10.1007/s40204-015-0040-4

Synthesis and evaluation of MePEG-PCL diblock copolymers: surface properties and controlled release behavior

Show Details XML HTML PDF
  • Anjan Kumar Mohanty*1,
  • Utpal Jana1,
  • Prabal Kumar Manna1,
  • Guru Prasad Mohanta1,
  1. Department of Pharmacy, Annamalai University, Chidambaram, Tamilnadu, 608002, IN
Cover Image

Published in Issue 2015-08-20

How to Cite

Mohanty, A. K., Jana, U., Manna, P. K., & Mohanta, G. P. (2015). Synthesis and evaluation of MePEG-PCL diblock copolymers: surface properties and controlled release behavior. Progress in Biomaterials, 4(2-4 (December 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40204-015-0040-4
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Abstract The amphiphilic block copolymers are composed of various combinations of hydrophilic and hydrophobic block unimers. The variation in unimer ratio alters the surface as well as micelle-forming properties of the block copolymers. These nanoscopic micelles have the ability to encapsulate hydrophobic compounds and act as potential drug carrier. MePEG-PCL copolymers with various block lengths were synthesized by ring-opening polymerization and characterized by 1 HNMR, GPC, WXRD and DSC. The number average molecular weight of the block copolymer was found to vary from 7511 to 21,270 as determined by GPC and 1 HNMR studies. The surface topology of the polymer films was determined by AFM analysis, which shows a smoother surface with increased MePEG contents in the block copolymers. The protein-binding assay indicates a better biocompatibility of the block copolymers in comparison to MePEG or PCL alone. The CMC of the block copolymer provides the information about micelle formations for encapsulation of hydrophobic materials and affects the in vitro release.

Keywords

  • Biodegradable polymers,
  • Drug carrier,
  • Micelle,
  • CMC,
  • EPR effect
HTML PDF

References

  1. Adams et al. (2003) Amphiphilic block copolymers for drug delivery 92(7) (pp. 1343-1355) https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.10397
  2. Aliabadi and Lavasanifar (2006) Polymeric micelles for drug delivery 3(1) (pp. 139-162) https://doi.org/10.1517/17425247.3.1.139
  3. Allen et al. (1999) Nano-engineering block copolymer aggregates for drug delivery 16(1–4) (pp. 3-27) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-7765(99)00058-2
  4. Andrade et al. (1992) Proteins at interfaces: principles, multivariate aspects, protein resistant surfaces, and direct imaging and manipulation of adsorbed proteins 11(1–4) (pp. 67-84) https://doi.org/10.1016/0267-6605(92)90031-N
  5. Arimura et al. (2005) Formation of core-shell type biodegradable polymeric micelles from amphiphilic poly(aspartic acid)-block-polylactide diblock copolymer 6(2) (pp. 720-725) https://doi.org/10.1021/bm0494491
  6. Aso et al. (1994) Effect of temperature on mechanisms of drug release and matrix degradation of poly(d, l-lactide) microspheres 31(1) (pp. 33-39) https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-3659(94)90248-8
  7. Bazile et al. (1995) Stealth Me. PEG-PLA nanoparticles avoid uptake by the mononuclear phagocytes system 84(4) (pp. 493-498) https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600840420
  8. Burke et al. (2004) Poly(lactide-co-glycolide) microsphere formulations of darbepoetin alfa: spray drying is an alternative to encapsulation by spray-freeze drying 21(3) (pp. 500-506) https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PHAM.0000019305.79599.a5
  9. Cho et al. (2001) Hydrolytic degradation behavior of poly(butylene succinate)s with different crystalline morphologies 79(6) (pp. 1025-1033) https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4628(20010207)79:6<1025::AID-APP50>3.0.CO;2-7
  10. Cook et al. (1997) Characterization and development of RGD-peptide-modified poly(lactic acid-co-lysine) as an interactive, resorbable biomaterial 35(4) (pp. 513-523) https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19970615)35:4<513::AID-JBM11>3.0.CO;2-C
  11. Dee et al. (1998) Design and function of novel osteoblast-adhesive peptides for chemical modification of biomaterials 40(3) (pp. 371-377) https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19980605)40:3<371::AID-JBM5>3.0.CO;2-C
  12. Deming (2000) Living polymerization of α-amino acid-N-carboxyanhydrides 38(17) (pp. 3011-3018) https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0518(20000901)38:17<3011::AID-POLA10>3.0.CO;2-Z
  13. Detchprohm et al. (2001) Synthesis of a novel chitin derivative having oligo(ε-caprolactone) side chains in aqueous reaction media 202(18) (pp. 3560-3570) https://doi.org/10.1002/1521-3935(20011201)202:18<3560::AID-MACP3560>3.0.CO;2-6
  14. Gou et al. (2009) Self-assembled hydrophobic honokiol loaded MPEG-PCL diblock copolymer micelles 26(9) (pp. 2164-2173) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-009-9929-8
  15. Huang et al. (2004) Degradation and cell culture studies on block copolymers prepared by ring opening polymerization of epsilon-caprolactone in the presence of poly(ethylene glycol) 69(3) (pp. 417-427) https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.30008
  16. Jenkins and Harrison (2006) The effect of molecular weight on the crystallization kinetics of polycaprolactone (pp. 474-478) https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.733
  17. Kabanov et al. (1995) Micelle formation and solubilization of fluorescent probes in poly(oxyethylene-b-oxypropylene-b-oxyethylene) solutions 28(7) (pp. 2303-2314) https://doi.org/10.1021/ma00111a026
  18. Kim et al. (2004) Preparation of poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(caprolactone) copolymers and their applications as thermo-sensitive materials 70(1) (pp. 154-158) https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.30049
  19. Koenig and Huang (1995) Biodegradable blends and composites of polycaprolactone and starch derivatives (pp. 1877-1882) https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-3861(95)90934-T
  20. Lavasanifar et al. (2001) Micelles self-assembled from poly(ethylene oxide)-block-poly(N-hexyl stearate l-aspartamide) by a solvent evaporation method: effect on the solubilization and haemolytic activity of amphotericin B 77(1–2) (pp. 155-160) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(01)00477-1
  21. Leenslag et al. (1987) Resorbable materials of poly(l-lactide). VII. In vivo and in vitro degradation 8(4) (pp. 311-314) https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(87)90121-9
  22. Li et al. (2010) Synthesis and characterization of amphiphilic lipopolymers for micellar drug delivery 11(10) (pp. 2610-2620) https://doi.org/10.1021/bm100561v
  23. Lucke et al. (2000) Biodegradable poly(d, l-lactic acid)-poly(ethylene glycol)-monomethyl ether diblock copolymers: structures and surface properties relevant to their use as biomaterials 21(23) (pp. 2361-2370) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00103-4
  24. Ma et al. (2008) Micelles of poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(epsilon-caprolactone) as vehicles for the solubilization, stabilization, and controlled delivery of curcumin 86(2) (pp. 300-310) https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.31584
  25. Mahmud et al. (2007) Polymeric micelles for drug targeting 15(9) (pp. 553-584) https://doi.org/10.1080/10611860701538586
  26. Mohanty et al. (2010) Etoposide-loaded biodegradable amphiphilic methoxy (poly ethylene glycol) and poly (epsilon caprolactone) copolymeric micelles as drug delivery vehicle for cancer therapy 17(5) (pp. 330-342) https://doi.org/10.3109/10717541003720688
  27. Moon et al. (2002) Improved blood compatibility by sustained release of heparin-deoxycholic acid conjugates in a PCL-PEG multiblock copolymer matrix 13(7) (pp. 817-828) https://doi.org/10.1163/156856202760197438
  28. Peter et al. (1997) Melt block copolymerisation of e-caprolactone and lactide (pp. 219-226) https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0518(19970130)35:2<219::AID-POLA3>3.0.CO;2-N
  29. Piao et al. (2003) Synthesis and characterization of PCL/PEG/PCL triblock copolymers by using calcium catalyst 44(7) (pp. 2025-2031) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(03)00087-9
  30. Puleo (1996) Biochemical surface modification of Co-Cr-Mo 17(2) (pp. 217-222) https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(96)85766-8
  31. Pulkkinena et al. (2009) In vivo implantation of 2,2′-bis(oxazoline)-linked poly-epsilon–caprolactone: proof for enzyme sensitive surface erosion and biocompatibility 36(2–3) (pp. 310-319) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2008.10.011
  32. Rashkov et al. (1996) Synthesis, characterization, and hydrolytic degradation of PLA/PEO/PLA triblock copolymers with short poly(l-lactic acid) chains 29(1) (pp. 50-56) https://doi.org/10.1021/ma950530t
  33. Saito et al. (2001) A biodegradable polymer as a cytokine delivery system for inducing bone formation 19(4) (pp. 332-335) https://doi.org/10.1038/86715
  34. Senda et al. (2002) Biodegradable blends of poly (e-caprolactone) with a-chitin and chitosan: specific interactions, thermal properties and crystallization behavior 51(1) (pp. 33-39) https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.793
  35. Shin et al. (1998) Methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)/epsilon-caprolactone amphiphilic block copolymeric micelle containing indomethacin. I. Preparation and characterization 51(1) (pp. 1-11) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(97)00164-8
  36. Skoglund and Fransson (1996) Continuous cooling and isothermal crystallization of polycaprolactone 61(13) (pp. 2455-2465) https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19960926)61:13<2455::AID-APP25>3.0.CO;2-1
  37. Stolnik et al. (1994) Surface modification of poly(lactide-co-glycolide) nanospheres by biodegradable poly(lactide)-poly(ethylene glycol) copolymers 11(12) (pp. 1800-1808) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018931820564
  38. Tessmar et al. (2003) The use of poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(lactic acid) derived copolymers for the rapid creation of biomimetic surfaces 24(24) (pp. 4475-4486) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00345-4
  39. Tsuji and Ikada (1997) Blends of crystalline and amorphous poly(lactide). III. Hydrolysis of solution-cast blend films 63(7) (pp. 855-863) https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19970214)63:7<855::AID-APP5>3.0.CO;2-P
  40. Uhrich et al. (1999) Polymeric systems for controlled drug release 99(11) (pp. 3181-3198) https://doi.org/10.1021/cr940351u
  41. von Burkersroda et al. (1997) Erosion of biodegradable block copolymers made of poly(d, l-lactic acid) and poly(ethylene glycol) 18(24) (pp. 1599-1607) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00098-7
  42. Wang and Qiu (1993) Polycaprolactone-poly(ethylene glycol) block copolymer, I: synthesis and degradability in vitro 4(6) (pp. 363-366) https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.1993.220040601
  43. Wang et al. (2012) Pharmacokinetics and disposition of nanomedicine using biodegradable PEG/PCL polymers as drug carriers 13(4) (pp. 338-353) https://doi.org/10.2174/138920012800166490
  44. Wang et al. (2013) Micelles of methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(epsilon-caprolactone) as a novel drug delivery vehicle for tacrolimus 9(2) (pp. 147-157) https://doi.org/10.1166/jbn.2013.1489
  45. Wang et al. (2014) Antitumor efficiency of d-alpha-tocopheryl polyethylene glycol 1000 succinate-b-poly(epsilon-caprolactone-ran-lactide) nanoparticle-based delivery of docetaxel in mice bearing cervical cancer 10(8) (pp. 1509-1519) https://doi.org/10.1166/jbn.2014.1844
  46. Winnik and Regismond (1996) Fluorescence methods in the study of the interactions of surfactants with polymers 118(1–2) (pp. 1-39) https://doi.org/10.1016/0927-7757(96)03733-8
  47. Xiong et al. (1995) Synthesis and characterization of block copolymers from d, l-lactide and poly(tetramethylene ether glycol) 55(6) (pp. 865-869) https://doi.org/10.1002/app.1995.070550604
  48. Yang et al. (2014) Anti-tumor activity and safety evaluation of fisetin-loaded methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(epsilon-caprolactone) nanoparticles 10(4) (pp. 580-591) https://doi.org/10.1166/jbn.2014.1746
  49. Yokoyama (2010) Polymeric micelles as a new drug carrier system and their required considerations for clinical trials 7(2) (pp. 145-158) https://doi.org/10.1517/17425240903436479
  50. Youxin et al. (1994) In-vitro degradation and bovine serum albumin release of the ABA triblock copolymers consisting of poly (L(+) lactic acid), or poly(L(+) lactic acid-co-glycolic acid) A-blocks attached to central polyoxyethylene B-blocks 32(2) (pp. 121-128) https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-3659(94)90050-7
  51. Zhou et al. (2003) Biodegradable poly(epsilon-caprolactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) block copolymers: characterization and their use as drug carriers for a controlled delivery system 24(20) (pp. 3563-3570) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00207-2