4.7 Article

Folic acid-modified biocompatible Pullulan/poly(acrylic acid) nanogels for targeted delivery to MCF-7 cancer cells

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpb.2023.02.001

关键词

Nanogel; Pullulan; pH-sensitive; Folic acid; MCF-7; Cancer therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel nanogel composed of poly(acrylic acid) (PAA) and pullulan (Pull) was prepared using a simple and green irradiation protocol. The synthesized nanogels were modified with bovine serum albumin (BSA) and folic acid (FA), and then loaded with doxorubicin (DOX) to obtain a delivery system with tumor-specific targeting ability and enhanced biocompatibility. In vitro studies showed that the DOX release from the nanogels was higher in acidic media, which is advantageous for tumor targeting. MTT assay and DAPI staining demonstrated the effectiveness of DOX-loaded nanogels on cancer cells. Neat nanogels showed no destructive effects on both cell lines. Overall, the biocompatible and tumor-specific nanogels hold promise as safe drug carriers for cancer therapy.
We prepared a novel nanogel consisting of poly(acrylic acid) (PAA) and pullulan (Pull) via a facile and green irradiation protocol. Synthesized nanogels were modified with bovine serum albumin (BSA) and folic acid (FA) and then loaded with doxorubicin (DOX) to obtain a delivery system with tumor-specific targeting ability and enhanced biocompatibility. In-vitro DOX release was investigated at different pH values, and it was found that DOX release was higher in acidic media, which is an advantage for the internalization of nanoparticles in acidic tumor environment. MTT assay and DAPI staining were performed to evaluate the effects of nanogels on L929 and MCF-7 cells. Based on the results of in vitro studies, DOX-loaded nanogels were found to be effective on cancer cells, while the neat ones were nondestructive in both lines. Overall, we envision that the biocompatible and tumor-specific nanogels could be a promising safe drug carrier system for cancer therapy.

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