4.3 Article

Investigation of characterization and cytotoxic effect of PEGylated nanoliposomal containing Melphalan on ovarian cancer: an in vitro study

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL NANOSCIENCE
卷 16, 期 1, 页码 102-116

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17458080.2021.1922669

关键词

Melphalan; PEGylated nanoliposome; ovarian cancer; reverse-phase evaporation; MTT; apoptosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study successfully synthesized MEL-loaded PEGylated nanoliposomes, which demonstrated stronger cytotoxic effects on ovarian cancer cells and increased the number of apoptotic cells compared to the control group.
This study aimed to synthesize Melphalan (MEL)-loaded PEGylated nanoliposomes and evaluate their cytotoxic effects on ovarian cancer A2780CP and SKOV3 cells. For this purpose, MEL-loaded PEGylated nanoliposomes were prepared by the reverse-phase evaporation method. They were then characterized, and the results showed that the size, size distribution, and zeta potential of the nanoformulation were 129.1 +/- 5.5 nm, 0.240 +/- 0.13, and -18.9 +/- 60.31 mv, respectively. Also, the encapsulation and loading efficiencies of MEL in the nanoparticles were determined to be 98.3 +/- 2.1% and 5.2 +/- 1.3%, respectively. Also, the drug release pattern was evaluated using a dialysis bag method, and the results demonstrated that 20.5% of MEL was released after 48 h from the nanoparticles, which was 2.7-fold slower compared to when the standard drug was used. In addition, the effects of the standard drug and nanoformulation on cell viability was assessed using a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, and the results showed that nanoformulation had 1.4-fold more toxicity than the standard drug. Moreover, the extent of apoptosis was investigated using the Annexin-propidium iodide kit and flow cytometry method. The results showed that MEL-loaded PEGylated nanoliposomes increased the apoptotic cells compared to the control group.

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

4.3
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