4.6 Article

Primary biocompatibility tests of poly (lactde-co-glycolide)-(poly-L-orithine/fucoidan) core-shell nanocarriers

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.180320

关键词

layer-by-layer self-assembly; poly-ornithine; fucoidan; PLGA; anti-tumour; biocompatibility

资金

  1. National marine economic innovation and development project [16PYY007SF17]
  2. Science Research Foundation of National Health and Family Planning Commission of PRC
  3. United Fujian Provincial Health and Education Project for Tracking the Key Research [WKJ-2016-2-22]
  4. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in Fujian Province University [2014FJ-NCET-ZR01]
  5. Subsidized Project for Postgraduates' Innovative Fund in Scientific Research of Huaqiao University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Layer-by-layer (LbL) self-assembly is the technology used in intermolecular static electricity, hydrogen bonds, covalent bonds and other polymer interactions during film assembling. This technology has been widely studied in the drug carrier field. Given their use in drug deliver) , systems, the biocompatibility of these potential compounds should be addressed. In this work, the primary biocompatibility of poly(lactide-co-glycolide)-(poly-L-orithine/fucoidan) [PLGA-(PLO/fucoidan)] core-shell nanoparticles (NPs) was investigated. Atomic force microscopy revealed the PLGA-(PLO/Fucoidan)(4 )NPs to be spherical, with a uniform size distribution and a smooth surface, and the NPs were stable in physiological saline. The residual amount of methylene chloride was further determined by headspace gas chromatography, in which the organic solvent can be volatilized during preparation. Furthermore, cell viability, acridine orange/ethidium bromide staining, haemolysis and mouse systemic toxicity were all assessed to show that PLGA-(PLO/fucoidan)(4) NPs were biocompatible with cells and mice. Therefore, these NPs are expected to have potential applications in future drug delivery systems.

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

4.6
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