| Literature DB >> 23351334 |
Nasir Mohajel1, Abdolhossein R Najafabadi, Kayhan Azadmanesh, Alireza Vatanara, Mohsen Amini, Esmail Moazeni, Amirabbas Rahimi, Kambiz Gilani.
Abstract
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).