| Literature DB >> 35453361 |
Nermine Besrour1, Taofiq Oludemi1,2, Filipa Mandim1, Carla Pereira1, Maria Inês Dias1, Marina Soković3, Dejan Stojković3, Olga Ferreira1, Isabel C F R Ferreira1, Lillian Barros1.
Abstract
The cosmetic industry is constantly searching for bioactive ingredients, namely, those obtained from natural sources with environmentally friendly connotations and less toxic effects. A previous study of our research group optimized the extraction of phenolic compounds from Juglans regia by heat-assisted extraction. Due to its richness in different phenolic compounds, the present work aimed to develop a formulation containing J. regia leaf extract. The extract's antioxidant, anti-tyrosinase, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, wound healing, cytotoxicity, and photostability properties were evaluated. The extract was then incorporated into an O/W base cream, followed by characterization of the final formulation in terms of its antioxidant properties, phenolic composition, and stability over time and at different storage conditions. The most abundant compounds in the hydroethanolic extract were 3-O-caffeoylquinic acid (18.30 ± 0.04 mg/g), quercetin-O-pentoside (9.64 ± 0.06 mg/g), and quercetin 3-O-glucoside (6.70 ± 0.19 mg/g). Besides those, the extract presented antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, wound closure, and antibacterial effects against several skin pathogens. In addition, HaCaT cell viability was maintained up to 98% at 400 µg/mL. Within Proteus vulgaris-infected HaCaT cells, the extract also presented an over 40% bacterial mortality rate at its nontoxic concentration (200 µg/mL). After incorporating the extract, the obtained formulation presented a good physicochemical profile over time and at different storage conditions while also maintaining its antioxidant effect; as such, it can be considered stable for topical application. Future work to evaluate its performance in terms of skin permeation and detailed toxicological studies with a focus on regulatory requirements, involving skin irritation, eye irritation, genotoxicity, photo-irritation, and dermal absorption, should be conducted, as the prepared formulation demonstrated relevant properties that deserve to be further explored.Entities:
Keywords: Juglans regia; bioactivity; cosmeceuticals; phenolic compounds
Year: 2022 PMID: 35453361 PMCID: PMC9031312 DOI: 10.3390/antiox11040677
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) ISSN: 2076-3921
Identification and quantification of phenolic compounds in J. regia hydroethanolic extract.
| Peak | Rt (min) | λmax (nm) | [M-H]¯( | MS2 ( | Tentative Identification | Quantification (mg/g Extract) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.4 | 324 | 353 | 191 (100), 179 (50), 173 (19), 135 (10) | 3- | 18.30 ± 0.04 |
| 2 | 5.58 | 311 | 337 | 191 (100), 173 (35), 163 (100) | 3- | 5.78 ± 0.30 |
| 3 | 14.15 | 350 | 435 | 303 (20), 285 (100) | Taxifolin | 0.47 ± 0.01 |
| 4 | 14.34 | 349 | 435 | 303 (41), 285 (100) | Taxifolin | 1.06 ± 0.02 |
| 5 | 16.53 | 343 | 449 | 317 (100) | Myricetin | 1.51 ± 0.0008 |
| 6 | 16.83 | 281 | 463 | 317 (100) | Myricetin | 1.91 ± 0.09 |
| 7 | 17.36 | 354 | 435 | 303 (100), 285 (31) | Taxifolin | 5.31 ± 0.02 |
| 8 | 17.7 | 354 | 463 | 301 (100) | Quercetin 3- | 6.70 ± 0.19 |
| 9 | 19.25 | 351 | 463 | 301 (100) | Quercetin 3- | 2.01 ± 0.0039 |
| 10 | 20.17 | 352 | 433 | 301 (100) | Quercetin | 9.64 ± 0.06 |
| 11 | 21.1 | 348 | 433 | 301 (100) | Quercetin | 5.12 ± 0.16 |
| 12 | 22.86 | 342 | 447 | 301 (100) | Quercetin | 1.62 ± 0.01 |
| 13 | 24.29 | 329 | 417 | 285 (100) | Kaempferol | 1.29 ± 0.0018 |
| 14 | 25.68 | 332 | 417 | 285 (100) | Kaempferol | 0.79 ± 0.0023 |
| 15 | 26.87 | 334 | 431 | 285 (100) | Kaempferol | 0.90 ± 0.0026 |
| Total phenolic acids | 24.08 ± 0.35 | |||||
| Total flavonoids | 38.33 ± 0.59 | |||||
| Total phenolic compounds | 62.41 ± 0.94 |
Calibration curves used: 1 chlorogenic acid, y = 168,823 x − 161,172, r = 0.999; 2 p-coumaric acid, y = 301,950 x + 6966.7, r = 0.999; 3 quercetin-3-O-glucoside, y = 34,843 x − 160,173, r = 0.999.
Figure 1HPLC profile of J. regia hydroethanolic extract at 370 nm wavelength. The peak identification and quantification are presented in Table 1.
Bioactive properties of J. regia hydroethanolic extract.
| Bioactivity | Hydroethanolic Extract | Positive Control |
|---|---|---|
| Antioxidant activity (EC50) | (µg/mL) | |
| DPPH scavenging activity | 137 ± 10 | 41 ± 1.1 |
| Reducing power | 27.6 ± 0.02 | 42 ± 0.9 |
| TBARS formation inhibition | 11.83 ± 1.06 | 5.41 ± 0.3 |
| OxHLIA | ||
| Δt = 60 min | 10.8 ± 0.5 | 21.8 ± 0.2 |
| Δt = 120 min | 51 ± 1 | 43.5 ± 0.3 |
| Anti-tyrosinase activity (EC50) | µg/mL | µg/mL |
| L-DOPA inhibition | 751 ± 0.01 | 4.26 ± 0.02 |
| Anti-inflammatory activity (EC50) | (µg/mL) | |
| NO inhibition | 109 ± 5 | 6 ± 0.1 |
| Antibacterial activity (MIC/MBC) | (mg/mL) | |
|
| 2/2 | 0.003/0.006 |
|
| 0.25/0.5 | 0.1/0.2 |
|
| 4/8 | 0.003/0.006 |
| 2/4 | 0.04/0.1 | |
nd—not determined; Trolox, kojic acid, dexamethasone, and streptomycin were used as a positive control for the antioxidant, anti-tyrosinase, anti-inflammatory, and antibacterial activities, respectively.
Figure 2(A) Relative growth rate (%) of HaCaT cells treated with different concentrations of J. regia extract. (B) Relative P. vulgaris invasion capacity of HaCaT cells treated with extract (200 µg/mL) presented as percentage of P. vulgaris invasion capacity of untreated HaCaT cells (arbitrarily set at 100%).
Figure 3The photostability profile of J. regia hydroethanolic extract. Each value is the mean of three replicate determinations ± standard deviation. Means with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Color variation (L*, a*, and b*) of control base cream and formulations containing J. regia hydroethanolic extracts.
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| T30 | T0 | T14 | T30 | |
| 79.34 ± 0.42 | 79.6 ± 0.63 | 82.93 ± 0.21 | 79.34 ± 0.42 | 79.67 ± 0.83 | 84.13 ± 0.47 | 79.34 ± 0.42 | 80.56 ± 0.26 | 84.46 ± 0.25 | |
| −1.52 ± 0.01 | −1.10 ± 0.03 | −1.24 ± 0.01 | −1.52 ± 0.01 | −1.16 ± 0.01 | −1.15 ± 0.01 | −1.52 ± 0.01 | −1.07 ± 0.01 | −1.59 ± 0.01 | |
| 0.79 ± 0.01 | 1.05 ± 0.02 | 1.32 ± 0.07 | 0.79 ± 0.01 | 1.12 ± 0.14 | 1.28 ± 0.01 | 0.79 ± 0.01 | 1.17 ± 0.01 | 0.46 ± 0.05 | |
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
| |||||||
| T0 | T14 | T30 | T0 | T14 | T30 | T0 | T14 | T30 | |
| 46.47 ± 0.22 | 47.39 ± 0.32 | 51.15 ± 0.06 | 47.30 ± 0.20 | 48.44 ± 0.08 | 51.88 ± 0.09 | 45.64 ± 0.16 | 46.39 ± 0.20 | 47.14 ± 0.10 | |
| 1.99 ± 0.2 | 1.75 ± 0.09 | 2.17 ± 0.01 | 1.8 ± 0.12 | 1.65 ± 0.01 | 2.43 ± 0.01 | 1.9 ± 0.03 | 2.43 ± 0.04 | 3.23 ± 0.03 | |
| 13.48 ± 0.25 | 14.03 ± 0.23 | 20.75 ± 0.08 | 13.67 ± 0.03 | 14.083 ± 0.2 | 20.84 ± 0.15 | 12.47 ± 0.14 | 13.87 ± 0.06 | 19.2 ± 0.17 | |
Figure 4pH and lightness (L*) variation in Formulations 1 and 2 evaluated at different times and temperatures. Each value is the mean of three replicate determinations ± standard deviation. Means with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 5Antioxidant activity of the different formulations at time 0 and after 14 and 30 days of storage at 5, 20, and 40 °C. Each value is the mean of three replicate determinations ± standard deviation. Means with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
The phenolic compound profile of each hydroethanolic formulation at different storage conditions in mg/g of cream.
| Peaks | H5 Formulation | H20 Formulation | H40 Formulation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T14 | T30 | T0 | T14 | T30 | T0 | T14 | T30 | |
| 1 | 0.62 ± 0.1 a | 0.61 ± 0.09 b | 0.49 ± 0.02 c | 0.77 ± 0.12 a | 0.71 ± 0.12 b | 0.49 ± 0.01 c | 0.67 ± 0.1 a | 0.57 ± 0.1 b | 0.48 ± 0.02 c |
| 2 | 0.76 ± 0.1 a | 0.76 ± 0.05 a | 0.63 ± 0.01 b | 0.86 ± 0.1 a | 0.82 ± 0.1 b | 0.63 ± 0.03 c | 0.80 ± 0.11 a | 0.73 ± 0.1 b | 0.65 ± 0.01 c |
| 3 | 0.50 ± 0.05 a | 0.51 ± 0.06 a | 0.40 ± 0.01 b | 0.53 ± 0.07 b | 0.56 ± 0.04 a | 0.40 ± 0.02 c | 0.60 ± 0.08 a | 0.50 ± 0.05 b | 0.38 ± 0.02 c |
| 4 | 0.48 ± 0.07 a | 0.45 ± 0.01 b | 0.36 ± 0.01 c | 0.48 ± 0.05 a | 0.48 ± 0.08 a | 0.35 ± 0.01 b | 0.50 ± 0.06 a | 0.44 ± 0.04 b | 0.36 ± 0.03 c |
| 5 | 2.72 ± 0.1 a | 2.74 ± 0.1 b | 1.51 ± 0.02 c | 3.12 ± 0.1 a | 2.95 ± 0.11 b | 1.39 ± 0.02 c | 3.10 ± 0.15 a | 2.36 ± 0.13 b | 1.57 ± 0.01 c |
| 6 | 0.43 ± 0.02 a | 0.40 ± 0.01 b | 0.33 ± 0.01 c | 0.42 ± 0.03 a | 0.45 ± 0.03 b | 0.32 ± 0.03 c | 0.43 ± 0.01 a | 0.39 ± 0.05 b | 0.35 ± 0.01 c |
| 7 | 1.87 ± 0.1 a | 1.86 ± 0.1 b | 1.16 ± 0.02 c | 2.24 ± 0.1 a | 2.13 ± 0.1 b | 1.06 ± 0.02 c | 2.33 ± 0.12 a | 1.79 ± 0.05 b | 1.18 ± 0.01 c |
| 8 | 1.37 ± 0.1 a | 1.35 ± 0.15 b | 0.82 ± 0.01 c | 1.57 ± 0.1 a | 1.48 ± 0.11 b | 0.76 ± 0.01 c | 1.41 ± 0.1 a | 1.18 ± 0.06 b | 0.90 ± 0.02 c |
| 9 | 0.50 ± 0.04 b | 0.54 ± 0.02 a | 0.39 ± 0.01 c | 0.55 ± 0.05 a | 0.51 ± 0.01 b | 0.37 ± 0.01 c | 0.52 ± 0.05 a | 0.47 ± 0.03 b | 0.40 ± 0.03 c |
| 10 | 0.44 ± 0.07 a | 0.44 ± 0.03 a | 0.35 ± 0.01 b | 0.44 ± 0.08 a | 0.43 ± 0.05 a | 0.34 ± 0.02 b | 0.45 ± 0.02 a | 0.40 ± 0.02 b | 0.34 ± 0.01 c |
| 11 | 0.35 ± 0.02 a | 0.34 ± 0.02 a | 0.31 ± 0.02 b | 0.36 ± 0.02 a | 0.36 ± 0.01 a | 0.31 ± 0.03 b | 0.36 ± 0.01 a | 0.33 ± 0.01 b | 0.32 ± 0.02 c |
| 12 | 0.42 ± 0.03 a | 0.42 ± 0.05 a | 0.33 ± 0.02 b | 0.45 ± 0.02 a | 0.38 ± 0.04 b | 0.33 ± 0.02 c | 0.40 ± 0.02 a | 0.38 ± 0.02 a | 0.33 ± 0.01 b |
| TPA | 1.39 ± 0.2 | 1.38 ± 0.14 | 1.13 ± 0.03 | 1.64 ± 0.22 | 1.54 ± 0.22 | 1.13 ± 0.04 | 1.47 ± 0.21 | 1.30 ± 0.2 | 1.14 ± 0.03 |
| TF | 9.13 ± 0.6 | 9.10 ± 0.55 | 6.02 ± 0.14 | 10.18 ± 0.62 | 9.78 ± 0.58 | 5.69 ± 0.19 | 10.16 ± 0.62 | 8.28 ± 0.46 | 6.18 ± 0.17 |
| TPC | 10.52 ± 0.8 | 10.14 ± 0.69 | 7.15 ± 0.17 | 11.82 ± 0.84 | 11.32 ± 0.8 | 6.82 ± 0.23 | 11.64 ± 0.83 | 9.59 ± 0.66 | 7.33 ± 0.2 |
1: 3-O-caffeoylquinic acid; 2: 3-p-coumaroylquinic acid; 3: taxifolin O-pentoside isomer; 4: quercetin 3-O-glucoside; 5: quercetin 3-O-glucoside; 6: quercetin 3-O-hexoside; 7: quercetin O-pentoside; 8: quercetin O-pentoside; 9: quercetin O-rhamnoside; 10: kaempferol O-pentoside; 11: kaempferol O-pentoside; 12: kaempferol O-rhamnoside; TPA: total phenolic acids; TF: total flavonoids; TPC: total phenolic compounds. Each value represents the mean ± SD. In each row, different letters indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05).