| Literature DB >> 32168873 |
Tiziana Esposito1, Teresa Mencherini1, Pasquale Del Gaudio1, Giulia Auriemma1, Silvia Franceschelli1, Patrizia Picerno1, Rita P Aquino1, Francesca Sansone1.
Abstract
An extract obtained from hazelnut shells by-products (lass="Chemical">HSE) has antioxidant and chemopreventive effects on <lass="Gene">span class="Species">human melanoma and cervical cancer cell lines, inducing apoptosis by caspase-3 activation. A clinical translation is limited by poor water solubility and low bioavailability. Dried plant extracts often show critical characteristics such as sticky/gummy appearance, unpleasant smell, and instability involving practical difficulties in processing for industrial use. A spray drying method has been applied to transform raw HSE in a microparticulate powder. The biopolymeric matrix was based on l-proline as loading carrier, hydroxyethylcellulose in combination with pectin as coating polymers; lecithin and ethanol were used as solubility enhancers. A Hot-Cold-Hot method was selected to prepare the liquid feed. The thus prepared powder showed good technological properties (solid-state, particle dimensions, morphology, and water dissolution rate), stability, and unchanged chemopreventive effects with respect to the unprocessed HSE.Entities:
Keywords: hazelnut shells by-product extract; improvement of the chemopreventive effect; long-term stability; multicomponent-based matrix; spray-dried microsystems
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32168873 PMCID: PMC7144004 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25061273
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Composition and characteristics of raw materials and spray-dried powders.
| Sample | P g/100mL | HEC g/100mL | PEC g/100mL | LEtOH g/100mL | HSE g/100mL | Yield % | AEC a % | AAC b % | EE c % | d50 µm (span) e |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HSE raw | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 3.16 ± 1.5d | - | - |
| HEC | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 277.22 (1.60) |
| P | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 250.10 (1.71) |
| PEC | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 50.53 (1.32) |
| Batch-3 | 5.00 | 0.20 | - | - | 39.8 ± 4.2 d | - | - | - | - | |
| Batch-9 | 5.00 | 0.20 | 0.50 | - | - | 45.0 ± 3.1 d | - | - | - | - |
| Batch-12 | 5.00 | 0.20 | 0.50 | 0.20 | - | 50.0 ± 2.0 d | - | - | - | - |
| Batch-13 | 5.00 | 0.20 | - | - | 0.25 | 39.8 ± 9.42 d | 4.30 | 3.11 ± 0.90 d | 92.10 | 18.41 (1.63) |
| Batch-15 | 5.00 | 0.20 | 0.50 | 0.20 | 0.25 | 43.00 ± 3.54 d | 3.90 | 2.10 ± 0.93 d | 95.12 | 3.02 (1.21) |
P: Proline; HEC: Hydroxyethylcellulose medium viscosity; PEC: Pectin; L: Lecithin; EtOH: Ethanol; a Actual Extract Content; b Actual Active Content; c Encapsulation Efficiency; d Average of triplicate analyses ± standard deviation; e Span value calculated as (d90 − d10) / d50
Figure 1Fluorescence (FM) images in bright field (a) P, proline spray drying, (b) hazelnut shells by-products (HSE) raw material in crystalline form; scanning electron microscopy (SEM) micrographs (c) Batch-3; (d) Batch-13, (e) Batch-9, (f) Batch-12, (g) Batch-15, FM image (h) Batch-15.
Figure 2Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) of raw materials: HEC, blue line; PEC, red line; P, black line; HSE extract raw material, green line.
Figure 3Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) of Batch-12, Batch-15, Batch-3, and Batch-13.
Figure 4Dissolution/release profile of Batch-13 and Batch-15 microparticles compared with HSE (unprocessed extract).
Figure 5Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) thermograms of Batch-15 (48 h in a desiccator) at t0, and after 1 month.
Figure 6Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of Batch-15 (48 h in a desiccator) at t0 (a) and after 1 month (b).
Figure 7Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) thermograms of Batch-15 (72 h in a desiccator) at t0, and after 6 months.
Figure 8Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of Batch-15 (72 h in a desiccator) at t0 (a) and after 6 months (b).
Actual Active Content (%) and free-radical scavenging activity of extract before (HSE unprocessed extract) and after microencapsulation process (Batch-15).
| 0 | 6 Months | 0 | 6 Months | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Materials | AAC% a,b | DPPH test EC50 a,c,d | ||
| HSE Unprocessed extract | 3.16 ± 0.80 | 1.15 ± 0.40 * | 33.42 ± 1.40 | 40.04 ± 2.11 * |
| Batch-15 | 2.10 ± 0.40 | 2.00 ± 0.60 | 33.20 ± 0.61 | 32.80 ±1.01 |
| α-tocopherol e | 10.1 ± 1.32 | 10.12 ± 1.20 | ||
a One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by and Tukey HSD test; means ± SD, * p <0.05; b Actual Active Content (AAC): Content of lawsonicin calculated by HPLC-DAD; c EC50 ± standard deviation (data from three experiments in triplicate); d In a unit of µg of HSE or Batch-15/mL; e Positive control of the DPPH test
MTT assay of raw extract (HSE) and optimized batch (Batch-15).
| Cell Line a | IC50 HSE Raw mg/mLb | IC50 Batch-15 mg/mL c |
|---|---|---|
| HaCaT | 0.500 ± 0.731 d | >15 d |
| SK-Mel-28 | 0.459 ± 0.831 d | 10.550 ± 3.010 |
| A375 | 0.584 ± 0.900 d | 4.550 ± 1.240 d |
| HeLa | 0.526 ± 0.890 d | 8.070 ± 2.150 d |
A375 and SK-Mel-28, melanoma cells; HeLa, cervical cancer cells; HaCaT immortalized human keratinocytes; IC50, required concentration of extract to inhibit cell proliferation by 50%; IC50, concentration of Batch-15 required to inhibit cell proliferation by 50% expressed as mg/mL; in this case, the result is depending on the Actual Extract Content (AEC, 3.9% in Batch-15); d IC50 ± standard deviation (data from three experiments in triplicate).