| Title |
Formulation of Natural Oil Nano-Emulsions for the Topical Delivery of Clofazimine, Artemisone and Decoquinate
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pharmaceutical Research, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11095-018-2471-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cornel Burger, Marique Aucamp, Jan du Preez, Richard K. Haynes, Andile Ngwane, Jeanetta du Plessis, Minja Gerber |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to formulate nano-emulsions comprising natural oils and the active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) clofazimine (CLF), artemisone (ATM) and decoquinate (DQ) in order to determine effectiveness of the nano-emulsions for topical delivery of the APIs. The APIs alone do not possess suitable physicochemical properties for topical drug delivery. Nano-emulsions were formulated with olive and safflower oils encapsulating the APIs. Skin diffusion and tape stripping studies were performed. By using the lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) assay, in vitro toxicity studies were carried out on immortalized human keratinocytes (HaCaT) cell line to determine cytotoxicities due to the APIs and the nano-emulsions incorporating the APIs. The nano-emulsions were effective in delivering the APIs within the stratum corneum-epidermis and the epidermis-dermis, were non-cytotoxic towards HaCaT cell lines (p < 0.05) and inhibited Mycobacterium tuberculosis in vitro. Natural oil nano-emulsions successfully deliver CLF, ATM and DQ and in principle could be used as supplementary topical treatment of cutaneous tuberculosis (CTB). Graphical Abstract ᅟ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 21% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 15 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2019.
All research outputs
#15,016,514
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Pharmaceutical Research
#2,210
of 2,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,509
of 330,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmaceutical Research
#10
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.