| Literature DB >> 29755535 |
Samira Khodayar1, Hassan Bardania2, Seyed Abbas Shojaosadati1, Fatemeh Bagheri1.
Abstract
Resistance to aspirin and its cytotoxicity significantly limits its therapeutic applications. Nano-liposomal encapsulation of aspirin can reduce its cytotoxicity. In this study, aspirin encapsulating nano-liposomes (AS-NL) was prepared and its performance in drug delivery and also cytotoxicity was evaluated. The effects of two independent variables including number of freeze/thawing cycles and concentration of aspirin on encapsulation efficiency was investigated using response surface methodology (RSM). A drug profile release was obtained by AS-NL. The concentration of cholesterol as effective for liposome stability and sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) as a drug release facilitator was also optimized using RSM. The maximum aspirin encapsulation efficiency (41.44%) and drug release (33.92%) was obtained for 0.514 mg cholesterol and 0.007 mg SLS used for liposome formulation. The morphology and size of AS-NLs were characterized using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and dynamic light scattering (DLS). The stability of AS-NL was evaluated by measuring the size change of nano-liposomes during 21 days using DLS analysis. The stability of AS-NL during this period was acceptable. The cytotoxicity test of AS-NL by MTT test reveals the cytotoxicity of aspirin can be reduced by using liposome encapsulation.Entities:
Keywords: Aspirin encapsulated nano-liposomes (AS-NL); Cholesterol; Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS); cytotoxicity
Year: 2018 PMID: 29755535 PMCID: PMC5937074
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.696
CCD of experiments for AEE optimization utilizing DX-7 software
| Run | The number of freeze/thawing | Aspirin concentration (mM) | AEE (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6 | 14.95 | 27.5 |
| 2 | 6 | 10 | 29.6818 |
| 3 | 1 | 10 | 14.7075 |
| 4 | 2 | 13.5 | 16.9873 |
| 5 | 6 | 5.05 | 24.9684 |
| 6 | 9 | 13.5 | 33.8852 |
| 7 | 2 | 6.5 | 16.9784 |
| 8 | 6 | 10 | 30.6818 |
| 9 | 6 | 10 | 28.9818 |
| 10 | 11 | 10 | 32.1561 |
| 11 | 6 | 10 | 27 |
| 12 | 9 | 6.5 | 33.3763 |
| 13 | 6 | 10 | 27 |
Central composite design matrix for independent variables and their response values
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.620 | 0.010 | 41.33 | 33.91 |
| 2 | 1.058 | 0.017 | 40.37 | 27.25 |
| 3 | 0.000 | 0.010 | 41.06 | 29.69 |
| 4 | 0.062 | 0.000 | 41.73 | 26.51 |
| 5 | 0.062 | 0.010 | 41.30 | 34.34 |
| 6 | 0.062 | 0.010 | 40.30 | 34.50 |
| 7 | 1.240 | 0.010 | 40.58 | 29.36 |
| 8 | 0.062 | 0.020 | 41.35 | 23.73 |
| 9 | 0.182 | 0.003 | 41.23 | 29.67 |
| 10 | 0.062 | 0.010 | 41.32 | 34.24 |
| 11 | 0.182 | 0.017 | 40.80 | 27.32 |
| 12 | 1.058 | 0.003 | 41.02 | 25.50 |
| 13 | 0.062 | 0.010 | 41.29 | 33.97 |
Experimental variables at different levels used in CCD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The number of Freeze/Thawing cycles | A | 2 | 5.5 | 9 | 1 | 11 |
| aspirin Concentration (mM) | B | 6.5 | 10 | 13.5 | 5.05 | 14.95 |
Factors and levels used in RSM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cholesterol concentration (mg) | A | 0 | 0.18 | 0.620 | 1.06 | 1.24 |
| SLS concentration (mg) | B | 0 | 0.003 | 0.010 | 0.017 | 0.02 |
ANOVA for response surface Quadratic Model
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 469.97 | 5 | <0.0001 |
| A | 420.09 | 1 | <0.0001 |
| B | 2.1 | 1 | 0.4372 |
| AB | 0.063 | 1 | 0.891 |
| A2 | 43.48 | 1 | 0.0072 |
| B2 | 8.4 | 1 | 0.1433 |
| Residual | 21.65 | 7 | |
| Lack of Fit | 10.91 | 3 | 0.3763 |
| Pure Error | 10.75 | 4 | |
| Cor Total | 491.62 | 12 |
SS = Sum of Squares; DF = Degree of Freedom
Figure 1Actual vs. predicted values of AEE
Figure 23D plot of interactive effect of aspirin concentration and number of freeze/thawing model on AEE.
Result of confirmation test for AEE
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 33.26 ± 1.3 | 33.47 | 31.51 | 35.44 |
Figure 3Aspirin release profile for designed experimentals (Table 6).
ANOVA of AEE and drug release
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Model | 5 | 1.96 | 0.0002 | 171.75 | < 0.0001 |
| A-Chol | 1 | 0.21 | 0.0072 | 2.76 | 0.0497 |
| B-SLS | 1 | 1.16 | < 0.0001 | 2.57 | 0.0561 |
| AB | 1 | 0.013 | 0.3943 | 4.22 | 0.0220 |
| A2 | 1 | 0.48 | 0.0008 | 37.01 | < 0.0001 |
| B2 | 1 | 0.16 | 0.0145 | 141.29 | < 0.0001 |
| Residual | 7 | 0.11 | 3.44 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 3 | 0.11 | 0.0001 | 3.19 | 0.0098 |
| Pure Error | 4 | 8.995E- 004 | 0.25 | ||
| Cor Total | 12 | 2.07 | 175.19 | ||
| R2 | 0.95 | ||||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.91 | ||||
DF = Degree of Freedom; SS = Sum of squares
Figure 4Predicted vs. actual for (A) AEE; (B) drug release
Figure 5Response surface plots results of factors interactions on (a) encapsulation efficiency (%); (b) drug release (%).
Confirmation test for predicted optimum condition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AEE% | 41.4422 | 41.31 | 41.57 | 41.39 |
| Drug Release% | 33.9175 | 33.19 | 34.64 | 33.26 |
Figure 6TEM images of AS-NL
Size changes of AS-NLs during three weeks storage period at 4 °C.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 74.46 | 0.228 |
| 1 | 92.50 | 0.201 |
| 2 | 95.65 | 0.379 |
| 3 | 129 | 0.203 |
Figure 7Size distribution of Aspirin encapsulated nano-liposomes
Figure 8Cell viability after treatment with free aspirin (1.2 mg/mL) and different concentration of AS-NLs (A) after 24 and (B) 48 h