| Literature DB >> 27316742 |
Ticiano Gomes do Nascimento1, Priscilla Fonseca da Silva2, Lais Farias Azevedo2, Louisianny Guerra da Rocha3, Isabel Cristina Celerino de Moraes Porto2, Túlio Flávio Accioly Lima E Moura3, Irinaldo Diniz Basílio-Júnior2, Luciano Aparecido Meireles Grillo2, Camila Braga Dornelas2, Eduardo Jorge da Silva Fonseca2, Eduardo de Jesus Oliveira4, Alex Tong Zhang5, David G Watson5.
Abstract
The ever-increasing demand for natural products and biotechnology derived from bees and ultra-modernization of various analytical devices has facilitated the rational and planned development of biotechnology products with a focus on human health to treat chronic and neglected diseases. The aim of the present study was to prepare and characterize polymeric nanoparticles loaded with Brazilian red propolis extract and evaluate the cytotoxic activity of "multiple-constituent extract in co-delivery system" for antileishmanial therapies. The polymeric nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract were prepared with a combination of poly-ε-caprolactone and pluronic using nanoprecipitation method and characterized by different analytical techniques, antioxidant and leishmanicidal assay. The red propolis nanoparticles in aqueous medium presented particle size (200-280 nm) in nanometric scale and zeta analysis (-20 to -26 mV) revealed stability of the nanoparticles without aggregation phenomenon during 1 month. After freeze-drying method using cryoprotectant (sodium starch glycolate), it was possible to observe particles with smooth and spherical shape and apparent size of 200 to 400 nm. Attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) and thermal analysis revealed the encapsulation of the flavonoids from the red propolis extract into the polymeric matrix. Ultra performance liquid chromatography coupled with diode array detector (UPLC-DAD) identified the flavonoids liquiritigenin, pinobanksin, isoliquiritigenin, formononetin and biochanin A in ethanolic extract of propolis (EEP) and nanoparticles of red propolis extract (NRPE). The efficiency of encapsulation was determinate, and median values (75.0 %) were calculated using UPLC-DAD. 2,2-Diphenyl-1-picryhydrazyl method showed antioxidant activity to EEP and red propolis nanoparticles. Compared to negative control, EEP and NRPE exhibited leishmanicidal activity with an IC50 value of ≅38.0 μg/mL and 31.3 μg/mL, 47.2 μg/mL, 154.2μg/mL and 193.2 μg/mL for NRPE A1, NRPE A2, NRPE A3 and NRPE A4, respectively. Nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract in co-delivery system and EEP presented cytotoxic activity on Leishmania (V.) braziliensis. Red propolis extract loaded in nanoparticles has shown to be potential candidates as intermediate products for preparation of various pharmaceutical dosage forms containing red propolis extract in the therapy against negligible diseases such as leishmaniasis. Graphical Abstract Some biochemical mechanisms of cellular debridement of Leishmania (V.) braziliensis species by the flavonoids of red propolis extract (EEP) or NRPE loaded with red propolis extract.Entities:
Keywords: ATR-FTIR; Antioxidant activity; Leishmanicidal activity; PCL-pluronic nanoparticles; Red propolis extract; SEM analysis; Thermal analysis; UPLC-DAD
Year: 2016 PMID: 27316742 PMCID: PMC4912519 DOI: 10.1186/s11671-016-1517-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Compositions of nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract (NRPE) using a nanocarrier in matrices system PCL-pluronic
| Composition (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Components | NRPE A1 | NRPE A2 | NRPE A3 | NRPE A4 | NRPE A5 | Placebo |
| Organic phase | ||||||
| PCL | 54.0 | 47.0 | 27.0 | 57.0 | 60.0 | 54.0 |
| Red propolis extract | 20.0 | 30.0 | 60.0 | 14.4 | 10.0 | - |
| Aqueous phase | ||||||
| Pluronic | 26.0 | 23.0 | 13.0 | 28.6 | 30.0 | 46.0 |
Particle size and polydispersion index and zeta potential and pH of nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract in suspension
| Composition | Particle size (nm) | Polydispersion index (PDI) | Zeta potential (mV) | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NRPE placebo | 279.6 ± 1.4 | 0.169 | −33.5 ± 6.06 | 6.0 ± 0.1 |
| NRPE A1 | 280.2 ± 8.7 | 0.089 | −26.8 ± 4.64 | 6.1 ± 0.1 |
| NRPE A2 | 262.2 ± 6.60 | 0.128 | −18.6 ± 3.66 | 6.1 ± 0.2 |
| NRPE A3 | 208.5 ± 4.79 | 0.115 | −12.7 ± 5.24 | 5.8 ± 0.2 |
| NRPE A4 | 225.2 ± 7.72 | 0.096 | −24.2 ± 5.24 | 6.0 ± 0.1 |
| NRPE A5 | 246.7 ± 9.2 | 0.113 | −19.1 ± 4.61 | 6.1 ± 0.1 |
Mean values refer to the mean of three determinations ± standard deviation
Fig. 1DSC curves of EEP and nanoparticles loaded with EEP in different compositions
Fig. 2ATR-FTIR spectra of EEP and nanoparticles loaded with EEP in different compositions. Comparative ATR-FTIR spectra of NRPE Placebo and Ethanolic Extract of Propolis (a), NRPE Placebo and NRPE A1 (b), NRPE Placebo and NRPE A2 (c), NRPE Placebo and NRPE A3 (d), NRPE Placebo and NRPE A4 (e) and NRPE Placebo and NRPE A5 (f)
Fig. 3Scanning electron microscopy of NRPE in different freeze-drying conditions. a, b Method A of drying at room temperature in freeze-drying (NRPE A2). c, d Method B of drying in freeze-drying (NRPE A21). e, f Method C of drying in freeze-drying using cryoprotectants: colloidal silicon dioxide e and sodium starch glycolate f of the NRPE A4 composition
Fig. 4Determination of markers of red propolis extract in EEP and NRPE using UPLC-DAD. Chromatogram of the placebo (a), EEP (b), NRPE A1 (c) and NRPE A2 (d). Identification of flavonoids (1) liquiritigenin (2) pinobanksin, (3) isoliquiritigenin, (4) formononetin, (5) biochanin A and (6) pinocembrin at the wavelength of 280 nm
Determination of the markers present in EEP and nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract using UPLC-DAD
| Concentration of flavonoids(μg/mL) ± SDa | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Composition | A | B | C | D | E |
| EEP | 2.290 ± 0.760 | 0.330 ± 0.003 | 2.510 ± 0.010 | 2.960 ± 0.010 | 0.371 ± 0.010 |
| NRPE A1 | 1.240 ± 0.040 | 0.329 ± 0.004 | 2.400 ± 0.040 | 1.740 ± 0.010 | 0.370 ± 0.004 |
| NRPE A2 | 0.950 ± 0.010 | 0.238 ± 0.020 | 1.770 ± 0.020 | 1.740 ± 0.010 | 0.324 ± 0.003 |
| NRPE A3 | 0.820 ± 0.01 | 0.200 ± 0.004 | 2.032 ± 0.001 | 1.860 ± 0.010 | 0.318 ± 0.001 |
| NRPE A4 | 1.216 ± 0.004 | 0.240 ± 0.003 | 1.888 ± 0.001 | 2.032 ± 0.022 | 0.327 ± 0.002 |
| NRPE A5 | 1.168 ± 0.003 | 0.230 ± 0.001 | 1.792 ± 0.031 | 2.002 ± 0.013 | 0.321 ± 0.002 |
A liquiritigenin, B pinobanksin, C isoliquiritigenin, D formononetin, E biochanin A
aMean values refer to the mean of three determinations ± standard deviation
Efficiency of encapsulation (%) of flavonoid marker compounds present in the nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract
| (%) Efficiency of encapsulation of flavonoids using UPLC-DADa | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Composition | A | B | C | D | E |
| NRPE A1 | 53.0 ± 1.6 | 99.8 ± 1.7 | 95.6 ± 1.7 | 77.4 ± 1.7 | 99.8 ± 1.7 |
| NRPE A2 | 41.3 ± 0.4 | 72.0 ± 0.9 | 70.5 ± 0.9 | 58.6 ± 0.5 | 82.1 ± 1.3 |
| NRPE A3 | 38.0 ± 0.8 | 60.9 ± 1.3 | 103.6 ± 0.7 | 75.4 ± 0.6 | 85.7 ± 0.2 |
| NRPE A4 | 57.3 ± 0.3 | 72.9 ± 0.8 | 96.6 ± 0.1 | 82.2 ± 1.4 | 88.3 ± 1.7 |
| NRPE A5 | 54.9 ± 0.2 | 70.9 ± 0.2 | 91.5 ± 2.5 | 81.2 ± 0.8 | 86.4 ± 1.7 |
A liquiritigenin, B pinobanksin, C isoliquiritigenin, D formononetin, E biochanin A
aMean values and standard deviation determinate in triplicate
Efficiency of encapsulation (%) and non-encapsulation proportion (%) of the flavonoid marker compounds present in nanoparticles of red propolis extract
| (%) Efficiency of encapsulation of flavonoids using UPLC-DAD | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Composition | (%) E.E. | (%) N.E. | ∑ (%E.E. + %N.E.) |
| NRPE A1 | 85.15 | 14.79ª | 96.25 |
| NRPE A2 | 65.74 | 39.47b | 105.20 |
| NRPE A3 | 72.76 | 41.48ª | 114.24 |
| NRPE A4 | 79.49 | 26.09c | 105.58 |
| NRPE A5 | 77.01 | 18.82d | 95.83 |
Mean values and standard deviation determinate in triplicate
E.E. efficiency of encapsulation, N.E. non-encapsulated
aExternal determination of formononetin
bExternal determination of liquiritigenin + pinobanksin + isoliquiritigenin + formononetin
cExternal determination of liquiritigenin and formononetin
dExternal determination of liquiritigenin + isoliquiritigenin + formononetin
Fig. 5Determination of IC50 for leishmanicidal assay against Leishmania (V.) braziliensis using normalized graph
Antioxidant activity (%AOA) of EEP and its nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract
| (% AOA) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Composition | (%)E.E.a | (%)N.E.a | ∑(%E.E. + %N.E.) |
| Trolox | 99.50 | a | 99.50 |
| EEP | 98.00 | a | 98.00 |
| NRPE A1 | 81.40 ± 2.75 | 30.73 ± 1.04 | 112.13 |
| NRPE A2 | 76.63 ± 6.86 | 27.18 ± 0.95 | 103.81 |
| NRPE A3 | 79.51 ± 2.13 | 36.75 ± 1.33 | 116.26 |
| NRPE A4 | 77.35 ± 2.98 | 38.10 ± 0.36 | 115.45 |
| NRPE A5 | 76.22 ± 5.74 | 18.27 ± 1.77 | 94.49 |
Free radical DPPH sequestering activity (%) of the ethanolic extract of Brazilian red propolis and its nanoparticles loaded with red propolis extract
aMean values refer to the mean of three determinations ± standard deviation
Fig. 6Some hypothesized biochemical mechanism of cellular debridement of Leishmania (V.) braziliensis species by the flavonoids of red propolis extract (EEP) or NRPE loaded with red propolis extract