| Literature DB >> 31739619 |
Marika Tenci1, Silvia Rossi1, Valentina Giannino2, Barbara Vigani1, Giuseppina Sandri1, Maria Cristina Bonferoni1, Maria Daglia3,4, Luigi Maria Longo5, Cristina Macelloni2, Franca Ferrari1.
Abstract
The aim of the present work was the development of an innovative in situ gelling system, to be applied on the mucosa of the distal colon via rectal route. The system consisted of three polymers having different functions: gellan (GG), able to jellify in presence of ions; methylcellulose (MC), a thermosensitive polymer with a gelation temperature close to 50 °C; and hydroxypropylcellulose (HPC), a mucoadhesive polymer. The three polymers were able to act synergistically, increasing the permanence of the vehicle on the mucosa and forming a protective gel layer. A DoE approach, "simplex centroid mixture design," was used to identify the optimal quantitative composition of the vehicle. The response variables considered were: vehicle viscosity at room temperature; increase in vehicle viscosity on increasing temperature (from room to physiological value) and upon dilution with simulated colonic fluid (SCF); and viscoelastic behavior, thixotropic area, and mucoadhesion properties of the gel formed at 37 °C upon dilution in SCF. The optimized vehicle was loaded with maqui berry extract (MBE), known for its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. MBE loading (0.5% w/w) into the vehicle improved rheological and mucoadhesive properties of the formulation. Both MBE and the optimized vehicle were not cytotoxic towards human fibroblasts and Caco-2 cells. Moreover, the optimized vehicle did not affect MBE antioxidant properties.Entities:
Keywords: in situ gelling systems; ion-sensitive polymers, methylcellulose, gellan, mucoadhesion, DoE approach, maqui berry extract, antioxidant properties, inflammatory bowel disease; thermo-responsive polymers
Year: 2019 PMID: 31739619 PMCID: PMC6920942 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics11110611
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.321
Figure 1Factor space and experimental points of a simplex centroid mixture design.
Mixture composition corresponding to the characteristic points of the Scheffè triangle.
| Points of Scheffè Triangle | GG % | MC % | HPC % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 4 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0 |
| 5 | 0.4 | 0 | 0.5 |
| 6 | 0 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.27 | 0.33 | 0.33 |
Figure 2Δη% values obtained for GG an K CARR aqueous solutions (1.4% w/w) upon dilution in simulated colonic fluid (SCF) (5:2 w/w) (mean values ± SD; n = 3).
Figure 3G′ values (measured at 1 Hz frequency) as a function of temperature obtained for GG 0.5% w/w/MC 0.5% w/w mixture, and MC 0.5% w/w aqueous solution (mean values ± SD; n = 3).
Response variables of the vehicles of the simplex centroid mixture design (mean values ± SE; n = 3–5).
| Vehicles | Response Variables | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| η 25 °C | ΔIp | tgδ 37 °C | TA 37 °C (Pa·s−1) | ΔAUC/AUC 37 °C (mN·mm) | |
| 1 | 0.639 ± 0.005 a | 6.96 ± 0.13 a’ | 0.23 ± 0.16 a” | 290 ± 8 a* | 73 ± 22 a** |
| 2 | 0.258 ± 0.005 b | −0.47 ± 0.05 b’ | 0.28 ± 0.11 b” | −163 ± 29 b* | 18 ± 4 b** |
| 3 | 0.378 ± 0.012 c | −0.28 ± 0.06 c’ | 3.92 ± 0.35 c” | −14 ± 6 c* | 126 ± 18 c** |
| 4 | 0.1914 ± 0.0006 d | 7.15 ± 0.40 d ‘ | 0.09 ± 0.02 d” | −82 ± 12 d* | 32 ± 6 d** |
| 5 | 0.1842 ± 0.0006 e | 1.08 ± 0.14 e’ | 0.215 ± 0.005 e” | 65 ± 5e* | 79 ± 9 e** |
| 6 | 0.238 ± 0.001 f | −0.78± 0.03 f’ | 3.53 ± 0.14 f” | 23 ± 7 f* | 59 ± 19 f** |
| 7 | 0.179 ± 0.027 g | −0.940 ± 0.001 g’ | 1.42 ± 0.45 g” | 26 ± 3 g* | 95 ± 32 g** |
Anova one way, multiple range test, p < 0.05: a versus b/c/d/e/f/g; b versus c/d/e/g; c versus d/e/f/g; d versus f; e versus f; f versus g; a′ versus b′/c′/e′/f′/g′; b′ versus d′/e′; c′ versus d′/e′/g′; d′ versus e′/f/′g′; e′ versus f′/g′; a″ versus b″/c″/d″/e″/f″/g″; b″ versus f″/g″; c″ versus f″/g″; a* versus b*/c*/d*/e*/f*/g*; b* versus c*/d*/e*/f*/g*; c* versus d*/e*; d* versus e*/f*/g*; e* versus f*; b** versus c**/e**/g**; c** versus d**/f**; d** versus g**.
Figure 4Contour plots (in tridimensional and bidimensional projections) drawn according to the best fit model for the response-variable normalized work of adhesion at 37 °C of the vehicle diluted in SCF (ΔAUC/AUC 37 °C).
Figure 5Combined contour plot showing the region of optimal mixture composition that satisfies all the constraints of the response variables.
Figure 6Percentage of viability values of MBE upon contact with: (A) fibroblasts; (B) Caco-2 cells. MBE 0.5% w/w solution was diluted according to different ratios (1:2, 1:5, 1:10, 1:20, and 1:40 v/v) with CM (A) or HBSS (B). CM and HBSS were used as references (mean values ± SE; n = 8). t-test (p < 0.05): (A) a versus b/e; b versus c/e/f/g.
Figure 7Percentage of viability values of unloaded (VH) and loaded (MBE-VH) vehicles of optimized composition observed after contact with (A) fibroblasts; (B) Caco-2 cells. Different dilutions (1:2, 1:5, 1:10, 1:20, and 1:40 v/v) in CM (A) or HBSS (B) were considered. CM and HBSS were used as references (mean values ± SE; n = 8). t-test (p < 0.05): (A) e versus e′.
Figure 8Antioxidant activity of MBE on (A) fibroblasts; (B) Caco-2 cells. CM/HBSS and H2O2 were used as references (mean values ± SE; n = 8). Anova one way–MRT (p < 0.05): (A) a versus b/d; b versus c/d; c versus d; (B) a versus b/c/d; b versus c/d; c versus d.
Figure 9Antioxidant activity of MBE and MBE-VH on (A) fibroblasts; (B) Caco-2 cells. CM/HBSS and H2O2 were used as references (mean values ± SE; n = 8). Anova one way–MRT (p < 0.05): (A) a versus b; b versus c/d.; (B) a versus b/c/d; b versus c/d.