Antibacterial and anticancerous drug loading kinetics for (10-x)CuO-xZnO-20CaO-60SiO2-10P2O5 (2 ≤ x ≤ 8) mesoporous bioactive glasses

Delivery Systems Original Research
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Delivery Systems


In the present study, antibacterial and anticancerous drug loading kinetics for the (10-x)CuO-xZnO-20CaO-60SiO2-10P2O5 (2≤x≤8, varying in steps of 2) mesoporous bioactive glasses (MBGs) have been studied. XRD analysis of the as prepared glass samples proved its amorphous nature. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) revealed the apatite layer formation on the surface of the MBGs after soaking for 15 days in SBF. Ion dissolution studies of calcium, phosphorous and silicon have been performed using inductively coupled plasma (ICP). FTIR and Raman analysis depicted about the presence of various bonds and groups present in the glasses. The pore size of MBGs lies in the range of 4.2–9.7 nm. Apart from this, specific surface area of the MBGs varied from 263 to 402 cm2/g. The MBGs were loaded with Doxorubicin (DOX), Vancomycin (VANCO) and Tetracycline (TETRA) drugs among which, the decreasing copper content influenced the loading properties of doxorubicin and tetracycline drugs. Vancomycin was fully loaded almost in all the MBGs, whereas other drugs depicted varying loading with respect to the copper content.

Graphical Abstract

Open image in new window



One of the author, GK is thankful to University Grant Commission (UGC) under the letter no.—F.15/2013-2014/PDFWM-2013-2014-GE-PUN-14803 (SA-II) for providing financial assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


  1. 1.
    Kaur G, Pickrell G, Sriranganathan N, Kumar V, Homa D. Review and the state of the art: sol–gel and melt quenched bioactive glasses for tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2015;104:1248–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaur G, Pandey OP, Singh K, Homa D, Scott B, Pickrell G. A review of Bioactive glasses: their structure, properties, fabrication and apatite formation. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2014;102(1):254–74.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Li HC, Wang DG, Hu JH, Chen CZ. Crystallization, mechanical properties and in vitro bioactivity of sol–gel derived Na2O–CaO–SiO2–P2O5 glass–ceramics by partial substitution of CaF2 for CaO. J Sol Gel Sci Technol. 2013;67:56–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    AJA PN, AJA AH, PENA P and AJA S. Bioactive glasses and glass ceramics. Bol Soc Esp Ceram Vid. 2007;46(2):45–55.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hum J, Boccaccini A R. Bioactive glasses as carriers for bioactive molecules and therapeutic drugs: a review. J Mater Sci. 2012;23(10):2317–33.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rahaman MN, Day DE, Bal BS, Fu Q, Jung SB, Bonewald LF, Tomsia AP. Bioactive glass in tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2011;7:2355–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Du RL, Chang J, Ni SY, Zhai WY. Characterization and in vitro bioactivity of zinc-containing bioactive glass and glassceramics. J Biomater Appl. 2006;20:341–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaur G, Pandey OP, Singh K,Chudasama B, Kumar V. Combined and individual doxorubicin/vancomycin drug loading, release kinetics and apatite formation for the CaO–CuO–P2O5–SiO2–B2O3 mesoporous glasses. RSC. 2016;6:51046–56.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goel A, Kapoor S, Tilocca A, Rajagopal RR, Ferreira JMF. Structural role of zinc in biodegradation of alkali-free bioactive glasses. J Mater Chem B. 2013;1:3073–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Venkatesan J, Pallela R, Bhatnagar I, Kim SK. Chitosan-amylopectin/hydroxyapatite and chitosan-chondroitin sulphate/hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol. 2012;51:1033–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xia W, Chang J. Well-ordered mesoporous bioactive glasses (MBG): a promising bioactive drug delivery system. J Control Release. 2006;110:522–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noriega AL, Arcos D, Barba II, Sakamoto Y, Terasaki O, Regı MV. Ordered mesoporous bioactive glasses for bone tissue regeneration. Chem Mater. 2006;18:3137–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu C, Zhang Y, Zhu Y, Friis T, Xiao Y. Structure–property relationships of silk-modified mesoporous bioglass scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2010;31:3429–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wu C, Fan W, Gelinsky M, Xiao Y, Simon P, Schulze R, Doert T, Luo Y, Cuniberti G. Bioactive SrO-SiO2 glass with well-ordered mesopores: characterization, physiochemistry and biological properties. Acta Biomater. 2011;7:1797–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Regi MV, Balas F, Arcos D. Mesoporous materials for drug delivery. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2007;46:7548–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Torchilin VP. Recent advances with liposomes as pharmaceutical carriers. Nat Rev Drug Descov. 2005;4:145–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yoo W, Lee CH. Drug delivery system for harmone. J Control Release. 2006;112:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Malmsten M. Soft drug delivery system. Soft Mater. 2006;2:760–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Regi MV. Ordered mesoporous materials in the context of drug delivery systems and bone tisue engineering. Chem Eur J. 2006;12:5934–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Regi MV, Ramila A, Real RP. A new property of MCM-41: drug delivery system. J Perez-Pariente Chem Mater. 2001;13:308–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fournier E, Passirani C, Montero-Menei CN, Benoit JP. Biocompatibilty of implantable synthetic polymer drug carriers: focus on brain biocompatibility. Biomater. 2003;24:3311–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Day RM, Boccaccini AR, Shurey S, Roether JA, Forbes A, Hench LL, Gabe SM. Assessment of polyglycolic acid mesh and bioactive glass for soft-tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2004;25:5857–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Day RM. Bioactive glass stimulates the secretion of angiogenic growth factors and angiogenesis in vitro. Tissue Eng. 2005;11:768–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gorustovich AA, Roether JA, Boccaccini AR. Effect of bioactive glasses on angiogenesis: a review of in vitro and in vivo evidences. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2009;16:199–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leu A, Stieger SM, Dayton P, Ferrara KW, Leach JK. Angiogenic response to bioactive glass promotes bone healing in an irradiated calvarial defect. Tissue Eng Part A. 2009;15:877–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jones JR, Ehrenfried LM, Hench LL. Optimising bioactive glass scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2006;27:964–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu H, Webster TJ. Nanomedicine for implants: a review of studies and necessary experimental tools. Biomaterials. 2007;28:354–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wu C, Chang J. Mesoporous bioactive glasses: structure characteristics, drug/growth factor delivery and bone regeneration application. Interface Focus. 2012;2:292–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Li Y, Liu YZ, Long T, Yu XB, Tang TT, Dai KR, Tian B, Guo YP, Zhu ZA. Mesoporous bioactive glass as a drug delivery system: fabrication, bactericidal properties and biocompatibility. J Mater Sci. 2013;24:1951–61.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lu H, Kawazoe N, Kitajima T, Myoken Y, Tomita M, Umezawa A, Chen G, Ito Y. Spatial immobilization of bone morphogenetic protein-4 in a collagen-PLGA hybrid scaffold for enhanced osteoinductivity. Biomaterials. 2012;33:6140–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liu X, Rahaman MN, Fu Q. Bone regeneration in strong porous bioactive glass (13–93) scaffolds with an oriented microstructure implanted in rat calvarial defects. Acta Biomater. 2013;9:4889–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nguyen TH, Lee BT. In vitro and in vivo studies of rhBMP2-coated PS/PCL fibrous scaffolds for bone regeneration. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2013;101:797–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wu C, Zhou Y, Xu M, Han P, Chen L, Chang J, Xiao Y. Copper-containing mesoporous bioactive glass scaffolds with multifunctional properties of angiogenesis capacity, osteostimulation and antibacterial activity. Biomater. 2013;34:422–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Park JK, Shim JH, Kang KS, Yeom J, Jung HS, Kim JY, et al. Solid free-formfabrication of tissue-engineering scaffolds with a poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) grafted hyaluronic acid conjugate encapsulating an intact bone morphogenetic protein-2/poly(ethylene glycol) complex. Adv Funct Mater. 2011;21:2906–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baino F, Fiorilli S, Brovarone CV. Bioactive glass-based materials with hierarchical porosity for medical applications: Review of recent advances. Acta Biomater. 2016;42:18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wu C, Chang J. Multifunctional mesoporous bioactive glasses for effective delivery of therapeutic ions and drug/growth factors. J Control Release. 2014;193:282–95.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hench LL, Thompson I. Twenty-first century challenges for biomaterials. J R Soc Interface. 2010;7(4):S379–91.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wu C, Zhou Y, Xu M, Han P, Chen L, Chang J, Xiao Y. Copper-containing mesoporous bioactive glass scaffolds with multifunctional properties of angiogenesis capacity, osteostimulation and antibacterial activity. Biomater. 2013;34:422–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kim TG, Shin H, Lim DW. Biomimetic scaffolds for tissue engineering. Adv Funct Mater. 2012;22:2446–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wang C, Xue Y, Lin K, Lu J, Chang J, Sun J. The enhancement of bone regeneration by a combination of osteoconductivity and osteostimulation using beta-CaSiO3/beta-Ca3(PO4)2 composite bioceramics. Acta Biomater. 2012;8:350–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hu YC, Zhong JP. Osteostimulation of bioglass. Chin Med J (Engl). 2009;122:2386–9.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Freeman AL, MD and Mayhew E. Targeted Drug Deliv. Cancer. 1986;58:573–83.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    McCarthy TJ, Zeelie JJ, Krause DJ. The antimicrobial action of zinc ion/antioxidant combinations. J Clin Pharm Ther. 1992;17:51–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Solomons NW. Mild human zinc deficiency produces an imbalance between cell-mediated and humoral immunity. Nutr Rev. 1998;56:27–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Prasad AS. Zinc: an overview. Nutrition. 1995;11:93–9.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Harris ED. Copper homeostasis: the role of cellular transporters. Nutr Rev. 2001;59:281–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tas AC. Synthesis of biomimetic Ca-hydroxyapatite powders at 37°C in synthetic body fluids. Biomater. 2000;21:1429–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wu HC, Wang TW, Sun JS, Wang WH, Lin FH. A novel biomagnetic nanoparticle based on hydroxyapatite. Nanotechnology. 2007;18:1–9.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Marsich L, Moimas L, Sergo V, Schmid C. Raman spectroscopic study of bioactive silica-based glasses: the role of alkali/alkali earth ratio on the non-bridging oxygen/bridging oxygen (NBO/BO) ratio. Spectroscopy. 2009;23(3–4):227–232.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pemberton JE, Latifzadeh L, Fletcher JP, Risbud SH. Raman spectroscopy of calcium phosphate glasses with varying CaO modifier concentrations. Chem Mater 1991;3(1):195–200.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kaur G, Pickrell G, Kimsawatde G, Homa D, Allbee HA, Sriranganathan N. Synthesis, cytotoxicity, and hydroxypatite formation in 27-tris-SBF for sol-gel based CaO–P2O5–SiO2–B2O3–ZnO bioactive glasses. Sci Rep. 2014;4:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kaur G, Sharma P, Kumar V, Singh K. Assessment of in vitro bioactivity of SiO2–BaO–ZnO–B2O3–Al2O3 glasses: an optico-analytical approach. Mater Sci Eng,C. 2012;32:1941–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kaur G, Kumar M, Arora A, Pandey OP, Singh K. Influence of Y2O3 on structural and optical properties of SiO2–BaO–ZnO–xB2O3-(10−x)Y2O3 glasses and glass ceramics. J Non Cryst Solids. 2011;357:858–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Dion A, Langman M, Hall G, Filiaggi M. Vancomycin release behaviour from amorphous calcium polyphosphate matrices intended for osteomyelitis treatment. Biomater. 2005;26:7276–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Domingues ZR, Cortès ME, Gomes TA, Diniz HF, Freitas CS, Gomes JB, Faria AMC, Sinisterra RD. Bioactive glass as a drug delivery system of tetracycline and tetracycline associated with β-cyclodextrin. Biomaterials. 2004;25(2):327–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhysicsPunjabi UniversityPatialaIndia
  2. 2.School of Physics and Materials ScienceThapar UniversityPatialaIndia

Personalised recommendations