Mika H Sipponen1,2, Heiko Lange1, Mariko Ago2, Claudia Crestini1. 1. Department of Chemical Science and Technologies, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via della Ricerca Scientifica, Rome 00133, Italy. 2. Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems, Aalto University, Vuorimiehentie 1, Espoo 02150, Finland.
Abstract
The mechanism of lignin nanoprecipitation and subsequent self-assembly was elucidated by studying generation of lignin nanoparticles (LNPs) from aqueous ethanol. LNP formation was found to follow a kinetically controlled nucleation-growth mechanism in which large lignin molecules formed the initial critical nuclei. Using this information, we demonstrate entrapment of budesonide in LNPs and subsequent pH-triggered and surfactant-responsive release of this synthetic anti-inflammatory corticosteroid. Overall, our results not only provide a promising intestinal delivery system for budesonide but also deliver fundamental mechanistic understanding for the entrapment of actives in LNPs with controlled size and release properties.
The mechanism of lignin nanoprecipitation and subsequent self-assembly was elucidated by studying generation of lignin nanoparticles (LNPs) from aqueous ethanol. LNP formation was found to follow a kinetically controlled nucleation-growth mechanism in which large lignin molecules formed the initial critical nuclei. Using this information, we demonstrate entrapment of budesonide in LNPs and subsequent pH-triggered and surfactant-responsive release of this synthetic anti-inflammatory corticosteroid. Overall, our results not only provide a promising intestinal delivery system for budesonide but also deliver fundamental mechanistic understanding for the entrapment of actives in LNPs with controlled size and release properties.
Lignins are natural
polyphenols emerging in large amounts from
pulp and paper and modern second-generation biorefinery processes.
The sustainability of future biorefineries largely depends on the
possible exploitation of the potentialities of lignin as the most
abundant renewable aromatic polymer.[1] To
date lignin is still mostly burnt to support energy needs of the processes.
The lack of significant lignin valorization is due to the low added
value applications developed so far. A sustainable lignin biorefinery
would credibly rely upon differentiated processes leading to high
value added chemicals and materials.[2−4] From this perspective,
the valorization and exploitation of intrinsic structural features
of lignin is of pivotal importance.Lignins are biocompatible
biopolymers exhibiting significant antioxidant
activity[5,6] and pH-dependent aqueous solubility.[7] They also present intrinsic amphiphilicity due
to the presence of phenolic and aliphatic hydroxyl groups, carboxylic
groups, and aromatic rings, respectively, which are present in various
quantities along polymeric and oligomeric backbones, depending on
the chosen type of technical lignin.[8−16] Such structural features strongly favor aggregation phenomena, exploitable
in the formation of nanostructures upon supramolecular self-assembly.[17−20] Among various promising applications, lignin particles in nanoscale
have been used as biocompatible photoluminescence emitters[21] and fluorescent sensors to detect formaldehyde
vapor.[22]Prior studies have fabricated
versatile lignin-based active carriers.
Nano- and microscale lignin capsules have been formed from vegetable
oil-in-water emulsions for the entrapment of coumarin 6 as a model
compound,[23−25] while lignin nanocapsules with an aqueous core were
synthesized for the entrapment of sulforhodamine.[26] Complex micelles from cationized pine alkali lignin and
sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate were used to entrap ibuprofen.[27] Lignin nanoparticles (LNPs), also referred to
as colloidal lignin particles (CLPs),[28,29] are compact
submicron spheres that have been used to entrap anticancer medicines,[30,31] the food flavor 2-propylpyridine,[32] and
the natural phenolic compound resveratrol.[33] Despite the scattered occurrence of such reports, to date little
is known about the mechanism of lignin nanoprecipitation and nanoparticle
self-assembly. There is a lack of general understanding of the driving
forces triggering particle formation and a potential subsequent release
of entrapped actives. This is especially relevant when targeting medical
applications that have to integrate a controlled release behavior
in the target tissue with a reliable supply of that active. Furthermore,
a mechanistic understanding of the active upload in LNP and the downstream
release is pivotal when attempting to couple specific activity of
the entrapped active with the intrinsic antioxidant (and therefore
anti-inflammatory) activity of lignin. Besides, previous studies used
odiferous Kraft lignin and nonbiocompatible solvents for the synthesis
of LNPs and performed chemical modifications without subsequent trace
analysis in the formed particles.The use of lignin with better
organoleptic and chemical properties
and the development of a process that involves only biocompatible
solvents are major issues that need attention to validate lignin-based
materials for biomedical applications. Sufficient organoleptic quality
is important for all delivery routes and especially crucial with respect
to oral dosing. Orally administered pharmaceuticals face varying acidity
from pH 1–2 in the stomach to pH 7–8 in the small intestine,
and pH 5–7 in the large intestine.[34] Coating and entrapment protect actives from the gastric acid, avoid
irritation of the stomach, and facilitate site-specific release.[35] The use of natural polymers for enteric coating
and as matrix-forming substances should be preferred over fossil oil-based
acrylic polymers that currently dominate this application.[36−43] So far, mainly various polysaccharides have been used,[36,39,40,44] but more recently research has seen an increasing general interest
in the use of lignin in biomaterial applications.[29,45−47]Interestingly, none of the aforementioned lignin-based
drug carriers
have attempted to target drug release in a system as complex as the
human gastrointestinal (GI) tract. One example of actives used in
this area is budesonide that is a synthetic corticosteroid for the
treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBS) such as Chron’s
disease.[48] Maximizing local activity of
this sparingly water-soluble drug in the colonic mucosa is a key challenge
for the controlled release.[49] Current commercial
budesonide formulations are capsules that among other excipients contain
gelatin and/or Eudragit acrylic polymers. Budesonide microsphere dispersions
have been prepared for inhalation products,[50] whereas nanoparticles formed from mesoporous silica, poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid, and acrylic resins have been prepared
for oral dosing.[38,43,51] However, information is lacking regarding the possible use of LNPs
in this application.This work was thus ultimately aiming at
understanding the mechanism
of formation of LNPs in a biocompatible system and exploiting this
insight for the development of efficient entrapment of budesonide
into LNPs suitable for a pH-triggered release protocol. The first
step of the study consisted of careful selection of the lignin source
in order to use a starting biopolymer containing significant amounts
of carboxylic acid groups, which dissociate in the pH region of intestinal
fluid and thus expectedly facilitate the release of actives. More
specifically, wheat straw soda lignin was selected as the carrier
biopolymer, and aqueous ethanol was used as a biocompatible solvent
system for the preparation of LNPs. Among the commercially available
lignins, wheat straw soda lignin was considered most suitable with
respect to the above-mentioned criteria. It contains 3.9 wt % of carbohydrates
(mainly arabinoglucuronoxylan, analyzed after 4% sulfuric
acid hydrolysis with HPLC) which were expectedly separated as insoluble
residues from the 70% ethanol-soluble fraction. Carboxylic groups
should provide control over dissolution of budesonide from the LNPs.
The carboxylic acid content of the soda lignin (1.18 mmol/g) is more
than twice the COOH content of an industrial softwood Kraft lignin.[28] Besides proving to be an efficient method for
entrapping budesonide for extended pH-dependent release, the formation
of LNPs was understood as a result of a kinetically controlled nucleation–growth
self-assembly mechanism.
Results
Controlling Lignin Nanoparticle
Preparation in Aqueous Ethanol
Preparation of LNPs commonly
employs aqueous organic solvents such
as tetrahydrofuran, dimethyl sulfoxide, and acetone. For biomedical
applications, utilization of biocompatible solvents is a prerequisite,
as any solvent residues may impart safety of the product. We selected
ethanol as the solvent and water as the nonsolvent for wheat straw
soda lignin and determined the important process conditions under
which spherical LNPs are formed. The solubility screening of soda
lignin provided initial hints of the regions in which lignin undergoes
self-assembly. The highest solubility of lignin (87%) was obtained
in 7:3 ethanol–water v/v solvent mixture that was selected
for this work (Figure S-1 in the Supporting
Information).The initial lignin concentration must be carefully
selected to obtain colloidal LNPs. Aggregation of particles beyond
3 g L–1 lignin concentrations was observed from
SEM images (Figure S-2) and DLS analysis
that indicated a linearly increasing average particle diameter within
the concentration range 1–20 g L–1, while
surface charge of the particles showed a parabolic trend (Figure a). Adding water
by means of a syringe pump into 3 g L–1 lignin solution
in 70% ethanol changed the appearance of the dispersions from transparent
to opaque, when the resulting volume fraction of ethanol decreased
from 62% to 13% (Figure b). The dilution rate exhibited another important effect on particle
size, when other factors were maintained constant (initial lignin
concentration 3 g L–1, final ethanol concentration
13%). There was a distinct pivot point at a dilution rate of 0.15
v v–1 min–1, above which the particle
diameter increased sharply (Figure c). In accordance with the SEM image analysis (mean
particle diameter 271 ± 110 nm, N = 160), DLS-based
particle size of 312 nm was obtained at the dilution rate of 0.06
v v–1 min–1.
Figure 1
Development of colloidal
lignin particles from aqueous ethanol
solution. (a) Effect of initial lignin concentration on particle size
and surface charge (ζ-potential) of lignin dispersions formed
by adding distilled water at a dilution rate of 0.06 v v–1 min–1. (b) Appearance of dispersions diluted at
a rate of 0.06 v v–1 min–1 (0.03
mL min–1) from 3 g L–1 initial
lignin concentrations in 70% ethanol solution to gradually decreasing
final ethanol and lignin concentrations. (c) Effect of dilution rate on particle size
of LNPs. Initial 3 g L–1 lignin solution in 7:3
ethanol–water (v/v) was diluted with distilled water using
a syringe pump. (d) SEM images show appearance of the dispersions
produced at dilution rates of 0.03 (d1–2), 1.16 (d3–4),
and >300 v v–1 min–1 (d5–6,
pipetting water into lignin solution).
Development of colloidal
lignin particles from aqueous ethanol
solution. (a) Effect of initial lignin concentration on particle size
and surface charge (ζ-potential) of lignin dispersions formed
by adding distilled water at a dilution rate of 0.06 v v–1 min–1. (b) Appearance of dispersions diluted at
a rate of 0.06 v v–1 min–1 (0.03
mL min–1) from 3 g L–1 initial
lignin concentrations in 70% ethanol solution to gradually decreasing
final ethanol and lignin concentrations. (c) Effect of dilution rate on particle size
of LNPs. Initial 3 g L–1 lignin solution in 7:3
ethanol–water (v/v) was diluted with distilled water using
a syringe pump. (d) SEM images show appearance of the dispersions
produced at dilution rates of 0.03 (d1–2), 1.16 (d3–4),
and >300 v v–1 min–1 (d5–6,
pipetting water into lignin solution).
Properties of LNPs
Stability of LNPs is important regarding
not only the scale-up and processability of the active formulation,
but also due to the contrastive acidity across the human GI tract.
Surface charge, conveniently measured as ζ-potential, predominantly
influences colloidal stability of nano- or microparticles. LNPs exhibited
decreasing ζ-potentials as the pH increased (Figure a). At neutral pH 7, LNPs,
more precisely the numerous carboxylic acid groups on their surfaces,
exhibited a ζ-potential of −43 mV, similar to the values
of LNPs prepared from Kraft lignin in aqueous THF.[28] Colloidal stability was also assessed by adjusting dispersions
at pH 2 through pH 10 with dilute hydrochloric acid or sodium hydroxide
and measuring particle sizes after 4 h standing of the dispersions
at room temperature. Particle sizes of LNPs decreased only slightly
when pH increased to 10, but aggregation occurred at pH 2.1, which
is close to the isoelectric point (Figure b).
Figure 2
Surface charge and stability
of LNPs. (a) ζ-potentials of
LNPs as a function of pH. (b) Particle diameters of LNPs at the native
pH 4.9 (dashed horizontal lines) and after 4 h holding at room temperature
of dispersions adjusted to pH 2–4 (dilute HCl) and pH 5–10
(dilute NaOH). (c) Volume (V) and intensity (I) distributions of particle sizes of LNPs produced at a
dilution rate 0.06 v v–1 min–1 (black solid line) and by rapid pouring of water to lignin solution
(dilution rate >300 v v–1 min–1, red dashed line). (d) UV–vis mass extinction coefficients
of soluble lignin, and LNPs produced at slow and high dilution rates.
Intrigued by the possibility to
control the particle size of LNPs, we prepared another sample by rapidly
pouring water into magnetically stirred lignin solution. As a result,
a clear transparent dispersion with mean particle size of 67 ±
1 nm was obtained (Figure c). UV–vis spectra of LNPs produced at contrasting
dilution rates of 0.03 v v–1 min–1 and approximately 300 v v–1 min–1 expectedly showed higher visible light absorption by the larger
particles, whereas the small particle exhibited rather similar spectrum
compared to the starting lignin solution in 70% ethanol. The significantly
lower mass extinction coefficients of LNPs compared to the values
of soluble lignin evidenced, however, that the majority of lignin
precipitated regardless of the dilution rate. The correlation of particle
size and dilution rate was confirmed by SEM imaging (Figure d).Surface charge and stability
of LNPs. (a) ζ-potentials of
LNPs as a function of pH. (b) Particle diameters of LNPs at the native
pH 4.9 (dashed horizontal lines) and after 4 h holding at room temperature
of dispersions adjusted to pH 2–4 (dilute HCl) and pH 5–10
(dilute NaOH). (c) Volume (V) and intensity (I) distributions of particle sizes of LNPs produced at a
dilution rate 0.06 v v–1 min–1 (black solid line) and by rapid pouring of water to lignin solution
(dilution rate >300 v v–1 min–1, red dashed line). (d) UV–vis mass extinction coefficients
of soluble lignin, and LNPs produced at slow and high dilution rates.
Mechanism of LNP Self-Assembly
and Nanoprecipitation
The observed effects of ethanol concentration
and dilution rate on
the formation of LNPs indicate kinetically controlled self-assembly,
which is postulated to involve electronic interactions between aromatic
moieties. If this reasoning is correct, then large lignin molecules
ought to precipitate at initial stages of water addition, as their
solubility decreases. To assess this, we determined molecular weight
distributions of soluble and insoluble lignin fractions generated
at different ethanol concentrations. At 62% ethanol concentration,
no solid fraction sedimented from the dispersion upon centrifugation
at 12000 rpm because of the small size of the colloidal particles.
An important molecular weight-dependent fractionation was observed
at lower ethanol concentrations. Compared to the molecular weight
distribution of the starting lignin soluble in 70% ethanol (dashed
line, Figure ), the
insoluble LNPs consisted of systematically larger lignin fragments.
There was a marked shift toward the polymeric region at 45% ethanol
concentration, while precipitation of gradually smaller molecules
occurred thereafter. The soluble fractions exhibited an opposite trend,
with increasing enrichment of low molecular weight fragments as the
ethanol concentration decreased.
Figure 3
Fractionation of lignin during LNP formation
into insoluble (black
line) and soluble (gray line) fractions from the starting solution
in 70% ethanol (red dashed line). GPC chromatograms show normalized
absorbance at 280 nm.
Fractionation of lignin during LNP formation
into insoluble (black
line) and soluble (gray line) fractions from the starting solution
in 70% ethanol (red dashed line). GPC chromatograms show normalized
absorbance at 280 nm.The accumulated insight on the LNP formation allowed us to
deduce
a mechanism for the self-assembly of lignin in ethanol–water
solvent mixture (Figure a). As could be anticipated from the distinct visual appearance of
LNPs (Figure b), clear
differences were observed in the particle size at different ethanol
concentrations (Figure b–c). Upon addition of water into lignin solution, the particle
formation initiates by molecular weight-dependent precipitation of
lignin, from high to low Mw. Small, approximately
40–70 nm, nuclei prevailed at ethanol concentrations from 62%
to 36% (Figure b).
At ethanol concentrations of 45%, their mean diameter was 65 ±
16 nm (SEM image analysis, N = 15). As shown by the
GPC results (Figure ), these nuclei formed from large molecules and further grew by aggregation
of these intermediate particles. At 36% ethanol concentration, SEM
images revealed crumpled particles with incompletely fused small particles
at their surfaces (Figure c). Such a tendency of LNPs to agglomerate was prevalent especially
at higher lignin concentrations that did not result in stable colloidal
dispersions (Figure S-2). Once the ethanol
concentration decreased to 26%, adsorption of smaller molecules rendered
the particles gradually smoother and the small nuclei were no longer
observed. While the majority of the LNPs were spherical (Figure d), irregular droplet-shaped
particles occasionally formed due to the incomplete fusing of the
particles. Finally, at 13% ethanol concentration, there were few small
particles (<50 nm), with the majority of particles in the size
range of 250–350 nm (Figures b and S-2). Other analyses,
such as the determination of surface area and porosity have not been
obtained at this stage. Variations in surface characteristics or pore
size distributions as a function of the production protocols will
be studied in due course as part of ongoing research.
Figure 4
Lignin nanoparticle formation
in ethanol–water system. (a)
Schematic mechanism of slow self-assembly and rapid nanoprecipitation.
Collision of the soft nuclei of 10–50 nm and their fusing with
larger particles lead to the growth of crumpled nanoparticle spheres.
Spherical colloidal lignin particles form upon adsorption of low molecular
weight and more polar lignin fragments on the preformed particles
when the ethanol concentration falls below 30%. (b) SEM images of
LNP dispersions (dilution rate 0.06 v v–1 min–1) at varying ethanol concentrations. (c) SEM image
of crinkly particles in the LNP dispersion at 36% ethanol concentration.
Scale bars = 500 nm.
Lignin nanoparticle formation
in ethanol–water system. (a)
Schematic mechanism of slow self-assembly and rapid nanoprecipitation.
Collision of the soft nuclei of 10–50 nm and their fusing with
larger particles lead to the growth of crumpled nanoparticle spheres.
Spherical colloidal lignin particles form upon adsorption of low molecular
weight and more polar lignin fragments on the preformed particles
when the ethanol concentration falls below 30%. (b) SEM images of
LNP dispersions (dilution rate 0.06 v v–1 min–1) at varying ethanol concentrations. (c) SEM image
of crinkly particles in the LNP dispersion at 36% ethanol concentration.
Scale bars = 500 nm.
Budesonide Entrapment in LNPs
Entrapment of budesonide
in LNPs was studied under the optimized self-assembly conditions and
compared to the nanoprecipitation approach. The first obvious task
was to determine the weight proportion of budesonide that can be entrapped
in LNPs. Budesonide crystallized from a 7:3 v/v ethanol–water
solution when water was added by means of a syringe pump in the absence
of lignin (Figure S-3). Some crystals and
aggregated LNPs were observed at 50% budesonide weight fraction (relative
to total weight of budesonide-LNPs), while at 25% only a few aggregates
were present. The 10% budesonide concentration was used as a loading
ratio hereafter.Entrapment efficiencies (EE) of 34–37%
were determined from the particles washed by repeated centrifugal
filtration (30 kDa membranes) in water dispersions (Figure ). Importantly, similar EE
values were obtained regardless of the contrastive LNP particle diameters
of 312 and 67 nm resulting from the regular self-assembly and the
nanoprecipitation approach, respectively. These values mean that the
oral dosing of approximately 250 mg of budesonide–LNPs suffices
to meet the required daily dosing of 9 mg, encouraging further development
of LNP-based controlled release products.
Figure 5
Entrapment
efficiencies (EE) of budesonide in LNPs. Comparison
of EE when using fresh budesonide solution (mean ± SD, N = 4), reused budesonide from permeate obtained in the
purification step as such (mean ± absolute deviation, N = 2), or after prior treatment with an ion-exchange resin
that adsorbed lignin (mean ± absolute deviation, N = 2). Nanoprecipitation consisted of rapid pouring of water into
the solution mixture of fresh budesonide and lignin (mean ± SD, N = 4). SD, standard deviation.
Comparison of the
essentially similar EE values achieved using
contrastive self-assembly and nanoprecipitation methods suggest that
budesonide entrapment was a matrix-type process, since the increased
surface area of the smaller LNPs did not influence the EE. The permeate
fractions of two repeated entrapment experiments contained 67 ±
1% of the initial amount of budesonide, signifying a mass balance
closure of 97%. Regarding the anticipated repeated reuse of budesonide
from the permeate fraction, it would be eventually required to reduce
the associated soluble lignin concentration. As a possible solution,
we demonstrated that it is possible to reduce the lignin concentration
by 65% by adsorption on Amberlite IRA-900 Cl ion-exchange resin (Figure S-4). The resin-purified budesonide fraction
exhibited a similar EE compared to the use of fresh budesonide (Figure ). The overall mass
recovery yield of purified LNPs (58 ± 1% N =
2) was not affected by the incorporation of budesonide (51 ±
7% N = 5). It is noted that mass recovery yields
based on lignin quantification by UV−vis spectrophotometry
(78 ± 7%, N = 3) were higher than that obtained
by weighing the lyophilized materials. For the active release study,
the larger LNPs from the self-assembly process were selected due to
the ease of the liquid–solid separation for HPLC analysis.Entrapment
efficiencies (EE) of budesonide in LNPs. Comparison
of EE when using fresh budesonide solution (mean ± SD, N = 4), reused budesonide from permeate obtained in the
purification step as such (mean ± absolute deviation, N = 2), or after prior treatment with an ion-exchange resin
that adsorbed lignin (mean ± absolute deviation, N = 2). Nanoprecipitation consisted of rapid pouring of water into
the solution mixture of fresh budesonide and lignin (mean ± SD, N = 4). SD, standard deviation.
Triggered Release of Budesonide under Simulated Physiological
Conditions
Budesonide release was determined at 37 °C
under acidity conditions simulating pH of the stomach, small intestine,
and colon. The active release involved disintegration of LNPs, and
hence dissolution of lignin, which challenged HPLC analysis of budesonide.
The method developed to overcome overlapping budesonide and lignin
peaks consisted in using an alkaline mobile phase, which led to a
rapid elution of lignin due to its charged groups and higher solubility
in the aqueous eluent compared to that of budesonide (Figure S-5a). Another important point that needed
attention was the aqueous solubility of budesonide. To ensure that
the active release rate from LNPs was not solubility-limited, the
theoretical maximum concentration was set at 3.6 mg L–1, which was within the range of linear dissolution kinetics regardless
of different pH values (Figure S-5b).The release rate of budesonide from the LNPs increased with increasing
pH, approaching the dissolution rate of the pure drug at pH 7.4 under
saturation conditions (Figure a). The released proportion plateaued in 3 h at 83% at pH
7.4 and remained at this level until 25 h. In contrast, particles
incubated at pH 2 and pH 5.5 exhibited much lower 25 h extents of
release of 57% and 74%, respectively. The particles aggregated at
pH 2 (Figure S-6, Figure b), which is beneficial since it reduces
the available surface area and reduced the diffusion rate of budesonide
from the particles under acidic conditions. The release half time
(t1/2) were 10 h, 90 min, and 5 min at
pH 2, 5.5, and 7.4. The release kinetics are favorable if compared
to the acidity across the GI tract. The short residence time of less
than 2 h in the stomach expectedly retains the majority of budesonide
until the small intestine in which alkaline pancreatic fluid triggers
the release by increasing pH and additionally by providing surface-active
lecithin.
Figure 6
Active release from lignin nanoparticles. (a) Release kinetics
of entrapped budesonide from LNPs at pH 2 (0.05 M HCl–KCl),
5.5 (0.05 M sodium phosphate buffer), and 7.4 (0.05 M sodium phosphate
buffer). Mean values ± average deviations of two replicate experiments
are shown. (b) Released antioxidant activity (as gallic acid equivalents,
GAE). The vertical dashed lines indicates the point of SDS supplementation
(20 g L–1 in the dispersion). Dashed curves are
logarithmic fits extrapolated to 30 h. Error bars indicate absolute
deviations from the mean.
Active release from lignin nanoparticles. (a) Release kinetics
of entrapped budesonide from LNPs at pH 2 (0.05 M HCl–KCl),
5.5 (0.05 M sodium phosphate buffer), and 7.4 (0.05 M sodium phosphate
buffer). Mean values ± average deviations of two replicate experiments
are shown. (b) Released antioxidant activity (as gallic acid equivalents,
GAE). The vertical dashed lines indicates the point of SDS supplementation
(20 g L–1 in the dispersion). Dashed curves are
logarithmic fits extrapolated to 30 h. Error bars indicate absolute
deviations from the mean.The effect of surface-active substances on the release of
the active
cargo was tested by supplementing SDS in the dispersions at the time
point of 30 h at which the active was incompletely released. Regardless
of the pH, budesonide was released within 1 h from the SDS supplementation
that disintegrated the particles (Figure S-5c). At pH 7.4, the released percentage of the active after the SDS
trigger was 10%, while at pH 2 it was 40% (Figure a).Dissolution of lignin occurred
in parallel with the release of
budesonide. The antioxidant activity (AA) profiles measured from the
supernatants revealed kinetically increasing AA at pH 7.4, whereas
at pH 5.5 there was only a slight increasing trend. Unaltered AA levels
at pH 2 resulted from the low solubility of lignin under acidic conditions
(Figure b). Again,
SDS served as a trigger, but in this case, the final AA levels correlated
with the pH. The value of 1.11 mmol GAE g–1 lignin
at pH 7.4 is five times as high as the value of LNPs (0.24 ±
0.00, N = 3) formed when precipitating lignin in
the ABTS•+ radical cation solution. This difference
is due to the dissolution of the majority of LNPs in the presence
of SDS (Figure S-5c). Without SDS, the
mean diameter of the particles after 25 h stirring at pH 7.4 was 264
± 70 nm (SEM image analysis, N = 683) that is
only slightly lower than the particle size of LNPs without budesonide
(312 nm by DLS). Therefore, the majority of budesonide was released
regardless of the incomplete disintegration of the particles. In addition
to particles that appeared intact, SEM images showed disintegrated
LNP debris (Figure S-5c). Such material
may have arisen from the dissolution of surface adsorbed charged lignin
fragments that increased porosity of LNPs and liberated budesonide
that was observed from dried release dispersions as recrystallized
flakes and small NPs with a diameter of 50 ± 7 nm (N = 29).
Discussion
There are two important
contributions from this work. The first
finding relates to the mechanism of lignin nanoparticle formation.
We studied the effects of lignin concentration, dilution rate, and
nonsolvent concentration on LNP properties and molecular weight fractionation.
Consequently, we propose a novel mechanism of lignin self-assembly
in aqueous ethanol solution involving a nucleation–growth process
that has occupied colloid scientists for a long time.[52]LNP formation via a nucleation–growth route
has been considered
earlier,[19] but our results show that the
nucleation initiates by precipitation of the large lignin fragments
as precursors for the critical nuclei. The growth proceeds via collision-driven
aggregation and fusing of the particles into gradually larger crinkly
intermediate particles. The formation completes by two parallel events:
orientation of the hydrophilic segments toward the particle surfaces
and adsorption of small polar lignin fragments on the existing particles.
Our GPC and SEM analyses provide indirect support for the final adsorption
step. This clarifies the mystique that has prevailed around LNP formation
in aqueous organic media.There are fragments of prior data
that support our conclusions,
but a lucid synthesis of the LNP formation mechanism has been lacking.
We showed that molecular weight governs the initiation of lignin precipitation
when ethanol concentration decreases. A similar trend of molecular
weight fractionation was previously observed from the precipitation
of aqueous ethanol solutions of Kraft lignin by adding water,[53] but that work did not study particle formation.
The inverse nonlinear correlation between the dilution rate and particle
diameter when adding water into a solution of lignin in organic solvents
has been shown before,[54,55] but the important correlation
to molecular weight of lignin has been missing. Xiong et al. proposed
that LNPs form by layer-by-layer (LbL) mechanism from THF upon adding
water as nonsolvent.[56] It is possible that
adsorption-based particle growth occurred in parallel with particle–particle
combination in our case of aqueous ethanol. However, SEM data suggest
that adsorption plays a more significant role in the finalization
stage of the LNP formation. We decided to use SEM imaging to observe
directly particle morphologies at various ethanol concentrations,
because DLS can give ambiguous data from colloidally unstable systems
such as incompletely formed LNPs.SEM images of LNPs (Figure b and c) exhibit
strikingly similar patterns of particle ripening
at decreasing ethanol concentration despite the different lignin sources
and coprecipitation of electrostatic complexes of cationic Kraft lignin
and sodium dodecyl benzenesulfonate.[27] The formation of complex micelles was ascribed to the self-assembly
via electronic interactions between aromatic moieties, which drives
the LNP formation in THF using water as a nonsolvent,[19,56] and are reasoned to be central also in the present work. Li et al.[27] indicated that the complex micelles grow by
aggregation of small particles, and suggested that the process completes
by the collapse of the loosely associate hydrophobic segments to the
micelle core. While minimization of surface energy is essential for
the LNP formation as well, our results revealed the important role
of molecular weight and collision-driven growth of the nuclei. Future
work should assess whether this mechanism can be generalized to LNP
formation in other solvent–nonsolvent systems.The second
significant contribution from this work is the developed
one-pot process for the facile entrapment of budesonide in LNPs, purification
of the particles, and reuse of the active. The release of the active
cargo was demonstrated by pH and surfactant triggers. The importance
of matching the lignin source to the target applications is frequently
undervalued. We used sulfur-free wheat straw soda lignin without chemical
modifications. Instead of using cytotoxic methanol in LNP preparation,[33] the demonstrated use of ethanol is another advantage
of the current work. Purification of the nanoscale particles from
the solvent and the remaining soluble actives is equally important,
yet often neglected. We demonstrated that centrifugation filtration
is a convenient method to remove practically all of the ethanol and
budesonide for reuse. This is important because, in addition to the
processing costs, it is important to develop a closed cycle for the
entrapment of expensive pharmaceutical actives.The LNP concentration
that remains colloidal when preparing particles
from aqueous ethanol solution is slightly higher compared to that
of water-to-ethanol precipitation of Kraft lignin[55] but lower compared to the concentrations of dispersions
obtained from aqueous THF solutions using water as a nonsolvent.[28,54] However, neither the low LNP concentration nor the moderate loading
percentage represents bottlenecks for this technology, since the daily
dosing of budesonide is only 9 mg. This illustrates the importance
of finding matching application for the LNPs.The release rate
of budesonide from LNPs increased with increasing
pH. This is explained by the presence of ionizablecarboxylic acid
(pKa 2–5) and phenolic hydroxyl
(pKa 7–11) groups[57] in soda lignin. At pH 2, only 27% of budesonide was released
in 2 h. This is slightly more compared to the release of 20% budesonide
from NPs formed from Eudragit acrylic resins[43] and significantly less compared to the burst release of 75% of loaded
budesonide from PLGA nanoparticles at pH 1.2 in 2 h.[38] These works employed an emulsion solvent evaporation method
for nanoparticle preparation and coating, which used ethyl acetate,
acetone, and ethanol as solvents, and is more complicated than our
one-pot coprecipitation approach. However, Eudragit S100-coating of
budesonide-loaded PLGA NPs reduced the extent of release to 18% after
2 h in pH 1.2. Coating might enable tailoring of the sustained release
properties of budesonide-loaded LNPs. The compression coating method
using Albizia procera gum could be
a starting point.[44]The burst release
of budesonide was faster at pH 7.4 compared to
the release from mixed Eudragit polymer NPs, but almost similar compared
to the release from NPs consisting of pH-responsive polymers only.[43] The excellent stability of the budesonide–LNPs
at pH 7.4 for up to 48 h (Figure S-5c)
suggests that ionization of the carboxylic groups is not sufficient
to disintegrate the aggregated lignin molecules. Compared to the dissolution
rates observed under acidic conditions, swelling of LNPs and desorption
of their outermost lignin layers may have facilitated release of budesonide.
Consequently, 83% of budesonide was released after 10 h stirring in
the release medium. Previously, entrapment of budesonide in cellulose
acetate butyrate led to complete release within 7 h at pH 7.5.[37] Embedding the microparticles in Eudragit S polymer
matrix reduced the dissolution rate, but in this case only 70% was
released after 24 h. LNPs disintegrated more extensively in the presence
of SDS that expectedly weakened intermolecular association forces.
All of these data indirectly support our findings on the LNP formation.Among lignin materials, the dissolution of ibuprofen from cationic
lignin-sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate micelles[27] was slower compared to our results with budesonide, which
can be due to the electrostatic interactions between the quaternary
ammonium groups and carboxylate groups of ibuprofen. Complete release
of benzazulene and sorafenib, two poorly water-soluble hydrophobic
drugs, was observed from LNPs at pH 7.4 after 2 and 6 h, respectively.[23] These authors reported elevated solubility rates
in the presence of lignin, which was detected in the present work
with budesonide (Figure S-7). It appears,
therefore, that facilitated codissolution of actives may be a more
general intrinsic property of amphiphilic lignins.
Conclusions
We elucidated the formation mechanism to enable preparation of
lignin nanoparticles with controlled properties for the entrapment
and release of actives. The practical benefit of this new knowledge
is the control over size and shape of the particles, as well as insight
into the entrapment of actives in the course of molecular weight-dependent
precipitation of lignin fragments. Budesonide was entrapped in LNPs
and its pH- and surfactant-dependent release was demonstrated. Under
physiological conditions, secretion of alkaline pancreatic juice that
increases pH in the small intestine between pH 7–8 is a likely
trigger for the release of the active. Overall, our results demonstrate
that LNPs provide a feasible platform for the entrapment and controlled
the release of actives, especially those with low required dosing
such as numerous steroids drugs. From the point of view of lignin
valorization, biomedical applications will involve limited amounts.
However, by increasing knowledge on the possible controlled release
systems, it may be possible to transfer some of the developed technologies
to high-volume applications in other fields of sustainable chemistry,
e.g. in agriculture and food.
Experimental Section
Materials
Wheat straw soda lignin was obtained from
GreenValue SA (Switzerland). Size-exclusion chromatography indicated
that this soda lignin has a weight-average molecular weight of 2820
g mol–1,[58] while 31P nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy analysis[59,60] showed the following functionalities (in mmol g–1): COOH 1.18, phenolic OH 2.55, aliphatic OH 1.92.[61] Pharmaceutical grade budesonide was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich.
Anhydrous ethanol and all reagent grade chemicals were used as such,
if not stated otherwise.
Colloidal Lignin Nanoparticle Preparation
All experiments
were made using wheat straw soda lignin dissolved in ethanol–water
7:3 v/v solvent mixture that was found to maximize the solubility
of this lignin (Figure S-1). Development
of LNP formation procedure consisted of diluting a magnetically stirred
(500 rpm) lignin solution in ethanol–water 7:3 v/v solvent
mixture by adding distilled water dropwise using a syringe pump (Model
BSP 99, Braintree Scientific, Inc.). The initial lignin concentration,
dilution rate, and final volume fraction of ethanol were varied. Alternatively,
a “nanoprecipitation” was done by pouring water rapidly
into a magnetically stirred lignin solution.
Budesonide Entrapment in
LNPs
A typical procedure for
active entrapment in LNPs consisted of adding 35 mL of distilled water
as nonsolvent at a dilution rate of 0.06 v v–1 min–1 to a 10 mL solution of lignin (3 g L–1) and budesonide (0.33 g L–1) in ethanol–water
7:3 v/v. Stirring rate was maintained at 500 rpm at room temperature.
Another approach employed the nanoprecipitation with distilled water
as nonsolvent of the solution mixture of lignin and budesonide in
ethanol–water 7:3 v/v. The final ethanol concentration was
16% in both of the procedures. The colloidal dispersions were purified
and concentrated by repeated 5–10 min centrifugal utltrafiltration
using 30 kDa Amicon Ultra-15 membranes (Millipore). Entrapment efficiency
was determined by extracting 3 mg of freeze-dried budesonide-LNPs
with 1 mL of ethanol under sonication during 1 h, followed by 5 h
rotation mixing at room temperature to ensure complete release of
the active.
Ion-Exchange Resin Purification of Budesonide
for Reuse
The permeate fraction from the washing step of
budesonide-LNPs was
evaporated to a small volume under reduced pressure and dissolved
in ethanol–water 7:3 v/v. Ten milliliters of this solution
was rotated with 5 g of Amberlite IRA-900 Cl ion-exchange resin during
4 h at room temperature. The resin was separated from the liquid phase
by filtration and washed with ethanol–water 7:3 v/v and distilled
water. The liquid fractions were combined, evaporated to a small volume
under reduced pressure, and dissolved in ethanol–water 7:3
v/v. After analysis of budesonide and lignin concentrations, this
purified fraction was used in the entrapment of budesonide in LNPs.
Particle Analysis
A Gemini Supra 35 Leo Scanning Electron
Microscope (SEM) was used to record images of the particle dispersions.
Samples deposited on aluminum surfaces were sputtered with gold (Emitech
K550X) and imaged at an acceleration voltage of 5 kV using a secondary
electron detector. ImageJ software was used to analyze particle diameter
from the SEM images. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) analysis of particle
sizes and surface charges of LNPs and budesonide–LNPs utilized
a Malvern Zetasizer Nano-ZS90 instrument. A dip cell probe was used
in ζ-potential measurements. Mean values of at least three measurements
of Z-average particle diameters and ζ-potentials are reported.
Budesonide Release Study
The release of entrapped budesonide
from LNPs was studied in aqueous 0.05 M buffer solutions to simulate
acidity in the stomach (pH 2, HCl–KCl buffer), small intestine
(pH 7.4, sodium phosphate buffer), and colon (pH 5.5, sodium phosphate
buffer). One milliliter of purified budesonide–LNPs was stirred
with 9 mL of the buffer solution at 150 rpm in a thermostatic water
bath at 37 °C. After 30 h, an aliquot was mixed with sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS, concentration of 20 g L–1 in the dispersion)
and incubated separately at 37 °C. Homogeneous aliquots were
taken at various time intervals and centrifuged for 5 min at 12000
rpm to separate particles from the liquid phase that was passed through
a 0.45 μm syringe filter. Soluble budesonide was analyzed by
HPLC using an YMC-Pack Polymer C18 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm, 6
μm particle size) eluted with a mixture of (A) 1% formic acid
in methanol and (B) 0.05 M aq sodium borate buffer (pH 11) in a volume
ratio of 75:25. The run time at 0.3 mL min–1 flow
rate was 60 min. A photodiode array detector signal at 254 nm was
used to detect budesonide at room temperature. The HPLC calibration
curves are given in the SI (Figure S-7).
ABTS Antioxidant Assay
Undiluted liquid phases separated
from the budesonide release dispersions were subjected to the antioxidant
assay[62] with a few modifications. The aqueous
aliquot, calibration standard, or distilled water blank (10 μL)
was mixed with 1 mL with the ABTS•+ radical cation
solution at 30 °C. The absorbance at 730 nm was measured exactly
one min after mixing of the components using a spectrophotometer with
a thermostatic cell container equilibrated at 30 °C. Reduction
in the absorbance was calculated relative to the blank value of 0.708.
Two replicates from the budesonide release study were measured as
single determinations, while triplicate measurements were made for
LNPs formed in situ from aqueous ethanol solution of soda lignin.
Aqueous gallic acid in the concentration range of 0.15–1.67
mM was used for calibration (Figure S-8). Mean values were calculated and expressed as gallic acid equivalents
(GAE) relative to the dry weight of lignin present in the original
dispersion, i.e. GAE/lignin (mmol g–1).
Lignin Characterization
Gel permeation chromatography
(GPC) analysis of lignin employed a PLgel 5 μm MiniMIX-C column
(Agilent, 250 mm × 4.6 mm) eluted at 70 °C with DMSO containing
0.1% lithium chloride. The run time at 0.25 mL min–1 flow rate was 20 min. Molecular weights were calculated from a linear
calibration (R2 = 0.999) constructed with
poly(styrenesulfonic acid)polymers (4.3–2600 kDa) and tannins
(170–941 Da).
Authors: Maija-Liisa Mattinen; Juan José Valle-Delgado; Timo Leskinen; Tuomas Anttila; Guillaume Riviere; Mika Sipponen; Arja Paananen; Kalle Lintinen; Mauri Kostiainen; Monika Österberg Journal: Enzyme Microb Technol Date: 2018-01-10 Impact factor: 3.493
Authors: Timo Leskinen; Joanna Witos; Juan José Valle-Delgado; Kalle Lintinen; Mauri Kostiainen; Susanne K Wiedmer; Monika Österberg; Maija-Liisa Mattinen Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: O O Thomsen; A Cortot; D Jewell; J P Wright; T Winter; F T Veloso; M Vatn; T Persson; E Pettersson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-08-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Arthur J Ragauskas; Gregg T Beckham; Mary J Biddy; Richard Chandra; Fang Chen; Mark F Davis; Brian H Davison; Richard A Dixon; Paul Gilna; Martin Keller; Paul Langan; Amit K Naskar; Jack N Saddler; Timothy J Tschaplinski; Gerald A Tuskan; Charles E Wyman Journal: Science Date: 2014-05-16 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Patrícia Figueiredo; Mika H Sipponen; Kalle Lintinen; Alexandra Correia; Alexandros Kiriazis; Jari Yli-Kauhaluoma; Monika Österberg; Anne George; Jouni Hirvonen; Mauri A Kostiainen; Hélder A Santos Journal: Small Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 13.281
Authors: J Y Zhu; Umesh P Agarwal; Peter N Ciesielski; Michael E Himmel; Runan Gao; Yulin Deng; Maria Morits; Monika Österberg Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 6.040
Authors: Xue Zhang; Maria Morits; Christopher Jonkergouw; Ari Ora; Juan José Valle-Delgado; Muhammad Farooq; Rubina Ajdary; Siqi Huan; Markus Linder; Orlando Rojas; Mika Henrikki Sipponen; Monika Österberg Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 6.988