| Literature DB >> 25540113 |
Laura von Schantz, Herje Schagerlöf, Eva Nordberg Karlsson, Mats Ohlin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Derivatized celluloses, such as methylcellulose (MC) and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), are of pharmaceutical importance and extensively employed in tablet matrices. Each batch of derivatized cellulose is thoroughly characterized before utilized in tablet formulations as batch-to-batch differences can affect drug release. The substitution pattern of the derivatized cellulose polymers, i.e. the mode on which the substituent groups are dispersed along the cellulose backbone, can vary from batch-to-batch and is a factor that can influence drug release.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25540113 PMCID: PMC4302574 DOI: 10.1186/s12896-014-0113-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Biotechnol ISSN: 1472-6750 Impact factor: 2.563
Figure 1Chemical structure of different celluloses derivatives. A. Cellulose consists of glucose saccharides connected through glycosidic 1–4 bonds. In the generation of cellulose derivatives hydrogen atoms (annotated as R) on three hydroxyl groups on each glucose unit are susceptible to chemical derivatization. The possible substitutions for hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), methylcellulose (MC), hydroxypropyl cellulose (HPC), hydroxyethyl cellulose (HEC) and carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) are shown. B. Schematic illustration of substitution patterns in homogenously and heterogeneously substituted cellulose.
Amino acid differences existing between CBM4-2 and mutants thereof
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| mutations outside the binding cleft | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2Affinity electrophoresis with three methylcellulose batches. The three batches have similar degree of substitution (1.76, 1.78 and 1.80 and denoted accordingly) however their substitution pattern differs. MC 1.76 is more homogeneously substituted while MC 1.78 and MC 1.80 have substitution patterns that are more heterogeneous. Three CBMs and a negative control (G-4) were run on native acrylamide gels containing one of each methylcellulose batch. CBM4-2 is more retained in the gels containing MC 1.78 or MC 1.80 compared to MC 1.76. A-6 and X-2 L110F are less discriminating and are retained in all gels containing methylcellulose. None of the CBMs were retained in the control gel containing no methylcellulose.
Figure 3Affinity electrophoresis with four hydroxypropyl methylcellulose batches. Two of the batches (20 and 22) are known to have a heterogeneous substitution pattern and the other two (21 and 23) a homogeneous substitution pattern. Three CBMs (CBM28, X-2 L110F and CBM4-2) and a negative control (G-4) were run in 17% acrylamide gels containing no or 1 mg/ml HPMC. Also a tandem CBM construct of CBM4-2:CBM4-2 together with a tandem negative control (G-4:G-4) were included in the assay. The retardation of the CBMs is modest but differences in mobility can be seen for CBM4-2 and CBM28 in gels containing HPMC of heterogeneous substitution pattern as compared to in gels with HPMC of homogeneous substitution pattern. The difference in retardation is more distinct for the tandem CBM4-2 construct.