| Literature DB >> 35328783 |
Mengjie Wang1, Chunxin Wang1, Shuaikai Ren1, Junqian Pan1, Yan Wang1, Yue Shen1, Zhanghua Zeng1, Haixin Cui1, Xiang Zhao1.
Abstract
Diabetes is a chronic metabolic disease characterized by lack of insulin in the body leading to failure of blood glucose regulation. Diabetes patients usually need frequent insulin injections to maintain normal blood glucose levels, which is a painful administration manner. Long-term drug injection brings great physical and psychological burden to diabetic patients. In order to improve the adaptability of patients to use insulin and reduce the pain caused by injection, the development of oral insulin formulations is currently a hot and difficult topic in the field of medicine and pharmacy. Thus, oral insulin delivery is a promising and convenient administration method to relieve the patients. However, insulin as a peptide drug is prone to be degraded by digestive enzymes. In addition, insulin has strong hydrophilicity and large molecular weight and extremely low oral bioavailability. To solve these problems in clinical practice, the oral insulin delivery nanosystems were designed and constructed by rational combination of various nanomaterials and nanotechnology. Such oral nanosystems have the advantages of strong adaptability, small size, convenient processing, long-lasting pharmaceutical activity, and drug controlled-release, so it can effectively improve the oral bioavailability and efficacy of insulin. This review summarizes the basic principles and recent progress in oral delivery nanosystems for insulin, including physiological absorption barrier of oral insulin and the development of materials to nanostructures for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.Entities:
Keywords: absorption barrier; bioavailability; nanodrug delivery system; oral insulin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35328783 PMCID: PMC8952690 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23063362
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1(A) Materials and nanostructures of oral insulin delivery systems. (B) The physiological absorption barrier of oral administration of insulin. (a) Destruction by gastric acid. (b) Degradation by digestive enzyme. (c) Retention by the mucus layer barrier. (d) Retardation by intestinal epithelial cell layer.
The physiological barriers of oral insulin administration and the mechanisms.
| Physiological Barriers | Constitution | Mechanisms to Overcome | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Destruction by gastric acid | Gastric acid, pH 1.0–2.0 | pH responsiveness | [ |
| Degradation by digestive enzymes | Pepsin, trypsin, chymotrypsin, elastase, and carboxypeptidase | Shielding effect, hydrophobic effect | [ |
| Retention by the mucus layer barriers | Water, glycoproteins, proteins, electrolytes and lipids | Charge-reversing, “Mucus-inert” electroneutral surface | [ |
| Retardation by intestinal epithelial cell layer | Tight junction, apical endocytosis, degradation of lysosomes, and basolateral to the circulation | Permeation enhancer, increase the active transportation | [ |
Representative materials for construction of oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Carrier Components | Method | Active Components | EE%; LE% | Size (nm); PDI | Zeta-Potential (mV) | In Vitro Release Study (Condition, Time, Insulin Release) | Dose (IU kg−1) | In Vivo Studies | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PLA | PLA, F127 [(PLA-F127-PLA) aggregates)] | Self-assembly | - | -; | 56; | - | pH 7.4, 2 h, 55% | 50 | BGL, | [ |
| PLA, PEG | Nanoprecipitation | IgG Fc | -; | 63; | −5.6 | pH 7.4, 2 h, 60%, | 1.1 | BGL | [ | |
| PLGA | PLGA | Reverse micelle-solvent evaporation method | SPC | 80~90; | 200; | −17~−12 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 45%; | 20 | rBA, 7.7% | [ |
| Double emulsion solvent evaporation | SPC, DSPE-PEG (2000) | 92.36; | 176; | −31.1 | - | 40 | rBA, 12.2% | [ | ||
| PLGA (50:50 c, | Double emulsion method | 47.0; | 247; | 45.2 | SGF, 6 h, 54.6%; | 20 | rPA, 11.8% | [ | ||
| PLGA (50:50, | Double emulsion method | TDCS, Tat (YGRKKRRQRRR) | 58.95; | 157; | 41.8 | pH 1.2, 6 h, 20%; | 10 | BGL, 12 h, 40%; | [ | |
| PLGA polymer (50:50; 20 kDa) | Double emulsion method | Folic acid, Chitosan | 41; | 252; | 5.99 | pH 1.2, 6 h, 32.2%; | 70 | rBA, 7.77% | [ | |
| MOFs | Fe-based mesoporous MOF | Physical absorption | SDS | 51.6; | 100; | −18.3 | pH 7.4, 14 h, 50%; | 50 | rPA, | [ |
| Zr6-based MOF | Physical absorption | - | -; | - | - | pH 1.29, 1 h, 10%; | - | - | [ | |
| Chitosan | Chitosan, γ-PGA | electrostatic interaction | - | 75; | 250; | 25 | pH < 7, 100% | 30 | rBA, | [ |
| Chitosan (100 kDa, 90%) | self-assembly method | Hyaluronic acids (200 kDa), Biotin | 71.72; | 277; | −27.90 | 250 U/mL trypsin, 2 h, 30% | 50 | rBA, 4.6% | [ | |
| Chitosan (365 and 222 kDa, 86% d), alginate | Electrostatic interaction and Chemical cross-linking | - | 78.3; | 104; | 3.89 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 25%; | 100 | rBA, 8.11% | [ | |
| Chitosan (200–300 kDa, 85%), snail mucin | Self-gelation method | - | 92.5; | 504; | 31.2 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 10%; | 50 | rBA, 10.6% | [ | |
| Chitosan (150 kDa, 85.8%) | Self-assembly method | SDS, L-Phenylalanine | 93.4; | 131; | 30.71 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 45%; | 50 | rPA, | [ | |
| Chitosan (29.80 kDa, 80.2%) | Chemical cross-linking | Pentaerythritol tetrakis (3-mercaptopropionate) | 79.63; | 220; | 2.3 | pH 2, 12 h, 96%; | 50 | 3 h, 50% | [ | |
| Carboxymethyl chitosan | Ionic cross-linking method | L-valine, PBA | 67; | 190; | - | SGF, 24 h, 16.6%; SIF, 24 h, 50.7%; | 75 | rPA, 7.55% | [ | |
| Others | Alginate, dextran sulfate | Emulsification/internal gelation, polyelectrolyte complexation | low molecular weight chitosan, bovine serum albumin | 30.7; | 300; | 28.9 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 35%; | - | - | [ |
| Proanthocyanidins, short-chain glucans | Recrystallization | - | 70.2; | 100~200; - | - | pH 1.2, 8 h, 60%; | 100 | rPA, 6.98% | [ | |
| HPMCP | Spontaneous emulsification solvent diffusion method | 90.8; | 200; | −15~0 | pH 3.0, 4 h, 8.2%; | 25 | rBA, 8.6% | [ | ||
| Waxy corn starch (approximately 99% amylopectin), Chitosan | Self-assembly | - | 89.6; | 311; 0.227 | −43.7 | pH 7.4, 8 h, 50% | 50 | rBA, 15.19% | [ | |
| Silica | - | SiO2 | 20~100; | 10 | rBA, 23.4% | [ |
a: The time from medication to glucose level testing; b: hypoglycemic effect; c: degree of deacetylation; d: the ratio of poly (lactic acid) and poly (glycolic acid); PDI: poly dispersion index; EE%: encapsulation efficiency; LE%: drug loading efficiency; rBA: relatively bioavailability, rPA: relatively pharmacological activity; BGL: blood glucose level; SPC: soybean phosphatidylcholine; PBA: phenylboronic acid; DSPE-PEG(2000): 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanol-amine-N-methoxy (polyethyleneglycol)-2000; SDS: sodium dodecyl sulfate; TDCS: N-trimethyl-N-dodecyl chitosan; γ-PGA: poly (γ-glutamic acid); HPMCP: hydroxypropyl methylcellulose phthalate; -: not given in the literature.
Figure 2The chemical structures of the carrier materials for oral insulin delivery nanosystems. (A) PLA, (B) PLGA, (C) chitosan, (D) MOFs, and (E) alginate acid.
Figure 3(A) The structure of liposomes. (B) TEM images of CLs and PcCLs, and schematic diagram for the process of the transport of the PcCLs through the mucus layers and epithelial barrier. (C) Schematic diagram of IPUL-CST and its intestinal uptake and lymphatic transport. (D) Schematic representation of the glucose-responsive oral insulin delivery liposomes for postprandial glycemic regulation.
Examples of liposomes as a nano structure for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Method | Active Components | EE%; | Size (nm); | Zeta-Potential (mV) | In Vitro Release Study | Dose | In Vivo Studies | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DOTAP, EPC | Thin-film hydration method | BSA | 28.7; | 195; | −10.9 | pH 6.8, 6 h, 45% | 75 | rBA, 11.9% | [ |
| DDAB, DOCA | Thin-film hydration method | CST, SPION | 75; | 194; | - | pH 1.2, 2 h, 10–14%; | 20 | rBA, 34% | [ |
| Mpeg2000-DSPE, HSPC | Extrusion, thin film hydration method | FA, PEG | 70; | 180; | −12.9~−4.0 | pH 1.2, 1 h, 25%; | 50 | rBA, 19.08% | [ |
| EPC, CH, SA | Thin film hydration | PAA, FA-PEG-PAH | >88; | 250; | 25.4 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 15%; | 50 | rBA, 20% | [ |
| PC, DSPE-PEG2000, CH | Microfluidic technique, nanoprecipitation | Chitosan, HPMCAS-MF, PEG | 91; | 363; | 23 | pH 1.2, 2 h, 1%; | - | - | [ |
| EP, CH, DOTAP | Thin-film hydration technique | Chitosan | 87.5; | 439; | 29.9 | pH 1.2, 50 h, 18.9%; | 250 | - | [ |
| EPC, DOPE, CH | Lipid film hydration method | Glucose-sensitive hyaluronic acid shell; Fc Rn | 20.7; | 94; | −28.1 | pH 2.5, 12 h, <10%; | 10 | - | [ |
DOATP: N-[1-(2, 3-Dioleoyloxy) propyl]-N,N,N-trimethylammonium methyl-sulfate; EPC: egg phosphotidylcholine; BSA: bovine serum albumin; RB: relative bioavailability, PAA: poly(acrylic acid); DDAB: dimethyl dioctadecyl ammonium bromide; DOCA: deoxycholic acid; CST: chondroitin sulfate-g-taurocholic acid; SPION: superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles; DSPE: distearoylphosphatidylethanola-mine; mPEG: methoxypolyethelene glycol; HSPC: hydrogenated soya phosphatidylcholine; FA: folic acid; PEG: polyethylene glycol; CH: cholesterol; PAH: poly(allylamine hydrochloride), SA: stearylamine; HPMCAS-MF (M grade fine powders, abbreviated as MF): hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate; PEG: poly(ethyleneglycol), DOPE: dioleoylphosphatidylethanolamine.
Figure 4(A) Structure of micelles. (B) Schematic representation of Ins-loaded PCPMs and its pH-triggered release. (C) Schematic representation of DSPE-PCB micelles for oral delivery of insulin.
Examples of micelles as nanostructures for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Method | Active Components | EE%; | Size (nm); | Zeta-Potential (mV) | In Vitro Release Study | Dose | In Vivo Studies | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P(MMA- | Electron transfer, atom transfer radical Polymerization and self-assembled | MAA.MMA. AEMA | -; | neutral pH 200; - | 15–25 | pH 1.2, 10 h, 36%~40%; | - | - | [ |
| PCB, | Zinc ion | 25; | −41 | - | 20 | rBA, | [ | ||
| DODA-501, NIP AAm, AAC | Free radical polymerization | 59; | 94~200; | pH 1.55, 2 h, 45%; | - | - | [ |
MMA: methyl methacrylate; MAA: methacrylicacid; AEMA: amino ethyl methacrylate; P(MMA-co-MAA)-b-PAEMA: Poly(methyl methacrylate-co-methacrylicacid)-b-poly(2-amino ethyl methacrylate); PCB: polycarboxybetaine; DSPE: 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine; DODA-501: dioctadecylamine-501; NIP Aam: N-isopropylacrylamide AAC: acrylic acid.
Figure 5(A) Structure of SLNs. (B) Schematic representation of possible structures of VEN. (C) Schematic diagram of SLN and its behavior in intestinal epithelium.
Examples of SLNs as a nanostructure for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Method | Active Components | EE%; | Size (nm); PDI | Zeta-Potential (mV) | In Vitro Release Study | Dose | In Vivo Studies | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soybean lecithin | double emulsion method | Peptide: GLFEAIEGFIENGWEGMIDGWYG | 98.16; | 161.6, | −16.1 | pH 5.5, 12 h, 50%; | 50 | rBA, 5.47% | [ |
| Soy lecithin | Emulsification solvent-evaporation technique | propylene glycol | 54.5; | 203.6, 0.175 | −43.3 | pH 2.5 (pepsin), | 50 | rBA, 5.1% | [ |
| Glyceryl Trimyristate, Soya Lecithin | Double emulsification | L-penetratin | 67.42; | 745.3, 0.227 | −23.7 | pH 1.2, 6 h, 91%; | 10 | rBA, 13.1% | [ |
Figure 6(A) Structures of organic nanospheres/nanocapsules. (B) Schematic representation of sequential FNC platform for preparation of the CPP/insulin nanoparticles. (C) The structure and the preparation process of NC-HTCC. (D) The structure of virus-like P-R8-Pho NPs and diagram of P-R8-Pho NPs to sequentially overcome mucus layer and intestinal epithelial cell layer.
Examples of organic nanospheres/nanocapsules as nanostructure for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Method | Active Components | EE%; | Size (nm); PDI | Zeta-Potential (mV) | In Vitro Release Study | Dose | In Vivo Studies | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poly( | Self-polymerization | - | 100; 20~60 | 120; | −20–−10 | pH 6.8, 2 h, 73.3% | 50 | rBA, 7.74% | [ |
| Hyaluronic acid (190 kDa), HPMCP | FNC | Penetratin peptide (Ste-RQIKIWFQNRRMKWKK) | 96.6; | 103; | −19.7 | pH 7.4, 12 h, 75% | 80 | rBA, 11% | [ |
| PLGA | Self-assembly nanoprecipitation | DSPE-PEG2000-R8, DSPE-PEG2000-Pho | ~35; | 81.8; 0.191 | −2.39 | pH 2.5, 0–2 h, 35%; | 50 | rBA, 5.96% | [ |
| Sodium tripolyphosphate, Chitosan (50 kDa, 95%) | FNC | 81.9; | 106; | −24.6 | pH 2.5, 0–2 h, 20%; | 80 | rBA, 13.3% | [ |
HPMCP: hydroxypropylmethyl cellulose phthalate; FNC: flash nano-complexation.
Figure 7(A) Structure of nanogel. (B) Schematic representation of insulin-loaded glucose-responsive nanocarriers further encapsulated into hyaluronic acid (HA) hydrogel for oral delivery of insulin. (C) Schematic diagram of pH and glucose dual-responsive nanogels for protein delivery. (D) Synthetic process and its pH responsiveness of CMS/PiBAA hybrid microgel.
Examples of nanogel as a nanostructure for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Method | Active Components | EE%; | Size (nm); | Zeta-Potential (mV) | In Vitro Release Study | Dose | In Vivo Studies | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (CMS- | Aqueous dispersion copolymerization | Acrylic acid, carboxymethyl starch | - | pH 1.2, 480; | - | pH 1.2, 4 h, 25%; | 60 | rPA, | [ |
| PLG, dextran | Covalent cross-linking | PBA, PEG | 44; | 43.7; | −40 | pH7.4, 72 h, 40.2% (Cg: 1 mg mL−1), 72.8% | - | - | [ |
| EGDMA | - | VPBA, | 68; | 166; | - | pH 1.2, 0–2 h, 10%; | 75 | BLG, | [ |
CMS-g-AA: acrylate-grafted-carboxymethyl starch; iBAA: 2-isobutyl-acrylic acid; PLG: poly (L-glutamic acid); Cg: the concentration of glucose; EGDMA: ethylene glycol dimethacrylate; VPBA: 4-vinylbenzeneboronic acid.
Figure 8(A) Structure of inorganic/organic hybrid. (B) Structure of penetration behavior of virus-mimicking nanoparticles (MSN-NH2@COOH/CPP5). (C) Structure of HAP-PEG-GA-INS NPs and schematic diagram of insulin delivery to the effector cells by HAP-PEG-GA-INS NPs. (D) Structure and synthesis of the MSNs core–shell nanoparticles (a) and its pH- and glucose-sensitive behavior (b).
Examples of inorganic/organic nanohybrid as nanostructure for oral insulin delivery nanosystems.
| Materials | Method | Active Components | EE%; | Size (nm); PDI | Zeta-Potential | In Vitro Release Study | Dose | In Vivo Studies | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mesoporous silica nanoparticles | Physical adsorption method | KLPVM peptide | 80; | 263.5; | −0.49 | pH 6.8, 6 h, 40.52% | 100 | rBA, 2.84% | [ |
| Hydroxyapatite, PEG | Homogeneous precipitation method, esterification reaction, amidation reaction | Gallic acid | 45–60; | 150; | 30–40 | - | 50 | - | [ |
| Iron-based MOF, mPEG-b-PLLA, SDS | Oil/water emulsion | SDS, PEG | 51.6; | ~100; - | −18.33 | pH 6.8, 12 h, 20%; | 50 | rPA, 7.8% | [ |
| Mesoporous silica nanoparticles | Aqueous polymerization and physical adsorption | APBA | 77~89; | 202.8; | −27.3 | pH 1.2, 5 h, 15.2%; | 25 | rBA, 3.1% | [ |
| Porous silicon nanoparticles | Immersion method | Poly (pyridyl di-sulfide ethylene phosphate), | ~74; | 241; | 6.6 | pH 1.2, 0~2 h, <1%; | 50 | rBA, 4.36% | [ |
mPEG-b-PLLA: Poly (ethylene glycol)-block-poly(L-lactide); APBA: 3-amidophenylboronic acid.