| Literature DB >> 32252563 |
Yuting Chen1, Xue Feng1, Luya Li1, Kewei Song2, Lantong Zhang1.
Abstract
Hinokiflavone (HF) is a natural biflavonoid extracted from medicinal plants such as Selaginella tamariscina and Platycladus orientalis. HF plays a crucial role in the treatment of several cancers. However, its poor solubility, instability, and low bioavailability have limited its use. In this study, soluplus/d-α-tocopherol acid polyethylene glycol 1000 succinate (TPGS)/dequalinium (DQA) was applied to improve the solubilization efficiency and stability of HF. HF hybrid micelles were prepared via thin-film hydration method. The physicochemical properties of micelles, including particle size, zeta potential, encapsulation efficiency, drug loading, CMC value, and stability were investigated. The in vitro cytotoxicity assay showed that the cytotoxicity of the HF hybrid micelles was higher than that of free HF. In addition, the HF hybrid micelles improved anticancer efficacy and induced mitochondria-mediated apoptosis, which is associated with the high levels of ROS inducing decreased mitochondrial membrane potential, promoting apoptosis of tumor cells. Furthermore, in vivo tumor suppression, smaller tumor volume and increased expression of pro-apoptotic proteins were found in nude mice treated with HF hybrid micelles, suggesting that HF hybrid micelles had stronger tumor suppressive activity compared with free HF. In summary, HF hybrid micelles developed in this study enhanced antitumor effect, which may be a potential drug delivery system for the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma.Entities:
Keywords: Hinokiflavone; hybrid micelle; lung adenocarcinoma; mitochondria-targeted; nude mice
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32252563 PMCID: PMC7178856 DOI: 10.1080/10717544.2020.1748760
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Deliv ISSN: 1071-7544 Impact factor: 6.419
Effect of different hydration time on micelles (n = 3).
| Hydration time (min) | Particle size (nm) | Encapsulation efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 20 | 74.58 ± 0.34 | 83.26 ± 0.37 |
| 40 | 70.93 ± 0.22 | 86.23 ± 0.12 |
| 60 | 65.85 ± 0.46 | 90.27 ± 0.63 |
| 80 | 64.79 ± 0.17 | 88.93 ± 0.22 |
Effect of different hydration temperature on micelles (n = 3).
| Hydration temperature (°C) | Particle size (nm) | Encapsulation efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 25 | 66.73 ± 0.22 | 90.25 ± 0.13 |
| 45 | 73.28 ± 0.46 | 86.12 ± 0.24 |
| 65 | 75.84 ± 0.38 | 80.71 ± 0.37 |
The effect of the amount of DQA on micelles (n = 3).
| DQA/drug (w/w) | Particle size (nm) | Encapsulation efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 1:2 | 69.31 ± 0.32 | 89.25 ± 0.28 |
| 1:1 | 65.97 ± 0.54 | 90.11 ± 0.25 |
| 2:1 | 72.18 ± 0.73 | 91.02 ± 0.14 |
The effect of TPGS/soluplus ratio on micelles (n = 3).
| TPGS/soluplus (w/w) | Particle size (nm) | Encapsulation efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 1:4 | 65.82 ± 0.74 | 89.02 ± 0.43 |
| 2:3 | 68.53 ± 0.62 | 87.85 ± 0.36 |
| 3:2 | 70.26 ± 0.11 | 86.92 ± 0.57 |
| 4:1 | 71.95 ± 0.21 | 80.67 ± 0.31 |
The effect of drug carrier ratio on micelles (n = 3).
| Drug/carrier (w/w) | Particle size (nm) | Encapsulation efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 1:31 | 82.74 ± 0.63 | 53.79 ± 0.21 |
| 1:41 | 67.83 ± 0.15 | 89.92 ± 0.07 |
| 1:51 | 72.46 ± 0.72 | 90.54 ± 0.13 |
Figure 1.Characterization of HF hybrid micelles. (A) Size distribution spectrum of HF hybrid micelles; (B) zeta potential spectrum of HF hybrid micelles; (C) stability of HF hybrid micelles within 30 days; (D) measurement of the CMC of HF hybrid micelles.
Figure 2.Survival rates of A549 cells after treatment with free HF and HF hybrid micelles.
Figure 3.ROS levels determined by flow cytometry.
Figure 4.Mitochondrial membrane potential detection of free HF and HF hybrid micelles by flow cytometry.
JC-1 monomer/aggregate of different formulations compared with control group.
| Group | Q2-1 (%) | Q2-2 (%) | Q2-3 (%) | Q2-4 (%) | JC-1 monomer/ aggregate (percentage of control) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 0 | 93.57 | 0 | 6.43 | – |
| Free HF group | 0 | 69.89 | 0 | 30.11 | 6.27 |
| HF hybrid micelle group | 0 | 52.77 | 0 | 47.23 | 13.02 |
Figure 5.In vivo evaluation in A549 tumor xenografted nude mice model. (A) Tumor volume changes (n = 3). (B) Variations of body weight (n = 3). (C) Final tumor weights (mean ± SD, n = 3), *p<.05, **p<.01.
Figure 6.HE and Immunohistochemical images of three groups. (A) HE images of lung tissue in three groups. (B) HE images of tumor tissue in three groups.
Figure 7.Immunohistochemical images of tumor tissue in three groups.