The present work is an attempt to integrate the molecular simulation studies with in vitro cytotoxicity of cytarabine-loaded chitosan nanoparticles and exploring the potential of this formulation as therapeutics for treating solid tumours. The molecular simulation was performed using GROMACS v5.4 in which, chitosan polymer (CHT; six molecules) was used to study the encapsulation and release of a single molecule of cytarabine. Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD) of the Cα atom of cytarabine (CBR) molecule shows that CBR starts to diffuse out of the CHT polymer binding pocket around 10.2 ns, indicated by increased fluctuation of RMSD at pH 6.4, while the drug diffusion is delayed at pH 7.4 and starts diffusing around 17.5 ns. Cytarabine-loaded chitosan nanoparticles (CCNP), prepared by ionic gelation method were characterized for encapsulation efficiency, particle size and morphology, zeta potential, crystallinity and drug release profile at pH 6.4 and 7.4. CCNPs showed 64% encapsulation efficiency with an average diameter of 100 nm and zeta potential of + 53.9 mV. It was found that cytarabine existed in amorphous state in nanoformulation. In vitro release studies showed 70% cytarabine was released from the chitosan-based nanoformulation release at pH 6.4, which coincides with the pH of tumour microenvironment. Cytotoxicity against breast cancer cell line (MCF 7) was higher for nanoformulation compared to free cytarabine. Haemocompatibility studies showed that chitosan-based nanoformulation is safe, biocompatible and nonhaemolytic in nature; hence, can be used as a safe drug delivery system. Taken together, our study suggests that chitosan nanoformulation would be an effective strategy for the pH-dependent release of cytarabine against solid tumours and might impart better therapeutic efficiency.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The first author is grateful to University Grants Commission (UGC), Government of India for providing BSR fellowship. The authors acknowledge the facilities extended by Sophisticated Test and Instrumentation Centre (STIC) and National Centre for Aquatic Animal Health, Cochin University of Science and Technology.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors would like to declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Alley MC, Scudiero DA, Monks A et al (1988) Feasibility of drug screening with panels of human tumor cell lines using a microculture tetrazolium assay. Cancer Res 48:584–588Google Scholar
Arifin DY, Lee LY, Wang CH (2006) Mathematical modeling and simulation of drug release from microspheres: implications to drug delivery systems. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 58:1274–1325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Augustine R, Nethi SK, Kalarikkal N et al (2017) Electrospun polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds embedded with europium hydroxide nanorods (EHNs) with enhanced vascularization and cell proliferation for tissue engineering applications. J Mater Chem B 5:4660–4672. https://doi.org/10.1039/c7tb00518kCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhattacharjee S (2016) DLS and zeta potential—What they are and what they are not? J Control Release 235:337–351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Bugnicourt L, Ladavière C (2016) Interests of chitosan nanoparticles ionically cross-linked with tripolyphosphate for biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci 60:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvo P, RemunanLopez C, VilaJato JL et al (1997) Chitosan and chitosan ethylene oxide propylene oxide block copolymer nanoparticles as novel carriers for proteins and vaccines. Pharm Res 14:1431–1436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Kojima H, Iida M, Miyazaki H et al (2002) Enhancement of cytarabine sensitivity in squamous cell carcinoma cell line transfected with deoxycytidine kinase. ArchOtolarHead Neck Surg 128:708–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar