4.6 Article

Preparation of phenylboronic acid-based hydrogel microneedle patches for glucose-dependent insulin delivery

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED POLYMER SCIENCE
卷 138, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/app.49772

关键词

copolymers; drug delivery systems; gels

资金

  1. Science and Technology Program of Zhejiang Province [2019C03063]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province [LY19B040007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the direct loading of insulin into polymerized glucose-responsive microneedle patch, demonstrating that insulin loading procedure was related to glucose concentration. The release of insulin on the surface of microneedles was uncontrolled by microneedles, while the release of insulin within microneedles depended on glucose concentration.
There is a problem with directly loading insulin into the polymerized glucose-responsive microneedle (MN) patch due to that polymerization conditions and solvents may damage the activity of insulin. In this study, we report a totally polymerized phenylboronic acid-based MN patch, and insulin was directly loaded in MNs by a mild drop/dry procedure. MN patch was prepared by copolymerization of N-isopropyl acrylamide,N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone, and 3-acrylamidoephenylboronic acid in MN mold. The MN patch showed good glucose-dependent swelling behavior in pH 9.0 at 27 degrees C. After insulin loading procedure, insulin was distributed on and within the MNs. About 43.2% of total insulin was diffused into MNs' interior. As a result, the release of insulin on MNs' surface was uncontrolled by MNs and rapidly finished after similar to 10 min. However, the release of insulin within MNs was depended on glucose concentration, and insulin was released 1.6 times more at 4 g/L than at 1 g/L glucose concentration after 12 h. Although further improvements are needed to make MN patch responding in physiological environment, this work suggests a solution for directly loading insulin in polymerized glucose-responsive MNs.

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

4.6
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