The synthesis, characterization, and self-assembly of a series of biocompatible poly(methyl caprolactone-co-caprolactone)-b-poly(ethylene oxide) amphiphilic block copolymers with variable MCL contents in the hydrophobic block are described. Self-assembly gives rise to polymeric nanoparticles (PNPs) with hydrophobic cores that decrease in crystallinity as the MCL content increases, and their morphologies and sizes show nonmonotonic trends with MCL content. PNPs loaded with the anticancer drug paclitaxel (PAX) give rise to in vitro PAX release rates and MCF-7 GI50 (50% growth inhibition concentration) values that decrease as the MCL content increases. We also show for selected copolymers that microfluidic manufacturing at a variable flow rate enables further control of PAX release rates and enhances MCF-7 antiproliferation potency. These results indicate that more effective and specific drug delivery PNPs are possible through tangential efforts combining polymer synthesis and microfluidic manufacturing.
The synthesis, characterization, and self-assembly of a series of biocompatible poly(methyl caprolactone-co-caprolactone)-b-poly(ethylene oxide) amphiphilic block copolymers with variable MCL contents in the hydrophobic block are described. Self-assembly gives rise to polymeric nanoparticles (PNPs) with hydrophobic cores that decrease in crystallinity as the MCL content increases, and their morphologies and sizes show nonmonotonic trends with MCL content. PNPs loaded with the anticancer drug paclitaxel (PAX) give rise to in vitro PAX release rates and MCF-7 GI50 (50% growth inhibition concentration) values that decrease as the MCL content increases. We also show for selected copolymers that microfluidic manufacturing at a variable flow rate enables further control of PAX release rates and enhances MCF-7 antiproliferation potency. These results indicate that more effective and specific drug delivery PNPs are possible through tangential efforts combining polymer synthesis and microfluidic manufacturing.
Polymeric nanoparticles
(PNPs), including micellar aggregates of
block copolymers, are recognized as promising candidates for drug
delivery due to their stability, morphological variability, and ease
of functionalization.[1−20] Efforts to design PNP nanomedicine formulations exhibiting improved
bioavailability and selectivity for a range of hydrophobic drugs have
focused on variation of both the chemistry[10,11,13−17,21−24] and multiscale structure[16,25−36] of the polymeric nanocarriers. For example, enhanced solubilization
of therapeutic agents in the PNP cores of block copolymer aggregates
can be achieved by the addition of pendant chains or functional groups
that lead to increased affinity with the hydrophobic blocks.[14,15] Further, the various applications of intermolecular (bottom-up)[37−41] and external (top-down)[42−47] forces to modulate the size, morphology, and internal crystallinity
of PNP nanocarriers highlight the numerous and complex relationships
between structure and drug delivery function.Poly(ε-caprolactone)-b-poly(ethylene oxide)
(PCL-b-PEO) is an FDA-approved amphiphilic block
copolymer that is commonly applied to drug delivery investigations
due to the inherent biodegradable and biocompatible properties arising
from its component blocks.[26,27,48−57] PEO is a hydrophilic polymer that provides water dispersability
and delayed physisorption of proteins, which imparts some degree of
stealthiness to PNP surfaces.[16] PCL is
an aliphatic polyester known to solubilize a wide range of hydrophobic
drugs;[16] moreover, PCL undergoes hydrolytic
degradation under physiological conditions, which makes it an appropriate
in vivo host for therapeutic molecules.[53] The semicrystalline nature of PCL is an inherent structural feature
that provides both advantages and disadvantages with respect to drug
delivery.[16,26,27,34−36] For instance, the presence of
crystallites can increase diffusion times in self-assembled PNP cores
for slower, more controlled release;[26,45−47] however, crystallites also tend to impede drug solubilization, leading
to lower loading efficiencies.[45−47] These features highlight the
need for new copolymers with hydrophobic blocks that are chemically
similar to PCL but with attenuated crystallinity.Poly(4-methyl-ε-caprolactone)
and poly(6-methyl-ε-caprolactone)
(PMCL) are hydrophobic polymers that are structurally similar to PCL
but with a methyl group on each repeat unit that disrupts the ability
of the chains to close-pack.[58,59] Therefore, in contrast
to PCL, both PMCL isomers are amorphous, low-Tg polymers.[58−60] The synthesis, properties, self-assembly, and drug
delivery applications of amphiphilic block copolymers based on PMCL
hydrophobic blocks have been described by several groups.[61−70] In addition, Wang et al. reported the copolymerization of 4-methyl-ε-caprolactone
(MCL) and ε-caprolactone (CL) to generate hydrophobic P(MCL-co-CL) random copolymers with various ratios of MCL and
CL monomers;[58] characterization of their
physical and biomedical properties (including degradability and biocompatibility)
suggested that such copolymers with variable MCL contents could offer
interesting and variable properties for biomedical applications, including
drug delivery.[58] However, to induce amphiphilic
self-assembly, hydrophobic random copolymers of this type would need
to be joined to a hydrophilic polymer block such as PEO. To the best
of our knowledge, the synthesis and characterization of amphiphilic
block copolymers possessing P(MCL-co-CL) hydrophobic
blocks of variable MCL content have not been reported to date.In our group, we have applied gas–liquid two-phase microfluidic
reactors to the production of a wide range of PNP systems,[42−44,71−74] including semicrystalline PCL-b-PEO PNPs for drug delivery.[45−47,75] Within these reactors, counter-rotating vortices within the liquid
phase enhance mixing and introduce flow-variable high-shear “hot
spots” which provide top-down control of multiscale structure,[42] including the size,[43] morphology,[44] and internal crystallinity[45] of the resulting PNPs. We have also shown that
microfluidic control of PNP structure enables important biomedical
properties, including photoresponsivity,[74] degradation rate,[45,47] drug loading efficiency,[45−47] drug release rate,[45−47] and in vitro antiproliferation,[47] to be tuned and optimized.A limitation of such top-down
microfluidic control of PNP colloids
is that the molecular structure and chemistry of the constituent copolymers
can play a dominant role in chain packing,[35,36] even when external shear forces are applied to direct the self-assembly
process. For instance, we have shown that microfluidic preparation
of PNPs from semicrystalline PCL-b-PEO leads to increases
in PCL crystallinity with increasing shear rate;[45,47,75] however, when PNPs of the same copolymer
are formed outside of the microfluidic channels in the absence of
shear, significant PCL crystallization is still observed.[45,47] Such observations strongly suggest that certain structural properties
(e.g., low-crystallinity PNP cores) that could yield desirable biomedical
functions cannot be achieved by top-down forces on their own.In this article, we describe the synthesis, characterization, and
self-assembly of a unique series of biocompatible block copolymers
possessing a hydrophilic PEO block of constant molecular weight and
a hydrophobic P(MCL-co-CL) block of variable MLC
content and constant molecular weight. Micellar aggregates of poly(methyl
caprolactone-co-caprolactone)-b-poly(ethylene
oxide) (P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO) containing
the anticancer drug paclitaxel (PAX) are found to be smaller and less
crystalline with higher PAX loading levels compared to those of the
equivalent PCL-b-PEO copolymer. Slower release rates
and improved MCF-7 antiproliferation potencies are determined as the
MCL content of the hydrophobic block increases. Moreover, microfluidic
self-assembly of P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO
is shown to further decrease release rates and enhance MCF-7 antiproliferation
effects compared to those of the conventional bulk preparations. These
results highlight the potential of combining polymer design/synthesis
(chemical control) with microfluidic shear processing (mechanical
control), through which new avenues can be opened for optimizing the
structure and function of polymeric nanomedicines.
Results and Discussion
Characterization
of Copolymers
From the 1H NMR spectra in Figure and Figure S2 (Supporting Information), number-average molecular weights
of the hydrophobic block Mn[P(MCL-co-CL)] and mole fractions of MCL in the hydrophobic blockfMCL were determined by measuring the relative
intensities of the CL and MCL peaks using the PEO peak (3.65 ppm)
as a reference, as the number-average molecular weight of PEO is known
(5000 g/mol). When ε-caprolactone and 6-methyl-ε-caprolactone
are copolymerized at increasing ratios of MCL to CL monomer, a decrease
in the CL methylene peak at 4.06 ppm, and the appearance of peaks
at 1.20 and 4.90 ppm, corresponding to the MCL methyl and methylene
groups, respectively, is observed (Figure ). The determined fractions of MCL are consistent
with the nominal feed ratios described in the Experimental
Section. Equations and sample calculations for PMCL-25 are
shown below.Table lists the Mn and fMCL values determined for the various copolymers in the
series in addition to polydispersity indexes (PDIs = Mw/Mn) determined from a combination
of Mw from GPC data and Mn from 1H NMR data. Also listed in Table are the critical
water content (cwc) values of the various copolymers in DMF at a copolymer
concentration of 0.33 wt %, based on titration curves shown in Figure S4 (Supporting Information). PMCL-0 has a lower cwc than that of all of the MCL-containing
copolymers, with the cwc further increasing slightly as the MCL content
of the copolymer increases. With the additional methyl group, PMCL
is more hydrophobic than PCL; on the basis of solubility alone, therefore,
we would expect the cwc to decrease as the MCL content increases,
whereas the opposite trend is observed in Table . A possible explanation for this trend is
that the decrease in PCL crystallization with the addition of MCL
monomer lowers the driving force for micellization, which increases
the cwc. This implies that the thermodynamic effects of PCL crystallinity
on micelle formation are dominant over hydrophobicity effects.
Figure 1
Selected 1H NMR spectra of P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO block copolymers with various MCL contents:
(A) PMCL-0, (B) PMCL-25, and (C) PMCL-100.
Table 1
Copolymer Characteristics and Critical
Water Contents
copolymer
Mn P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEOa
Mn P(MCL-co-CL)
fMCL
PDIb
cwc (wt %)c
PMCL-0
9437
4437
0
1.96
7.1 ± 0.1
PMCL-25
10 063
5063
0.26
2.55
8.6 ± 0.2
PMCL-50
9795
4795
0.49
1.95
8.8 ± 0.1
PMCL-75
9432
4432
0.72
1.77
9.4 ± 0.3
PMCL-100
9690
4690
1
2.34
9.3 ± 0.2
Mn(PEO)
= 5000 g/mol.
PDI = Mw(GPC)/Mn(NMR).
Errors are standard deviations
of
three separate cwc measurements.
Selected 1H NMR spectra of P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO block copolymers with various MCL contents:
(A) PMCL-0, (B) PMCL-25, and (C) PMCL-100.Mn(PEO)
= 5000 g/mol.PDI = Mw(GPC)/Mn(NMR).Errors are standard deviations
of
three separate cwc measurements.
Effect of MCL Content on Multiscale Structure of PNPs
Aqueous
PNP dispersions of all five copolymers with different MCL
contents were first prepared by the conventional bulk method of dropwise
water addition followed by dialysis (Figure ). Morphologies and mean PCL core dimensions
from TEM data (Figure A–E) and effective hydrodynamic diameters from dynamic light
scattering (DLS) data (Figure F) are listed in Table .
Figure 2
Effect of MCL content on PNP morphology and size. (A–E)
TEM images of bulk-prepared PNPs with various MCL contents and (F)
plot of Dh,eff vs fMCL from DLS of the various PNP samples shown in (A)–(E).
Scale bars are 200 nm.
Table 2
Morphologies,a Mean Core Dimensions,b and Effective Hydrodynamic
Diametersc for P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO Nanoparticles with Various MCL Contents
copolymer
morphologies
and mean core dimensions (nm)
Dh,eff (nm)
PMCL-0
S (13 ± 2)
1300 ± 100
C (24 ± 2)
PMCL-25
S (22 ± 2)
230 ± 50
C (17 ± 2)
PMCL-50
S (20 ± 1)
62 ± 9
PMCL-75
S (23 ± 5)
60 ± 10
PMCL-100
S (25 ± 1)
210 ± 30
C (21 ± 4)
Morphologies determined
by TEM are
indicated as S (spheres) and C (cylinders).
Mean dimensions refer to sphere
diameters or cylinder widths determined by TEM. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.
Effective hydrodynamic diameters
determined by DLS using cumulent analysis. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.
Effect of MCL content on PNP morphology and size. (A–E)
TEM images of bulk-prepared PNPs with various MCL contents and (F)
plot of Dh,eff vs fMCL from DLS of the various PNP samples shown in (A)–(E).
Scale bars are 200 nm.Morphologies determined
by TEM are
indicated as S (spheres) and C (cylinders).Mean dimensions refer to sphere
diameters or cylinder widths determined by TEM. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.Effective hydrodynamic diameters
determined by DLS using cumulent analysis. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.Self-assembly of the PCL-b-PEO copolymer without
the MCL monomer (PMCL-0, Figure A) gave rise to prominent cylinders along with some
small spheres. As the MCL content increased to fMCL = 0.25 (PMCL-25, Figure B), a decrease in the length and width of the cylinders
and a concomitant increase in the core diameters of the spheres (from
13 to 22 nm) was observed. With a further increase in MCL content
(PMCL-50 and PMCL-75, Figure C,D, respectively), the cylinders no longer formed and pure
spheres of fairly constant core diameter (20–23 nm) were observed
by TEM. Finally, PNP formation of the PMCL-b-PEOcopolymer without the CL monomer (PMCL-100, Figure E) gave rise to the return of the cylindrical
morphology, in the form of some short rods (Figure E, white arrows) with coexisting spheres
of mean core diameter 25 nm.The initial trend of a decreasing
number of cylinders with increasing
MCL content is consistent with a decrease in PCL crystallinity as
the number of methyl groups in the hydrophobic block is increased.
In previous studies of semicrystalline blockcopolymer self-assembly,
it has been shown that low-curvature morphologies such as cylinders
and lamellae are generally favored by highly crystalline cores, whereas
high-curvature spheres become more prominent as the core crystallinity
decreases.[36,76] On the other hand, the trend
reversal leading to the reappearance of cylinders in the PMCL-100
case is most likely related to the competing effect of increasing
hydrophobicity as the MCL content increases.[38,39] The dominant effect of high hydrophobicity leading to high interfacial
tension in the PMCL-100 sample is supported by the fact that the spherical
cores in that sample (Figure E) are the largest of all five copolymers (Table ), suggesting densely packed
and highly stretched hydrophobic chains at the core–corona
interface. The observed disappearance followed by reappearance of
cylinders with increasing MCL content (Figure A–E) is also reflected in the corresponding
effective hydrodynamic diameters from DLS, which decrease and then
increase as fMCL increases (Figure F).We carried out XRD
on the series of PNP colloids to confirm the
trends in crystallinity suggested by the above morphological study.
Percent crystalline PCL values, χPCL, were determined
from peak deconvolution of the XRD patterns (Figure A–C) and are plotted in Figure D as a function of MCL fraction
in the hydrophobic block, fMCL. The XRD
pattern for the PCL-b-PEO copolymer (fMCL = 0, Figure A) provides a baseline for comparison with the MCL-containing
copolymers, showing deconvoluted peaks associated with crystalline
PEO (blue) and crystalline PCL (red) in addition to an amorphous halo
(pink) from which a χPCL value of ∼25% is
determined (Figure D). In contrast, the deconvolution of XRD profiles of all MCL-containing
copolymers suggests no significant contribution from crystalline PCL
peaks, leading to χPCL values of ∼0% for all
copolymers with fMCL ≥ 0.25 (Figure D). This suggests
that PCL crystallization in the PNP core is disrupted even with the
minimum MCL content in this series. However, visual comparison of
the XRD patterns of PMCL-25 (Figure B) and PMCL-100 (Figure C) in the region between the two PEO peaks (2θ
= 29.2 and 35.2) suggests a possible weak contribution from crystalline
PCL in the former sample. This is consistent with the TEM data, from
which we find that PMCL-25 shows some tendency to form cylinders (Figure B) but PMCL-50 (Figure C) and PMCL-75 (Figure D) do not. We conclude
that some crystalline PCL is present in copolymers with fMCL ≤ 0.25 but not in copolymers with fMCL > 0.25; in the fMCL =
0.25 case, the PCL crystallinity is too small to be quantified by
XRD (Figure B), but
is large enough to influence self-assembly behavior (Figure B).
Figure 3
Effect of MCL content
on PNP core crystallinity. (A–C) Selected
XRD profiles for bulk-prepared PNPs with various MCL contents and
(D) corresponding plot of χPCL vs fMCL. Fits show contributions from crystalline PEO (blue),
crystalline PCL (red), and amorphous material (pink).
Effect of MCL content
on PNP core crystallinity. (A–C) Selected
XRD profiles for bulk-prepared PNPs with various MCL contents and
(D) corresponding plot of χPCL vs fMCL. Fits show contributions from crystalline PEO (blue),
crystalline PCL (red), and amorphous material (pink).
Effect of MCL Content on Drug Delivery Properties
of PAX-Loaded
PNPs
We next formed PAX-loaded PNPs from each copolymer at
a variety of drug-to-polymer loading ratios, r, using
the conventional bulk method of dropwise water addition followed by
dialysis and centrifugation to remove any unencapsulated drug. Figure shows the TEM data
of the PAX-loaded PNPs formed from five different copolymers with
variable MCL contents, each with three different loading ratios of r = 0.1, 0.25, and 0.50. For the PMCL-0 copolymer, we find
that the morphological effect of the PAX loading ratio is negligible,
with all loading ratios forming cylinders and spheres (Figure A,F,K), similar to the corresponding
PNPs without PAX (Figure A). Adding PAX appears to have a more significant morphological
effect on the PNPs in which the hydrophobic cores contain at least
some MCL repeat units, which is possibly a result of PCL crystallization
effects being less dominant in those samples compared to PMCL-0. For
example, whereas the PMCL-25 and PMCL-100 PNPs both include cylinders
in the absence of PAX (Figure B,E), these copolymers form only spheres once a small amount
of PAX is added to the formulation (r = 0.1, Figure B,E).
Figure 4
Effect of MCL content
and loading ratio r on PNP
morphology. (A–O) TEM images of bulk-prepared PAX-loaded PNPs
with various MCL contents and prepared with various drug-to-polymer
loading ratios, r. Scale bars are 200 nm.
Effect of MCL content
and loading ratio r on PNP
morphology. (A–O) TEM images of bulk-prepared PAX-loaded PNPs
with various MCL contents and prepared with various drug-to-polymer
loading ratios, r. Scale bars are 200 nm.The disruption of the cylinders by PAX addition
in the MCL-containing
copolymers can be attributed to different effects, depending on the
MLC composition and the driving force for cylinder formation. In the
case of PMCL-25, it is likely that the plasticizing effect of PAX
precludes PCL crystallization and therefore cylinder formation; in
the case of PMCL-100, we believe cylinders are prevented by the lowering
of interfacial tension associated with solubilization of PAX in the
PNP cores. For all four MCL-containing copolymers (PMCL-25, PMCL-50,
PMCL-75, and PMCL-100), pure spheres of relatively constant size within
experimental error were obtained when the loading ratio was increased
from r = 0.1 to 0.5 (Figure , Table ).
Table 3
Morphologies,a Mean Core Dimensions,b and Effective Hydrodynamic
Diametersc for PAX-Loaded P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO Nanoparticles with Various MCL Contents
and Different Drug-to-Polymer Loading Ratios
copolymer
drug/polymer loading
ratio, r (w/w)
morphologies
and mean core dimensions (nm)
Dh,eff (nm)
PMCL-0
0.10
S (16 ± 1)
1110 ± 90
C (20 ± 3)
0.25
S (13 ± 1)
1080 ± 90
C (23 ± 2)
0.50
S (13 ± 3)
1100 ± 100
C (20 ± 3)
PMCL-25
0.10
S (23 ± 2)
60 ± 10
0.25
S (24 ± 1)
63 ± 6
0.50
S (25 ± 4)
65 ± 5
PMCL-50
0.10
S (21 ± 3)
60 ± 10
0.25
S (24 ± 2)
60 ± 10
0.50
S (23 ± 1)
61 ± 8
PMCL-75
0.10
S (25 ± 3)
60 ± 10
0.25
S (26 ± 1)
60 ± 10
0.50
S (23 ± 2)
60 ± 9
PMCL-100
0.10
S (19 ± 2)
60 ± 10
0.25
S (22 ± 2)
60 ± 10
0.50
S (25 ± 3)
61 ± 6
Morphologies determined
by TEM are
indicated as S (spheres) and C (cylinders).
Mean dimensions refer to sphere
diameters or cylinder widths determined by TEM. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.
Effective hydrodynamic diameters
determined by DLS using cumulent analysis. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.
Morphologies determined
by TEM are
indicated as S (spheres) and C (cylinders).Mean dimensions refer to sphere
diameters or cylinder widths determined by TEM. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.Effective hydrodynamic diameters
determined by DLS using cumulent analysis. Errors represent standard
deviations of mean values of three separate nanoparticle preparations
under the same conditions.PAX loading efficiencies (Figure A) and corresponding loading levels (Figure B) were determined by high-performance
liquid chromatography (HPLC) for PNPs of the five copolymers and three
different loading ratios. For all five copolymers, loading efficiencies
decrease with increasing loading ratio (Figure A), which is consistent with the loading
levels that remain relatively constant as the loading ratio increases
(Figure B). Also in Figure B, it is apparent
that the loading levels at all investigated loading ratios are higher
for the MCL-containing copolymers (PMCL-25, PMCL-50, PMCL-75, and
PMCL-100) compared to the PMCL-0 case. It should also be noted that
the four MCL-containing copolymers, irrespective of MCL content, show
identical loading levels within experimental error.
Figure 5
Effect of MCL content
and loading ratio r on PAX
loading. (A) Loading efficiencies and (B) loading levels for bulk-prepared
PAX-loaded PNPs with various MCL contents and prepared with various
drug-to-polymer loading ratios, r.
Effect of MCL content
and loading ratio r on PAX
loading. (A) Loading efficiencies and (B) loading levels for bulk-prepared
PAX-loaded PNPs with various MCL contents and prepared with various
drug-to-polymer loading ratios, r.From the above observations, we conclude that all
five copolymers
form PNPs in which the hydrophobic cores become saturated with PAX
at the lowest investigated loading ratio of r = 0.1.
Therefore, further addition of PAX beyond r = 0.1
does not increase loading levels (Figure B) or change the PNP morphologies or sizes
(Table ), whereas
loading efficiencies decrease with increasing r as
the amount of unencapsulated drug removed in the centrifugation step
increases (Figure A). Another conclusion is that the introduction of MCL monomer into
the hydrophobic core clearly increases the maximum amount of PAX that
can be incorporated into the PNPs, although the saturation level of
PNPs with different MCL contents is the same. On the basis of the
measured saturated loading levels, we determined that the mole ratio
of PAX molecules to copolymer chains within the PNPs is ∼0.4
for PMCL-0 and ∼0.5 for all MCL-containing copolymers.The effect of copolymerized MCL increasing PAX encapsulation may
be due in part to the higher hydrophobicity of the MCL-containing
copolymers leading to higher PAX solubilities within the PNP cores.
However, we note that although core hydrophobicity should increase
monotonically with increasing MCL content, the saturated loading levels
do not appear to follow the same trend. Instead, we see a stepwise
increase in PAX loading levels between PMCL-0 and PMCL-25, followed
by no further increase as the MCL content increases between PMCL-25
and PMCL-100 (Figure B). We note that this stepwise increase in PAX loading level with
MCL content tracks with the corresponding stepwise decrease in core
crystallinity, as measured by XRD (Figure F). This suggests that the effect of MLC
addition on PAX encapsulation is more strongly related to changes
in core crystallinity than to changes in core hydrophobicity. Specifically,
the increase in saturated loading levels from 0.004 for PMCL-0 to
0.005 for all MCL-containing copolymers (Figure B) can be attributed to the corresponding
sharp drop in the percentage of crystalline PCL within the core (Figure F), providing a larger
amorphous volume in which to accommodate encapsulated PAX.For
in vitro release experiments, PAX-loaded PNPs of all five copolymers
prepared at a single loading ratio (r = 0.25) were
assessed, and the resulting release profiles are shown in Figure A. Release half times, t1/2, were estimated by extrapolation from the
various release profiles, and are plotted in the inset to Figure A versus MCL content.
The release profiles show a clear effect of adding MCL to the hydrophobic
block on drug release rates, with PMCL-0 (fMCL = 0) showing the fastest release (t1/2 = ∼50 min), and the release half time increasing modestly
but significantly to t1/2 = ∼60
min for PMCL-25 (fMCL = 0.25). This is
followed by an apparent (although possibly not statistically significant)
gradual increase in release half time from t1/2 = ∼60 to ∼70 min as the MCL content increases
from fMCL = 0.25 to 1.
Figure 6
Effect of MCL content
on in vitro PAX release. (A) In vitro PAX
release profiles for bulk-prepared PAX-loaded PNPs with various MCL
contents (r = 0.25) and corresponding plot of t1/2 vs fMCL (inset).
(B) Dh,eff, vs release time for samples
in (A), showing relative hydrolytic degradation rates during in vitro
PAX release; inset shows re-scaled data for MCL-containing copolymers
only.
Effect of MCL content
on in vitro PAX release. (A) In vitro PAX
release profiles for bulk-prepared PAX-loaded PNPs with various MCL
contents (r = 0.25) and corresponding plot of t1/2 vs fMCL (inset).
(B) Dh,eff, vs release time for samples
in (A), showing relative hydrolytic degradation rates during in vitro
PAX release; inset shows re-scaled data for MCL-containing copolymers
only.It is at first surprising that
the PAX-loaded PNPs prepared from
PMCL-0 show the fastest in vitro release, considering that higher
crystallinities and larger core volumes should slow down PAX diffusion
times to the core–corona interface of the PNPs. However, further
insight into this trend comes by considering that an important mechanism
of PAX release is the hydrolytic degradation of PNPs at physiological
temperature, pH, and ionic strength.[16,45] We therefore
tracked the hydrolytic degradation of the nanoparticles during the
first 24 h of release, by monitoring the effective hydrodynamic diameters
by DLS as a function of release time (Figure B). We see that over this time period, the
mean effective hydrodynamic sizes of the PMCL-0 PNPs drop from ∼1100
to ∼200 nm (by about 80%), which can be attributed to the hydrolytic
breakdown of the original cylinders (Figure F) into spheres, whereas the PNP sizes of
all other copolymers (shown previously to be pure spheres, Figure G–J) drop
from ∼70 to ∼50 nm (i.e., by about 30%), which can be
attributed to a gradual degradation of the spheres. The relatively
fast and dramatic increase in surface area via hydrolytic degradation
of PMCL-0 compared to the smaller increase in surface area over the
same period for the PNPs of all four MCL-containing copolymers (Figure C) thus explains
the slightly faster release of drug from PMCL-0.The antiproliferative
effects of the PAX-loaded PNPs prepared from
three of the five copolymers (PMCL-25, PMCL-50, and PMCL-75; constant
loading ratio, r = 0.25) were measured using the
MCF-7 cell line. Free PAX was evaluated as a positive control and
empty PNPs without PAX prepared from the copolymerPMCL-25 were evaluated
as a negative control. For all investigated samples and positive controls,
growth inhibition plots were generated for 48, 72, and 96 h incubation
times (Supporting Information, Figures S6–S8). Negative controls showed
no significant effect of the copolymer alone on cell viability; negligible
cell death by empty PNPs was measured up to a polymer concentration
of 36.5 ppm (Supporting Information, Figure S9), which was equivalent to the highest
polymer concentration applied in doses of PAX-loaded PNPs (∼40
ppm).Associated GI50 values in Figure show significant differences
in antiproliferative
effects for the PAX-loaded PNPs prepared from copolymers with different
MCL contents. All three PNP formulations show attenuated antiproliferative
effects (elevated GI50 values) relative to free PAX; this
can be understood in terms of the cell exposure to drug being reduced
by encapsulation in the polymer formulations. For both 48 and 96 h
incubation times, we found a significant decrease in GI50 value as the MCL content in the hydrophobic block increased. The
same clear trend was not found for the 72 h data, perhaps due to the
larger relative errors in GI50 values at the intermediate
incubation time.
Figure 7
Effect of MCL content on MCF-7 antiproliferation potency.
GI50 values for PAX-loaded PNPs with various MCL contents
(r = 0.25). Data is shown for incubation times of
48, 72,
and 96 h. Connecting brackets indicate statistical comparisons between
PNPs generated from copolymers with different MCL contents. Single
asterisks indicate p < 0.05; double asterisks
indicate p < 0.01; open circles indicate p > 0.05.
Effect of MCL content on MCF-7 antiproliferation potency.
GI50 values for PAX-loaded PNPs with various MCL contents
(r = 0.25). Data is shown for incubation times of
48, 72,
and 96 h. Connecting brackets indicate statistical comparisons between
PNPs generated from copolymers with different MCL contents. Single
asterisks indicate p < 0.05; double asterisks
indicate p < 0.01; open circles indicate p > 0.05.To understand the observed effect of MCL content on MCF-7
antiproliferation,
we first consider that all of the investigated PNP formulations consist
of pure spheres (Figure G–I, r = 0.25) with core sizes (24–26
nm) and hydrodynamic diameters (60–63 nm) that are remarkably
similar for the three investigated copolymersPMCL-25, PMCL-50, and
PMCL-75. In addition, loading levels (Figure B) and release rates (Figure A) are similar for all three copolymers.
We conclude that the number, size, and morphology of the PNPs exposed
to cells in the antiproliferation assays were effectively the same
for the three copolymer formulations, and that the in vitro release
profiles were also not significantly different. This leaves us to
consider the different mechanical properties of the hydrophobic core
surfaces, which should become “stickier” and smoother[58] as the MCL content increases. We tentatively
propose that changes in the PNP surface properties with increasing
MCL content and concomitant enhancements in cellular interactions
may be responsible for the observed increases in antiproliferative
potency.
Structure and Drug Delivery Properties of PAX-Loaded PNPs Prepared
Using Microfluidics
The previous sections have shown that
copolymerization of MCL and CL to form amphiphilic block copolymers
with composition-variable hydrophobic blocks offers chemical control
of structure and function for drug delivery PNPs. In this section,
we apply selected MCL-containing copolymers to compare the structure
and drug delivery function of PAX-loaded PNPs prepared using the conventional
approach of dropwise water addition with those prepared in a two-phase
microfluidic reactor at different flow rates. As shown in previous
studies from our group,[42−47,71−75] these reactors enable particle processing via variable
shear. For this comparison, we focus on the PMCL-50 copolymer, although
PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-25 and PMCL-75 were also prepared in the microfluidic
reactor at different flow rates; TEM and DLS data for those samples
is presented in the Supporting Information (Figure S10).Figure shows TEM images of the PAX-loaded
PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) produced using the bulk
preparation method (Figure A) and in the microfluidic reactor at different flow rates: Q = 50 μL/min (Figure B), Q = 100 μL/min (Figure C), and Q = 200 μL/min (Figure D). Three of the four PNP samples contain pure spheres, with
the exception being the Q = 100 μL/min sample,
which contains some cylinders (Figure C inset). The effective hydrodynamic diameters of the
PNPs, Dh,eff, show a general decrease
with increasing flow rate (Figure E) with the exception of a sharp increase between Q = 50 and 100 μL/min corresponding to the appearance
of cylinders (Figure C). The increase in PNP size followed by a decrease with increasing
flow rate is attributed to competing mechanisms of microfluidic PNP
processing, with shear-induced particle coalescence being dominant
at low flow rates and shear-induced particle breakup being dominant
at high flow rates.[44] Similar nonmonotonic
trends in morphology and hydrodynamic size are found for PMCL-75,
although not for the PMCL-25 copolymer, which forms only pure spheres
of steadily decreasing size as the flow rate increases (Supporting Information, Figure S10).
Figure 8
Effect of preparation method and flow rate on PNP morphology
and
size. TEM images of PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) prepared using the bulk preparation method (A) and in the
two-phase microfluidic reactor at different flow rates (B–D),
and (E) Dh,eff vs Q for
the PNPs in (A)–(D); Q = 0 μL/min designates
the bulk-prepared PNPs. Scale bars are 200 nm.
Effect of preparation method and flow rate on PNP morphology
and
size. TEM images of PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) prepared using the bulk preparation method (A) and in the
two-phase microfluidic reactor at different flow rates (B–D),
and (E) Dh,eff vs Q for
the PNPs in (A)–(D); Q = 0 μL/min designates
the bulk-prepared PNPs. Scale bars are 200 nm.Next, loading efficiencies and in vitro release profiles
were compared
for the bulk and microfluidic preparations of PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50
(r = 0.25, Figure ). Figure A shows that loading efficiency decreased when moving from
the bulk to the microfluidic preparation method, as we have previously
reported for the preparation of PAX-loaded PCL-b-PEO
PNPs,[47] but did not change significantly
when the flow rate was increased from Q = 50 to 200
μL/min. Comparing in vitro release profiles, Figure B and the inset show that PAX
release is markedly slower for the microfluidic PNPs prepared at Q = 50 μL/min (t1/2 =
∼90 min) compared to the bulk-prepared PNPs (t1/2 = ∼70 min), and that release rates slow further
when the microfluidic flow rate increases to Q =
200 μL/min (t1/2 = ∼120 min).
Figure 9
Effect
of preparation method and flow rate on PAX loading and in
vitro release. (A) Loading efficiencies and (B) release profiles with
corresponding plot of t1/2 vs fMCL (inset) for PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) prepared using the bulk preparation method and
in the two-phase microfluidic reactor at different flow rates; in
the inset to (B), Q = 0 μL/min designates the
bulk-prepared PNPs.
Effect
of preparation method and flow rate on PAX loading and in
vitro release. (A) Loading efficiencies and (B) release profiles with
corresponding plot of t1/2 vs fMCL (inset) for PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) prepared using the bulk preparation method and
in the two-phase microfluidic reactor at different flow rates; in
the inset to (B), Q = 0 μL/min designates the
bulk-prepared PNPs.Consideration of the
series of release profiles in Figure A together with that in Figure B highlights the
merits of combining both chemical synthesis and microfluidic shear
processing for optimizing the drug delivery properties of PNP formulations.
First, chemical copolymerization of MCL (Figure A) increased release half times from t1/2 = ∼50 min (PMCL-0) to t1/2 = ∼70 min (PMCL-50); then, microfluidic processing
of PMCL-50 further increased release half times from t1/2 = ∼70 min (bulk preparation) to t1/2 = ∼120 min (microfluidic preparation, Q = 200 μL/min). The final result of coupling chemical
and processing control yields PNPs showing extended PAX release over
5 days (Q = 200 μL/min, Figure B), which is in sharp contrast to PNPs of
bulk-prepared PMCL-0 (Figure A) from which ∼90% of PAX is released after only 2
h.In previous work from our group, increases in PAX release
times
from PNPs prepared in the two-phase microfluidic reactor at increasing
flow rate have been attributed to the increased formation of shear-induced
crystallites in the hydrophobic core,[45] more homogenous PAX distributions in the core,[47] or a combination of both effects.[47] Here, we expect that the presence of methyl side groups will preclude
core crystallization of PMCL-50, even in the presence of shear processing,
although core crystallinities were not measured for the microfluidic-prepared
samples of this copolymer. However, we did carry out XRD measurements
of the PMCL-25 PNPs without PAX (r = 0) prepared
both in the bulk and in the microfluidic reactor at Q = 50 μL/min, and we found no discernible differences in crystallinities
in those samples; this suggests that, unlike the PCL-b-PEO copolymers, shear-induced crystallization effects are not strong
in the MCL-containing copolymers presented here. From these considerations,
we conclude that the slowing down of PAX release for the PNPs prepared
at faster flow rates (Figure B) is more likely explained by faster mixing times leading
to more homogenously distributed PAX molecules within the core; this
is in contrast to the bulk-prepared PNPs, where slow water addition
is expected to give rise to greater localization of PAX molecules
at the core–corona interface with consequential burst release.Finally, we compare the MCF-7 antiproliferation effects for the
bulk and microfluidic preparations of PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25). Growth inhibition plots were generated for 48,
72, and 96 h incubation times (Supporting Information, Figures S11–S13). Associated
GI50 values in Figure show significant differences in antiproliferative
effects for the PAX-loaded PNPs prepared using different preparation
methods. Specifically, for all incubation times, a significant decrease
in GI50 values is found for the microfluidic preparations
relative to the bulk preparation. For the 48 and 96 h incubation times,
antiproliferation potencies are not significantly different for the
microfluidic preparations at two different flow rates; however, for
the 72 h incubation time, a small but significant increase in GI50 is found when the flow rate is increased from Q = 50 to 200 μL/min. The stronger antiproliferation effects
for the microfluidic-prepared PNPs compared to those of the bulk-prepared
PNPs could be related to the relative decreases in in vitro release
times, loading efficiencies, or PNP hydrodynamic sizes, or a combination
of these factors.
Figure 10
Effect of preparation method and flow rate on MCF-7 antiproliferation
potency. GI50 values for PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) prepared using the bulk preparation method an
in the two-phase microfluidic reactor at different flow rates. Data
is shown for incubation times of 48, 72, and 96 h. Connecting brackets
indicate statistical comparisons between PNPs generated by different
methods. Single asterisks indicate p < 0.05; double
asterisks indicate p < 0.01; open circles indicate p > 0.05.
Effect of preparation method and flow rate on MCF-7 antiproliferation
potency. GI50 values for PAX-loaded PNPs of PMCL-50 (r = 0.25) prepared using the bulk preparation method an
in the two-phase microfluidic reactor at different flow rates. Data
is shown for incubation times of 48, 72, and 96 h. Connecting brackets
indicate statistical comparisons between PNPs generated by different
methods. Single asterisks indicate p < 0.05; double
asterisks indicate p < 0.01; open circles indicate p > 0.05.Similar to our previous discussion of in vitro release times,
we
find that a combination of chemistry and processing enables optimization
of PNP antiproliferation effects. First, increasing the MCL content
in the hydrophobic block via chemical synthesis was shown to effect
a steady decrease in 48 and 96 h GI50 values (Figure ); next, microfluidic
processing of a selected copolymer (PMCL-50) led to a further decrease
in GI50 compared to that of the bulk preparation method
(Figure ). Taken
together, we conclude that a combination of high MCL content (chemical
control) and microfluidic manufacturing (processing control) should
provide routes to PNPs with optimum potency for MCF-7 antiproliferation.
Conclusions
New biocompatible block copolymers and improved
nanoparticle manufacturing
methods define two fronts in the concerted development of better polymeric
nanomedicines. In this study, we applied tandem efforts on both fronts,
bringing to bear both chemical and processing approaches to the drug
delivery problem. First, the synthesis, characterization, and self-assembly
of a series of biocompatible P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO amphiphilic block copolymers with variable MCL contents
in the hydrophobic block were described. The hydrophobic cores of
the resulting PNPs were less crystalline as the MCL content increased,
and the morphologies and sizes showed nonmonotonic trends with MCL
content due to the competing effects of core crystallinity and core
hydrophobicity. Loading the anticancer cargo drug PAX into PNPs of
the self-assembled block copolymers showed that in vitro drug release
rates decreased and MCF-7 antiproliferation effects increased as the
MCL content increased. Next, the effects of microfluidic manufacturing
at variable flow rate on the structure and drug delivery function
of the PAX-loaded PNPs was explored, indicating that shear processing
enables further control of release rates and enhances antiproliferation
potency. Along with showing specific routes to interesting biomolecular nanomaterials,
these results highlight the merits of developing more effective and
specific drug delivery PNPs through tangential efforts combining both
polymer synthesis and microfluidic manufacturing.
Experimental
Section
Materials
2-Methylcyclohexanon (99.0%), potassium peroxymonosulfate
(Oxone), sodium bicarbonate (99.0%), calcium hydride (95%), stannous
octonate (95%), PEG methyl ether (MePEG-OH, MW ∼5000), and
ε-caprolactone (97%) were all purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and
used for the synthesis of copolymers. NaCl (Bio Basic Canada, 99.9%),
KCl (Caledon, 99.0%), Na2HPO4 (Bio Basic Canada,
98.0%), and KH2PO4 (Caledon, 99.0%) were used
to prepare phosphate buffered saline (PBS, pH = 7.4). Methanol (Fisher
Chemical, 99.9%), methylene chloride (Fisher Chemical, 99.9%), toluene
(Caledon, 99.5%), ethyl ether (VWR, 99%), dimethylformamide (DMF,
Caledon, 99.8%), acetonitrile (Caledon, HPLC grade), t-butyl methyl ether (Sigma-Aldrich, HPLC grade), and dichloromethane
(DCM, EMD, HPLC grade) were used as received without further purification.
Paclitaxel (99.0%) was purchased from Polymed Inc.
Synthesis of
6-Methyl-ε-Caprolactone (MCL)
The
synthesis of the MCL monomer was modified from ref (60). To a 100 mL round-bottom
flask, 2-methylcyclohexanone (0.721 g, 6.43 mmol), methanol (20 mL),
water (20 mL), and sodium bicarbonate (3 g, 36 mmol) were added. The
vessel was vigorously stirred with a Teflon-coated magnetic stir bar.
Oxone (4 g, 13 mmol, ∼2 equiv) was added in two portions—the
second added 10 min after the first. After the addition of Oxone,
vigorous gas evolution occurred over 20 min, abated, and ceased after
∼1 h. The reaction was allowed to stir for 6 h, followed by
filtration, and was then extracted with methylene chloride. The organic
phase was concentrated under vacuum. A total of 0.82 g was recovered
(99% crude yield). The monomer was purified by fractional vacuum distillation
(the distillate temperature was 55 °C at 0.98 Torr) from calcium
hydride and stored over 3 Å activated molecular sieves. Additional
purification of 6-methyl-ε-caprolactone was needed to produce
monomodal high molecular weight PMCL by passing the distilled monomer
through a column of activated alumina under nitrogen. The 1H NMR spectra of the resulting MCL product is shown in Figure S1 (Supporting Information).
Synthesis of P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO Copolymers
The copolymers of P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO with different ratios of ε-caprolactone
(CL) and 6-methyl-ε-caprolactone (MCL) were synthesized via
ring opening polymerization of ε-CL and ε-MCL in the presence
of MePEG-OH as the macroinitiator and tin(II) 2-ethylhexanoate (stannous
octoate; Sn(Oct)2) as the catalyst. The polymerization
was carried out under a nitrogen atmosphere in a flame-dried round-bottom
flask equipped with a magnetic stirrer bar. In brief, following azeotropic
distillation in toluene, MePEG-OH (5 g, 1 mmol) was dissolved in a
75 mL volume of dried toluene; CL (3.63 g, 31.8 mmol), MCL (1.36 g,
10.6 mmol), and 0.7 wt % Sn(Oct)2 relative to the total
mass of lactones were added to the reaction vessel. The polymerization
was carried out at 110 °C for 24 h with continuous stirring.
The copolymers were isolated by precipitation in cold ether and dried
under vacuum. The copolymers were then characterized by 1H NMR and gel permeation chromatography (GPC). By changing the feed
ratio of MCL and CL, copolymers with different MCL/CL ratios were
synthesized. The molecular weight and MCL fraction, defined as the
number-averaged weight of MCL in a copolymer chain over the number-averaged
weight of the hydrophobic block, were calculated from the 1H NMR spectra. GPC characterization (Supporting Information, Figure S3) was done
by Advanced Polymer Materials Inc. with chloroform as eluent and a
series of PEO standards. PDI values (Mw/Mn) were calculated from Mn from NMR and Mw from GPC.
Copolymers with nominal MCL fractions of fMCL = 0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, and 1 are referred to as PMCL-0, PMCL-25,
PMCL-50, PMCL-75, and PMCL-100 in the text. Copolymer characteristics
are tabulated in Table .
Critical Water Content Determination
Critical water
contents were determined for solutions of the various copolymers in
DMF at an initial copolymer concentration of 0.33 wt % by dropwise
water addition and static light intensity measurement. Light scattering
experiments were performed on a Brookhaven Instruments photocorrelation
spectrometer equipped with a BI-200SM goniometer, a BI-9000AT digital
autocorrelator, and a Melles Griot He–Ne Laser (632.8 nm) with
a maximum power output of 75 mW, at a scattering angle of 90°
and a temperature of 23 °C. For each copolymer, a 0.66 wt % solution
in DMF was prepared and allowed to equilibrate overnight. This stock
solution was then filtered through 2 × 0.45 μm teflon syringe
filters (VWR) in series and then diluted to a final concentration
of 0.33 wt % using filtered DMF (2 × 0.20 μm Teflon syringe
filter, National Scientific). To initiate PNP formation, filtered
deionized water (2 × 0.20 μm Nylon syringe filters, National
Scientific) was added in successive 0.03–0.06 g quantities
to this solution. After each addition of water, the solution was vortexed
to help mixing, and then equilibrated for 15 min before the scattered
light intensity was measured. From the resulting plots of scattered
light intensity versus water concentration, cwc values were determined
by extrapolation of the steep increase in intensity to the baseline.
Titration plots and cwc determinations for each copolymer are shown
in Figure S4 (Supporting Information); the resulting
cwc values for each copolymer are tabulated in Table and were used as reference values for selecting
water contents for the bulk and microfluidic PNP preparations.
Bulk Preparation
of PAX-Loaded P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO
PNPs
PNPs of each block copolymer containing
various quantities of PAX were formed by the conventional method of
dropwise water addition. For these experiments, ∼3 g of 0.33
wt % copolymer solutions in DMF with various PAX/polymer (w/w) loading
ratios (r = 0, 0.10, 0.25, and 0.50) were prepared
and equilibrated overnight. Deionized water was added dropwise at
a rate of 80 μL/min to a target water content of cwc + 10 wt
% using a syringe pump with moderate stirring. After reaching the
target water content, PNPs were immediately quenched into a 10×
excess (by volume) of deionized water, followed by 12 h dialysis (6–8
kD MWCO dialysis membrane, Spectrum Laboratories) against deionized
water to remove residual DMF. Then, unencapsulated drug precipitate
was removed from the dialyzed PNPs by centrifugation at 16 000g for 10 min. Unless otherwise stated, all samples were
prepared in triplicate under the specified conditions.
Microfluidic
Reactor Fabrication
Negative masters were
fabricated on silicon wafers (Silicon Materials) using the negative
photoresist SU-8 100 (Microchem). A 150 μm thick SU-8 film was
spin-coated at 2000 rpm onto the silicon wafer and heated at 65 °C
for 12 min and then at 95 °C for 50 min. After the wafer was
cooled, a photomask was placed directly above and the wafer was exposed
to UV light for 100 s. Then, the UV-treated film was heated at 65
°C for 1 min and then at 95 °C for 20 min. Finally, the
silicon wafer was submerged in SU-8 developer (Microchem) and rinsed
with isopropanol until all unexposed photoresist was removed.Microfluidics chips were fabricated from poly(dimethyl siloxane)
(PDMS) using a SYLGARD 184 silicon elastomer kit (Dow Corning). For
fabrication of all PDMS chips, the elastomer and curing agent were
mixed at a 7:1 ratio and degassed under vacuum. The resulting mixture
was poured over a clean negative master chip in a Petri dish and further
degassed until all remaining air bubbles were removed. PDMS was heated
at 85 °C until cured (∼20 min), and then peeled from the
negative master; holes were punched through the reservoirs of the
resulting PDMS chip to allow for the insertion of tubing. A thin PDMS
film (substrate layer) was also made on a glass slide by spin-coating
a 20:1 elastomer/curing agent mixture followed by curing. The substrate
layer was then permanently bonded to the base of the microfluidic
reactor (channel layer) after both components were exposed to oxygen
plasma for 45 s. The resulting reactor (Figure S5) has a set channel depth of 150 μm and consists of
a sinusoidal mixing channel 100 μm wide and a sinusoidal processing
channel 200 μm wide, which is identical to the reactor described
in previous publications from our group.[74,75]
Flow Delivery and Control
Pressure-driven flow of liquids
to the reactor inlet was provided using 1 mL gastight syringes (Hamilton,
Reno, NV) mounted on syringe pumps (Harvard Apparatus, Holliston,
MA). The microfluidic chip was connected to the liquid syringes via
1/16th in. (OD) Teflon tubing (Scientific Products and Equipment,
ON). Gas flow was introduced to the chip via an Ar tank regulator
and a downstream regulator (Johnston Controls) for fine adjustments.
The chip was connected to the downstream regulator through a 1/16th
in. (OD)/100 μm (ID) Teflon tube (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor,
WA). The liquid flow rate (Qliq) was programmed
via the syringe pumps and the gas flow rate (Qgas) was fine-tuned via the downstream pressure regulator to
set the nominal total flow rates (Q) of 50, 100,
and 200 μL/min described in the main text. Because of the compressible
nature of the gas and the high gas/liquid interfacial tension, discrepancies
arise between the nominal (programmed) and actual values of Qgas, Qgas/Qliq, and the total flow rate (Qtotal). Therefore, actual values of Qgas, Qgas/Qliq, and Qtotal = Qgas + Qliq for each
microfluidic experiment (Table S1) were
calculated from the frequency of bubble formation and the average
volume of gas bubbles, determined from image analysis of the mean
lengths of liquid and gas plugs, Lliq and Lgas, respectively, under a given set of flow
conditions. This method of flow calculation has been previously described
by our group.[43] For all experiments, the
relative gas-to-liquid flow ratio Qgas/Qliq ∼1 and all actual Qtotal values were within 10% of the nominal Q values reported in the main text.Visualization
of the gas bubbles and liquid plugs within the microfluidic reactor
was achieved using an upright optical microscope (Omax) with a 10×
objective lens. Images were captured using a 2.07 megapixel PupilCam
camera (Ken-A-Vision) and mean lengths of liquid and gas plugs were
determined from the images using image analysis software (ImageJ).
Microfluidic Preparation of PAX-Loaded P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO PNPs
For the microfluidic preparation
of the PNPs, the following three fluid streams were combined to form
gas-segmented liquid plugs within the reactor: (1) 1.0 wt % P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO solution in DMF with PAX/polymer
loading ratio r = 0.25, (2) pure DMF, and (3) DMF/water.
The flow rates of the three liquid streams were equal for all runs
and the water content of the DMF/water stream was selected to yield
steady state on-chip concentrations of 0.33 wt % copolymer and cwc
+ 10.0 wt % water.For each PNP preparation, the sample was
collected from the chip into vials containing a 10× excess by
volume of deionized water, followed by 12 h dialysis (6–8 kD
MWCO dialysis membrane, Spectrum Laboratories) against deionized water
to remove residual DMF. Then, unencapsulated drug precipitate was
removed from the dialyzed PNPs by centrifugation at 16 000g for 10 min. Unless otherwise stated, all samples were
prepared in triplicate under the specified conditions.
Transmission
Electron Microscopy
Negatively stained
samples for TEM imaging were prepared by depositing a drop of block
copolymer PNP dispersion (typically ∼0.1 mg/mL) on a carbon-coated
300-mesh copper TEM grid followed by a drop of 1 wt % uranyl acetate
aqueous solution as a negative staining agent. Excess liquid was immediately
removed using lens paper, followed by drying of the remaining liquid
under ambient conditions. Imaging was performed on a JEOL JEM-1400
transmission electron microscope, operating at an accelerating voltage
of 80 kV and equipped with a Gatan Orius SC1000 CCD camera.For each copolymer and flow condition, morphologies and mean PNP
sizes were determined based on triplicate preparations; for each preparation,
morphology and size analysis was carried out using at least three
images taken in different regions of the grid. Mean dimensions for
each condition were determined from a total of 450 spheres and 150
cylinders. Averaging and statistical analysis of dimensions from TEM
images were conducted using ImageJ software.
Dynamic Light Scattering
Effective hydrodynamic diameters
of PAX-loaded PNPs were determined using dynamic light scattering
(DLS). DLS measurements were carried out using a Brookhaven Instruments
Zeta-Pals Analyzer equipped with a solid state Laser (660 nm) with
a maximum power output of 35 mW. All DLS measurements of PAX-loaded
PNPs were performed in pure water at an experimental temperature of
25 °C and at a scattering angle of 90°.For DLS sample
preparation, PAX-loaded PNPs were transferred to precleaned polystyrene
cuvettes, and then diluted with deionized water filtered through two
nylon syringe filters in series with nominal pore sizes of 0.2 μm
(National Scientific Company) if necessary. For each PNP preparation,
mean effective hydrodynamic sizes were determined from three measurements
of the autocorrelation function using cumulent analysis.
X-ray Diffraction
For XRD sample preparation, water
was removed from dialyzed PNPs by rotary evaporation at 25 °C
until solid films were obtained. The resulting films were then scraped
as a powder onto the XRD specimen holder. X-ray diffraction measurements
were performed on a Rigaku Miniflex diffractometer with a Cr source
(KR radiation, λ = 2.2890 Å), operating at 30 kV and 15
mA with a resolution of 0.05° (2θ) and a scan speed of
1°/min. X-ray diffraction profiles were collected for 2θ
ranging from 10 to 50°.Peak deconvolution was done using
Origin Pro 2015. Two characteristic reflections for both crystalline
PCL and crystalline PEO were identified and used to fix the positions
of four Lorentzian peak contributions to the fit;[45] another small Lorentzian peak contribution was used to
account for a small shoulder on the more intense PCL peak to obtain
a good fit. Thus, XRD data was fit to a sum of 6 Lorentzian functions:
3 peaks assigned to crystalline PCL (2θ = 32.5, 32.7, and 35.7),
2 peaks assigned to crystalline PEO (2θ = 29.2 and 35.2), and
1 peak (no fixed position) assigned to incoherent scattering from
amorphous copolymer (amorphous halo). Areal peak contributions from
the three components (crystalline PCL, crystalline PEO, and amorphous
copolymer) were then determined by integration and the percentage
of crystalline PCL (relative to the total copolymer mass), χPCL, was calculated using
Paclitaxel Loading Efficiency
Determination
PAX loading
efficiencies of PAX-loaded PNPs were determined by high-performance
liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS). Water was removed
from ∼2 g of a gravimetrically determined quantity of PNP dispersion
by rotary evaporation at 25 °C; then ∼0.2 g of a gravimetrically
determined quantity of acetonitrile was added to the resulting solid
and the mixture was vortexed for 2 min to ensure complete dissolution
of drug. HPLC-MS (Ultimate 3000, Thermo Scientific) with a C18 column
(Phenomenex Luna 5u C18), a constant eluent composition of 65/35 acetonitrile/water
(v/v) with 1 v/v % formic acid, and a diode array detector (DAD) set
at 227 nm, was then used to quantify the concentration of drug in
the resulting solutions. Sample injection volumes were 50 μL,
and the flow rate was 1 mL/min. A calibration curve for the DAD was
generated by analysis of 7 standards containing different known PAX
concentrations in acetonitrile. Quantities of PAX in the various dissolved
PNP solutions were determined and loading efficiencies and loading
levels were calculated for each sample using the following equations.
In Vitro PAX Release Kinetics
Experiments were carried
out to monitor the in vitro release of PAX from PAX-loaded PNPs using
HPLC-MS. In a typical experiment, after centrifugation to remove precipitated
drug, ∼2 g of a gravimetrically determined quantity of dialyzed
PAX-loaded PNPs were transferred to a 5 mL Float-A-Lyzer tube (SpectrumLabs,
MWCO 100 kDa) for each predetermined time. These tubes were then placed
in a 5 L beaker of the release medium, consisting of ∼4 L of
PBS; throughout the release experiments, the release medium was constantly
stirred using magnetic stirring and maintained at physiological temperature
(37 °C), and was changed every 2 days. At each predetermined
time (t = 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 72, and 96 h), the solution
of a single tube was transferred to a vial and then dried by rotary
evaporation at 25 °C. After that, ∼0.2 g of a gravimetrically
determined quantity of acetonitrile was added. The resulting solution
was injected for HPLC-MS analysis and PAX was detected by DAD. Percentages
of PAX released were calculated relative to the determined mass of
PAX in the PNPs at the t = 0 release time. Reported
release percentages at each release time are averages determined from
triplicate preparations under the specified conditions.
Hydrolytic
Degradation of PAX-Loaded P(MCL-co-CL)-b-PEO PNPs
During the in vitro release
of PAX into PBS (pH = 7.4, 37°C), aliquots of PAX-loaded PNPs
were removed at four different release times (t =
3, 6, 12, and 24 h) for analysis by DLS, to monitor hydrolytic degradation
of the PNPs.
Cell-Culture and Antiproliferation Assay
MCF-7 cells
were grown to ∼95% confluence in Dulbecco’s modified
Eagle’s medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum
in a 75 cm2 tissue culture flask, and maintained at 37
°C with 5% CO2 in a tissue culture incubator. Cells
were then trypsinized, collected, and pelleted by centrifugation (3
min at 160g). The cell pellet was then resuspended
in DMEM media, and the cell concentration was determined using a hemocytometer.
After the initial cell concentration was determined, the suspension
was diluted to 1.0 × 105 cells/mL. Next, a multichannel
pipette was used to fill a 96-well plate with 100 μL/well of
the diluted cell suspension. The cell-loaded plates were then incubated
for 24 h at 37 °C under an atmosphere of 5% CO2.According to calculated loading levels, aqueous stock dispersions
of each investigated sample of PAX-loaded PNPs were prepared by either
diluting or concentrating the original dispersions, such that 100×
dilution of the stock would result in a working PAX concentration
of 2 μg/mL. After 24 h of cell incubation, 6.5 μL aliquots
of stock dispersions of aqueous PAX-loaded PNPs or 6.5 μL of
free PAX dissolved in dimethylsulfoxide were diluted in 643.5 μL
of DMEM media to obtain a working PAX concentration of 2 μg/mL.
Serial dilutions were carried out, and then 100 μL of each diluted
stock was added to the appropriate well of the 96-well plate (containing
∼1.0 × 104 cells in 100 μL of media,
as described above), to generate a range of different concentrations
for analysis (1, 0.308, 0.095, 0.029, 0.0090, 0.0028, and 8.5 ×
10–4 μg/mL PAX). The treated cells were incubated
for 48, 72, or 96 h at 37 °C under a 5% CO2 atmosphere.
To determine cell viability, 20 μL of CellTiter-Blue was added
to each well after the predetermined incubation time was complete.
After the addition of CellTiter-Blue, the 96-well plates were incubated
for 4 h (5% CO2, 37 °C), and then fluorescence (λex = 560 nm; λem = 590 nm emission) readings
were recorded on a 96-well plate reader. Percent growth was calculated
for each well, based upon the following formulawhere S is the sample reading
(cells + drug + media), Bt is the average
reading for the untreated population of cells (cells + media), and B0 is the average reading of the untreated population
of cells at the beginning of the experiment (cells + media at t = 0). In the above equation, the numerator represents
cell proliferation in the presence of drug and the denominator represents
cell proliferation in the absence of drug. Percentage growth data
sets were fit using XLfit (IDBS) and by forcing fits through 100%
growth at low PAX concentrations. Reported GI50 values
were determined from a single PNP preparation, with each concentration
being tested 3 times (Figures S6–S8 and S11–S13 for percentage growth data). Standard errors
(used as error bars in Figures and 9) were obtained from the goodness
of fit for each percentage growth plot, using the statistical package
in XLfit. These same standard errors were then used to calculate the p-values used to determine statistical significance for
comparisons between measured growth inhibition results.
Authors: Amanda L Glover; Sarah M Nikles; Jacqueline A Nikles; Christopher S Brazel; David E Nikles Journal: Langmuir Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: Yan Geng; Paul Dalhaimer; Shenshen Cai; Richard Tsai; Manorama Tewari; Tamara Minko; Dennis E Discher Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2007-03-25 Impact factor: 39.213