3.8 Article

A comparative in vitro evaluation of self-assembled PTX-PLA and PTX-MPEG-PLA nanoparticles

Journal

NANOSCALE RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/1556-276X-8-301

Keywords

Self-assembly; PLA; Nanoparticles; Paclitaxel; Drug delivery system

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81000660, 31271071]
  2. Xiamen Science and Technology Project [3502Z20123001, 3502Z20114007]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a dialysis technique to direct the self-assembly of paclitaxel (PTX)-loaded nanoparticles (NPs) using methoxypolyethylene glycol-poly(d,l-lactide) (MPEG-PLA) and PLA, respectively. The composition, morphology, particle size and zeta potential, drug loading content, and drug encapsulation efficiency of both PTX-PLA NPs and PTX-MPEG-PLA NPs were characterized by X-ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, transmission electron microscopy, dynamic light scattering, electrophoretic light scattering, and high-performance liquid chromatography. The passive targeting effect and in vitro cell viability of the PTX-MPEG-PLA NPs on HeLa cells were demonstrated by comparative cellular uptake and MTT assay of the PTX-PLA NPs. The results showed that the PTX-MPEG-PLA NPs and PTX-PLA NPs presented a hydrodynamic particle size of 179.5 and 441.9 nm, with a polydispersity index of 0.172 and 0.189, a zeta potential of -24.3 and -42.0 mV, drug encapsulation efficiency of 18.3% and 20.0%, and drug-loaded content of 1.83% and 2.00%, respectively. The PTX-MPEG-PLA NPs presented faster release rate with minor initial burst compared to the PTX-PLA NPs. The PTX-MPEG-PLA NPs presented superior cell cytotoxicity and excellent cellular uptake compared to the PTX-PLA NPs. These results suggested that the PTX-MPEG-PLA NPs presented more desirable characteristics for sustained drug delivery compared to PTX-PLA NPs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available