| Literature DB >> 34203811 |
Maryam Moghtaderi1, Amir Mirzaie2, Negar Zabet3, Ali Moammeri1, Amirreza Mansoori-Kermani4, Iman Akbarzadeh4, Faten Eshrati Yeganeh5, Arman Chitgarzadeh6, Aliasghar Bagheri Kashtali6, Qun Ren7.
Abstract
With the increased occurrence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, alternatives to classical antibiotics are urgently needed for treatment of various infectious diseases. Medicinal plant extracts are among the promising candidates due to their bioactive components. The aim of this study was to prepare niosome-encapsulated Echinacea angustifolia extract and study its efficacy against multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae strains. Encapsulation was first optimized by Design of Experiments, followed by the empirical study. The obtained niosomes were further characterized for the size and morphology using dynamic light scattering (DLS), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Spherical niosomes had a diameter of 142.3 ± 5.1 nm, as measured by DLS. The entrapment efficiency (EE%) of E. angustifolia extract reached up to 77.1% ± 0.3%. The prepared niosomes showed a controlled drug release within the tested 72 h and a storage stability of at least 2 months at both 4 and 25 °C. The encapsulated E. angustifolia displayed up to 16-fold higher antibacterial activity against multidrug-resistant K.pneumoniae strains, compared to the free extract. Additionally, the niosome exhibited negligible cytotoxicity against human foreskin fibroblasts. We anticipate that the results presented herein could contribute to the preparation of other plant extracts with improved stability and antibacterial activity, and will help reduce the overuse of antibiotics by controlled release of natural-derived drugs.Entities:
Keywords: Echinacea angustifolia; antibacterial activity; drug delivery; encapsulation; niosome; stability
Year: 2021 PMID: 34203811 PMCID: PMC8232788 DOI: 10.3390/nano11061573
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Different levels for variables in the Box-Behnken optimization.
| Level | −1 | 0 | +1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| A (Hydration time, min) | 30 | 45 | 60 |
| B (Hydration volume, mL) | 6 | 8 | 10 |
| B (Hydration volume, mL) | 6 | 8 | 10 |
Design of Experiments using the Box-Behnken method to optimize the niosomal formulation of E. angustifolia extract. Total lipid (Span 60, Tween 60, and Cholesterol) concentration: 300 µmol; ratio of Span 60 and Tween 60 set to 1 to 1 (molar ratio); ratio of surfactant and Cholesterol set to 1 to 1 (molar ratio).
| Run | Levels of Independent Variables | Dependent Variables | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydration Time (min) | Hydration Volume (mL) | Cholesterol Content (µmol) | Average Size (nm) | Polydispersity Index (PDI) | Entrapment Efficiency (EE) (%) | |
| 1 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 327.1 | 0.37 | 67.2 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 285.4 | 0.31 | 49.6 |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 259.6 | 0.32 | 52.2 |
| 4 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 350.1 | 0.38 | 54.2 |
| 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 291.3 | 0.34 | 69.7 |
| 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 119.1 | 0.23 | 64.0 |
| 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 181.9 | 0.18 | 73.3 |
| 8 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 395.4 | 0.39 | 61.3 |
| 9 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 172.5 | 0.26 | 79.6 |
| 10 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 235.8 | 0.30 | 56.4 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 188.7 | 0.23 | 66.1 |
| 12 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 164.8 | 0.26 | 78.8 |
| 13 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 145.7 | 0.24 | 47.6 |
| 14 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 160.2 | 0.27 | 78.3 |
| 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 205.7 | 0.28 | 75.4 |
Figure 1Box-Behnken method for average diameter (A) and encapsulation efficiency (EE) (B) as a function of the cholesterol content, hydration time, and hydration volume. The optimized responses thereof were in line with the experimental data (C), N = 3.
Desirability criteria and predicted values for the variables.
| Number | A (Hydration Time, min) | B (Hydration Volume, mL) | C (Cholesterol Content, µmol) | Desirability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 53 | 8 | 150 | 0.933 |
Figure 2Morphological ascertainment of the optimized form. (A) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), (B) transmission electron microscopy (TEM), (C) analysis of particle size distribution by dynamic light scattering (DLS), and (D) Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectra of (a) cholesterol, (b) Span 60, (c) Tween 60, (d) E. angustifolia, (e) Niosome, and (f) E. angustifolia-loaded niosome. Arrow: indicating the peak of E. angustifolia.
Figure 3(A) In vitro drug release profile of E. angustifolia extracts at different pH from the optimized formulation of drug-loaded niosomes. Free Ea: free E. angustifolia extracts; NioEa (pH 3), NioEa (pH 5) and NioEa (pH 7.4): niosome-encapsulated E. angustifolia extracts kept at pH 3, pH 5, and pH 7.4, respectively. N = 3. Stability in respect to vesicle size (B) and Drug remaining (C) of optimum E. angustifolia-loaded niosomes during 60 days of storage at 4 ± 2 and 25 ± 2 °C. N = 3. ***: p < 0.001, **: p < 0.01, *: p < 0.05.
The kinetic release models and the parameters obtained for optimum niosomal formulation. * Diffusion or release exponent; ** Free E. angustifolia; *** E. angustifolia-loaded niosome.
| Release Model | Zero-Order | Korsmeyer–Peppas | First-Order | Higuchi | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 | R2 | n * | R2 | R2 | |
| FreeEa **—pH 7.4 | 0.8109 | 0.8425 | 0.5944 | 0.9254 | 0.7468 |
| NioEa ***—pH 7.4 | 0.5981 | 0.9925 | 0.4160 | 0.7548 | 0.9322 |
| NioEa—pH 5 | 0.6541 | 0.9739 | 0.4675 | 0.7628 | 0.9691 |
| NioEa—pH 3 | 0.7739 | 0.9785 | 0.5146 | 0.8035 | 0.9475 |
MIC and MBC values of selected bacteria and niosome-encapsulated E. angustifolia extract.
| Strain No. | MIC of | MIC of Extract-Loaded Niosome (µg mL−1) | Increased Efficacy of Niosome (Fold) | MBC of | MBC of Extract-Loaded Niosome (µg mL−1) | Increased |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 | 4000 | 250 | 16.0 |
| 6 | 4000 | 500 | 8.0 | 4000 | 500 | 8.0 |
| 10 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 |
| 13 | 2000 | 500 | 4.0 | 2000 | 500 | 4.0 |
| 16 | 4000 | 250 | 16.0 | 4000 | 250 | 16.0 |
| 24 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 |
| 29 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 |
| 33 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 |
| 37 | 4000 | 1000 | 4.0 | 4000 | 2000 | 2.0 |
| 46 | 1000 | 62.5 | 16.0 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 |
| 51 | 2000 | 500 | 4.0 | 4000 | 1000 | 4.0 |
| 56 | 1000 | 62.5 | 16.0 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 |
| 61 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 |
| 66 | 1000 | 250 | 4.0 | 1000 | 250 | 4.0 |
| 71 | 500 | 62.5 | 8.0 | 500 | 125 | 4.0 |
| 73 | 1000 | 62.5 | 16.0 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 |
| 77 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 | 2000 | 125 | 16.0 |
| 82 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 |
| 84 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 | 1000 | 250 | 4.0 |
| 87 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 |
| 91 | 1000 | 62.5 | 16.0 | 1000 | 125 | 8.0 |
| 94 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 | 2000 | 250 | 8.0 |
| 96 | 1000 | 250 | 4.0 | 1000 | 250 | 4.0 |
Figure 4Cytotoxicity of various concentrations of E. angustifolia extract and E. angustifolia-loaded niosome against HFF normal cells within 72 h. The viable HFF cells subjected to distilled water were used as controls and set as 100%. The cytotoxic cut-off was set to 70% viable cells, i.e., a lethal dose of 30%. N = 3. ***: p < 0.001, **: p < 0.01, *: p < 0.05.