4.8 Article

Stimuli responsive liquid crystals provide 'on-demand' drug delivery in vitro and in vivo

期刊

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
卷 135, 期 3, 页码 218-226

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2009.01.009

关键词

Cubic phase; Hexagonal phase; Stimuli responsive liquid crystal; Sustained release; Hydrophilic drug

资金

  1. Australian Institute of Nuclear Science and Engineering [AINGRA07016]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lipid-based liquid crystalline materials have been proposed as controlled drug delivery systems. Differences in liquid crystal nanostructure have previously been shown to change drug diffusion and hence release, however there has been little progress towards the use of in situ changes to nanostructure to control drug release. In this study, phytantriol and glyceryl monooleate-based bicontinuous cubic (Q(2)) and inverse hexagonal (H-2) nanostructures have been designed to allow change to the nanostructure in response to external change in temperature, with a view to controlling drug release rates in vivo. Changes to nanostructure with temperature were confirmed by crossed polarised optical microscopy and small angle X-ray scattering. Phytantriol containing 3% (w/w) vitamin E acetate provided the necessary phase transition behaviour to progress this system to in vitro release and in vivo proof of concept studies. Using glucose as a model hydrophilic drug, drug diffusion was shown to be reversible on switching between the H-2 and Q(2) nanostructures at temperatures above and below physiological temperature respectively. An in vivo proof of concept study in rats showed that after subcutaneous administration of these materials, the changes in nanostructure induced by application of a heat or cool pack at the injection site stimulated changes in drug release from the matrix anticipated from in vitro release behaviour, thereby demonstrating the potential utility of these systems as 'on demand' drug release delivery vehicles. (c) 2009 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

4.8
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