| Literature DB >> 35156490 |
Soha M Kandil1, Iman I Soliman2, Heba M Diab3, Nermeen I Bedair4, Marwa H Mahrous1, Ebtsam M Abdou1,5.
Abstract
Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) is an antioxidant that is widely used in cosmetics in skincare products. Due to the excessive low stability of ascorbic acid in cosmetic formulations, the stabilized ascorbic acid derivative, magnesium ascorbyl phosphate (MAP) was formulated as vesicular carriers; ethosomes and niosomes. The aim was to deliver MAP at the intended site of action, the skin, for sufficient time with enhanced permeation to get an effective response. Ethosomes were formulated using a full 32 factorial design to study ethanol and phospholipid concentration effect on ethosomes properties. Niosomes were formulated using 23 factorial designs to study the effect of surfactant type, surfactant concentration and cholesterol concentration on niosomes properties. The prepared formulations were evaluated for their Entrapment efficiency, particle size, polydispersity index, zeta potential and % drug permeated. The optimized ethosomal and niosomal formulations were incorporated into carbopol gel and evaluated for their permeation, skin retention and stability. A comparative split-face clinical study was done between the ethosomal and niosomal formulations for melasma treatment using Antera 3 D® camera. The optimized ethosomal and niosomal gels showed comparable controlled permeation and higher skin retention over their ethosomes and niosomes formulations respectively. Magnesium ascorbyl phosphate ethosomal gel showed clinically and statistically significant melanin level decrease after one month while MAP niosomal gel showed clinically and statistically significant melanin level decrease after six months. A combination of MAP ethosomes and niosomes could be promising skincare formulations for melasma and hyperpigmentation short and long-term treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Antera 3D® camera; ethosomes; hyperpigmentation; magnesium ascorbyl phosphate; melasma; niosomes; permeation; skin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35156490 PMCID: PMC9040897 DOI: 10.1080/10717544.2022.2036872
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Deliv ISSN: 1071-7544 Impact factor: 6.819
Experimental runs, independent and dependent variables of the 32 full factorials experimental design of Magnesium ascorbyl phosphate-loaded ethosomes.
| Runs* | Factors (Independent variables) | Responses (Dependent variables) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethanol % (v/v) (mL/100 mL) | PC % (w/v) (g/100 mL) | Y1:E.E (%) | Y2: Particle size (nm) | Y3:PDI | Y4:ZP (mV) | Y5: % permeated (8 h) | |||
| FE1 | (−1) | 30 | (−1) | 1 | 51.45 ± 2.34 | 148.62 ± 15.27 | 0.496 ± 0.071 | −32.24 ± 5.24 | 38.12 ± 2.61 |
| FE2 | (−1) | 30 | (0) | 2 | 65.56 ± 1.56 | 158.73 ± 18.53 | 0.482 ± 0.054 | −33.42 ± 3.45 | 33.24 ± 1.93 |
| FE3 | (−1) | 30 | (1) | 3 | 60.71 ± 2.04 | 167.42 ± 12.37 | 0.480 ± 0.123 | −31.47 ± 5.34 | 31.80 ± 2.52 |
| FE4 | (0) | 40 | (−1) | 1 | 63.43 ± 3.17 | 157.27 ± 17.63 | 0.415 ± 0.142 | −29.37 ± 3.74 | 51.62 ± 2.14 |
| FE5 | (0) | 40 | (0) | 2 | 70.32 ± 2.86 | 163.47 ± 10.46 | 0.375 ± 0.085 | −26.72 ± 2.64 | 42.83 ± 3.51 |
| FE6 | (0) | 40 | (1) | 3 | 66.67 ± 3.46 | 183.37 ± 20.46 | 0.262 ± 0.053 | −30.28 ± 4.72 | 40.92 ± 2.13 |
| FE7 | (1) | 50 | (−1) | 1 | 83.43 ± 2.23 | 160.57 ± 13.74 | 0.257 ± 0.008 | −35.91 ± 4.08 | 68.47 ± 3.60 |
| FE8 | (1) | 50 | (0) | 2 | 86.14 ± 1.58 | 180.63 ± 11.42 | 0.237 ± 0.014 | −32.92 ± 3.81 | 61.91 ± 2.94 |
| FE9 | (1) | 50 | (1) | 3 | 76.47 ± 3.51 | 193.52 ± 10.58 | 0.222 ± 0.047 | −36.64 ± 3.64 | 57.52 ± 2.50 |
*MAP (0.3% w/v (0.333 g/100 mL)) and PG (10% v/v (10 mL/100 mL)) were kept constant in all formulations, volume was completed up to 100 mL with distilled water. EE: Entrapment Efficiency, PDI: Polydispersity index, ZP: Zeta potential.
Experimental runs, independent and dependent variables of the 23 full factorials experimental design of Magnesium ascorbyl phosphate-loaded niosomes.
| Runs* | Factors (Independent variables) | Responses (Dependent variables) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surfactant type | Surfactant molar ratio | Cholesterol molar ratio | Y1:EE (%) | Y2: Particle size (nm) | Y3:PDI | Y4:ZP (mV) | Y5: % permeated (8 h) | |||
| FN1 | Span 60 | (−1) | 1 | (−1) | 1 | 69.80 ± 3.56 | 218.60 ± 22.52 | 0.253 ± 0.124 | −26.83 ± 3.34 | 36.67 ± 3.64 |
| FN2 | Span 60 | (−1) | 1 | (+1) | 2 | 78.63 ± 2.47 | 258.23 ± 16.85 | 0.281 ± 0.092 | −32.42 ± 2.58 | 30.14 ± 1.96 |
| FN3 | Span 60 | (+1) | 2 | (−1) | 1 | 86.82 ± 4.52 | 138.43 ± 17.84 | 0.312 ± 0.112 | −27.56 ± 2.67 | 54.42 ± 2.35 |
| FN4 | Span 60 | (+1) | 2 | (+1) | 2 | 92.13 ± 3.09 | 169.32 ± 12.22 | 0.292 ± 0.163 | −31.42 ± 2.43 | 46.37 ± 3.24 |
| FN5 | Span 80 | (−1) | 1 | (−1) | 1 | 53.85 ± 4.52 | 362.43 ± 24.63 | 0.415 ± 0.131 | −25.82 ± 4.52 | 33.34 ± 2.05 |
| FN6 | Span 80 | (−1) | 1 | (+1) | 2 | 61.24 ± 2.68 | 384.62 ± 14.52 | 0.281 ± 0.082 | −32.63 ± 3.84 | 28.46 ± 2.98 |
| FN7 | Span 80 | (+1) | 2 | (−1) | 1 | 68.32 ± 2.97 | 278.40 ± 10.58 | 0.354 ± 0.028 | 26.08 ± 3.06 | 50.58 ± 2.68 |
| FN8 | Span 80 | (+1) | 2 | (+1) | 2 | 87.32 ± 3.12 | 315.62 ± 11.23 | 0.382 ± 0.036 | −30.52 ± 2.41 | 40.42 ± 3.21 |
*MAP (one molar ratio) was kept constant in all formulations. EE: Entrapment Efficiency, PDI: Polydispersity index, ZP: Zeta potential.
Figure 1.Effect of different independent factors; (X1): Ethanol concentration, (X2): PC concentration on: (a) EE%, (b) PS, (c) PDI, (d) ZP, (e) MAP % permeated (8 h) of the prepared MAP Ethosomes.
Figure 2.Effect of different independent factors; (X1): Ethanol concentration, (X2): PC concentration on: (a) EE%, (b) PS, (c) PDI, (d) ZP, (e) MAP % permeated (8 h) of the prepared MAP Niosomes.
Figure 3.Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) photographs of: (a) MAP- loaded ethosomes (FE7), (b) MAP- loaded niosomes (FN3).
Figure 4.MAP skin permeation and skin retention from MAP solution, MAP ethosomes (FE7), MAP ethosomal (FE7) gel, MAP niosomes (FN3) and MAP niosomal (FN3) gel.
Effect of storage on selected ethosomes (FE7) and niosomes (FN3) formulations.
| Formulation | Month | Stored at 4 °C | Stored at room temperature | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EE% | PS (nm) | EE% | PS (nm) | ||
| FE7 | 0 | 83.43 ± 2.23 | 160.57 ± 13.7 | 83.43 ± 2.23 | 160.57 ± 13.7 |
| 1 | 83.12 ± 1.89 | 163.54 ± 8.67 | 81.67 ± 2.34 | 171 ± 11.57 | |
| 2 | 82.63 ± 2.06 | 167.85 ± 10.69 | 79.53 ± 1.85 | 183 ± 9.38 | |
| 3 | 82.17 ± 2.18 | 170.52 ± 12.85 | 76.52 ± 1.93 | 189.32 ± 13.08 | |
| FN3 | 0 | 86.82 ± 4.52 | 138.43 ± 17.84 | 86.82 ± 4.52 | 138.43 ± 17.84 |
| 1 | 86.53 ± 3.46 | 136.62 ± 22.54 | 85.48 ± 5.39 | 140.32 ± 19.40 | |
| 2 | 85.72 ± 4.08 | 141.31 ± 19.42 | 82.57 ± 3.62 | 153.72 ± 23.43 | |
| 3 | 85.03 ± 3.94 | 141.54 ± 24.62 | 81.44 ± 4.51 | 159.89 ± 22.24 | |
EE: Entrapment Efficiency, PS: Particle size.
Demographic and clinical data.
| Gender | |
| Women | 23 (57.5%) |
| Men | 17 (42.5) |
| Age | |
| Mean ± SD | 41.90 ± 9.097 |
| Range | 25–55 |
| Skin type | |
| II | 1 (2.5%) |
| III | 24 (60%) |
| IV | 15 (37.5) |
| Rt side Average melanin level before Treatment | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.799 ± 0.1190 |
| Range | 0.5–1 |
| Rt side Average melanin level After 1 month | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.776 ± 0.1158 |
| Range | 0.5–1 |
| Rt side Average melanin level After 6 months | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.748 ± 0.1608 |
| Range | 0.1–1 |
| Lt side Average melanin level before treatment | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.792 ± 0.1321 |
| Range | 0.6–1 |
| Lt side Average melanin level After 1 month | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.772 ± 0.1234 |
| Range | 0.6 – 1 |
| Lt side Average melanin level After 6 months | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.758 ± 0.1619 |
| Range | 1 |
Figure 5.Samples of Antera 3D® Camera photos of before and after treatment with: (A) Right side (MAP niosoma gel) and (B) Left side (MAP ethosoal gel).