| Literature DB >> 35890246 |
Ali M Nasr1, Yasmin I Mortagi2, Nashwa H Abd Elwahab3, Mohammad Y Alfaifi4, Ali A Shati4, Serag Eldin I Elbehairi4,5, Reda F M Elshaarawy6,7, Islam Kamal1.
Abstract
(1) Background: Thymus vulgaris L. (thyme) essential oil (TEO) has gained much attention because of its long history of medicinal usage. However, the lack of precise chemical profiling of the TEO and methods to optimize the bioactivity and delivery of its constituents has hampered its research on quality control and biological function; (2)Entities:
Keywords: anti-inflammatory; anti-melanoma; release kinetics; thyme oil multilayer nanoemulsions; transdermal delivery
Year: 2022 PMID: 35890246 PMCID: PMC9317589 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14071350
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.525
Chemical ingredients (listed according to concentration) of Thymus extract (TEO) using GC-MS.
| No. | Compound | RT (min) | Yield (%) | No. | Compound | RT (min) | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Germacrene D | 12.43 | 10.1 |
| 7-Hydroxyfarnesen | 18.09 | 0.99 |
|
| Thymol | 9.21 | 8.32 |
| α-Gurjunen | 10.85 | 0.88 |
|
| Carotol | 16.57 | 7.6 |
| 1H-Cyclopropa[a]naphthalene | 18.23 | 0.85 |
|
| Carvacrol | 9.51 | 6.96 |
| Isolongifolene oxide | 19.72 | 0.83 |
|
| α-Acorenol | 13.3 | 6.25 |
| 6-epi-shyobunol | 16.74 | 0.81 |
|
| D-Germacren-4-ol | 14.31 | 5.61 |
| Aristol-1(10)-en-9-yl Isovalerate | 18.28 | 0.75 |
|
| (-)-Globulol | 13.39 | 4.75 |
| 8,9-dehydro-Cycloisolongifolene | 18.32 | 0.75 |
|
| Cubebanol | 12.67 | 4.47 |
| Cubebanol | 14.48 | 0.74 |
|
| Humulene | 11.79 | 4.12 |
| Nonadecatriene-5,14-diol | 18.75 | 0.71 |
|
| α-Copaen | 10.19 | 3.86 |
| 6-epi-shyobunol | 13.67 | 0.65 |
|
| Isocaryophillene | 11.07 | 3.58 |
| 8,9-dehydro-Neoisolongifolene | 18.25 | 0.65 |
|
| 2,4-Patchouladiene | 18.19 | 3.09 |
| 9.59 | 0.64 | |
|
| Ledene oxide-(II) | 19.49 | 2.03 |
| β-Selinene | 12.8 | 0.61 |
|
| (-) β-Elemene | 10.56 | 1.85 |
| (-)-Spathulenol | 20.24 | 0.61 |
|
| α-Cadinol | 15.97 | 1.75 |
| Isolongifolene oxide | 20.51 | 0.61 |
|
| α-Pinene oxide | 16.91 | 1.69 |
| Ledene oxide-(II) | 20.39 | 0.59 |
|
| τ-Muurolol | 15.53 | 1.68 |
| Thunbergol | 21.43 | 0.59 |
|
| Germacrene A | 10.69 | 1.35 |
| D-Guaiene | 12.85 | 0.57 |
|
| Caryophyllene oxide | 18.02 | 1.31 |
| Cyclooctenone dimer | 18.92 | 0.57 |
|
| Cholestan-3-ol | 18.68 | 1.22 |
| Alloaromadendrane-4β,10α-diol | 19.86 | 0.57 |
|
| Junenol | 13.42 | 1.15 |
| Ledol | 16.85 | 0.56 |
|
| Cembrene | 21.13 | 1.13 |
| α-Yalangene | 10.32 | 0.55 |
|
| Nerolidol-Epoxyacetate | 18.56 | 1.05 |
| Longifolenaldehyde | 18.14 | 0.53 |
|
| τ-Cadinol | 15.79 | 1.04 |
| o-Cymene | 6.92 | 0.45 |
|
| (-)-Spathulenol | 19.57 | 1.03 |
Scheme 1Schematic diagram for preparation of oligochitosan (OC), glycidyl N,N-dimethylhexadecyl ammonium chloride (GDMHAC), amphiphilic oligochitosan (AOC), and TEO-based NEs.
Impact of OD of AOC on the stability indices of AOC-based NEs (particle size, PDI, and ZP).
| NE | GDMHAC:OC | QD% | Particle Size (nm) | PDI | ZP (mV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AOC-NE1 | 1.0:1.0 | 20.6 | 193.91 ± 2.12 | 0.23 | 21.83 ± 0.58 |
| AOC-NE2 | 1.5:1.0 | 29.5 | 194.63 ± 3.65 | 0.21 | 24.91 ± 0.42 |
| AOC-NE3 | 2.0:1.0 | 39.3 | 184.74 ± 1.27 | 0.19 | 23.82 ± 0.55 |
| AOC-NE4 | 2.5:1.0 | 44.4 | 180.85 ± 1.75 | 0.23 | 23.99 ± 0.48 |
| AOC-NE5 | 3.0:1.0 | 47.5 | 179.03 ± 1.98 | 0.22 | 24.78 ± 0.39 |
Figure 1The effect of OC and AOC protective layers on the stability of their respective NEs (A) zeta potential (mV) and (B) particle size during a week of storage at room temperature, compared with bare NE (NE1).
Figure 2FTIR spectra of the extracted TEO, Tween80, lecithin, primary nanoemulsion (NE1), amphiphilic oligochitosan (AOC), and its secondary nanoemulsion (AOC-NE3).
Figure 3SEM micrographs of (A) AOC and (B) its secondary nanoemulsion (AOC-NE3).
Figure 4(A) Effect of Dic, TEO, and TEO-based NEs (NE1, OC-NE4, and AOC-NE3) at progressive concentrations of (0–50 μg/mL) on the nitric oxide formation in LPS-induced RAW 264.7 cells. (B) Changes in the RAW 264.7 cells viability after treatment by AOC-NE3 for 48 h.
Figure 5Skin permeability profile of TEO-based nanoformulations (NE1 and AOC-NE3) through a rat skin for 24 h.
Permeability parameters (Jss, Kp, and Er) and correlation coefficients for the in vitro release study of TEO based on different kinetic models of NE1 and AOC-NE3 nanoformulations.
| Sample | Permeate in 24 h |
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zero Order | 1st Order | Higuchi | |||||
|
| – | 0.0491 ± 0.01 | 0.17 ± 0.05 | – | – | – | – |
|
| 2.31 ± 0.15 | 0.0763 ± 0.03 | 0.92 ± 0.12 | 1.56 ± 0.48 | 0.79044 | 0.63515 | 0.91442 |
|
| 3.47 ± 0.13 | 0.2313 ± 0.10 | 4.61 ± 0.83 | 4.72 ± 0.83 | 0.95937 | 0.78812 | 0.99853 |
IC50 (μg/mL) and SI values for Thymus extract (TEO) and its NEs against melanoma (A-375) and human skin fibroblast (HSF) cells.
| Cell Line | IC50 (μg/mL) ± SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TEO | NE1 | OC-NE4 | AOC-NE3 | |
|
| 76.13 ± 2.35 | 27.11 ± 1.33 | 18.78 ± 1.56 | 14.38 ± 1.05 |
|
| 104.29 ± 3.11 | 79.42 ± 2.87 | 74.86 ± 1.85 | 72.19 ± 2.39 |
|
| 1.37 | 2.92 | 3.99 | 5.02 |