4.7 Article

The influence of formulation variables on in vitro transfection efficiency and physicochemical properties of chitosan-based polyplexes

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
Volume 261, Issue 1-2, Pages 115-127

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-5173(03)00301-6

Keywords

DNA vaccine; chitosan; in vitro transfection efficiency; physicochemical properties; multivariate data analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate how a selection of formulation variables affects the in vitro transfection efficiency and physicochemical properties (particle size, zetapotential and chitosan-plasmid association) of chitosan-based polyplexes. Experimental designs in combination with multivariate data analysis were applied to reveal the effects of the formulation variables on the responses. The following formulation variables were studied: molecular weight and degree of acetylation of chitosan, pH and ionic strength of the buffer in which chitosan was dissolved, charge ratio of polyplexes, plasmid concentration and inclusion of a coacervation agent in the plasmid solution. The in vitro transfection efficiency in Epithelioma papulosum cyprini (EPC) cells was affected by the polyplex charge ratio, the DNA concentration in the complexes as well as the molecular weight and degree of acetylation of the chitosans. Two favourable formulations were identified in a more thorough investigation. These formulations were made of SC 113 (theoretical charge ratio 10) and SC214 (theoretical charge ratio 3). The size of the complexes was affected by the degree of acetylation, concentration of DNA, pH, inclusion of a coacervation agent and the charge ratio. The charge ratio, pH and ionic strength determined the zetapotential of the particles, while the charge ratio was important for the association between the plasmid and chitosan. (C) 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available