| Literature DB >> 35049550 |
Sabdat Ozichu Ekama1,2, Margaret O Ilomuanya1, Chukwuemeka Paul Azubuike1, James Babatunde Ayorinde2, Oliver Chukwujekwu Ezechi2, Cecilia Ihuoma Igwilo1, Babatunde Lawal Salako2.
Abstract
The challenges encountered with conventional microbicide gels has necessitated the quest for alternative options. This study aimed to formulate and evaluate a bigel and thermosensitive gel, designed to combat the challenges of leakage and short-residence time in the vagina. Ionic-gelation technique was used to formulate maraviroc and tenofovir microspheres. The microspheres were incorporated into a thermosensitive gel and bigel, then evaluated. Enzyme degradation assay was used to assess the effect of the acid phosphatase enzyme on the release profile of maraviroc and tenofovir microspheres. HIV efficacy and cytotoxicity of the microspheres were assessed using HIV-1-BaL virus strain and HeLa cell lines, respectively. Maraviroc and tenofovir release kinetics followed zero-order and Higuchi model kinetics. However, under the influence of the enzyme, maraviroc release was governed by first-order model, while tenofovir followed a super case II transport-mechanism. The altered mode of release and drug transport mechanism suggests a triggered release. The assay of the microspheres suspension on the HeLa cells did not show signs of cytotoxicity. The thermosensitive gel and bigel elicited a progressive decline in HIV infectivity, until at concentrations of 1 μg/mL and 0.1 μg/mL, respectively. The candidate vaginal gels have the potential for a triggered release by the acid phosphatase enzyme present in the seminal fluid, thus, serving as a strategic point to prevent HIV transmission.Entities:
Keywords: HIV prevention; HIV/AIDS; acid phosphatase; microparticles; pre-exposure prophylaxis; vaginal gels microbicides
Year: 2021 PMID: 35049550 PMCID: PMC8774413 DOI: 10.3390/gels8010015
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gels ISSN: 2310-2861
Cumulative percentage of drug released from microspheres, with and without acid phosphatase enzyme.
| Time (h) | Maraviroc | Maraviroc | Tenofovir | Tenofovir |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 30.84 | 34.88 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 33.80 | 40.13 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 35.60 | 54.36 |
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 39.80 | 58.86 |
| 12 | 31.02 | 46.3 | 42.76 | 59.66 |
| 24 | 42.31 | 66.2 | 49.20 | 99.65 |
| 48 | 60.65 | 75.4 | 79.92 | - |
| 72 | 94.70 | 100 | 81.40 | - |
Mathematical models for maraviroc and tenofovir release kinetic data.
| Mathematical Models | R2 Values without Enzyme * | R2 Values with Enzyme * |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Zero-order | 0.9409 | 0.8460 |
| First-order | 0.8966 | 0.8922 |
| Higuchi model | 0.8953 | 0.8687 |
| Korsmeyer–Peppas model | 0.7543 | 0.7292 |
|
| ||
| Zero-order | 0.8086 | 0.8475 |
| First-order | 0.8590 | 0.8470 |
| Higuchi model | 0.9034 | 0.9473 |
| Korsmeyer–Peppas model | 0.4907 | 0.5039 |
* R2 = coefficient of correlation and the highest value best describes a drug kinetic model of release. ** Depicts the drug transport mechanism(n).
Figure 1(A) Zero-order kinetic release of maraviroc from microspheres. (B) First-order kinetic release of maraviroc from microspheres facilitated with enzymes.
Figure 2(A) Korsmeyer-peppas model kinetic release of tenofovir from microspheres. (B) Korsmeyer-peppas model kinetic release for tenofovir from microspheres facilitated with enzymes.
Composition of a 10 mL thermosensitive gel and characterization results.
| Code | PF127 (g) | PF68 (g) | Gelation Temperature* (°C) | Gelation Time * (secs) | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | 2.0 | 0.08 | 37.6 ± 0.6 | 37 ± 1.4 | 5.69 |
| T2 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 36.4 ± 0.8 | 36 ± 1.1 | 5.83 |
| T3 | 1.8 | 0.1 | No gelation | - | 5.97 |
| T4 | 1.5 | 0.1 | No gelation | - | 5.94 |
| T5 | 2.0 | 0.2 | 39.4 ± 1.3 | 39 ± 1.6 | 5.84 |
| T6 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 42.6 ± 2.2 | 54 ± 1.8 | 5.89 |
| T7 | 1.5 | 0.2 | No gelation | - | 5.97 |
| T8 | 2.0 | - | 33.4 ± 0.9 | 96 ± 1.5 | 5.02 |
| T9 | 1.8 | - | 39.8 ± 0.8 | 120 ± 2.2 | 5.89 |
* Each value is presented as mean ± SD, n = 3.
Figure 3Thermosensitive gel, showing gelation at 36.4 °C.
Characterization for thermosensitive gel containing maraviroc and tenofovir microspheres.
| Parameter | Values |
|---|---|
| pH | 5.83 |
| Osmolality | 991 mOsm/kg. |
| Viscosity at 4 °C | 24cps |
| Viscosity at 25 °C | 88 cps |
| Viscosity at 37 °C | 62,887 cps |
| Release kinetic model of maraviroc from the gel | Zero-order (R2 = 0.9051) |
| Release kinetic model of tenofovir from the gel | Higuchi model (R2 = 0.9163) |
Formulation chart for varying organogel combinations and gelation characteristics.
| Code | Span 60% | Tween 80 | Soya Bean Oil % | Gel Characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | 2 | 1 | 97 | No gelation |
| F2 | 5 | 1 | 94 | No gelation |
| F3 | 10 | 1 | 89 | Gelation |
| F4 | 15 | 1 | 84 | Gelation |
| F5 | 18 | 1 | 81 | Gelation |
| F6 | 20 | 1 | 79 | Gelation |
| F7 | 25 | 1 | 74 | Gelation |
| F8 | 2 | 2 | 96 | No gelation |
| F9 | 5 | 2 | 93 | No gelation |
| F10 | 10 | 2 | 88 | Gelation |
| F11 | 15 | 2 | 83 | Gelation |
| F12 | 18 | 2 | 80 | Gelation |
| F13 | 20 | 2 | 78 | Gelation |
| F14 | 25 | 2 | 73 | Gelation |
Varying combinations of organogel–hydrogel mix for bigel formation.
| Code | Ratio (Organogel: Hydrogel) | pH of Bigel Mix |
|---|---|---|
| T1 | 1:1 | 3.65 |
| T2 | 2:1 | 4.43 |
| T3 | 3:1 | 3.8 |
| T4 | 4:1 | 4.8 |
|
| ||
| T5 | 1:2 | 3.5 |
| T6 | 1:3 | 3.7 |
| T7 | 1:4 | 5.6 |
Figure 4Organogel, hydrogel, and bigel mix.
Characterization parameters for the optimal bigel containing Maraviroc and Tenofovir microspheres.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| pH | 3.65 |
| Osmolality | 628 mOsm/kg |
| Viscosity | 8840 cps |
| Release kinetic model of maraviroc from the bigel | Zero-order (R2= 0.9431) |
| Release kinetic model of tenofovir from the bigel | Higuchi model(R2 = 0.9206) |
Independent sample t-test, comparing the means of absorbance of the test agent and controls to test for significance in cytotoxicity assay.
| S/N | Test Agent | N | Viability ** (%) | Mean ± SD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MVC/TFV (1000 μg/mL) | 3 | 71.2 | 0.371 ± 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Negative control | 3 | 100 | 0.521 ± 0.01 | ||
| 2 | MVC/TFV (100 μg/mL) | 3 | 83.5 | 0.435 ± 0.02 | 0.006 |
| Negative control | 3 | 100 | 0.521 ± 0.01 | ||
| 3 | MVC/TFV (10 μg/mL) | 3 | 95.3 | 0.497 ± 0.011 | 0.054 |
| Negative control | 3 | 100 | 0.521 ± 0.01 | ||
| 4 | MVC/TFV (1 μg/mL) | 3 | 98.1 | 0.511 ± 0.001 | 0.069 |
| Negative control | 3 | 100 | 0.521 ± 0.01 | ||
| 5 | MVC/TFV (0.1 μg/mL) | 3 | 98.4 | 0.513 ± 0.002 | 0.098 |
| Negative control | 3 | 100 | 0.521 ± 0.01 | ||
| 6 | MVC/TFV (1000 μg/mL) | 3 | 71.2 | 0.371 ± 0.014 | <0.001 |
| Positive control | 3 | 13.5 | 0.071 ± 0.01 | ||
| 7 | MVC /TFV (100 μg/mL) | 3 | 83.5 | 0.435 ± 0.02 | <0.001 |
| Positive control | 3 | 13.5 | 0.071 ± 0.01 | ||
| 8 | MVC/TFV (10 μg/mL) | 3 | 95.3 | 0.497 ± 0.011 | <0.001 |
| Positive control | 3 | 13.5 | 0.071 ± 0.01 | ||
| 9 | MVC/TFV (1 μg/mL) | 3 | 98.1 | 0.511 ± 0.001 | <0.001 |
| Positive control | 3 | 13.5 | 0.071 ± 0.01 | ||
| 10 | MVC/TFV (0.1 μg/mL) | 3 | 98.4 | 0.513 ± 0.002 | <0.001 |
| Positive control | 3 | 13.5 | 0.071 ± 0.01 | ||
| 11 | Negative control | 3 | 100 | 0.521 ± 0.01 | <0.001 |
| Positive control | 3 | 13.5 | 0.071 ± 0.01 |
* Significance level = 0.05. ** 95% confidence interval. Maraviroc = MVC, Tenofovir = TFV.
Figure 5Cytotoxic effect of the varying concentrations of maraviroc and tenofovir microspheres, negative and positive control on the HeLa cell lines. Results are given as mean ± SD, n = 3.
Figure 6HIV infectivity dose-response curve for the optimal thermosensitive and bigel, containing maraviroc and tenofovir microspheres and nonoxynol-9 gel, incubated with HIV-1 indicator TZM-bl cells at different concentrations (n = 5 ± SD). No significant difference between the mean HIV infectivity values of the thermosensitive and bigel (p > 0.05).