| Literature DB >> 31581554 |
Eleonora Maretti1, Cecilia Rustichelli2, Magdalena Lassinantti Gualtieri3, Luca Costantino4, Cristina Siligardi5, Paola Miselli6, Francesca Buttini7, Monica Montecchi8, Eliana Leo9, Eleonora Truzzi10, Valentina Iannuccelli11.
Abstract
The mimicking of physiological conditions is crucial for the success of accurate in vitro studies. For inhaled nanoparticles, which are designed for being deposited on alveolar epithelium and taken up by macrophages, it is relevant to investigate the interactions with pulmonary surfactant lining alveoli. As a matter of fact, the formation of a lipid corona layer around the nanoparticles could modulate the cell internalization and the fate of the transported drugs. Based on this concept, the present research focused on the interactions between pulmonary surfactant and Solid Lipid Nanoparticle assemblies (SLNas), loaded with rifampicin, an anti-tuberculosis drug. SLNas were functionalized with a synthesized mannosylated surfactant, both alone and in a blend with sodium taurocholate, to achieve an active targeting to mannose receptors present on alveolar macrophages (AM). Physico-chemical properties of the mannosylated SLNas satisfied the requirements relative to suitable respirability, drug payload, and AM active targeting. Our studies have shown that a lipid corona is formed around SLNas in the presence of Curosurf, a commercial substitute of the natural pulmonary surfactant. The lipid corona promoted an additional resistance to the drug diffusion for SLNas functionalized with the mannosylated surfactant and this improved drug retention within SLNas before AM phagocytosis takes place. Moreover, lipid corona formation did not modify the role of nanoparticle mannosylation towards the specific receptors on MH-S cell membrane.Entities:
Keywords: active targeting; inhalation; mannosylated surfactant; pulmonary surfactant; solid lipid nanoparticles; tuberculosis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31581554 PMCID: PMC6835947 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics11100508
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.321
Figure 1Transmission electron microscopy images of the SLNas samples.
Physical characteristics of the SLNas samples (mean values ± SD).
| Physical Characteristics | SLNas/MS | SLNas/MS-ST | SLNas/ST | SLNas/F127 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Circularity | 0.6 ± 0.1 a | 0.83 ± 0.03 b | 0.74 ± 0.07 ab | 0.75 ± 0.06 ab |
| Size (nm) | 740 ± 85 a | 309 ± 30 b | 668 ± 25 a | 408 ± 57 b |
| PDI | 0.60 ± 0.05 | 0.30 ± 0.02 | 0.46 ± 0.05 a | 0.46 ± 0.05 a |
| Z potential (mV) | −35.2 ± 0.1 | −40.5 ± 0.9 | −55 ± 2 | −15 ± 0.1 |
| d(BET) (nm) | 730 ± 10 | 900 ± 20 | 1020 ± 50 a | 1090 ± 20 a |
| ρ true (g/cm3) | 1.147 ± 0.001 | 1.1939 ± 0.0008 | 1.247 ± 0.002 | 1.1791 ± 0.0008 |
| ρ bulk (g/cm3) | 0.048 ± 0.001 | 0.079 ± 0.001 | 0.031 ± 0.000 | 0.147 ± 0.005 |
| ρ tapped (g/cm3) | 0.052 ± 0.001 a | 0.086 ± 0.001 | 0.038 ± 0.000 a | 0.29 ± 0.02 |
| Carr’s Index | 9 ± 2 a | 8 ± 2 a | 17 ± 1 a | 50 ± 8 |
| BET area (m2/g) | 7.2 ± 0.10 | 5.6 ± 0.10 | 4.7 ± 0.20 a | 4.67 ± 0.09 a |
| da (nm) | 210 | 288 | 231 | 676 |
ab Among columns, means that have no superscript in common are significantly different from each other (p < 0.05).
Aerodynamic parameters of the SLNas samples provided by Glass Twin Impinger: Emitted Dose (ED) and Fine Particle Fraction (FPF). Mean values ± SD.
| SLNas Samples | ED (%) | FPF (%) |
|---|---|---|
| SLNas/MS | 87 ± 4 a | 38 ± 5 a |
| SLNas/MS-ST | 84 ± 2 ab | 41 ± 5 a |
| SLNas/ST | 83 ± 1 ab | 53 ± 4 |
| SLNas/F127 | 72 ± 8 b | 11.77 ± 0.01 |
ab Among lines, means that have no superscript in common are significantly different from each other (p < 0.05).
Drug loading (DL) and encapsulation efficiency (EE) values of the SLNas samples. Mean values ± SD.
| SLNas Samples | DL (%) | EE (%) |
|---|---|---|
| SLNas/MS | 9.2 ± 0.2 | 36.8 ± 0.9 |
| SLNas/MS-ST | 8.7 ± 0.2 | 34.9 ± 0.9 |
| SLNas/ST | 8.9 ± 0.3 | 36 ± 1 |
| SLNas/F127 | 8.4 ± 0.8 | 34 ± 3 |
Figure 2Simultaneous thermogravimetry (red line) and differential scanning calorimetry (blue line) of SLNas/MS (a), SLNas/MS-ST (b), SLNas/ST (c), SLNas/F127 (d), physical mixture (e), and rifampicin (f).
Figure 3XRPD profiles of the SLNas samples in comparison with the physical mixture of SLNas components as well as pure rifampicin.
SLNas surface elemental composition (relative percentage of C, N, O, S, and Na) evaluated by XPS analysis and wettability expressed in terms of contact angle (θ).
| SLNas Samples | C | O | N | S | Na | θ (deg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SLNas/MS | 71 | 25.5 | 3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 51 ± 5 |
| SLNas/MS-ST | 82 | 15.0 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 32 ± 4 |
| SLNas/ST | 89 | 8.4 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 37 ± 8 |
| SLNas/F127 | 86 | 13.3 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 79 ± 2 |
Dimensional values (size and PDI) of the SLNas samples before and after treatment with Curosurf. Mean values ± SD.
| SLNas Samples | In Saline Solution | In Saline Solution with Curosurf | Fold Increase in Size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size (nm) | PDI | Size (nm) | PDI | ||
| SLNas/MS | 962 ± 286 | 0.45 ± 0.20 | 1611 ± 272 | 0.4 ± 0.2 | 1.67 |
| SLNas/MS-ST | 356 ± 64 | 0.29 ± 0.13 | 1839 ± 90 | 0.22 ± 0.01 | 5.17 |
| SLNas/ST | 284 ± 36 | 0.27 ± 0.04 | 884 ± 158 | 0.31 ± 0.02 | 3.11 |
| SLNas/F127 | 551 ± 6 a | 0.68 ± 0.05 | 837 ± 272 a | 0.5 ± 0.3 | 1.52 |
a Among lines, superscript indicates no significant difference among the size without Curosurf and that with Curosurf from each sample (p > 0.05).
Figure 4Representative ESEM image with an enlarged frame of a SLNas/MS sample treated with Curosurf.
Elemental composition by EDX analysis of pure Curosurf and of SLNas samples treated with Curosurf (relative weight %, mean values ± SD).
| Samples | C | O | Na | P | S | Cl |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Curosurf | 71 ± 2 | 22 ± 2 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 4.6 ± 0.6 | 0.04 ± 0.04 | 1.6 ± 0.2 |
| SLNas/MS | 85 ± 3 | 8 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.03 ± 0.04 | 4 ± 2 |
| SLNas/MS-ST | 83 ± 3 | 8 ± 3 | 4 ± 3 | 0.3 ± 0.2 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 5 ± 3 |
| SLNas/ST | 91 ± 1 | 8 ± 1 | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.26 ± 0.06 | 0.02 ± 0.02 | 0.7 ± 0.2 |
| SLNas/F127 | 94.39 ± 0.05 | 3.94 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 0.02 ± 0.01 | 0.01 ± 0.00 | 0.9 ± 0.2 |
Figure 5Rifampicin release from SLNas/MS (a), SLNas/MS-ST (b), SLNas/ST (c), and SLNas/F127 (d) in simulated lung fluid with or without (w/o) the pulmonary surfactant substitute (Curosurf).
Figure 6Cytotoxicity of SLNas samples at 6 h incubation time (a) and pure rifampicin at 24 h incubation time (b) determined on MH-S cell line. Dotted line as the control. Significance was indicated by * p <0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.005.
Figure 7Intramacrophagic rifampicin percentages upon cell exposure to SLNas samples in comparison with those determined following both cell mannose receptor inhibition and co-treatment with pulmonary surfactant substitute (Curosurf). SLNas/MS (a), SLNas/MS-ST (b), SLNas/ST (c), and SLNas/F127 (d). Significance was indicated by * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.005.