The solubilization of lyophobic compounds in block copolymer micelles has been extensively investigated but remains only partially understood. There is a need to understand the fundamental parameters that determine the spatial distribution of the solubilized compounds within the micelles. Controlling this feature is a key aspect in the design of drug delivery systems with tailored release properties. Using Scheutjens-Fleer self-consistent field (SF-SCF) computations, we found that solubilization is regulated by a complex interplay between enthalpic and entropic contributions and that the spatial distribution can be controlled by the concentration and solubility of the guest compound in the dispersion medium. Upon solubilization, a characteristic change in size and mass of the micelles is predicted. This can be used as a fingerprint to indirectly assess the spatial distribution. Based on these findings, we developed two experimental protocols to control and assess the spatial distribution of lyophobic compounds within block copolymer micelles.
The solubilization of lyophobic compounds in block copolymer micelles has been extensively investigated but remains only partially understood. There is a need to understand the fundamental parameters that determine the spatial distribution of the solubilized compounds within the micelles. Controlling this feature is a key aspect in the design of drug delivery systems with tailored release properties. Using Scheutjens-Fleer self-consistent field (SF-SCF) computations, we found that solubilization is regulated by a complex interplay between enthalpic and entropic contributions and that the spatial distribution can be controlled by the concentration and solubility of the guest compound in the dispersion medium. Upon solubilization, a characteristic change in size and mass of the micelles is predicted. This can be used as a fingerprint to indirectly assess the spatial distribution. Based on these findings, we developed two experimental protocols to control and assess the spatial distribution of lyophobic compounds within block copolymer micelles.
Block copolymer micelles
are often used to disperse and transport
compounds at concentrations exceeding their solubility in the medium.
This strategy is widely applied in industrial formulations[1] and has great potential for transportation and
targeted delivery of drugs in vivo.[2−5] Solubilization of guest compounds has been
studied extensively during the last few decades. On the basis of spectroscopic
studies [UV–visible,[6,7] nuclear magnetic resonance
(NMR)],[8] small-angle scattering experiments
(small-angle X-ray scattering[9] and small-angle
neutron scattering[8]), and theoretical considerations,[10] it has been proposed that the solubilized compound
can be located in two regions of the micelles: within the interior
of the core and near the core–corona interface. This spatial
distribution (or solubilization region) is of key importance as it
determines the local environment of the guest molecules. This can
dramatically affect, for instance, the release kinetics of the encapsulated
compounds in drug delivery systems.[11,12] The release
of compounds adsorbed at the core–corona interface is typically
fast,[11] whereas the release of compounds
solubilized into the core can be very slow,[11] as diffusion throughout the dense desolvated core of the micelle
is required prior to release in solution.[11] Hence, the ability to control the solubilization region is crucial
for the design of drug delivery systems with controlled release properties.The factors controlling the solubilization region are however only
partially understood, as most of the efforts have been made to understand
what controls the solubilization efficiency. Some studies[13,14] hypothesize that the latter is governed by specific interactions
between the guest and the micelle, and semiempirical predictive models
have been developed accordingly.[14] Although
these models provide useful insights into the compatibility between
the guest and the micelles, they do not enable accurate quantitative
predictions of the encapsulation efficiency and guest distribution.[14] In other studies, the solubilization is treated
as a partition equilibrium between the solvent and the micelle,[15−17] thus considering the latter as a macroscopic phase where there is
no distinction between different solubilization regions. Both approaches
have another fundamental limitation in common: they do not take into
account the change in free energy of the micelle because of the presence
of solubilized material. This aspect has been included in the theoretical
approach of Nagarajan and co-workers,[10,18] but their
model does not provide quantitative information about the spatial
distribution of the guest compounds within the micelle.The
Scheutjens–Fleer self-consistent field[19,20] (SF-SCF) theory is a numerical lattice-based method[19] which allows computing the equilibrium properties of self-assembled
block copolymer structures in the presence of guest compounds.[20−22] The SF-SCF computations are typically very fast (only a few seconds
are required to compute the equilibrium properties of a single self-assembled
structure); therefore, they are very suitable to systematically study
solubilization.The radial concentration profiles (see Figure ) generated from
the computations describe
the spatial arrangement of the components inside and outside the self-assembled
structure and can be used to assess the preferred solubilization region,
while simultaneously monitoring any change in the micelle structure.
Furthermore, the SF-SCF method provides access to important information,
such as the number of copolymer chains per micelle at equilibrium
(also known as aggregation number, Nagg) and the critical micelle concentration. With the SF-SCF method,
we investigate which parameters control the solubilization and local
distribution of a model guest compound in diblock copolymer micelles
dispersed in a solvent and we identify a signature effect on the micelle
equilibrium properties, which will be discussed in detail.
Figure 1
Solubility
of guest compound (G) and concentration profile for
the model A–B micelle: (a) solubility of G (ϕG*) as a function
of χGS (ϕG* = 102.52–3.61χ); (b) SF-SCF concentration profile showing the structure of
the A45–B28 micelle in solvent S (χSA = 0.4, χSB = 3, and χAB = 1). The local concentration (ϕ) of each component is plotted
as a function of the distance from the center r of
the micelle. The vertical black line indicates the hydrodynamic radius RH of the micelle (see the Supporting Information for details).
Solubility
of guest compound (G) and concentration profile for
the model A–B micelle: (a) solubility of G (ϕG*) as a function
of χGS (ϕG* = 102.52–3.61χ); (b) SF-SCF concentration profile showing the structure of
the A45–B28 micelle in solvent S (χSA = 0.4, χSB = 3, and χAB = 1). The local concentration (ϕ) of each component is plotted
as a function of the distance from the center r of
the micelle. The vertical black line indicates the hydrodynamic radius RH of the micelle (see the Supporting Information for details).On the basis of the theoretical findings, we designed a simple
experimental protocol where the dominating solubilization region is
actively controlled by tuning the guest solubility. To test this methodology,
we investigated the solubilization of the solvatochromic dye Nile
red (NR) in micelles composed of poly-(ethylene oxide)-block-poly-ε-caprolactone (PEO–PCL). These biocompatible
block copolymers are used in biomedical applications and represent
suitable candidates for the design and preparation of drug delivery
systems.[3] The absorption spectrum of NR
in the UV–visible range, particularly the wavelength of the
absorption maximum λmax, is sensitive to the polarity
of the environment.[23] Therefore, it is
possible to monitor the position of dye within the micelles via UV–visible
spectroscopy. As NR is poorly soluble in water (<5 × 10–7 mol·L–1, see the Supporting Information) but well soluble in ethanol,
we used mixtures of water and ethanol to tune the NR solubility and
control the solubilization region. Further, with the guidance of the
SF-SCF theoretical insights, we developed an experimental procedure
which we used to determine experimentally the solubilization region
of naphthalene (NF), benzophenone (BP), and 2, 2′-bipyridine
(BPy) into PEO–PCL micelles. These compounds have been chosen
because they are characterized by similar structures but different
solubility in water. The procedure uses static light-scattering (SLS)
and dynamic light-scattering (DLS) measurements to monitor the variation
in the size and mass of the assemblies upon solubilization.
Experimental Section
Materials
Unless
differently specified, all the chemicals
were obtained from Sigma and the solvents were obtained from Biosolve,
the Netherlands.
Synthesis, Purification, and Characterization
of PEO–PCL
The diblock copolymer EO45–CL14 (PEO–PCL)
has been synthesized and purified using a polymerization procedure
and purification method reported previously.[24]The number-average molar mass of the synthesized copolymer MnNMR = 3.6 kDa, based on the degree of polymerization, was measured via 1H NMR and carried out on a Varian 400 (400 MHz) spectrometer
at 25 °C in deuterated chloroform.The molar mass dispersity D̵ = Mw/Mn was determined by means
of size exclusion chromatography, using Waters GPC equipped with a
Waters (model 510) pump and a (model 410) differential refractometer.
A set of two mixed bed columns (Mixed-C, Polymer Laboratories, 30
cm, 40 °C) was used and tetrahydrofuran was selected as the eluent.
The system was calibrated using narrow molar mass polystyrene standards,
ranging from 600 to 7106 Da. A value of D̵ =
1.10 was obtained for the synthesized copolymer.
NR Characterization
UV–vis spectroscopy measurements
were performed on a Shimadzu 2700 spectrophotometer. The absorbance
(A) spectra of the NR solutions were recorded as
a function of the incident light wavelength using a 0.5 nm step size
at a medium measurement speed with a 1 nm slit size. The samples and
the reference (pure dispersion media) were placed in quartz cuvettes
with a path length of 1 cm.The molar attenuation coefficient
of NR was determined in a water–ethanol mixture containing
a water volume fraction ϕW = 0.5. To this end, the
absorption spectra of solutions with concentrations of 3 × 10–5, 3 × 10–5, 3 × 10–5, and 5 × 10–6 M were recorded
in the wavelength range 400 ≤ λ ≤ 800 nm. NR shows
a single absorption peak with the maximum at λmax = 576 nm. The absorbance A at λmax was fitted as a function of the dye concentration with a linear
regression to obtain the molar attenuation coefficient of NR, εNR = 33 400 l·mol–1·cm–1, according to the Lambert–Beer law (A = εbC, with b =
1 cm the optical path length, and C the molar concentration).
The data are plotted in Figure S7 in the Supporting Information. The linear behavior is lost at a higher concentration
and the intercept of the fitted line differs significantly from zero.
This might indicate the formation of NR dimers or other small, stable
aggregates in water–ethanol mixtures.The solubility
of NR in water–ethanol mixtures was determined
as a function of the water volume fraction ϕW. An
excess of NR was added to different water–ethanol mixtures
with 0.5 < ϕW < 0.95 and the mixtures were
shaken on a shaking table for 2 h. Centrifugation at 5000 rcf and
filtration via a 0.22 μm PTFE syringe filter (VWR) were used
to remove the excess insoluble NR before measuring the UV–vis
absorbance of the mixtures. The NR solubility CNR* was determined
from the value of εNR, approximated as constant in
the water–ethanol mixtures (the determination of εNR for high ϕW mixtures is challenging because
of the extremely low dye solubility) studied. Under this assumption, CNR* is slightly overestimated, as changes in the attenuation coefficients
(of the order of a few percent) are known to occur in similar systems
with increasing ϕW.[25] This,
however, is not expected to influence the qualitative interpretation
of the data.
Micelle Formation in a 50:50 Water–Ethanol
Mixture
A mixture containing 100 mg of PEO–PCL and
2 mL of a ϕW = 0.5 water–ethanol mixture was
heated to 60 °C
under stirring. At this temperature, the solution becomes optically
transparent after a few minutes, indicating the formation of micelle
dispersion (see the Supporting Information). The mixtures were subsequently cooled down to 40 °C and half
of it (1 mL) was diluted by quickly adding 9 mL of the ϕW = 0.5 water–ethanol mixture at room temperature. The
diluted dispersion was analyzed via light scattering to verify the
formation of the micelles. The results are reported in the Supporting Information.
Solubilization of NR in
PEO–PCL Micelles
A set
of six mixtures containing 100 mg of PEO–PCL and 2 mL of 4
× 10–6 M NR solution in ϕW = 0.5 water–ethanol mixtures were heated to 60 °C under
stirring. At this temperature after a few minutes, the solution becomes
optically transparent, indicating the formation of micelle dispersion
(see the Supporting Information). The mixtures
were subsequently cooled down to 40 °C and 1 mL of each mixture
was quickly transferred into a vial containing 9 mL of solvent mixture
at room temperature. The composition of the six mixtures was set in
order to obtain final water–ethanol volume fractions of ϕW = 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, and 0.95, respectively. The final
dispersions were analyzed via UV–visible to determine their
λmax values. The normalized spectra of the final
NR/micelles mixtures are plotted in Figure S6 in the Supporting Information, whereas the λmax values
are plotted in Figure b.
Figure 8
NR solubilization.
(a) NR solubility (CNR*) in water–ethanol
mixtures as a function of the water volume fraction ϕW. (b) Position of the NR absorption maximum λmax as a function of ϕW in the absence (dots) and presence
(diamonds) of the PEO–PCL micelles at a fixed NR concentration CNR = 4 × 10–6 M value.
The spline curves are depicted to guide the eye. The vertical dashed
line indicates the point where the concentration of NR equals its
solubility (CNR* = CNR). The horizontal
lines correspond to the λmax values of NR into the
core (λmaxcore = 546 nm)- and interface (λmaxinterface = 569 nm)-mimicking solutions.
Determination of the Solubilization Region of NR
The
position of the absorption maximum λmax depends on
the polarity of the environment;[23] hence,
it can be used to distinguish the solubilization region of NR. However,
to unambiguously identify such regions, λmax reference
values for NR located at the core–corona interface and inside
the core of the micelles are needed.In a previous work,[26] we found that the core of PEO–PCL micelles
is composed of 95% of PCL and 5% of water, whereas the average composition
of the corona was found to be approximately 13% of PEO 87% of water.
On the basis of these data, we prepared two solutions which mimic
the polarity of the core and the core–corona interface. The
core-mimicking solution was prepared by mixing 95% of ε-caprolactone
and 5% of water, whereas the interface-mimicking was composed of 50%
of ε-caprolactone (Sigma), 15% of PEO (Sigma, Mn = 400 Da), and 35% of deionized water. PEO (400 kDa)
has been chosen to reduce the possibility of aggregation of the polymer
in solution.[27] All the solutions were optically
homogeneous (no turbidity was observed because of demixing). The UV–vis
absorption spectra of NR dispersed into the core and interface-mimicking
solutions (Figure S4 in the Supporting Information) were used as references to determine whether the dye was encapsulated
into the core or adsorbed at the core–corona interface of the
micelles. To this end, the λmax values obtained from
these spectra were compared with that of NR obtained in the different
water–ethanol mixtures in the presence of micelles to identify
the solubilization region.
Solubilization of NF, BP, and BPy
Micelles of EO45–CL14 in water have
been prepared by adding
1 mL of acetone containing 50 mg of the copolymerto 9 mL of distilled
water, leading to a final block copolymer concentration of 5 mg·mL–1. The solution was shaken by hand to ensure complete
mixing. A similar procedure has been applied to solubilize NF, BP,
and BPy into the micelles: two different amounts of encapsulants (4
and 20 mg) have been added in 1 mL of acetone together with 50 mg
of the copolymer, followed by quick addition of the solution in 9
mL of deionized water. Each solvent was filtered prior to use with
an appropriate 0.22 μm syringe filter. The micelle dispersions
were subsequently diluted with deionized water in order to obtain
suspensions with various polymer concentrations, which have been analyzed
to determine the molar mass and the size of the micelles via light
scattering.
SF-SCF Computations and Light-Scattering
Analysis
A
detailed description of the procedure used for SF-SCF computations
and light scattering analysis is reported in the Supporting Information.
Results and Discussion
Solubility
of the Guest Compound
Before discussing
the SF-SCF results, it is important to establish a connection between
the SF-SCF-related quantities and the experimentally measurable ones.
The SF-SCF method is based on the Flory–Huggins (FH) theory;
therefore, it uses the so-called FH interaction parameters (χ)
as a measure of the pair interaction between all the components of
the system of interest.[28] The components
are modeled as sets of connected segments distributed over a lattice.[28] According to FH theory, the size of the components
(number of connected segments) and their χ parameters determine
their miscibility.[28] To ease the interpretation
of the SF-SCF results, the solubility (ϕG*) of the guest compound (G) (Figure
S1 in the Supporting Information) in the
solvent (S), in the absence of the copolymer molecules, has been calculated
as a function of the interaction parameter χGS (see Figure a and the Supporting Information for details). In the following
discussion, we will refer to the solubility, expressed as a volume
fraction ϕG*, instead of χGS.
Self-Assembly of A–B
Block Copolymers
The model
copolymer used to systematically study the solubilization was an A–B-type
diblock copolymer (A45–B28, for which
an experimental analog was available) where A is the lyophilic block
and B is the lyophobic block (χSA = 0.4, χSB = 3 and χAB = 1). In the absence of the
guest compound, the equilibrium SF-SCF computations predict the formation
of spherical micelles. These micelles are characterized by an average
aggregation number Nagg = 306 and a hydrodynamic
radius RH = 23 lattice units (see the Supporting Information for more details). From
the radial concentration profiles (Figure b), it appears that the blocks are segregated
into different domains: a solvent-poor core and a solvent-rich corona
(Figure b), connected
via a 3–4 lattice units wide interface.
Effect of Guest Solubility
and Concentration on Solubilization
For understanding how
the guest solubility and concentration affect
the solubilization of G within the A–B micelles, it is useful
to start by neglecting the effect of specific interactions between
G and the copolymer blocks. In the SF-SCF computations, such interactions
are defined by the two parameters χGA and χGB, which were set to be zero. Under this condition, G and
the copolymer interact only via an excluded volume. Unless specified,
the average concentration of G in the computational lattice ϕG = 2 × 10–3 and ϕG* is tuned by varying
χGS.The solubilization efficiency ΣG (Figure ),
defined as the ratio between the number of G molecules solubilized
in the micelle and the total number of G molecules in the computational
lattice, has been evaluated as a function of the guest solubility
ϕG* (see
the Supporting Information for details).
We find a ΣG transition between the regimes ϕG* > ϕG and ϕG* < ϕG, illustrated in the radial concentration
profiles in Figure . Transferring molecules from the solution and confining them into
a micelle is associated with an entropy penalty which (in the absence
of attractive interactions) must be overcompensated by a favorable
change in the free energy of the micelle. Still, even for athermal
interactions and completely soluble G, a portion of the G molecules
is already solubilized in the micelle. In fact, for ϕG* > ϕG, we observe a small but finite value of ΣG (Figure ).
Figure 2
Solubilization
efficiency ΣG of the guest compound
(G) into the A45–B28 micelles as a function
of the G solubility ϕG*.
Figure 3
Concentration profiles showing the structure of the A–B
micelle upon solubilization of G at (a) ϕG* > ϕG and
(b)
ϕG* <
ϕG. The local concentration (ϕ) of the B blocks
(dashed curves) and G (continuous curves) are plotted as a function
of the distance from the center r of the micelle
for different ϕG* values. The A blocks and S are omitted to increase the clarity
of the graph. (c) Schematic representation of the structure of the
A45–B28 micelle upon solubilization of
G in the two regimes as can be derived from the SF-SCF concentration
profiles.
Solubilization
efficiency ΣG of the guest compound
(G) into the A45–B28 micelles as a function
of the G solubility ϕG*.Concentration profiles showing the structure of the A–B
micelle upon solubilization of G at (a) ϕG* > ϕG and
(b)
ϕG* <
ϕG. The local concentration (ϕ) of the B blocks
(dashed curves) and G (continuous curves) are plotted as a function
of the distance from the center r of the micelle
for different ϕG* values. The A blocks and S are omitted to increase the clarity
of the graph. (c) Schematic representation of the structure of the
A45–B28 micelle upon solubilization of
G in the two regimes as can be derived from the SF-SCF concentration
profiles.The radial concentration profiles
(Figure a) show that
for ϕG* > ϕG, the solubilized
G molecules are mainly adsorbed at the core–corona interface.
In Figure , the value
of Nagg, the surface area α per
polymer at the core–corona interface, the micelle hydrodynamic
size RH, and the concentration of G into
the micelle core σGcore and at the core–corona interface Θ derived
from the SF-SCF computations are presented as a function of ϕG*. The adsorption
of G reduces the tension of the core–corona interface,[18,29] which leads to a lower effective attraction between the lyophobic
chains. This is reflected in the decrease of Nagg and in the increase of the surface area α (α
≈ Nagg–1, see
eq S3 in the Supporting Information for
details) observed in Figure a,b, respectively. A larger α value allows a reduction
of chain stretching both in the core and in the corona, with a consequent
increase of the configurational entropy (as schematically depicted
in Figure c).
Figure 4
SF-SCF results
for (a) aggregation number Nagg, (b) surface
area occupied by each polymer at the interface
between core and corona α, and (c) hydrodynamic radius of the
micelle RH as a function of the guest
solubility ϕG*. (d) Local volume fraction of G in the center of the core
σGcore (continuous curves) and degree of coverage of the core–corona
interface Θ (dashed curves) as a function of ϕG*. Results are plotted
for different values of the total number of lattice layers L. The black vertical lines indicate where ϕG* = ϕG and separate the adsorption-dominated region (Ad) from the encapsulation-dominated one (En).
SF-SCF results
for (a) aggregation number Nagg, (b) surface
area occupied by each polymer at the interface
between core and corona α, and (c) hydrodynamic radius of the
micelle RH as a function of the guest
solubility ϕG*. (d) Local volume fraction of G in the center of the core
σGcore (continuous curves) and degree of coverage of the core–corona
interface Θ (dashed curves) as a function of ϕG*. Results are plotted
for different values of the total number of lattice layers L. The black vertical lines indicate where ϕG* = ϕG and separate the adsorption-dominated region (Ad) from the encapsulation-dominated one (En).In case the guest concentration
exceeds the solubility (ϕG* < ϕG), ΣG increases dramatically (Figure ).When ϕG* is approximately 10 times smaller than ϕG, the
value of ΣG approaches 1 (ΣG = 1
corresponds to a solubilization efficiency of 100%). In this regime,
G increasingly accumulates within the core of the micelle, which results
in the formation of a G-rich domain, as follows from the concentration
profiles in Figure b. The values of Nagg and RH increase (Figure a,c) with decreasing ϕG*, whereas α decreases as more A–B
molecules accumulate at the surface of the G-rich droplet. In the
encapsulation-dominated regime (ϕG* < ϕG), the value
of Nagg and RH strongly depends on the size of the computational lattice L, as shown in Figure . This indicates that upon solubilization, the equilibrium
characteristics of the assembly depend on the relative amount of guest
and copolymer molecules present in the solution (see related discussion
in the Supporting Information), similarly
to what is observed for emulsions.[19,30]The
comparison between the local concentration of G inside the
lyophobic core (σGcore) and the fraction (Θ) of the core–corona
interface covered by G as a function of ϕG* (Figure d) corroborates that the crossover between
adsorption-dominated and encapsulation-dominated regimes is sharp
and occurs at ϕG ≈ ϕG*. In the encapsulation-dominated
regime, adsorption still takes place, with an interfacial coverage
value Θ ≈ 0.6 and almost independent of the guest concentration
(Figure d).In another set of computations, the coverage of the core–corona
interface Θ has been studied as a function of the overall guest
concentration ϕG (thus varying the total number of
G molecules in the computational lattice) for three different ϕG* values. The adsorption
can be properly described with a Langmuir isotherm for Θ ≪
Θmax, as shown in Figure . This finding is in agreement with the experimental
observations of Choucair and Eisenberg,[6] who studied the solubilization of 2-nitrodiphenylamine in polystyrene-poly(acrylic
acid) micelles. The deviation of the SCF data from the Langmuir model
(Figure ) probably
results from a competition between adsorption and encapsulation.
Figure 5
Degree
of coverage of the core–corona interface of PEO–PCL
micelles upon adsorption of the guest molecule G as a function of
the solubility G (ϕG), as obtained from the SF-SCF
computations. The results are displayed for three different values
of the solubility of G (ϕG*) and are fitted with a Langmuir isotherm (Θ
= KadϕG/(1 + KadϕG), where Kad is the adsorption constant) for ϕG < ϕG*, corresponding to the conditions where adsorption dominates. The
vertical dashed lines indicate the three ϕG = ϕG* values.
Degree
of coverage of the core–corona interface of PEO–PCL
micelles upon adsorption of the guest molecule G as a function of
the solubility G (ϕG), as obtained from the SF-SCF
computations. The results are displayed for three different values
of the solubility of G (ϕG*) and are fitted with a Langmuir isotherm (Θ
= KadϕG/(1 + KadϕG), where Kad is the adsorption constant) for ϕG < ϕG*, corresponding to the conditions where adsorption dominates. The
vertical dashed lines indicate the three ϕG = ϕG* values.We can conclude that in the absence
of specific interactions between
the guest and the micelles, the guest concentration and solubility
govern the preferred solubilization region. At ϕG* > ϕG, the guest molecules adsorb at the core–corona interface
in spite of the loss of translational entropy. Adsorption is driven
by a reduction of the interfacial tension between the core of the
micelle and the solvent. The typical signature of this process is
a reduction of the aggregation number of the micelle.Insoluble
compounds, which in the absence of the copolymer molecules
would phase-separate, accumulate in the droplets surrounded by the
copolymer molecules, forming emulsion-like structures. The typical
signature of this process is an increase in the size and the aggregation
number of the assemblies, which is a function of the relative concentration
between the polymer and the guest.
Effect of Specific Interactions
between the Guest and the Micelles
To determine how specific
interactions affect solubilization, we
performed two sets of computations in which G interacted with the
corona (A) or with the core (B) forming blocks, respectively. The
specific interactions were introduced by assigning a nonzero value
to either χGA or χGB. Both attractive
(χGA, χGB = −0.25, −0.5,
−1) and repulsive (χGA, χGB = 1) interactions were tested. Illustrative results are plotted
in Figure .
Figure 6
Effect of specific
interactions between the guest G and (a) corona
blocks and (b) core blocks on the solubilization efficiency ΣG of G into the A45–B28 micelles
as a function of the G solubility ϕG*. (c,d) Local volume fraction of G in
the center of the core σGcore and degree of coverage of the core–corona
interface Θ at ϕG* = 0.34 as a function of (c) χGA and (d) χGB. (e,f) Influence of ϕG* on the relative
mass of the self-assembled structures δSF-SCF.
Effect of specific
interactions between the guest G and (a) corona
blocks and (b) core blocks on the solubilization efficiency ΣG of G into the A45–B28 micelles
as a function of the G solubility ϕG*. (c,d) Local volume fraction of G in
the center of the core σGcore and degree of coverage of the core–corona
interface Θ at ϕG* = 0.34 as a function of (c) χGA and (d) χGB. (e,f) Influence of ϕG* on the relative
mass of the self-assembled structures δSF-SCF.Again, two distinct regimes could
be identified, characterized
by a dramatic difference in encapsulation efficiency. The crossover
between the two regimes takes place at ϕG* > ϕG if attraction
with one of the blocks (χGA, χGB < 0) is present (see Figure a,b) indicating that, not surprisingly, specific attraction
allows solubilizing the compounds more efficiently. Interestingly,
a strong repulsion with the corona blocks (χGA =
1) seems to have little effect on the solubilization efficiency (Figure a), whereas a strong
repulsion with the core blocks (χGB = 1, Figure b) shifts the position
of the transition point toward ϕG* < ϕG, as upon solubilization,
G is mostly in contact with the core.Above the transition point
(ϕG* >
ϕG), the attraction
between G and the corona blocks (χGA < 0) enhances
the interfacial adsorption (Figure c) but does not affect the concentration of G within
the core. In contrast, the attraction between G and the core blocks
(χGB < 0) enhances both interfacial adsorption
and core encapsulation, leading to preferential core encapsulation,
even at ϕG* ≫ ϕG (Figure d).The ratio between the mass of the self-assembled
structures with
the solubilized material M over the mass of the bare
empty micelles M0 is defined here as δSF-SCF = M/M0 (Figure e,f). The
SF-SCF computations predict that if the interfacial adsorption dominates,
δSF-SCF < 1, whereas if encapsulation is
preferred, δSF-SCF > 1 regardless of the
way
G interacts with the micelles. This quantity is relevant as it can
be compared with experimental data.The radial concentration
profiles plotted in Figure for ϕG* < ϕG show that the presence
of attractive interactions strongly affect the equilibrium morphology
of the assemblies. Strikingly, attraction with the corona (Figure a–c) leads
to the stabilization of multishell “onion-like” structures,
where G is mostly dispersed in the A-rich shells. Medium (χGB = −0.5) and strong (χGB = −1)
attraction for the core results in a stabilization of bilayer vesicular
structures (Figure e–g) where G is mostly located into the B-rich region. This
morphology is preferred as it allows maximizing the favorable contact
between G and B while reducing the stretching of the B chains. In Figure d,h, it is shown
that a repulsive interaction between G and one of the blocks results
in the formation of a G-rich core inside the micelles, similarly to
what was observed in the absence of specific interactions with G.
Figure 7
Radial
concentration profiles ϕ(r) and resulting
two-dimensional (2D) representations showing the structures of the
micelle–guest complex at ϕG* = 9.6 × 10–3 (χGS = 2) and ϕG = 2 × 10–3 for different values of the interaction parameters, indicated at
the top of each profile. The 2D representation of the concentration
profiles provides the volume fraction of the guest (G) molecules (left)
and the volume fraction of the block copolymers. The different panels
(a–h) are referred to in the main text (right).
Radial
concentration profiles ϕ(r) and resulting
two-dimensional (2D) representations showing the structures of the
micelle–guest complex at ϕG* = 9.6 × 10–3 (χGS = 2) and ϕG = 2 × 10–3 for different values of the interaction parameters, indicated at
the top of each profile. The 2D representation of the concentration
profiles provides the volume fraction of the guest (G) molecules (left)
and the volume fraction of the block copolymers. The different panels
(a–h) are referred to in the main text (right).Attraction enhances the uptake of guest molecules
by the micelles,
while in the presence of repulsion, even if strong (χGA, χGB = 1), solubilization is mostly controlled
by lyophobic forces as in the absence of specific interactions. Here,
we note that although the SF-SCF computations predict a change in
the equilibrium morphology, polymer self-assembly is (usually) controlled
by a combination of thermodynamic and kinetic factors.[26,31,32] Consequently, the effect of solubilization
on the morphology of block copolymer assemblies will be further investigated
in a future study.
Active Control of the Dominating Solubilization
Region
The SF-SCF computations predict that the preferred
solubilization
region is influenced by the solubility and concentration of the guest
compound. Hence, tuning the solubility of the guest should enable
control over the dominating solubilization region. To verify this,
we designed an experimental system where PEO–PCL micelles are
used to solubilize NR in different water–ethanol mixtures.
In such mixtures, the solubility of NR (CNR*) is a function
of the water–ethanol ratio, see Figure a and the Supporting Information for more details. NR is
a solvatochromic dye, that is, its photophysical properties depend
on the physical properties of the environment. Specifically, the shift
in the position of the absorption maximum λmax in
the visible range can be used to probe the polarity of the environment.[23] To use this shift for determining the preferred
solubilization region of NR, we prepared reference solutions which
mimic the polarity of the core and the core–corona interface
region. We used the information obtained in previous theoretical and
experimental investigations[26] to determine
the composition of such solutions: the core-mimicking was prepared
by mixing 95% of ε-caprolactone and 5% of water, whereas the
interface-mimicking was composed of 50% of ε-caprolactone, 15%
of PEO, and 35% of deionized water. The λmax values
(λmaxcore = 546 nm, λmaxinterface = 569 nm) obtained from the absorption spectra of
NR in these solutions are depicted in Figure b as horizontal lines (see Figure S4 in the Supporting Information for more details).NR solubilization.
(a) NR solubility (CNR*) in water–ethanol
mixtures as a function of the water volume fraction ϕW. (b) Position of the NR absorption maximum λmax as a function of ϕW in the absence (dots) and presence
(diamonds) of the PEO–PCL micelles at a fixed NR concentration CNR = 4 × 10–6 M value.
The spline curves are depicted to guide the eye. The vertical dashed
line indicates the point where the concentration of NR equals its
solubility (CNR* = CNR). The horizontal
lines correspond to the λmax values of NR into the
core (λmaxcore = 546 nm)- and interface (λmaxinterface = 569 nm)-mimicking solutions.Next, UV–vis spectra of
NR have been recorded in the different
water–ethanol mixtures in the absence of micelles (Figure S5
in the Supporting Information) to monitor
the λmax shift as a function of the mixture composition
(Figure b, dots).
Increasing the volume fraction of water ϕW enhances
the average polarity of the solvent, resulting in a red shift of the
absorption maximum λmax from 576 to 635 nm (Figure b).Subsequently,
PEO–PCL micelles were prepared in the different
mixtures in the presence of NR to study the solubilization of the
dye. A fixed concentration CNR = 4 ×
10–6 M was used in all experiments with NR; hence,
according to our solubility measurements, the condition CNR* = CNR is achieved at ϕW = 0.72
(Figure b, vertical
dashed line).In Figure b, it
is shown that the λmax value of NR is not affected
by the presence of PEO–PCL micelles for ϕW = 0.5. These indicates that the dye is mostly dispersed in solution
and does not accumulate inside the micelles. The λmax values follow from the UV–vis spectra of the (PEO–PCL
containing) NR solutions reported in Figure S6 in the Supporting Information.In contrast, for
ϕW ≥ 0.6, a gradual blue
shift of λmax from 582 to 544 nm is observed, which
is opposite to the red shift observed for NR in the absence of micelles
(Figure b). This indicates
that the dye is mainly surrounded by an environment with lower polarity
than the solvent; hence, it is preferentially located inside the micelles.
When CNR* ≈ CNR, the value λmax ≅ λmaxinterface indicates that NR is preferentially
located at the core–corona interface. When ϕW increases (hence the solubility further decreases), λmax shifts toward lower wavelengths until the reference plateau
value for the core λmaxcore = 546 is reached. Hence, for CNR* ≳ CNR (ϕW ≲ 0.72), interfacial
adsorption dominates, whereas for CNR* ≲ CNR (ϕW ≳ 0.72), encapsulation in the
core takes place, as predicted by the SF-SCF computations. We confirmed
experimentally that tuning the solubility of the guest compound allows
to actively control the solubilization region.
Determination of the Dominating
Solubilization Region
The experimental determination of the
preferred solubilization region
by electron microscopy or small-angle scattering methods is often
not possible because of the low-contrast difference between polymeric
micelles and organic guest compounds. However, the SF-SCF results
presented here provide a relation between the preferred solubilization
region and the hydrodynamic size RH and
relative mass of the assemblies δSF-SCF. Consequently,
the solubilization region should be indirectly assessable by performing
simple static and DLS experiments on the micelles in the presence
and absence of the guest. To verify this methodology, we investigated
the self-assembly behavior of the PEO–PCL upon solubilization
of three compounds, NF, BP, and BPy. It is noted that the structure
of these molecules is comparable with the structure of our SF-SCF
guest molecule G, see Figure S1 in the Supporting Information. Although not relevant for biomedical applications,
these compounds represent an interesting model system, as their chemical
structures are (qualitatively) similar to that of many small drugs
and are characterized by different water solubility values: CBPy* > CBP* > CNF* (see Table S1 in the Supporting Information). Dynamic and static light-scattering properties
of the resulting assemblies are plotted in Figure . These data have been used to calculate
the ratio between the average mass of the micelles M0 with solubilized material over the mass of the bare
empty micelles M (see the Supporting Information). This parameter, defined as δexp = M/M0, is the experimental
analogue of δSF-SCF. It is expected that if
interfacial adsorption dominates, δexp < 1, whereas
if encapsulation is preferred, δexp > 1.
Figure 9
Results of
the light-scattering characterizations. (a) Decay rates
obtained by fitting the autocorrelation functions at different scattering
angles for various samples, as a function of the squared scattering
vector q2. (b) Debye plots obtained from
the static light-scattering (SLS) measurements at a scattering angle
θ = 90 and different sample concentrations.
Results of
the light-scattering characterizations. (a) Decay rates
obtained by fitting the autocorrelation functions at different scattering
angles for various samples, as a function of the squared scattering
vector q2. (b) Debye plots obtained from
the static light-scattering (SLS) measurements at a scattering angle
θ = 90 and different sample concentrations.The obtained values of δexp are reported
in Table for the
different
samples together with the SF-SCF theoretical predictions. The samples
studied are bare micelles composed of EO45–CL14 block copolymers and micelles plus either 0.4 or 2 mg·mL–1 of guest molecules. The solubilization of the more
soluble BPy results in δBPyexp < 1 values at both concentrations, which
are below the BPy solubility CBPy*, indicating that interfacial
adsorption dominates. The solubilization of BP results in interfacial
adsorption at low concentrations (δBPexp < 1), whereas at high concentrations,
core encapsulation takes place, as testified by the δBPexp > 1 value,
associated with an increase of the radius of the micelle (see Table ).
Table 1
Summary of the Features of EO45–CL14 Micelles with and without Solubilized
Guest Compounds as Predicted by SF-SCF (Denoted by the SF-SCF Superscript)
and Measured Experimentally (Denoted by the exp Superscript)
sample
a,cδSF-SCF
b,cδexp
aRHSF-SCF/nm
bRHexp/nm
bare micelles
9.2
9
+0.4 mg·mL–1 BPy
0.97
0.61
9.2
8
+2 mg·mL–1 BPy
0.66
0.37
8.8
8
+0.4 mg·mL–1 BP
0.92
0.72
9.6
9
+2 mg·mL–1 BP
1.94
2.19
12.4
13
+0.4 mg·mL–1 NF
1.05
1.27
10.0
9
+2 mg·mL–1 NF
2.07
NA
12.8
NA
Value predicted with SF-SCF.
Value obtained from SLS (see the Supporting Information for details).
Value predicted with SF-SCF.Value obtained from SLS (see the Supporting Information for details).δ
> 1 indicates encapsulation-dominated
adsorption and δ < 1 indicates preferential interfacial adsorption.In contrast, the radius of
the micelle remains fairly constant
when adsorption at the core–corona interface takes place (δBPexp < 1). These
observations are consistent with a guest concentration-dependent transition
between the two solubilization regimes.In the case of NF, Ce > CNF* already
at 0.4 mg·mL–1. Hence, the solubilization of
NF results in a value of δNFexp > 1 at the lower concentration. At a
high
NF concentration, a turbid dispersion containing precipitate was repeatedly
observed, and therefore, those sample could not be analyzed. The experimental
results are in agreement with the SF-SCF predictions for the solubilization
of NF, BP, and BPy into PEO–PCL micelles. A final consideration
regards the change in the second virial coefficients of the micelle
upon solubilization (the change in the slopes of the Debye plots upon
different conditions, Figure b). It seems that the presence of solubilized materials affects
the way micelles interact, which may be indicative for the type of
interaction of the encapsulated compounds with the lyophilic blocks
(PEO).
Summary and Conclusions
We have
demonstrated theoretically and experimentally that the
solubilization locus of the guest compounds inside the block copolymer
micelles is mostly determined by the concentration and the solubility
of the guest molecules. The presence of attractive interactions between
guest and block copolymer molecules enhances the uptake of guests
by the micelles and affects the equilibrium morphology of the assemblies.
Both experiments and SF-SCF computations reveal that interfacial adsorption
is preferred at guest concentrations lower than the solubility, whereas
at concentrations that exceed the guest solubility, the core encapsulation
dominates. The experimental studies performed with NR show that solvent
mixtures can be used to tune the solubility of the guest compound,
in order to actively control the solubilization region. The SCF computations
predict that encapsulation resembles the formation of a nanoemulsion
because a droplet enriched in guest molecules is formed at the center
of the micelle core. Each of these two regimes has a characteristic
signature on measurable properties of the micelles. Upon adsorption,
the mass of the micelles decreases while their size remains rather
constant. Upon encapsulation, the mass of the micelles increases,
together with their hydrodynamic radius. Hence, the preferred solubilization
region, usually difficult to assess via direct methods, can be predicted
and experimentally determined by monitoring the change in size and
mass of the micelles upon solubilization, for instance, via static
and DLS.
Authors: Jérôme G J L Lebouille; Leo F W Vleugels; Aylvin A Dias; Frans A M Leermakers; Martien A Cohen Stuart; Remco Tuinier Journal: Eur Phys J E Soft Matter Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 1.890
Authors: Fleurie M Kelley; Bruna Favetta; Roshan Mammen Regy; Jeetain Mittal; Benjamin S Schuster Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-12-21 Impact factor: 12.779