Oil-in-Water Nanosized Emulsions for Drug Delivery and Targeting. Tamilvanan Shunmugaperumal
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Oil-in-Water Nanosized Emulsions for Drug Delivery and Targeting - Tamilvanan Shunmugaperumal страница 19

Название: Oil-in-Water Nanosized Emulsions for Drug Delivery and Targeting

Автор: Tamilvanan Shunmugaperumal

Издательство: John Wiley & Sons Limited

Жанр: Химия

Серия:

isbn: 9781119585251

isbn:

СКАЧАТЬ whose final appearance is white similar to the traditional emulsions but these dispersions do not contain both surfactants and oil or oil combination. Taking the physical appearance (white color) into consideration, these colloidal dispersions get the term “surfactant‐ and oil‐free emulsions.” Both of these two emulsions (surfactant‐free and surfactant‐ and oil‐free) are briefly discussed in Chapter 7.

Photo depicts freeze-dried emulsions using different cryo- or lyo-protectants and reconstitution of freeze-dried powder into nanosized emulsion.

      It is known from the literatures that the interaction between cationic liposomes and polyanionic macromolecules like DNA is dependent on ± ratio, and at the ratio of maximum transfection there is a major aggregation leading to destabilization of formulation or desorption of DNA from the formulation (Liu et al. 1997). Furthermore, Simberg et al. (2003) suggest that an understanding of the interplay between lipoplex composition, its interaction with serum, hemodynamics, and target tissue properties (susceptibility to transfection) could explain the biodistribution and efficient in vivo transfection following intravenous administration of cationic lipid‐DNA complexes (lipoplexes) into mouse. However, it is interesting to see what could happen when the cationic nanosized emulsion is applied to in vitro cell culture models in the presence of serum. The serum stability of emulsion/DNA complex was reported (Yi et al. 2000). Further studies are, however, necessary to be carried out to understand clearly the origin of the serum stability of this emulsion. In addition, the transfection efficiency of this emulsion was not affected by time up to 2 h post‐emulsion/DNA complex formation. This means that the o/w cationic nanosized emulsion allows the experimenter to have a wider time window to work within during transfection study.

      The o/w nanosized emulsions stabilized by both cationic and anionic lipidic emulsifiers were investigated in order to compare the degree of binding and uptake by specific cells that over‐expressed tumor receptors (Goldstein et al. 2007a). Immunoemulsions were prepared by conjugating an antibody to the surfactant molecule via a hydrophobic linker and then the antibody‐conjugated surfactant was used to make the emulsion by the de novo method. The anionic stabilized emulsions showed decreased stability leading to phase separation after 20 days of storage. The reduced stability of anionic immunoemulsion could be attributed to the rapid decrease of the zeta‐potential caused by the positively charged conjugated antibody and consequently, due to a lower electrostatic repulsion between the colloidal droplets (Goldstein et al. 2007b). On the other hand, immunoemulsions stabilized by both anionic and cationic emulsifiers exhibited a multifold increase in cell binding in contrast to the emulsions without antibodies.

      Anionic phospholipids are also commonly utilized for the stabilization of API‐carrying nanosized emulsion droplets both individually and in binary mixtures (Trotta et al. 2002). Soybean lecithin and modified phospholipid, n‐hexanoyl lysolecithin (6‐PC), alone and as 1 : 1 mixtures were used as stabilizers of MCT droplets in water (Trotta et al. 2002). Although individual uncharged phospholipids provide emulsion droplets, a moderate negative charge for stabilization, mixed phospholipids produce much more stable emulsions and a large negative zeta‐potential value. A possible explanation for this phenomenon is related to the increased incorporation of polar compounds from the soya lecithin into the mixed interfacial film when 6‐PC is present. This interfacial film acts as a stabilizer by forming a high energy barrier that repels adjacent droplets and leads to the formation of stabilized emulsified droplets. The stability of the emulsion did not noticeably change, even in the presence of the model destabilizing API, indomethacin, demonstrating the high potential for such mixed emulsifiers for the formulation of colloidal API delivery systems (Trotta et al. 2002). Lysolecithin has one fatty acid ester chain removed from the glycerol backbone, in addition, lysolecithin is toxic (destroys RBC cell membranes). Furthermore, although the role of phospholipids is essential for the stability of the emulsions, possible cataractogenic effects due to the phosphatidyl choline (PC) and, basically, to a derivative of the same, lysophosphatidyl, have been described by different authors (Cotlier et al. 1975; Kador and Kinoshita 1978).

      A new class of surface‐active dialkyl maleates can be utilized for emulsion polymerization (Abele et al. 1997). Here, the emulsion droplets of monomeric maleates are self‐stabilized and simultaneously serve as liquid “reactive storage carriers.” Three types of head group in the dialkyl maleates were studied—nonionic, cationic, and zwitterionic with different lengths of hydrophobic alkyl chain. Cationic and zwitterionic dialkyl maleates with the longest alkyl chains ‐C16H33 and ‐C17H35 provided the best stability for o/w nanosized emulsions. When compared with the data obtained for the well‐known nonionic surfactant nonylphenol‐poly (ethylene oxide) (NPEO10) and the cationic cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB), an excellent stabilizing capacity especially for the cationic maleates can be stated. Whereas nonionic dialkyl maleates show almost the same emulsifying ability and stability as NPEO10, the cationic derivatives of these novel surfactants are more effective in stabilization than the traditional CTAB.