| Literature DB >> 35380084 |
Sifan Huang1, Xinyu Wang1, Mengmeng Liu1, Zhizhe Lin2, Wenqian Gu2, Haili Zhao2, Yanqiu Zhang2, Baoyue Ding3, Jiyong Liu4, Xin Wu1,2, Wei Fan5, Jianming Chen1,2.
Abstract
Sodium aescinate (SA) is often used for intravenous (IV) injection owing to its anti-inflammatory, anti-exudative, increasing venous tension, improving blood circulation and reducing swelling activities. However, the clinical application of SA is limited by strong irritation, short half-life and low bioavailability. To overcome these defects, we intended to modify SA by encapsualing it with liposomes . SA was mixed with a proper amount of phospholipid and lyophilized to prepare the liposome of sodium aescinate for injection (SA-Lip-I). Its physical properties, cumulative release and dilution stability were evaluated in vitro. Its pharmacodynamic characteristics were evaluated. Safety of SA-Lip-I was evaluated in terms of hemolysis, IV irritation and acute toxicity. The mean particle size of SA-Lip-I was 117.33±0.95 nm, polydispersity index (PDI) was 0.140±0.017, Zeta potential was -30.34±0.23 mv, The cumulative release of SA-Lip at 12 h was more than 80%, which met the release requirements of nanoparticles. SA-Lip-I was well stable in the four mediators and met the clinical medication requirements. In addition, SA-Lip-I had better efficacy than the SA-I and has a significant difference. Furthermore, SA-Lip-I did not induce hemolysis at 37°C, and produced by far milder venous irritation as compared with SA-I. In addition, LD50 of SA-Lip-I was 2.12 fold that of the commercial SA-I, with no obvious side effects.The modified SA-Lip-I is a promising preparation which can reduce the irritation and toxic side effects, improve the treatment effect to a certain extent, but greatly alleviate pain of the patient during treatment, achieving the optimal curative effect.Entities:
Keywords: Sodium aescinate; efficiency; liposome; safety; stability
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35380084 PMCID: PMC8986259 DOI: 10.1080/10717544.2022.2058114
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Deliv ISSN: 1071-7544 Impact factor: 6.419
Figure 1.The characteristics of SA-Lip-I. (A) SA-Lip. (B) SA-Lip lyophilized product. (C) SA-Lip reconstituted solution. (D) Particle size distribution of SA-Lip-I. (E) Zeta potential of SA-Lip-I. (F) TEM micrographs of SA-Lip-I. (G) In vitro cumulative release of SA-Lip-I in different media (n = 3).
The encapsulation rate of SA-Lip (n = 3).
| Production batch | EE (%) | Mean ± SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20210104 | 2.49 | 0.04 | 98.47 | 98.33 ± 0.0012 |
| 20210105 | 2.35 | 0.04 | 98.17 | |
| 20210106 | 2.45 | 0.04 | 98.34 |
Comparison of SA-Lip-I before and after lyophilization (n = 3).
| Production batch | Before lyophilization | After lyophilization | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EE% | Size (nm) | PDI | EE% | Size (nm) | PDI | |
| 20210309 | 99.33 | 118.23 | 0.147 | 95.81 | 126.40 | 0.167 |
| 20210317 | 99.43 | 111.4 | 0.152 | 95.58 | 119.03 | 0.157 |
| 20210322 | 99.62 | 117.5 | 0.141 | 95.40 | 129.8 | 0.164 |
| Mean ± SD | 99.46 ± 0.0012 | 115.71 ± 3.0622 | 0.147 ± 0.0045 | 95.60 ± 0.0017 | 125.08 ± 4.4953 | 0.163 ± 0.0042 |
Figure 2.The physical stability of SA-Lip-I. (A) Changes in particle size after SA-Lip reconstitution when diluted with 5% glucose injection and 0.9% sodium chloride injection (n = 3). (B) Change in PDI after SA-Lip reconstitution when diluted with 5% glucose injection and 0.9% sodium chloride (n = 3). (C) Change in EE% after SA-Lip reconstitution when diluted with 5% glucose injection and 0.9% sodium chloride injection (n = 3). (D) Stability of SA-Lip-I in different concentrations of FBS (n = 3).
Figure 3.Anti-inflammatory effect of SA-Lip-I in vivo. Compared with control group *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, compared with the SA-I group p < .05, p < .01, p < .001. (A) Average swelling degree of ear (n = 8). (B) Average weight of granuloma (n = 7). (C) Pat edema volume after 1 h (n = 7). (D) Pat edema after volume after 4 h (n = 7).######
Figure 4.ELISA determined the PGE2, TNF-α, and IL-1β results. Compared with the control group *p < .05, **p < .01,***p < .01, compared with the model group p < .01, p < .001, compared with the SA-I group p < .05, p < .01, p < .001. (A) ELISA determined the IL-1β results. (B) ELISA determined the TNF-α. (C) ELISA determined the PGE-2.#####&&&&&&
Deaths of mice in each group (x ± s).
| Dose (mg/kg) | Number of animals | Mortality | Mortality rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.958 | 10 | 0 | 0.0 |
| 4.948 | 10 | 1 | 10.0 |
| 6.185 | 10 | 2 | 20.0 |
| 7.731 | 10 | 3 | 30.0 |
| 9.664 | 10 | 5 | 50.0 |
| 12.08 | 10 | 7 | 70.0 |
| 15.01 | 10 | 10 | 100 |