| Literature DB >> 28293282 |
Zahra Izadiyan1, Mahiran Basri1,2, Hamid Reza Fard Masoumi1,3, Roghayeh Abedi Karjiban1, Norazlinaliza Salim1, Kamyar Shameli4.
Abstract
The aim of this study is the development of nanoemulsions for intravenous administration of Sorafenib, which is a poorly soluble drug with no parenteral treatment. The formulation was prepared by a high energy emulsification method and optimized by response surface methodology. The effects of overhead stirring time, high shear rate, high shear time, and cycles of high-pressure homogenizer were studied in the preparation of nanoemulsion loaded with Sorafenib. Most of the particles in nanoemulsion are spherical in shape, the smallest particle size being 82.14 nm. The results of the 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide, a tetrazole reveal that the optimum formulation does not affect normal cells significantly in low drug concentrations but could remove the cancer cells. Finally, a formulation containing Sorafenib retained its properties over a period of 90 days. With characterization, the study of the formulated nanoemulsion has the potential to be used as a parenteral nanoemulsion in the treatment of cancer. Graphical abstractSchematic figure of high pressure homogenizer device.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-cancer; Nanoemulsion; Parenteral delivery; Response surface methodology; Sorafenib
Year: 2017 PMID: 28293282 PMCID: PMC5334191 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-017-0248-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
Fig. 1Molecular structure of Sorafenib
Fig. 2Solubility of Sorafenib in different types of oil containing 3% of lecithin
The matrix of actual and predicted values of particle size from CCRD experimental design
| Run no. | Overhead stirring time (min) | Shear rate (rpm) | Shear time (min) | Cycle of homogenizer (cycle) | Particle size (nm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual | Predicted | |||||
| 1 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 10.00 | 14.00 | 102.20 | 104.96 |
| 2 | 200.00 | 2000.00 | 25.00 | 11.00 | 105.20 | 102.73 |
| 3 | 200.00 | 4400.00 | 25.00 | 11.00 | 81.83 | 83.81 |
| 4 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 77.96 | 76.26 |
| 5 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 8.00 | 93.45 | 92.32 |
| 6 | 120.00 | 4400.00 | 25.00 | 17.00 | 92.67 | 94.23 |
| 7 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 89.24 | 89.48 |
| 8 | 240.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 85.87 | 86.07 |
| 9 | 200.00 | 4400.00 | 15.00 | 17.00 | 90.20 | 88.55 |
| 10 | 200.00 | 4400.00 | 15.00 | 11.00 | 81.20 | 84.60 |
| 11 | 200.00 | 2000.00 | 25.00 | 17.00 | 82.18 | 84.26 |
| 12 | 120.00 | 2000.00 | 15.00 | 17.00 | 75.31 | 74.99 |
| 13 | 200.00 | 4400.00 | 25.00 | 17.00 | 82.99 | 88.31 |
| 14 | 80.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 91.94 | 88.50 |
| 15 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 30.00 | 14.00 | 82.53 | 83.54 |
| 16 | 160.00 | 5600.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 77.55 | 78.42 |
| 17 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 88.90 | 84.68 |
| 18 | 120.00 | 4400.00 | 15.00 | 17.00 | 75.28 | 77.32 |
| 19 | 120.00 | 2000.00 | 15.00 | 11.00 | 87.10 | 86.01 |
| 20 | 200.00 | 2000.00 | 15.00 | 11.00 | 88.36 | 87.27 |
| 21 | 120.00 | 4400.00 | 25.00 | 11.00 | 88.77 | 87.82 |
| 22 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 89.23 | 88.00 |
| 23 | 200.00 | 2000.00 | 15.00 | 17.00 | 101.67 | 102.04 |
| 24 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 20.00 | 89.91 | 87.36 |
| 25 | 120.00 | 4400.00 | 15.00 | 11.00 | 81.84 | 84.92 |
| 26 | 160.00 | 800.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 84.53 | 84.92 |
| 27 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 85.90 | 84.92 |
| 28 | 120.00 | 2000.00 | 25.00 | 17.00 | 87.52 | 84.92 |
| 29 | 120.00 | 2000.00 | 25.00 | 11.00 | 82.15 | 84.92 |
| 30 | 160.00 | 3200.00 | 20.00 | 14.00 | 87.56 | 84.92 |
Analysis of variance of the fitted modify quadratic equation for particle size and regression coefficients of the final reduced models
| Source | Coefficient estimate | Mean square |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 84.92 | 86.66 | 7.49 | 0.0004 |
| X1 | −1.84 | 81.28 | 7.03 | 0.0200 |
| X2 | 0.32 | 0.80 | 0.069 | 0.7969 |
| X3 | 0.044 | 0.047 | 0.004099 | 0.9499 |
| X4 | −3.67 | 322.86 | 27.91 | 0.0001 |
| X1 X2 | −1.33 | 28.28 | 2.45 | 0.1419 |
| X1 X3 | 1.04 | 17.15 | 1.48 | 0.2449 |
| X1 X4 | −0.43 | 2.95 | 0.26 | 0.6218 |
| X2 X3 | 2.23 | 79.48 | 6.87 | 0.0211 |
| X2 X4 | 1.87 | 55.73 | 4.82 | 0.0469 |
| X3 X4 | 0.75 | 9.09 | 0.79 | 0.3914 |
| X12 | −0.98 | 26.28 | 2.27 | 0.1557 |
| X22 | 0.43 | 5.09 | 0.44 | 0.5186 |
| X32 | 0.75 | 15.36 | 1.33 | 0.2699 |
| X42 | 2.45 | 164.08 | 14.19 | 0.0024 |
| X2 X3 X4 | −2.35 | 88.14 | 7.62 | 0.0162 |
| X12X2 | −5.78 | 178.00 | 15.39 | 0.0017 |
| Residual | 11.57 | – | – | |
| Lack of fit | 14.79 | 2.31 | 0.1859 | |
| Pure error | 6.41 | – | – | |
|
| 0.9022 | |||
| Adjusted | 0.7818 | |||
| Predicted | 0.1345 | |||
| PRESS | 1330.20 | |||
| Adequate precision | 11.708 | |||
| Standard deviation | 3.40 |
Fig. 3Response surface plots; the interaction effect of a overhead stirring time and the cycle of high pressure homogenizer; b high shear time and the cycle of high pressure homogenizer; c shear rate and the cycle of high pressure homogenizer on response (particle size)
The actual and predicted response values for the optimized nanoemulsion
| Model | Independent variable | Particle size (nm) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overhead stirring | High shear rate | High shear stirring time | High pressure homogenizers | Actual | Predicted | |
| Units | (min) | (rpm) | (min) | (cycle) | ||
| 1 | 120.00 | 4000.00 | 10.00 | 16.00 | 82.14 | 81.7261 |
Fig. 4TEM micrograph of drug loaded nanoemulsion
Fig. 5The mean stability of particle size as a function of time for the formulations 4 °C
Fig. 6Effect of drug concentration on cell viability of 3T3 (a) and Hep G2 cell (b)
Level of independent variables for using RSM
| Symbol | Independent variable | Level of variables | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −2 | −1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | ||
|
| Overhead stirring time | 80 | 120 | 160 | 200 | 240 |
|
| Shear rate | 800 | 2000 | 3200 | 4400 | 5600 |
|
| Shear time | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 |
|
| Cycle of homogenizer | 8 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 20 |