| Literature DB >> 35209242 |
Jasmeet Kaur1, Md Khalid Anwer2, Ali Sartaj3, Bibhu Prasad Panda4, Abuzer Ali5, Ameeduzzafar Zafar6, Vinay Kumar7, Sadaf Jamal Gilani8, Chandra Kala9, Mohamad Taleuzzaman10.
Abstract
The objective of the current research is to develop ZnO-Manjistha extract (ZnO-MJE) nanoparticles (NPs) and to investigate their transdermal delivery as well as antimicrobial and antioxidant activity. The optimized formulation was further evaluated based on different parameters. The ZnO-MJE-NPs were prepared by mixing 10 mM ZnSO4·7H2O and 0.8% w/v NaOH in distilled water. To the above, a solution of 10 mL MJE (10 mg) in 50 mL of zinc sulfate was added. Box-Behnken design (Design-Expert software 12.0.1.0) was used for the optimization of ZnO-MJE-NP formulations. The ZnO-MJE-NPs were evaluated for their physicochemical characterization, in vitro release activity, ex vivo permeation across rat skin, antimicrobial activity using sterilized agar media, and antioxidant activity by the DPPH free radical method. The optimized ZnO-MJE-NP formulation (F13) showed a particle size of 257.1 ± 0.76 nm, PDI value of 0.289 ± 0.003, and entrapment efficiency of 79 ± 0.33%. Drug release kinetic models showed that the formulation followed the Korsmeyer-Peppas model with a drug release of 34.50 ± 2.56 at pH 7.4 in 24 h. In ex vivo studies ZnO-MJE-NPs-opt permeation was 63.26%. The antibacterial activity was found to be enhanced in ZnO-MJE-NPs-opt and antioxidant activity was found to be highest (93.14 ± 4.05%) at 100 µg/mL concentrations. The ZnO-MJE-NPs-opt formulation showed prolonged release of the MJE and intensified permeation. Moreover, the formulation was found to show significantly (p < 0.05) better antimicrobial and antioxidant activity as compared to conventional suspension formulations.Entities:
Keywords: Box–Behnken design; ZnO-MJE nanoparticles; antimicrobial and antioxidant activity; in vitro release; permeation study
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35209242 PMCID: PMC8878222 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27041450
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Rubia cordifolia (Image taken under Creative commons CC by 4.0 license).
Scheme 1Flow chart of work.
Observed responses of different formulation batches on the basis of independent variables.
| Factor | Response | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formulation Code (FC) | ZnSO4·7H2O | Ultrasonic Time | Stirring | % Entrapment Efficiency ± SD | Particle Size ± SD | PDI ± SD |
| F1 | 4.75 | 2 | 500 | 81.6 ± 0.17 | 264.1 ± 0.81 | 0.291 ± 0.001 |
| F2 | 6.75 | 2 | 500 | 82.3 ± 0.05 | 263.1 ± 1.55 | 0.292 ± 0.002 |
| F3 | 4.75 | 4 | 500 | 82.85 ± 0.13 | 261.3 ± 1.62 | 0.294 ± 0.002 |
| F4 | 6.75 | 4 | 500 | 79.85 ± 0.11 | 262.3 ± 1.58 | 0.281 ± 0.003 |
| F5 | 4.75 | 3 | 400 | 78.9 ± 0.21 | 263.4 ± 0.84 | 0.279 ± 0.001 |
| F6 | 6.75 | 3 | 400 | 76.3 ± 0.29 | 257.9 ± 0.85 | 0.288 ± 0.004 |
| F7 | 4.75 | 3 | 600 | 76.1 ± 0.29 | 260.2 ± 1.13 | 0.289 ± 0.003 |
| F8 | 6.75 | 3 | 600 | 77.3 ± 0.24 | 264.5 ± 0.57 | 0.279 ± 0.001 |
| F9 | 5.75 | 2 | 400 | 78.7 ± 0.33 | 257.5 ± 0.57 | 0.319 ± 0.002 |
| F10 | 5.75 | 4 | 400 | 82.3 ± 0.24 | 260.3 ± 0.82 | 0.315 ± 0.002 |
| F11 | 5.75 | 3 | 500 | 80.08 ± 0.34 | 259.1 ± 1.16 | 0.289 ± 0.001 |
| F12 | 5.75 | 3 | 500 | 79.84 ± 0.28 | 260.1 ± 0.65 | 0.289 ± 0.002 |
| F13 * | 5.75 | 3 | 500 | 79.00 ± 0.33 | 257.1 ± 1.76 | 0.289 ± 0.003 |
(* Optimized formulation, SD = standard deviation, n = no. of times).
ANOVA of responses (particle size, PDI, and entrapment efficiency).
| Particle Size | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source | Sum of Square | DF | Mean Square | F-Value | ||
| Model | 64.30 | 9 | 7.14 | 23.30 | 0.0126 | Significant |
| A-ZnSO4·7H2O | 0.1800 | 1 | 0.1800 | 0.5870 | 0.4994 | -- |
| B-Ultra-Sonication Time | 3.24 | 1 | 3.24 | 10.57 | 0.0475 | -- |
| C-Stirring Speed | 2.89 | 1 | 2.89 | 9.42 | 0.0546 | -- |
| AB | 1.00 | 1 | 1.00 | 3.26 | 0.1687 | -- |
| AC | 24.01 | 1 | 24.01 | 78.29 | 0.0030 | -- |
| BC | 7.05 | 1 | 7.05 | 23.00 | 0.0172 | -- |
| A² | 16.11 | 1 | 16.11 | 52.52 | 0.0054 | -- |
| B² | 1.52 | 1 | 1.52 | 4.95 | 0.1126 | -- |
| C² | 0.4563 | 1 | 0.4563 | 1.49 | 0.3097 | -- |
| Residual | 0.9200 | 3 | 0.3067 | -- | -- | |
| Lack of Fit | 0.1800 | 1 | 0.1800 | 0.4865 | 0.5577 | Not Significant |
| Pure Error | 0.7400 | 2 | 0.3216 | -- | -- | -- |
| Cor Total | 65.22 | 12 | -- | -- | -- | --- |
|
| ||||||
| Model | 0.0018 | 9 | 0.0002 | 10.50 | 0.0393 | Significant |
| A-ZnSO4·7H2O | 0.0000 | 1 | 0.0000 | 1.10 | 0.3719 | -- |
| B-Ultra-sonication time | 0.0000 | 1 | 0.0000 | 0.8306 | 0.4293 | -- |
| C-Stirring speed | 2.500 × 107 | 1 | 2.500 × 107 | 0.0130 | 0.9165 | -- |
| AB | 0.0000 | 1 | 0.0000 | 2.54 | 0.2090 | -- |
| AC | 0.0001 | 1 | 0.0001 | 4.68 | 0.1191 | -- |
| BC | 2.168 × 1019 | 1 | 2.168 × 1019 | 1.126 × 1014 | 1.0000 | -- |
| A² | 0.0006 | 1 | 0.0006 | 30.17 | 0.0119 | -- |
| B² | 0.0008 | 1 | 0.0008 | 44.08 | 0.0070 | -- |
| C² | 0.0004 | 1 | 0.0004 | 20.77 | 0.0198 | -- |
| Residual | 0.0001 | 3 | 0.0000 | -- | -- | -- |
| Lack of Fit | 0.0000 | 1 | 0.0000 | 0.7090 | 0.4884 | Not significant |
| 0.0000 | 2 | -- | -- | -- | -- | |
| 0.0019 | 12 | -- | -- | -- | -- | |
|
| ||||||
| Model | 58.83 | 9 | 6.54 | 26.34 | 0.0106 | Significant |
| A-ZnSO4·7H2O | 1.71 | 1 | 1.71 | 6.90 | 0.0786 | -- |
| B-Ultra-sonication time | 0.3600 | 1 | 0.3600 | 1.45 | 0.3148 | -- |
| C-Stirring speed | 0.8100 | 1 | 0.8100 | 3.26 | 0.1685 | -- |
| AB | 3.42 | 1 | 3.42 | 13.79 | 0.0340 | -- |
| AC | 3.61 | 1 | 3.61 | 14.55 | 0.0317 | -- |
| BC | 5.88 | 1 | 5.88 | 23.70 | 0.0166 | -- |
| A² | 0.5003 | 1 | 0.5003 | 2.02 | 0.2507 | -- |
| B² | 15.23 | 1 | 15.23 | 61.36 | 0.0043 | -- |
| C² | 10.57 | 1 | 10.57 | 42.58 | 0.0073 | -- |
| Residual | 0.7445 | 3 | 0.2482 | -- | -- | -- |
| Lack of Fit | 0.1013 | 1 | 0.1013 | 0.3148 | 0.6312 | not significant |
| Pure Error | 0.6432 | 2 | -- | -- | -- | -- |
| Cor Total | 59.58 | 12 | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Figure 23D (A), contour (B), and actual and predicted (C) values of particle size.
Figure 33D (A), contour (B), and actual and predicted (C) values of particle size.
Figure 43D (A), contour (B), and actual and predicted (C) values of particle size.
Figure 5Particle size, zeta potential, and PDI value and morphological examination.
Figure 6Comparative releases of the drug at pH 7.4.
Various kinetic release models.
| Dissolution Media | Zero Order | First Order | Higuchi Model | Korsmeyer–Peppas | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | R2 | K | R2 | K | R2 | K | R2 | K |
| pH 7.4 | 0.8725 | 0.033 | 0.9098 | 0.000 | 0.9679 | 1.143 | 0.9912 | 4.982 |
Figure 7Comparative permeation of ZnO nanosuspension and MJE suspension.
Figure 8Antioxidant activity of MJE dispersion and ZnO-MJE-NPs. ** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001.
Result of the stability study of ZnO-MJE-NPs at 25 ± 1 °C/60% RH for 3 months.
| Months | Evaluation Parameter | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Physical Appearance | Particle Size | Entrapment Efficiency | Drug Content | |
| 0 | Clear and No Sedimentation or Cake Formation. | 262.5 ± 2.36 | 78.78 ± 2.51 | 97.26 ± 2.17 |
| 1 | Clear and No Sedimentation or Cake Formation. | 265.1 ± 4.17 | 77.89 ± 1.98 | 98.56 ± 1.88 |
| 2 | Clear and No Sedimentation or Cake Formation. | 263.7 ± 3.11 | 76.82 ± 2.28 | 97.76 ± 2.51 |
| 3 | Clear and No Sedimentation or Cake Formation. | 267.5 ± 2.78 | 76.23 ± 2.76 | 97.35 ± 2.51 |