AGS cells [46] IONP-RuCO / / Magnetothermal CO therapy / / [96] IONP-RuCO 28 mg/g / Magnetothermal / / / [13] C dots/Ag3PO4-C3N4-RGD nanoparticle / / Visible light catalysis CO therapy +chemotherapy Tumor targeting PC-3 tumor mice [44] FeCO-MnO2@MSN 118.7 mg/g 100% Acid CO therapy+CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [65] RuCO-DOPA-PBAN 3 mol/mol 40% (10 mM cysteine, 2 h) Cysteine CO therapy / RAW264.7 macrophages [97] PEG-bI-OrnRu-bI-nBu micelle 22.3 mg/g / Cysteine CO therapy / THP-1 Blue cells [98] CORM2@SMA micelle 18.0 mg/g / Spontaneous release CO therapy / KG-1 cell [99] NO BNN6‐SPION@hMSN 134.5 mg/g / US NO therapy +MRI / HeLa cell [8] TPZ@HMTN-SNO / / US NO therapy +SDT therapy +hypoxia-activated therapy+USI EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [67] Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G 29.3 mg/g / H2O2+US NO therapy Tumor targeting Panc-1 tumor mice [15] PEG-USMS-SNO / / X-Ray NO therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [10] BNN6-GON 259 mg/g 100% NIR NO therapy / 143B cells [14] C-TiO2@Lyso-RuNO/FA nanoparticle 19.5 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane-lysosome targeting HeLa cells [55] N-GQDs@RuNO/TPP 48 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PTT Mitochondria targeting HeLa tumor mice [56] RBS/DOX-UCNP@MSN 39 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +chemotherapy / HeLa and MCF-7 cells [62] SPION@PDA@MSN-SNO/DOX / / NIR-photothermal NO therapy +chemotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [11] GSNO/Cu1.6S@PLGA nanoparticle / / Visible Photothermal NO therapy +PTT / MRC-5 cells [32] RuNO-TiO2 nanoparticle 4.8 mg/g / Visible light NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane targeting HeLa cells [54] Cdot@SNO/TPP 0.96 mg/g / UV Light NO therapy Mitochondria targeting HepG2, A549 and HeLa cells [57] BNN6-DOX@mPEG-PLGA micelle / / UV light NO therapy +chemotherapy / OVCAR-8/ADR cells [30] Arg@MV-GOx / / Magnetothermal +glucose NO therapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Diabetic mice [33] DETANONOate-CPT11@PLGA / / Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [38] GSNO@CaCO3-PAsp nanoparticle 11.2 mg/g 85.3% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 cells [39] Arg@hMON-GOx 22.4 mg/g / Glucose NO therapy + starving therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect U87MG tumor mice [20] p(GD-Az-JSK)/DOX / 58.8% GSH/GST NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting HepG2 cells [21] DOX@KHA nanogel / / Tyrosine +GSH NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting 4T1 tumor mice [41] QM-NPQ@PDHN / / GSH+GSTπ NO therapy+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SMMC-7721 tumor mice [34] RSNO-Au nanoparticle / 100% Chemical catalysis / / / [48] β-gal-NONOate@PMA capsule / / Biocatalysis NO therapy / Glaucoma [50] Gas . Nanomedicine formulation . Gas loading amount . Gas release efficiency . Trigger for gas release . Theranostic method . Targeted route . Tumor model . Reference . H2 AB@MSN 130.6 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [18] AB@PDA nanoparticle 31.9 mg/g 80% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2 therapy +PTT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [24] MBN 173.9 mg/g 100% Acid H2 therapy +chemotherapy In situ targeting by oral uptake BGC-823 tumor mice [19] Fe@CMC nanoparticle 19 mg/g / Acid H2 therapy PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [73] PdH0.2 nanocube 1.9 mg/g 100% NIR H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1, B16-F10 tumor mice [26] PdH-MOF nanoparticle 9.4 mg/g 100% ·OH H2 therapy + PTT+PAI+PTI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [74] Chlα-AA-Au@liposome / / Visible light catalysis H2 therapy / Inflammation [45] Pdot-AA@liposome / / Visible light catalytic H2 therapy / Inflammation [51] Mg@MSN 79 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / PC12 cells [75] Mg@PLGA microparticle 7 mg/g / Spontaneous release H2 therapy / Osteoarthritis [76] H2-C3F8@DSPE-PEG microbubble / / Spontaneous release H2 therapy +USI / Myocardial ischemia [52] CO2 hMSN-Arg-CO2 50.6 mg/g / US CO2 therapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Panc-1 tumor mice [9] DEACM-PEG micelle / / UV CO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect Renca cells [31] DOX-CaCO3-Pasp-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid+US CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SCC-7 tumor mice [60] HMME@MCC-HA 333.6 mg/g 93% (pH = 5.8+US, 24 h) Acid+US CO2 therapy + SDT+USI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [68] CaCO3-DOX@PLG-RVG nanoparticle 207.3 mg/g / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI Cell membrane targeting N2a tumor mice [77] DOX–HCO3@hMSN / / Acid CO2 therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 and MCF-7/ADR cells [78] ABC@HSPC liposome / / Thermal CO2 therapy+USI / HT1080 cells [79] ABC-DOX@DSPE-PEG liposome 55.7 mg/g / Thermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +USI / H460 cells [80] ABC-DOX-Au-@liposome-MUC1 aptamer / / NIR-photothermal CO2 therapy +chemotherapy +PTT+USI+FI Cell membrane targeting MCF-7 tumor mice [81] SO2 UCNP@hMSN-DM 15.8 mg/g / NIR SO2 therapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect S180 tumor mice [28] DOX@DN-PLG-mPEG micelle 3.5 mg/g 90% (120 min) GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [36] MON-DN@PCBMA-DOX 11.4 mg/g / GSH SO2 therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 ADR tumor mice [35] O2 ROS O2-PFH-IR780@Lipid / / NIR O2 therapy +PDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect CT26 tumor mice [29] O2-PFC@Bi2Se3-PEG nanoparticle 3.1 mg/g / NIR-photothermal O2 therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [63] DOX/CP-NI nanoparticle / / Vis/NIR PDT +chemotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [82] Ce6-MnO2@HSA / / Acid O2 therapy +PDT+MRI+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-49 tumor mice [66] Ce6-DOX@H-MnO2-PEG nanoparticle / / Acid CDT +chemotherapy +immunotherapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [40] MnO2@HA-Man nanoparticle / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +MRI Tumor/TAMs targeting 4T1 tumor mice [83] UCSD@SiO2@MnO2 / / H2O2+acid O2 therapy +PDT +radiotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [84] GOD-Fe3O4@DMSN / / Fenton catalysis CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 and U87 tumor mice [43] AFe nanoparticle / / Fenton catalysis CDT+MRI Magnetic targeting 4T1 tumor mice [47] C dots-C3N4@-PpIX-PEG-RGD nanoparticle / 1.4 mg/L (630 nm, 20 min) Photocatalysis O2 therapy+PDT Tumor targeting 4T1 tumor mice [85] Catalase@MON / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy + HIFU thermal therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MB-231 tumor mice [49] Catalase@liposome-RGD / / Catalase catalysis O2 therapy +PDT Tumor targeting U87-MG tumor mice [53] H2S SP@UCNP-PEG 1.92 × 10−18 g/particle / NIR H2S therapy / L929 cells [27] DATS@MSN 84.4 mg/g / GSH H2S therapy / Ischemic/reperfusion injury [86] PEG-b-poly(FBEMA-SATO) micelle / / Cystine H2S therapy / HCT116 cells [37] HA-JK1 hydrogel / / Acid H2S therapy / Cutaneous wound model [87] HS-ASP/PTX@PCL-PEG micelle 4.5 mg/g 88.2% HS-ASP (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid H2S therapy +chemotherapy / LL/2 cells [88] ADT-Fe2O3@Liposome / / CBS/CSE H2S therapy +USI+MRI Magnetic targeting HepG2 tumor mice [58] BSA/ALA/DADS nanoemulsion / / Spontaneous release H2S therapy / MCF-7 and HuT 78 cells [89] CO MnCO-GON 881 mg/g 100% NIR CO therapy / Raw264.7 cells [7] FeCO-mPB-PEG nanoparticle / 73% NIR CO therapy +PTT+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect HeLa tumor mice [64] MnCO-UCNP@PL-PEG / 91% NIR / / / [90] FeCO-DOX@MCN-PEG / / NIR-photothermal CO therapy +PTT +chemotherapy +PAI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [12] MnCO-Ferritin / / Visible light CO therapy / HEK-293 cells [5] QD-MnCO / / Visible light CO therapy / / [91] MnCO-WTPhC 7.8 mol/mol 96.7% Visible light CO therapy / HEK293 cells [92] MnCO-nanodiamond 7.1 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [93] MnCO@Al-MCM-41 nanoparticle 31.5 mg/g / UV light CO therapy / / [94] MnCO@SFN 1.2 mg/g 39.3% UV light / / / [95] MnCO@hMSN 337.4 mg/g 100% H2O2 CO therapy / 4T1 tumor mice [16] MnCO@Ti-MOF / / H2O2 CO therapy / AGS cells [46] IONP-RuCO / / Magnetothermal CO therapy / / [96] IONP-RuCO 28 mg/g / Magnetothermal / / / [13] C dots/Ag3PO4-C3N4-RGD nanoparticle / / Visible light catalysis CO therapy +chemotherapy Tumor targeting PC-3 tumor mice [44] FeCO-MnO2@MSN 118.7 mg/g 100% Acid CO therapy+CDT Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [65] RuCO-DOPA-PBAN 3 mol/mol 40% (10 mM cysteine, 2 h) Cysteine CO therapy / RAW264.7 macrophages [97] PEG-bI-OrnRu-bI-nBu micelle 22.3 mg/g / Cysteine CO therapy / THP-1 Blue cells [98] CORM2@SMA micelle 18.0 mg/g / Spontaneous release CO therapy / KG-1 cell [99] NO BNN6‐SPION@hMSN 134.5 mg/g / US NO therapy +MRI / HeLa cell [8] TPZ@HMTN-SNO / / US NO therapy +SDT therapy +hypoxia-activated therapy+USI EPR effect MCF-7 tumor mice [67] Arg@hMSN-CLT1-G 29.3 mg/g / H2O2+US NO therapy Tumor targeting Panc-1 tumor mice [15] PEG-USMS-SNO / / X-Ray NO therapy +radiotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect 4T1 tumor mice [10] BNN6-GON 259 mg/g 100% NIR NO therapy / 143B cells [14] C-TiO2@Lyso-RuNO/FA nanoparticle 19.5 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane-lysosome targeting HeLa cells [55] N-GQDs@RuNO/TPP 48 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +PTT Mitochondria targeting HeLa tumor mice [56] RBS/DOX-UCNP@MSN 39 mg/g / NIR NO therapy +chemotherapy / HeLa and MCF-7 cells [62] SPION@PDA@MSN-SNO/DOX / / NIR-photothermal NO therapy +chemotherapy +FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [11] GSNO/Cu1.6S@PLGA nanoparticle / / Visible Photothermal NO therapy +PTT / MRC-5 cells [32] RuNO-TiO2 nanoparticle 4.8 mg/g / Visible light NO therapy +PDT Cell membrane targeting HeLa cells [54] Cdot@SNO/TPP 0.96 mg/g / UV Light NO therapy Mitochondria targeting HepG2, A549 and HeLa cells [57] BNN6-DOX@mPEG-PLGA micelle / / UV light NO therapy +chemotherapy / OVCAR-8/ADR cells [30] Arg@MV-GOx / / Magnetothermal +glucose NO therapy +MRI Passive targeting by the EPR effect Diabetic mice [33] DETANONOate-CPT11@PLGA / / Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy Passive targeting by the EPR effect MCF-7/ADR tumor mice [38] GSNO@CaCO3-PAsp nanoparticle 11.2 mg/g 85.3% (pH = 5, 24 h) Acid NO therapy +chemotherapy / MCF-7 cells [39] Arg@hMON-GOx 22.4 mg/g / Glucose NO therapy + starving therapy+USI Passive targeting by the EPR effect U87MG tumor mice [20] p(GD-Az-JSK)/DOX / 58.8% GSH/GST NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting HepG2 cells [21] DOX@KHA nanogel / / Tyrosine +GSH NO therapy +chemotherapy Cell membrane targeting 4T1 tumor mice [41] QM-NPQ@PDHN / / GSH+GSTπ NO therapy+FI Passive targeting by the EPR effect SMMC-7721 tumor mice [34] RSNO-Au nanoparticle / 100% Chemical catalysis / / / [48] β-gal-NONOate@PMA capsule / / Biocatalysis NO therapy / Glaucoma [50] AA, ascorbic acid; AP-DN, n-(3-azidopropyl)-2,4-dinitrobenzenesulphonamide; Arg, L-arginine; ALA, α-linolenic acid; ADT, anethole dithiolethione; ASP, aspirin; BSA, bovine serum albumin; CBS, cystathionine-β synthase; CSE, cystathionine-γ-lyase; CPT-11, irinotecan; CDT, chemodynamic therapy; CMC, carboxymethyl cellulose; Chlα, chlorophylla; CP-NI, 2-nitroimidazole-grafted conjugated polymer; DOX, doxorubicin; DSPE-PEG, 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine-N-[methoxy(polyethylene glycol)]; DETANONOate, diethylenetriamine diazeniumdiolate; DEACM, (7-diethylaminocoumarin-4-yl)methyl; DADS, diallyl disulphide; DM, 1-(2,5-dimethylthien-1,1-dioxide-3-yl)-2-(2,5-dimethylthien-3-yl)-hexafluorocyclopentene; DMSN, dendritic mesoporous silica nanoparticle; EPR effect, enhanced permeability and retention effect; FBEMA, 2-(4-formylbenzoyloxy)ethyl methacrylate; FA, folic acid; FeCO, carbonyl iron compounds; FI, fluorescence imaging; GSH, glutathione; GST, glutathione S-transferase; GOD, glucose oxidase; HA, hyaluronic acid; HSPC, hydrogenated soy phosphatidylcholine; HA, hyaluronic acid; HMTN, hollow mesoporous titanium dioxide nanoparticle; HMME, hematoporphyrin monomethyl ether; HIFU, high intensity focused ultrasound; IONP, iron oxide nanoparticle; JSK, O2-(2,4-dinitrophenyl) 1-[(4-ethoxycarbonyl) piperazin-1yl]diazen-1-ium-1,2-diolate; JK1, hydrogen sulphide donor (C8H8Li3NO3PS); KHA, keratin-hyaluronic acid; Lyso, lysosome; MCC, mesoporous calcium carbonate; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; mPB, mesoporous Prussian blue; MBN, magnesium boride nanosheet; Man, mannan; MV, magnetic microvesicle; NPQ, O2-(2,4-dinitro-5-{[2-(β-d-galactopyranosyl olean-12-en-28-oate-3-yl)-oxy-2-oxoethyl] piperazine-1-yl}phenyl) 1-(methylethanolamino)diazen-1-ium-1,2-dilate; N-GQDs, N-doped graphene quantum dots; NIR, near-infrared light; PpIX, protoporphyrin; PDHN, PEGylated disulphide-doped hybrid nanocarrier; PTX, paclitaxel; PFH, perfluorohexane; p(GD-Az-JSK), nitric oxide prodrug molecule copolymer; PFC, perfluorocarbon; PCL, polycaprolactone; PAI, photoacoustic imaging; PTI, photothermal imaging; PTT, photothermal therapy; PDT, photodynamic therapy; PEG-bI-OrnRu-bI-nBu, poly(ethylene glycol)-bpoly[Ru(CO)3Cl(ornithinate acrylamide)]-b-poly(n-butylacrylamide); PDA, polydopamine; Pdot, polymer dot; PEG-PAsp, poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(L-aspartic acid) copolymer; PLG, poly(D, L-lactide-co-glycolide); QM, quinolone-malononitrile derivative; QD, quantum dot; RuCO, ruthenium carbonyl compounds; RGD, arg-gly-asp; RVG, rabies virus glycoprotein; SFN, silk fibroin nanoparticle; SDT, sonodynamic therapy; SPION, superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticle; SPCD, silicon phthalocyanine dihydroxide; TPP, triphenylphosphonium; TPZ, tirapazamine; USMS, UCNP@mSiO2; UCSD, UCNP&SPCD; US, ultrasound; UV, ultraviolet light; Vis, visible light; WTPhC, wild-type polyhedral crystal. Open in new tab For stimuli-responsive gas-releasing nanome-dicines, some advanced stimuli sources such as various specific enzymes, microwaves, NIR-II light, electricity and magnet fields have rarely been employed, and many nanocarriers with corresponding functions could be developed in depth for construction of advanced gas-releasing nanomedicines. Most current targeting paths focus only on one or two organelles, and more attention should be paid to a multistep targeting strategies to improve targeted efficiency of nanomedicines. Some gases such as NO and SO2 can damage the nuclei of cancer cells, and therefore direct nuclei-targeted delivery of these gases could possibly improve their anticancer efficacies. However, nuclei-targeted gas delivery by nanomedicines has not been reported so far. Catalytic strategies for controlled gas release are emerging, and many strategies in industrial catalysis could be used as reference. Along with quick development of gas therapy-related basic research, a large number of ‘from bench to beside’ clinical trials have been executed. Several drugs for NO therapy, such as nitroglycerin, sodium nitroprusside, isosorbide mononitrate, hydralazine and 2-nicotinamidoethyl nitrate, have been widely used clinically for urgent treatment of cardiovascular diseases, and their clinical applications are also being extended to cancer treatment. The main adverse effects involve blood poisoning to a certain extent because of poor controllability of NO release and high toxicity of decomposition products. A phase II study of concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy with nitroglycerin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer demonstrated an acceptable toxicity profile [70,71]. Recently, phase Ib/II trial results indicated the safety, tolerability and promising activity of NG-monomethyl-L-arginine (L-NMMA, iNOS inhibitor) in combination with chemotherapy in treatment of chemotherapy-refractory triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) [72]. It implies that besides the intratumoral delivery of therapeutic NO/CO/H2S gases and their prodrugs, the tumor-targeted delivery of related iNOS/HO1/CBS inhibitors by nanomedicine approach also holds great promise to improve anticancer efficacy and avoid side effects. In addition, direct inhalation of therapeutic gases such as NO and O2 has been widely used in clinic, especially to treat respiratory diseases such as novel corona virus disease (COVID-19), but have a potential poisoning risk from overdose. Compared with other several therapeutic gases, use of H2 gas therapy is a recently developed method for treating numerous diseases, but has huge prospects because of the high biosafety and wide-spectrum therapeutic effects of H2. More than 60 clinic trials of hydrogen therapy have been reported so far for treatment of various inflammation-related diseases, including assistance of radiotherapy and chemotherapy and oxygen therapy of COVID-19 pneumonia [100], mainly through inhalation of H2 gas and oral uptake of hydrogen-rich water. The outcome of hydrogen therapy can be further improved by nanomedicine strategies, especially aiming at deep-seated tumors such as glioma and hepatocarcinoma. Development of H2-releasing nanomedicines for cancer therapy is still at the preclinical stage, but is worth further exploration. The existing H2 prodrugs for construction of nanomedicines are only few, and the controlled hydrogen release strategy also needs to be extended for development of more H2-releasing nanomedicines. Varied routes to hydrogen administration including oral uptake, injection and surface dressing could be exploited, which would create further need for specific nanomedicines. The use of H2-releasing nanomedicines for improvement of many therapy modes is still a blank page. FUNDING This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51872188), the Shenzhen Basic Research Program (JCYJ20170302151858466, JCYJ20170818093808351, JCYJ20170818141810756 and GJHZ20180418190532315), the Special Funds for the Development of Strategic Emerging Industries in Shenzhen (20180309154519685), the PhD Start-up Fund of Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2017A030310471 and 2018A030310573), and the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2018M643171). Conflict of interest statement. None declared. REFERENCES 1. Sheeba C , Marslin G, Revina Aet al. Signaling pathways influencing tumor microenvironment and their exploitation for targeted drug delivery . Nanotechnol Rev 2013 ; 3 : 123 – 51 . Google Scholar OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat 2. Szabo C. Gasotransmitters in cancer: from pathophysiology to experimental therapy . Nat Rev Drug Discovery 2016 ; 15 : 185 – 203 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 3. Mocellin S , Bronte V, Nitti D. Nitric oxide, a double edged sword in cancer biology: searching for therapeutic opportunities . Med Res Rev 2007 ; 27 : 317 – 52 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 4. Frederiksen LJ , Sullivan R, Maxwell LRet al. Chemosensitization of cancer in vitro and in vivo by nitric oxide signaling . Clin Cancer Res 2007 ; 13 : 2199 – 206 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 5. Fujita K , Tanaka Y, Abe Set al. A Photoactive carbon-monoxide-releasing protein cage for dose-regulated delivery in living cells . Angew Chem Int Ed 2016 ; 55 : 1056 – 60 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 6. Tabe H , Fujita K, Abe Set al. Preparation of a cross-linked porous protein crystal containing ru carbonyl complexes as a CO-releasing extracellular scaffold . Inorg Chem 2015 ; 54 : 215 – 20 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 7. He Q , Kiesewetter DO, Qu Yet al. NIR-responsive on-demand release of CO from metal carbonyl-caged graphene oxide nanomedicine . Adv Mater 2015 ; 27 : 6741 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 8. Jin Z , Wen Y, Hu Yet al. MRI-guided and ultrasound-triggered release of NO by advanced nanomedicine . Nanoscale 2017 ; 9 : 3637 – 45 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 9. Zhang K , Xu H, Chen Het al. CO2 bubbling-based 'nanobomb' system for targetedly suppressing panc-1 pancreatic tumor via low intensity ultrasound-activated inertial cavitation . Theranostics 2015 ; 5 : 1291 – 302 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 10. Fan W , Bu W, Zhang Zet al. X-ray radiation-controlled NO-release for on-demand depth-independent hypoxic radiosensitization . Angew Chem Int Ed 2015 ; 54 : 14026 – 30 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 11. Guo R , Tian Y, Wang Yet al. Near-infrared laser-triggered nitric oxide nanogenerators for the reversal of multidrug resistance in cancer . Adv Funct Mater 2017 ; 27 : 1606398 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 12. Yao X , Yang P, Jin Zet al. Multifunctional nanoplatform for photoacoustic imaging-guided combined therapy enhanced by CO induced ferroptosis . Biomaterials 2019 ; 197 : 268 – 83 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 13. Kunz PC , Meyer H, Barthel Jet al. Metal carbonyls supported on iron oxide nanoparticles to trigger the CO-gasotransmitter release by magnetic heating . Chem Commun 2013 ; 49 : 4896 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 14. Fan J , He N, He Qet al. A novel self-assembled sandwich nanomedicine for NIR-responsive release of NO . Nanoscale 2015 ; 7 : 20055 – 62 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 15. Zhang K , Xu H, Jia Xet al. Ultrasound-triggered nitric oxide release platform based on energy transformation for targeted inhibition of pancreatic tumor . ACS Nano 2016 ; 10 : 10816 – 28 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 16. Jin Z , Wen Y, Xiong Let al. Intratumoral H2O2-triggered release of CO from a metal carbonyl-based nanomedicine for efficient CO therapy . Chem Commun 2017 ; 53 : 5557 – 60 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 17. Lennicke C , Rahn J, Lichtenfels Ret al. Hydrogen peroxide – production, fate and role in redox signaling of tumor cells . Cell Commun Signal 2015 ; 13 : 39 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 18. Yang T , Jin Z, Wang Zet al. Intratumoral high-payload delivery and acid-responsive release of H2 for efficient cancer therapy using the ammonia borane-loaded mesoporous silica nanomedicine . Appl Mater Today 2018 ; 11 : 136 – 43 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 19. Fan M , Wen Y, Ye Det al. Acid-responsive H2-releasing 2D MgB2 nanosheet for therapeutic synergy and side effect attenuation of gastric cancer chemotherapy . Adv Healthc Mater 2019 ; 8 : 1900157 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 20. Fan W , Lu N, Huang Pet al. Glucose-responsive sequential generation of hydrogen peroxide and nitric oxide for synergistic cancer starving-like/gas therapy . Angew Chem Int Ed 2017 ; 56 : 1229 – 33 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 21. Zhang J , Song H, Ji Set al. NO prodrug-conjugated, self-assembled, pH-responsive and galactose receptor targeted nanoparticles for co-delivery of nitric oxide and doxorubicin . Nanoscale 2018 ; 10 : 4179 – 88 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 22. Romanski S , Rücker H, Stamellou Eet al. Iron dienylphosphate tricarbonyl complexes as water-soluble enzyme-triggered CO-releasing molecules (ET-CORMs) . Organometallics 2012 ; 31 : 5800 – 9 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 23. Gao J , Zheng W, Zhang Jet al. Enzyme-controllable delivery of nitric oxide from a molecular hydrogel . Chem Commun 2013 ; 49 : 9173 – 5 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 24. Zhang C , Zheng DW, Li CXet al. Hydrogen gas improves photothermal therapy of tumor and restrains the relapse of distant dormant tumor . Biomaterials 2019 ; 223 : 119472 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 25. Hou J , Pan Y, Zhu Det al. Targeted delivery of nitric oxide via a ‘bump-and-hole’-based enzyme-prodrug pair . Nat Chem Biol 2019 ; 15 : 151 – 60 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 26. Zhao P , Jin Z, Chen Qet al. Local generation of hydrogen for enhanced photothermal therapy . Nat Commun 2018 ; 9 : 4241 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 27. Chen W , Chen M, Zang Qet al. NIR light controlled release of caged hydrogen sulfide based on upconversion nanoparticles . Chem Commun 2015 ; 51 : 9193 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 28. Li S , Liu R, Jiang Xet al. Near-infrared light-triggered sulfur dioxide gas therapy of cancer . ACS Nano 2019 ; 13 : 2103 – 13 . Google Scholar PubMed OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat 29. Cheng Y , Cheng H, Jiang Cet al. Perfluorocarbon nanoparticles enhance reactive oxygen levels and tumor growth inhibition in photodynamic therapy . Nat Commun 2015 ; 6 : 8785 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 30. Fan J , He Q, Liu Yet al. Light-responsive biodegradable nanomedicine overcomes multidrug resistance via NO-enhanced chemosensitization . ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2016 ; 8 : 13804 – 11 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 31. Zhang Y , Guan Y, Ge Set al. Light-responsive CO2 bubble-generating polymeric micelles for tumor cell ablation . Medicinal Chem Commun 2017 ; 8 : 405 – 7 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 32. Kao P , Lee IJ, Liau Iet al. Controllable NO release from Cu1.6S nanoparticle decomposition of S-nitrosoglutathiones following photothermal disintegration of polymersomes to elicit cerebral vasodilatory activity . Chem Sci 2017 ; 8 : 291 – 7 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 33. Yang F , Li M, Liu Yet al. Glucose and magnetic-responsive approach toward in situ nitric oxide bubbles controlled generation for hyperglycemia theranostics . J Control Release 2016 ; 228 : 87 – 95 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 34. Jia X , Zhang Y, Zou Yet al. Dual intratumoral redox/enzyme‐responsive NO‐releasing nanomedicine for the specific, high‐efficacy, and low‐toxic cancer therapy . Adv Mater 2018 ; 30 : 1704490 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 35. Yao X , Ma S, Peng Set al. Zwitterionic polymer coating of sulfur dioxide-releasing nanosystem augments tumor accumulation and treatment efficacy . Adv Healthc Mater 2020 ; 9 : e1901582 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 36. Shen W , Liu W, Yang Het al. A glutathione-responsive sulfur dioxide polymer prodrug as a nanocarrier for combating drug-resistance in cancer chemotherapy . Biomaterials 2018 ; 178 : 706 – 19 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 37. Foster JC , Radzinski SC, Zou Xet al. H2S-releasing polymer micelles for studying selective cell toxicity . Mol Pharmaceutics 2017 ; 14 : 1300 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 38. Chung M , Liu H, Lin Ket al. A pH-responsive carrier system that generates NO bubbles to trigger drug release and reverse P-glycoprotein-mediated multidrug resistance . Angew Chem Int Ed 2015 ; 54 : 9890 – 3 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 39. Lee HJ , Park DJ, Choi GHet al. pH-responsive mineralized nanoparticles as stable nanocarriers for intracellular nitric oxide delivery . Colloids Surf B 2016 ; 146 : 1 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 40. Yang G , Xu L, Chao Yet al. Hollow MnO2 as a tumor-microenvironment-responsive biodegradable nano-platform for combination therapy favoring antitumor immune responses . Nat Commun 2017 ; 8 : 902 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 41. Sun Z , Yi Z, Cui Xet al. Tumor-targeted and nitric oxide-generated nanogels of keratin and hyaluronan for enhanced cancer therapy . Nanoscale 2018 ; 10 : 12109 – 22 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 42. Lin H , Chen Y, Shi J. Nanoparticle-triggered in situ catalytic chemical reactions for tumour-specific therapy . Chem Soc Rev 2018 ; 47 : 1938 – 58 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 43. Huo M , Wang L, Chen Yet al. Tumor-selective catalytic nanomedicine by nanocatalyst delivery . Nat Commun 2017 ; 8 : 357 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 44. Zheng D , Li B, Li Cet al. Photocatalyzing CO2 to CO for enhanced cancer therapy . Adv Mater 2017 ; 29 : 1703822 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 45. Wan W , Lin Y, Chen Het al. In situ nanoreactor for photosynthesizing H2 gas to mitigate oxidative stress in tissue inflammation . J Am Chem Soc 2017 ; 139 : 12923 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 46. Jin Z , Zhao P, Zhang Jet al. Intelligent metal carbonyl metal–organic framework nanocomplex for fluorescent traceable H2O2‐triggered CO delivery . Chem Eur J 2018 ; 24 : 11667 – 74 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 47. Zhang C , Bu W, Ni Det al. Synthesis of iron nanometallic glasses and their application in cancer therapy by a localized fenton reaction . Angew Chem Int Ed 2016 ; 55 : 2101 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 48. Taladriz-Blanco P , Pastoriza-Santos V, Pérez-Juste Jet al. Controllable nitric oxide release in the presence of gold nanoparticles . Langmuir 2013 ; 29 : 8061 – 9 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 49. Liu T , Zhang N, Wang Zet al. Endogenous catalytic generation of O2 bubbles for in situ ultrasound-guided high intensity focused ultrasound ablation . ACS Nano 2017 ; 11 : 9093 – 102 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 50. Chandrawati R , Chang JYH, Reina-Torres Eet al. Localized and controlled delivery of nitric oxide to the conventional outflow pathway via enzyme biocatalysis: toward therapy for glaucoma . Adv Mater 2017 ; 29 : 1604932 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 51. Zhang B , Wang F, Zhou Het al. Polymer dots compartmentalized in liposomes as a photocatalyst for in situ hydrogen therapy . Angew Chem Int Ed 2019 ; 58 : 2744 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 52. He Y , Zhang B, Chen Yet al. Image-guided hydrogen gas delivery for protection from myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury via microbubbles . ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2017 ; 9 : 21190 – 9 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 53. Chen H , Tian J, He Wet al. H2O2-activatable and O2-evolving nanoparticles for highly efficient and selective photodynamic therapy against hypoxic tumor cells . J Am Chem Soc 2015 ; 137 : 1539 – 47 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 54. Xiang H , An L, Tang Wet al. Photo-controlled targeted intracellular delivery of both nitric oxide and singlet oxygen using a fluorescence-trackable ruthenium nitrosyl functional nanoplatform . Chem Commun 2015 ; 51 : 2555 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 55. Xiang H , Deng Q, An Let al. Tumor cell specific and lysosome-targeted delivery of nitric oxide for enhanced photodynamic therapy triggered by 808 nm near-infrared light . Chem Commun 2016 ; 52 : 148 – 51 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 56. Guo M , Xiang H, Wang Yet al. Ruthenium nitrosyl functionalized graphene quantum dots as an efficient nanoplatform for NIR-light-controlled and mitochondria-targeted delivery of nitric oxide combined with photothermal therapy . Chem Commun 2017 ; 53 : 3253 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 57. Xu J , Zeng F, Wu Het al. Preparation of a mitochondria‐targeted and NO‐releasing nanoplatform and its enhanced pro‐apoptotic effect on cancer cells . Small 2014 ; 10 : 3750 – 60 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 58. Liu Y , Yang F, Yuan Cet al. Magnetic nanoliposomes as in situ microbubble bombers for multimodality image-guided cancer theranostics . ACS Nano 2017 ; 11 : 1509 – 19 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 59. Shi B , Yan Q, Tang Jet al. Hydrogen sulfide-activatable second near-infrared fluorescent nanoassemblies for targeted photothermal cancer therapy . Nano Lett 2018 ; 18 : 6411 – 6 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 60. Min KH , Min HS, Lee HJet al. pH-controlled gas-generating mineralized nanoparticles: a theranostic agent for ultrasound imaging and therapy of cancers . ACS Nano 2015 ; 9 : 134 – 45 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 61. Zhang M , Song R, Liu Yet al. Calcium-overload-mediated tumor therapy by calcium peroxide nanoparticles . Chem 2019 ; 5 : 2171 – 82 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 62. Zhang X , Tian G, Yin Wet al. Controllable generation of nitric oxide by near‐infrared‐sensitized upconversion nanoparticles for tumor therapy . Adv Funct Mater 2015 ; 25 : 3049 – 56 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 63. Song G , Liang C, Yi Xet al. Perfluorocarbon‐loaded hollow Bi2Se3 nanoparticles for timely supply of oxygen under near‐infrared light to enhance the radiotherapy of cancer . Adv Mater 2016 ; 28 : 2716 – 23 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 64. Li W , Su C, Tsao Let al. Controllable CO release following near-infrared light-induced cleavage of iron carbonyl derivatized prussian blue nanoparticles for CO-assisted synergistic treatment . ACS Nano 2016 ; 10 : 11027 – 36 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 65. Zhao B , Zhao P, Jin Zet al. Programmed ROS/CO-releasing nanomedicine for synergetic chemodynamic-gas therapy of cancer . J Nanobiotechnol 2019 ; 17 : 75 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 66. Lin T , Zhao X, Zhao Set al. O2-generating MnO2 nanoparticles for enhanced photodynamic therapy of bladder cancer by ameliorating hypoxia . Theranostics 2018 ; 8 : 990 – 1004 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 67. Feng Q , Li Y, Yang Xet al. Hypoxia-specific therapeutic agents delivery nanotheranostics: a sequential strategy for ultrasound mediated on-demand tritherapies and imaging of cancer . J Control Release 2018 ; 275 : 192 – 200 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 68. Feng Q , Zhang W, Yang Xet al. pH/ultrasound dual‐responsive gas generator for ultrasound imaging‐guided therapeutic inertial cavitation and sonodynamic therapy . Adv Healthc Mater 2018 ; 7 : 1700957 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 69. Yu S , Li G, Zhao Pet al. NIR-laser-controlled hydrogen-releasing PdH nanohydride for synergistic hydrogen-photothermal antibacterial and wound-healing therapies . Adv Funct Mater 2019 ; 29 : 1905697 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 70. Oscar A , Mónika B, María Dolores MMet al. Phase II study. Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy with nitroglycerin in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer . Radiother Oncol 2014 ; 111 : 311 – 5 . Google Scholar PubMed OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat 71. Illum H , Wang DH, Dowell JEet al. Phase I dose escalation trial of nitroglycerin in addition to 5-fluorouracil and radiation therapy for neoadjuvant treatment of operable rectal cancer . Surgery 2015 ; 158 : 460 – 5 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 72. Chung AW , Ensor JE, Darcourt Jet al. Abstract CT052: A Phase Ib and II clinical trial investigating the efficacy of nitric oxide deprivation and docetaxel in triple negative breast cancer . Cancer Res 2019 ; 79 : CT052 . Google Scholar OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat 73. Kou Z , Zhao P, Wang Zet al. Acid-responsive H2-releasing Fe nanoparticles for safe and effective cancer therapy . J Mater Chem B 2019 ; 7 : 2759 – 65 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 74. Zhou G , Wang YS, Jin Zet al. Porphyrin–palladium hydride MOF nanoparticles for tumor-targeting photoacoustic imaging-guided hydrogenothermal cancer therapy . Nanoscale Horiz 2019 ; 4 : 1185 – 93 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 75. Kong L , Chen C, Mou Fet al. Magnesium particles coated with mesoporous nanoshells as sustainable therapeutic-hydrogen suppliers to scavenge continuously generated hydroxyl radicals in long term . Part Part Syst Charact 2019 ; 36 : 1800424 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 76. Wan WL , Lin YJ, Shih PCet al. An in situ depot for continuous evolution of gaseous H2 mediated by a magnesium passivation/activation cycle for treating osteoarthritis . Angew Chem Int Ed 2018 ; 57 : 9875 – 9 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 77. Jang HJ , Jeong EJ, Lee KY. Carbon dioxide-generating PLG nanoparticles for controlled anti-cancer drug delivery . Pharm Res 2018 ; 35 : 59 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 78. Yang L , Wen Z, Long Yet al. A H+-triggered bubble-generating nanosystem for killing cancer cells . Chem Commun 2016 ; 52 : 10838 – 41 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 79. Chung MF , Chen KJ, Liang HFet al. A liposomal system capable of generating CO2 bubbles to induce transient cavitation, lysosomal rupturing, and cell necrosis . Angew Chem Int Ed 2012 ; 51 : 10089 – 93 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 80. Han HD , Jeon YW, Kwon HJet al. Therapeutic efficacy of doxorubicin delivery by a CO2 generating liposomal platform in breast carcinoma . Acta Biomater 2015 ; 24 : 279 – 85 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 81. Chuang EY , Lin CC, Chen KJet al. A FRET-guided, NIR-responsive bubble-generating liposomal system for in vivo targeted therapy with spatially and temporally precise controlled release . Biomaterials 2016 ; 93 : 48 – 59 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 82. Qian C , Yu J, Chen Yet al. Light-activated hypoxia-responsive nanocarriers for enhanced anticancer therapy . Adv Mater 2016 ; 28 : 3313 – 20 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 83. Song M , Liu T, Shi Cet al. Bioconjugated manganese dioxide nanoparticles enhance chemotherapy response by priming tumor-associated macrophages toward M1-like phenotype and attenuating tumor hypoxia . ACS Nano 2015 ; 10 : 633 – 47 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 84. Fan W , Bu W, Shen Bet al. Intelligent MnO2 nanosheets anchored with upconversion nanoprobes for concurrent pH-/H2O2-responsive UCL imaging and oxygen-elevated synergetic therapy . Adv Mater 2015 ; 27 : 4155 – 61 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 85. Zheng DW , Li B, Li CXet al. Carbon-dot-decorated carbon nitride nanoparticles for enhanced photodynamic therapy against hypoxic tumor via water splitting . ACS Nano 1936 ; 10 : 8715 – 22 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 86. Sun X , Kong B, Wang Wet al. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles for glutathione-triggered long-range and stable release of hydrogen sulfide . J Mater Chem B 2015 ; 3 : 4451 – 7 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 87. Wu J , Chen A, Zhou Yet al. Novel H2S-releasing hydrogel for wound repair via in situ polarization of M2 macrophages . Biomaterials 2019 ; 222 : 119398 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 88. Cai L , He L, Wang Yet al. Efficient cocktail chemotherapy by co-delivery of a hydrogen sulfide-releasing aspirin prodrug and paclitaxel via single nanoparticles . RSC Adv 2017 ; 7 : 13458 – 66 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 89. Ciocci M , Iorio E, Carotenuto Fet al. H2S-releasing nanoemulsions: a new formulation to inhibit tumor cells proliferation and improve tissue repair . Oncotarget 2016 ; 7 : 84338 – 58 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 90. Pierri AE , Huang PJ, Garcia JVet al. A photoCORM nanocarrier for CO release using NIR light . Chem Commun 2015 ; 51 : 2072 – 5 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 91. Ruggi A , Zobi F. Quantum-CORMs: quantum dot sensitized CO releasing molecules . Dalton Trans 2015 ; 44 : 10928 – 31 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 92. Tabe H , Shimoi T, Boudes Met al. Photoactivatable CO release from engineered protein crystals to modulate NF-kappaB activation . Chem Commun 2016 ; 52 : 4545 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 93. Dördelmann G , Meinhardt T, Sowik Tet al. CuAAC click functionalization of azide-modified nanodiamond with a photoactivatable CO-releasing molecule (PhotoCORM) based on [Mn(CO)3(tpm)]+ . Chem Commun 2012 ; 48 : 11528 – 30 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 94. Gonzales MA , Han H, Moyes Aet al. Light-triggered carbon monoxide delivery with Al-MCM-41-based nanoparticles bearing a designed manganese carbonyl complex . J Mater Chem B 2014 ; 2 : 2107 – 13 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 95. Jiménez-Amezcua I , Carmona FJ, Romero-García Iet al. Silk fibroin nanoparticles as biocompatible nanocarriers of a novel light-responsive CO-prodrug . Dalton Trans 2018 ; 47 : 10434 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 96. Meyer H , Winkler F, Kunz Pet al. Stabilizing alginate confinement and polymer coating of CO-releasing molecules supported on iron oxide nanoparticles to trigger the CO release by magnetic heating . Inorg Chem 2015 ; 54 : 11236 – 46 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 97. van der Vlies AJ , Inubushi R, Uyama Het al. Polymeric framboidal nanoparticles loaded with a carbon monoxide donor via phenylboronic acid-catechol complexation . Bioconjug Chem 2016 ; 27 : 1500 – 8 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 98. Hasegawa U , Vlies AJ, Simeoni Eet al. Carbon monoxide-releasing micelles for immunotherapy . J Am Chem Soc 2010 ; 132 : 18273 – 80 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 99. Yin H , Fang J, Liao Let al. Styrene-maleic acid copolymer-encapsulated CORM2, a water-soluble carbon monoxide (CO) donor with a constant CO-releasing property, exhibits therapeutic potential for inflammatory bowel disease . J Control Release 2014 ; 187 : 14 – 21 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 100. Guan W , Wei C, Chen Aet al. Hydrogen/oxygen mixed gas inhalation improves disease severity and dyspnea in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 in a recent multicenter, open-label clinical trial . J Thorac Dis 2020 ; 12 : 3448 – 52 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Author notes Equally contributed to this work. © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of China Science Publishing & Media Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of China Science Publishing & Media Ltd.
TI - Strategies for engineering advanced nanomedicines for gas therapy of cancer
JF - National Science Review
DO - 10.1093/nsr/nwaa034
DA - 2020-09-12
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/strategies-for-engineering-advanced-nanomedicines-for-gas-therapy-of-unrn1MXYW0
SP - 1485
EP - 1512
VL - 7
IS - 9
DP - DeepDyve
ER -