| Literature DB >> 26088982 |
Linghui Dian1, Enjiang Yu, Xiaona Chen, Xinguo Wen, Zhengzan Zhang, Lingzhen Qin, Qingqing Wang, Ge Li, Chuanbin Wu.
Abstract
To improve its poor aqueous solubility and stability, the potential chemotherapeutic drug quercetin was encapsulated in soluplus polymeric micelles by a modified film dispersion method. With the encapsulation efficiency over 90%, the quercetin-loaded polymeric micelles (Qu-PMs) with drug loading of 6.7% had a narrow size distribution around mean size of 79.00 ± 2.24 nm, suggesting the complete dispersibility of quercetin in water. X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns illustrated that quercetin was in amorphous or molecular form within PMs. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) indicated that quercetin formed intermolecular hydrogen bonding with carriers. An in vitro dialysis test showed the Qu-PMs possessed significant sustained-release property, and the formulation was stable for at least 6 months under accelerated conditions. The pharmacokinetic study in beagle dogs showed that absorption of quercetin after oral administration of Qu-PMs was improved significantly, with a half-life 2.19-fold longer and a relative oral bioavailability of 286% as compared to free quercetin. Therefore, these novel soluplus polymeric micelles can be applied to encapsulate various poorly water-soluble drugs towards a development of more applicable therapeutic formulations.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 26088982 PMCID: PMC4493852 DOI: 10.1186/1556-276X-9-684
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Figure 1The structure of quercetin (A), soluplus (B) and formation of PMs (C).
Figure 2Effects of stabilizer F concentration on size and EE of Qu-PMs ( = 3).
Figure 3Effect of magnetic stirring time on size and encapsulation efficiency ( = 3).
Effects of initial drug loading on size, PDI, zeta potential, and EE (mean ± SD, = 3)
| Drug loading (%) | Size (nm) | PDI | Zeta potential | EE (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 59.97 ± 3.70 | 0.183 ± 0.023 | -13.4 ± 0.20 | 93.24 ± 3.05 |
| 7 | 79.00 ± 2.24 | 0.154 ± 0.044 | -17.10 ± 2.30 | 95.91 ± 4.05 |
| 9 | 111.2 ± 3.45 | 0.134 ± 0.082 | -15.1 ± 1.60 | 75.06 ± 3.19 |
PDI, polydispersity index; EE, encapsulation efficiency; SD, standard deviation.
Figure 4Size (A), zeta potential (B), TEM (C), and colloidal solution (D) of Qu-PMs.
Figure 5XRD of Qu (a), physical mixture (b), Qu-PMs (c), and void PMs (d).
Figure 6FTIR of Qu (a), physical mixture (b), void PMs (c), and Qu-PMs (d).
Characterization of freeze dried Qu-PMs with 5% mannitol after 6 months of storage at 30°C ± 0.5°C and 65% ± 5% RH (mean ± SD, = 3)
| Parameters | Initial | Final |
|---|---|---|
| Size(nm) | 63.76 ± 2.35 | 65.63 ± 3.71 |
| PDI | 0.151 ± 0.023 | 0.183 ± 0.056 |
| EE (%) | 92.06 ± 2.41 | 90.36 ± 3.84 |
| Physical appearance | Intact cake | Intact cake |
| Ease of redispersion | By mere shaking | By mere shaking |
PDI, polydispersity index; SD, standard deviation; EE, encapsulation efficiency.
Figure 7Release of quercetin from propylene glycol solution and Qu-PMs suspension.
Fitting of Qu release data from Qu-PMs into various mechanism models
| Model | Equation |
|
|---|---|---|
| Zero-order |
| 0.8766 |
| First-order | ln( | 0.9311 |
| Higuchi |
| 0.9894 |
y, accumulative release percentage; t, sampling time; R, correlation coefficient.
Figure 8Mean quercetin plasma concentration.
Pharmacokinetic parameters of quercetin in serum after oral administration (mean ± SD, = 3)
| Parameter | Pure Qu | Qu-PMs |
|---|---|---|
|
| 5.24 ± 1.32 | 7.56 ± 3.28 |
|
| 5.31 ± 1.08 | 7.02 ± 2.02 |
| AUC0~∞(μg/h/mL) | 37.68 ± 16.8 | 107.84 ± 54.4 |
|
| 4.94 ± 2.03 | 10.81 ± 3.7 |
| MRT (h) | 7.18 ± 2.25 | 27.09 ± 7.8 |
|
| 286 ± 3.23 |
AUC(0→∞), area under the plasma concentration-time curve calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule from time 0 to infinity; SD, standard deviation; T 1/2, elimination half-life; C max, peak plasma concentration; T max, time to reach peak plasma concentration.