4.8 Article

pH-sensitive drug loading/releasing in amphiphilic copolymer PAE-PEG: Integrating molecular dynamics and dissipative particle dynamics simulations

期刊

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
卷 162, 期 1, 页码 185-193

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.06.027

关键词

Amphiphilic copolymer; Drug delivery; pH-sensitive; Simulation

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Singapore [R-279-000-261-281]
  2. National University of Singapore [R-279-000-353-112]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecular dynamics (MD) and dissipative particle dynamics (DPD) simulations are integrated to investigate the loading/releasing of anti-cancer drug camptothecin (CPT) in pH-sensitive amphiphilic copolymer, composed of hydrophobic poly(beta-amino ester) (PAE) and hydrophilicmethyl ether-capped poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG). MD simulation is used to estimate the Flory-Huggins interaction parameters and miscibility of binary components. On this basis, DPD simulation is applied to examine the micellization of PAE-PEG, CPT loading in PAE-PEG, and CPT releasing in PAEH-PEG. With increasing concentration, PAE-PEG forms spherical then disk-like micelles and finally vesicles, as a competitive counterbalance of free energies for the formation of shell, interface and core. CPT loading in PAE-PEG micelles/vesicles is governed by adsorption-growth-micellization mechanism, and CPT is loaded into both hydrophobic core and interface of hydrophobic core/hydrophilic shell. The predicted loading efficiency is close to experimental value. Similar to literature reports, the loading of high concentration of CPT is observed to cause morphology transition from micelles to vesicles. Upon protonation, CPT is released from micelles/vesicles by swelling-demicellization-releasing mechanism. This multi-scale simulation study provides microscopic insight into the mechanisms of drug loading and releasing, and might be useful for the design of new materials for high-efficacy drug delivery. (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

4.8
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