4.7 Article

Evaluation of optimum conditions for Achyranthes bidentata polysaccharides encapsulated in cubosomes and immunological activity in vitro

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.11.064

关键词

Achyranthes bidentata polysaccharide; Cubosomes; Immune activity; Optimization

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31672596, 31372472]
  2. Special Fund for Agro-scientific Research in the Public Interest [201303046, 201403051]
  3. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cubosomes, as biocompatible carriers in drug delivery systems, consist of curved bicontinuous lipid bilayers. With a honeycombed structure divided into two internal aqueous channels, cubosomes could be used for many bioactive ingredients. Achyranthes bidentata polysaccharides (ABPs) are isolated from the roots of Achyranthes bidentata, used in Chinese herbal medicine, and present a noticeable effect as an immunomodulator. This study investigates the optimal preparation of combined cubosome-ABP (Cub-ABP) nanoparticles using response surface methodology and explores their characteristics and stability. The encapsulation efficiency of optimized Cub-ABPs was 72.59%. In-vitro stability studies demonstrated the stability of Cub-ABPs and cubosome nanoparticles without ABPs; both were stable for up to 25 days. Safe concentrations of Cub-ABPs and cubosome nanoparticles without ABPs are 104.06 mu g/mL and 208.13 mu g/mL with comparatively low cytotoxicity against lymphocytes. Moreover, the feasible immunomodulatory effects of Cub-ABPs were determined by evaluating their proliferation and change of CD4(+)/CD8(+) ratio on splenic lymphocytes in vitro. Proliferation and flow cytometry studies revealed that, compared with free ABPs and blank cubosomes, Cub-ABPs proved more effective in promoting lymphocyte proliferation and in triggering the transformation of T-Iymphocytes into T-h-cells. (C) 2017 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

4.7
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