4.7 Article

Conjunctival and corneal tolerability assessment of ocular naltrexone niosomes and their ingredients on the hen's egg chorioallantoic membrane and excised bovine cornea models

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
卷 432, 期 1-2, 页码 1-10

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.04.063

关键词

Naltrexone hydrochloride; Opioid growth factor; Niosomes; Bovine cornea; Ocular delivery

资金

  1. Culture Affairs and Mission Department, Ministry of Higher Education, Cairo, Egypt

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed at combining the hen's egg test-chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM), bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) test and histological examination of excised corneas to evaluate the conjunctival and corneal toxicity of niosomes and their ingredients. Various surfactant/lipid combinations and concentrations (1-10%, w/v) were investigated for the ocular delivery of an ambitious drug (naltrexone hydrochloride) for treatment of diabetic keratopathy. Four niosomal formulations were investigated and found to be non irritant to the 10 days old HET-CAMs (an acceptable conjunctival model). Only one of the tested ingredients (sodium cholate - CH) showed moderate irritation, however such an effect was diminished when incorporated into niosomes. Corneal opacity and fluorescein permeability scores for the test substances correlated well with the HET-CAM test results. Corneal erosion and stromal thickness were found to be in agreement with the HET-CAM and BCOP results, which discriminated well between moderately and mildly irritant test substances. Corneal histological examination revealed toxicity signs included epithelial erosion, stromal condensation and stromal vacuolisation, which allowed better discrimination between strong and moderate irritants. It is concluded that the prepared niosomes possess good ocular tolerability and minimal ocular tissue irritation. They can be further investigated as ocular delivery systems using appropriate animal models. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据