| Literature DB >> 33171816 |
Khaled M Hosny1,2,3, Nabil A Alhakamy1,2, Amal M Sindi4, Rasha A Khallaf3.
Abstract
Burn wound healing is a complex process that involves the repair of injured tissues and the control of infection to diminish the scar formation, pain, and discomfort associated with such injuries. The aim of this research was to formulate and optimize a self-nanoemulsion drug delivery system based on the use of coconut oil and loaded with simvastatin. Coconut oil possesses antiinflammatory and antibacterial activity, and simvastatin has interesting properties for promoting the wound-healing process because it increases the production of the vascular endothelial growth factor at the site of injury. The Box-Behnken design was employed for the optimization of the coconut oil-simvastatin self-nanoemulsion drug delivery system. The prepared formulations were characterized according to globular size and their activity in the healing of burn wounds by assessing the mean wound diameter and level of interlukin-6 in experimental animals. Additionally, the antimicrobial activity of the prepared formulations was assessed. The nanoemulsion was considered adequately formed when it had droplets of between 65 and 195 nm. The statistical design proved the important synergistic effect of coconut oil and simvastatin for burn wound management in their synergistic potentiation of wound closure and their anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial effects. The optimum formulation achieved up to a 5.3-fold decrease in the mean burn wound diameter, a 4.25-fold decrease in interleukin-6 levels, and a 6-fold increase in the inhibition zone against Staphylococcus aureus when compared with different control formulations. Therefore, the designed nanoemulsions containing a combination of coconut oil and simvastatin could be considered promising platforms for the treatment of chronic and burn wounds.Entities:
Keywords: burns; coconut oil; experimental design; nanoemulsion; simvastatin; wound healing
Year: 2020 PMID: 33171816 PMCID: PMC7695003 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics12111061
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.321
Independent variables and their levels, along with dependent variables and their constraints, in the Box–Behnken design of nanoemulsion formulations.
| Independent Variables | Levels | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| −1 | 0 | 1 | |
| A = Coconut oil amount (mg) | 125 | 175 | 225 |
| B = Simvastatin amount (mg) | 5 | 10 | 20 |
| C = S mix ratio | 1:1 | 1:2 | 1:3 |
| Dependent variables | Constrains | ||
| Y1 = Droplet size (nm) | Minimize | ||
| Y2 = mean burned wound diameter (mm) | Minimize | ||
| Y3 = Interleukin-6 (U/mL) | Minimize | ||
| Y4 = inhibition zone against | Maximize | ||
Box–Behnken design and responses of SMV-loaded self-nanoemulsion drug delivery systems (SNEDDSs).
| A | B | C | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run | Coconut Oil Amount | Simvastatin Amount | Smix Ratio | Globule Size (nm) | Mean Burned Wound Diameter (mm) | Interleukin-6 (U/mL) | Inhibition Zone against |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 174 | 4.5 | 1750 | 21 |
| 2 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 91 | 6.5 | 2450 | 7 |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 138 | 5 | 2000 | 13 |
| 4 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 157 | 5.5 | 2200 | 20 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | 6 | 2250 | 13 |
| 6 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 78 | 10 | 3150 | 6 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 118 | 6 | 2280 | 12 |
| 8 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 169 | 4.5 | 1600 | 22 |
| 9 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 130 | 5 | 1850 | 15 |
| 10 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 71 | 13 | 3800 | 5 |
| 11 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 84 | 11 | 3400 | 6 |
| 12 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 105 | 8 | 2850 | 11 |
| 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 123 | 6.5 | 2400 | 12 |
| 14 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 189 | 3 | 1000 | 24 |
| 15 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 110 | 9 | 3000 | 10 |
| 16 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 65 | 12.5 | 3550 | 4 |
| 17 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 152 | 5.5 | 2050 | 20 |
| 18 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 97 | 7.5 | 2600 | 6 |
| 19 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 195 | 3.5 | 1300 | 23 |
Figure 1Graphic representation of the effect of independent variables on globule size for different SMV-CnO SNEDDS formulations. (A) Main effect plot. (B) Contour plot. (C) Three-dimensional surface plot.
Figure 2Graphic representation of the effect of independent variables on mean burn wound diameter for different SMV-CnO SNEDDS formulations. (A) Main effect plot. (B) Contour plot. (C) Three-dimensional surface plot.
Figure 3Graphic representation of the effect of independent variables on IL-6 levels for different SMV-CnO SNEDDS formulations. (A) Main effect plot. (B) Contour plot. (C) Three-dimensional surface plot.
Figure 4Graphic representation of the effect of independent variables on the inhibition zone against S. aureus for different SMV-CnO SNEDDS formulations. (A) Main effect plot. (B) Contour plot. (C) Three-dimensional surface plot.
Regression analysis results for all responses.
| Dependent Variables | R2 | Adjusted R2 | Predicted R2 | Adequate Precision | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Y1 | 0.9990 | 0.9979 | 0.9962 | 0.0001 | 962.96 | 108.41 |
| Y2 | 0.9945 | 0.9890 | 0.9689 | 0.0001 | 181.19 | 4.73 |
| Y3 | 0.9852 | 0.9822 | 0.9761 | 0.0001 | 332.59 | 2.477 × 105 |
| Y4 | 0.9976 | 0.9951 | 0.9873 | 0.0003 | 411.01 | 10.38 |
Figure 5Desirability ramp and bar chart for optimization. (A) Desirability ramp shows the levels for independent variables and predicted values for the responses of the optimum formulation. (B) Bar chart shows the desirability values for the combined responses.
Actual and experimental values of the optimized nanoemulsion formulation (means ± SD, n = 3).
| Solution | Coconut oil Amount (mg) | SMV Amount (mg) | Smix Ratio | Droplet Size (nm) | Mean Burned Wound Diameter (mm) | Interleukin-6 (U/mL) | Inhibition Zone against | Desirability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicated value | 225 | 20 | 1.8:1 | 188.7 | 3.2 | 1063.9 | 24.3 | 0.9840 |
| Experimental value | 225 | 20 | 1.8:1 | 186.0 ± 2.5 | 3.0 ± 0.10 | 1045.0 ± 15 | 24.0 ± 0.5 | 0.9840 |
Composition and actual and predicted responses of the optimal nanoemulsion formulation.
| Factor | Optimal Value | Response Variable | Actual Value | Predicted Value | % Prediction Error a |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: Coconut oil amount (mg) | 225 | Droplet size (nm) | 186 | 188.7 | −1.45 |
| B: SMV amount (mg) | 20 | Mean burned wound diameter (mm) | 3 | 3.2 | −6.66 |
| C: Smix ratio | 1.8:1 | Interleukin-6 (U/mL) | 1045 | 1063.9 | −1.72 |
| Inhibition zone against | 24 | 24.3 | −1.25 |
a: negative sign indicated that predicted value higher than actual value.
Figure 6Overlay plot for the optimal SMV-CnO SNEDDS region determination.
Characterization of optimum formulation in comparison with control groups (means ± SD, n = 3).
| Run | A: CnO Amount | B: SMV Amount | C: Smix Ratio | Globule Size | Mean Burned Wound Diameter | Interleukin-6 | Inhibition Zone against |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (nm) | (mm) | (U/mL) | (mm) | ||||
| Optimum formulation | 225 mg | 20 | 1.8:1 | 186 | 3 ± 0.2 | 1045 ± 55 | 24 ± 1.5 |
| F1 | 225 mg | 0 | 1.8:1 | 144 | 8 ± 0.5 | 2435 ± 76 | 17 ± 0.8 |
| F2 | Oleic acid | 20 | 1.8:1 | 198 | 7 ± 1.0 | 2800 ± 95 | 11 ± 1.2 |
| SMV aqueous dispersion | 0 | 20 | 0 | 650 | 14 ± 0.9 | 4115 ± 120 | 7 ± 0.5 |
| Normal Saline | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | 16 ± 2.2 | 4450 ± 150 | 4 ± 0.1 |
Figure 7Wound-healing efficacy of the optimized SMV-CnO SNEDDS formulation compared with the same parameters in four different controls. (A) Mean burn wound diameter. (B) IL-6 level. (C) Inhibition zone against S. aureus.