4.8 Article

Dexamethasone-pDMAEMA polymeric conjugates reduce inflammatory biomarkers in human intestinal epithelial monolayers

期刊

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
卷 135, 期 1, 页码 35-43

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2008.12.001

关键词

Polymeric conjugates; Mucus-covered epithelia; Inflammatory bowel disease; Dexamethasone; Prodrugs

资金

  1. Science Foundation Ireland Investigator grant [04 IN3 B575]
  2. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) [04/IN3/B575] Funding Source: Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mucoadhesive polymer, poly(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate, (pDMAEMA), was synthesised by living radical polymerisation and subsequently conjugated by quaternisation reaction to a functionalised anti-inflammatory corticosteroid dexamethasone, to separately yield two conjugates with either 9:1 or 18:1 molar ratios of dexamethasone: polymer respectively. The hypothesis was to test whether the active agent maintained in vitro bioactivity when exposed to the apical side of human intestinal epithelial monolayers, Caco-2 and mucos-covered HT29-MTX-E12 (E12). HPLC analysis indicated high conjugate purity. Similar to pDMAEMA, fluorescently-labelled dexamethasone-pDMAEMA conjugates were bioadhesive to Caco-2 and mucoadhesive to E12. Apical addition of conjugates suppressed mRNA expression of the inflammatory markers, NURR1 and ICAM-1 in E12 following stimulation by PGE(2) and TNF-alpha, respectively. Conjugates also suppressed TNF-alpha stimulated cytokine secretion to the basolateral side of Caco-2 monolayers. Measurement of dexamethasone permeability from conjugates across monolayers suggested that conjugation reduced permeability compared to free dexamethasone. LDH assay indicated that conjugates were not cytotoxic to monolayers. Anti-inflammatory agents can therefore be successfully conjugated to polymers and they retain adhesion and bioactivity and have potential to be formulated for topical administration. (C) 2008 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