| Literature DB >> 23351334 |
Nasir Mohajel1, Abdolhossein R Najafabadi, Kayhan Azadmanesh, Alireza Vatanara, Mohsen Amini, Esmail Moazeni, Amirabbas Rahimi, Kambiz Gilani.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study. Along with research on development of more efficient gene delivery systems, it is necessary to search on stabilization processes to extend their active life span. Chitosan is a nontoxic, biocompatible and available gene delivery carrier. The aim of this study was to assess the ability of this polymer to preserve transfection efficiency during spray-drying and a modified freeze-drying process in the presence of commonly used excipients.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23351334 PMCID: PMC3556052 DOI: 10.1186/2008-2231-20-29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Daru ISSN: 1560-8115 Impact factor: 3.117
Theoretical composition of freeze dried and spray dried powders
| DNA | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| LMWC | 33.7 | 33.7 | 23.6 | 23.6 | 16.8 | 16.8 | 6.7 | 6.7 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 2.36 | 2.36 | 1.68 | 1.68 | 0.67 | 0.67 |
| Lactose | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 |
| Leucine | - | 200 | - | 200 | - | 200 | - | 200 | - | 200 | - | 200 | - | 200 | - | 200 |
All measurements are in milligrams.
Figure 1Size, polydispersity index and zeta potential of freshly prepared and reconstituted nanocomplexes from freeze dried or spray dried powders. a, z-average size, b, polydispersity index and c, zeta potential, Points are averages of three measurements and error bars are standard deviation.
Values of K-S tests for comparison of size distribution profiles of processed nanocomplexes with freshly prepared ones
| Freeze dried | 0.860 | 0.508 | 0.822 | 0.713 | 0.943 | 0.877 | 0.84 | 0.806 | 0.205 | 0.08 | 0.109 | 0.518 | 0.681 | 0.448 | 0.244 | 0.595 |
| Spray dried | 0.84 | 0.777 | 0.240 | 0.38 | 0.748 | 0.174 | 0.799 | 0.79 | 0.115 | 0.167 | 0.799 | 0.343 | 0.392 | 0.02* | 0.02* | 0.045* |
.*: statistically meaningful difference from original size distribution profile.
Calculated similarity factors between size distribution profiles of freeze dried and spray dried nanocomplexes with those of freshly prepared ones
| Freeze dried | 93.73 | 93.13 | 97.31 | 97.39 | 94.36 | 98.79 | 97.5 | 99.35 | 90.96 | 87.32 | 88.48 | 83.19 | 87.49 | 86.15 | 93.67 | 90.31 |
| Spray dried | 95.84 | 94.41 | 95.14 | 89.33 | 88.93 | 86.85 | 89.56 | 90.38 | 85.62 | 83.79 | 94.25 | 93.35 | 86.57 | 81.24 | 74.41 | 81.61 |
Figure 2Relative stability of supercoiled structure during freeze-drying and spray-drying processes. a, Electrophoresis images of dissociated pDNA from reconstituted nanocomplexes processed by freeze-drying (upper) and spray-drying (lower) pure pDNA was used as control. b, relative intensity of supercoiled pDNA band of freeze dried and spray dried nanocomplexes. Error bars are standard deviation (n = 3).
Figure 3Relative transfection efficiency of reconstituted freeze dried or spray dried powders. Error bars are standard deviation (n = 3).