4.5 Article

Anti-Neoplastic Cytotoxicity of SN-38-Loaded PCL/Gelatin Electrospun Composite Nanofiber Scaffolds against Human Glioblastoma Cells In Vitro

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
卷 104, 期 12, 页码 4345-4354

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1002/JPS.24684

关键词

biomaterial; nanotechnology; blood brain barrier; polymeric drug delivery systems; in vitro models

资金

  1. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation [Q2007C08]
  2. Shandong Provincial Science and Technology Development planning Program of China [2014GSF118019]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [20100471526]
  4. Independent Innovation Foundation of Shandong University [2012TS157]
  5. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81472353]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrospun poly(epsilon-caprolactone) (PCL)/gelatin (GT) scaffolds were developed to provide controlled release of 7-ethyl-10-hydroxy camptothecin (SN-38). Acetic acid was introduced to improve the miscibility of PCL and GT to produce a homogeneous nanofiber membrane mixture. The effect of SN-38 content in binary mixtures on processability, fiber morphology, water sorption, swelling, and drug release was investigated. Electrospun PCL/GT blend nonwoven fibers showed fiber surface roughness, decreased PCL crystallinity, and increased swelling with increasing drug content of 1, 2, and 4 wt %. Additionally, increasing the SN-38 concentration reduced the degradation rate of the GT. Furthermore, we hypothesize the existence of a drug content saturation point in the monoaxial fiber to explain the different drug release patterns of PG2 compared with those of PG1 and PG4. The matrix also showed good biodegradation and anti-tumor function. Our results demonstrate that SN-38-loaded PCL/GT fibers can be obtained by electrospinning. The SN-38-loaded fibers merit further evaluation as a means to potentially prevent locoregional recurrence following surgical tumor resection. (C) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association

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

4.5
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