4.7 Article

Bile Acid-Based Drug Delivery Systems for Enhanced Doxorubicin Encapsulation: Comparing Hydrophobic and Ionic Interactions in Drug Loading and Release

期刊

MOLECULAR PHARMACEUTICS
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 1266-1276

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.7b01091

关键词

bile acids; doxorubicin; pH-responsive; drug delivery systems

资金

  1. NSERC of Canada
  2. FRQNT
  3. FRSQ

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Doxorubicin (Dox) is a drug of choice in the design of drug delivery systems directed toward breast cancers, but is often limited by loading and control over its release from polymer micelles. Bile acid-based block copolymers present certain advantages over traditional polymer-based systems for drug delivery purposes, since they can enable a higher drug loading via the formation of a reservoir through their aggregation process. In this study, hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions are compared for their influence on Dox loading inside cholic acid based block copolymers. Poly(allyl glycidyl ether) (PAGE) and poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) were grafted from the cholic acid (CA) core yielding a star-shaped block copolymer with 4 arms (CA-(PAGE-b-PEG)(4)) and then loaded with Dox via a nanoprecipitation technique. A high Dox loading of 14 wt % was achieved via electrostatic as opposed to hydrophobic interactions with or without oleic acid as a cosurfactant. The electrostatic interactions confer a pH responsiveness to the system. 50% of the loaded Dox was released at pH 5 in comparison to 12% at pH 7.4. The nanoparticles with Dox loaded via hydrophobic interactions did not show such a pH responsiveness. The systems with Dox loaded via electrostatic interactions showed the lowest IC50 and highest cellular internalization, indicating the pre-eminence of this interaction in Dox loading. The blank formulations are biocompatible and did not show cytotoxicity up to 0.17 mg/mL. The new functionalized star block copolymers based on cholic acid show great potential as drug delivery carriers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据