You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Pharmaceutics
  • Review
  • Open Access

30 November 2021

Application of Lipid-Based Nanocarriers for Antitubercular Drug Delivery: A Review

,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa XI B.P. 212, Democratic Republic of the Congo
2
Division of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria 0208, South Africa
3
Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Public Health, Official University of Bukavu, Bukavu 570, Democratic Republic of the Congo
4
School of Health Sciences, Department of Pharmacy, University of Zambia, Lusaka 10101, Zambia
This article belongs to the Special Issue Application of Drug Penetration or Delivery in the Fight against Infectious Diseases

Abstract

The antimicrobial drugs currently used for the management of tuberculosis (TB) exhibit poor bioavailability that necessitates prolonged treatment regimens and high dosing frequency to achieve optimal therapeutic outcomes. In addition, these agents cause severe adverse effects, as well as having detrimental interactions with other drugs used in the treatment of comorbid conditions such as HIV/AIDS. The challenges associated with the current TB regimens contribute to low levels of patient adherence and, consequently, the development of multidrug-resistant TB strains. This has led to the urgent need to develop newer drug delivery systems to improve the treatment of TB. Targeted drug delivery systems provide higher drug concentrations at the infection site, thus leading to reduced incidences of adverse effects. Lipid-based nanocarriers have proven to be effective in improving the solubility and bioavailability of antimicrobials whilst decreasing the incidence of adverse effects through targeted delivery. The potential application of lipid-based carriers such as liposomes, niosomes, solid lipid nanoparticles, nanostructured lipid carriers, nano and microemulsions, and self-emulsifying drug delivery systems for the treatment of TB is reviewed herein. The composition of the investigated lipid-based carriers, their characteristics, and their influence on bioavailability, toxicity, and sustained drug delivery are also discussed. Overall, lipid-based systems have shown great promise in anti-TB drug delivery applications. The summary of the reviewed data encourages future efforts to boost the translational development of lipid-based nanocarriers to improve TB therapy.

1. Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB) is currently one of the top 10 causes of death worldwide and the deadliest infectious disease, ranking above human immunodeficiency virus and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) []. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), approximately 10 million people were infected with TB in 2020 and 1.5 million died from the disease in the same year. This is equivalent to a staggering 4000 deaths per day []. The global distribution of TB cases is not homogenous, and its incidence is highest in developing countries. Approximately 860,000 people have comorbidities of TB and HIV, as well as related syndromes, with 250,000 deaths having been documented in this population []. Furthermore, various analyses [,,,] that have been conducted since the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic have reported that patients with pre-existing TB who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 are at higher risk of developing serious complications from COVID-19, possibly because of the large surface area of the lungs, which makes them highly susceptible to the virus following inhalation [].
Currently, chemotherapy represents the only hope for the clinical management of patients with TB, achieving cure rates as high as 95% when correctly administered to people with drug-susceptible TB []. However, most of the anti-TB drugs exhibit poor pharmacokinetic profiles that often compromise their full potential in clinical settings. Among the problems related to the therapeutic limitations of the existing anti-TB regimens are the poor bioavailability of most anti-TB drugs due to the variable drug absorption and unwanted first-pass metabolism, lengthy regimens with high dosing frequencies, individual and combined drug toxicity, as well as severe adverse effects. These obstacles are partly responsible for the low patient adherence, therapeutic failure, and alarming development of multidrug-resistant strains, thus justifying the current deadly status of TB and the urgent need to improve the existing anti-TB therapy [,]. To this effect, considerable attention in TB research has been given to the pulmonary drug delivery strategy, due to the possibility of increasing the drug concentrations in the lungs (i.e., the primary infected tissues) without systemic exposure []. For example, Contreras et al. [] investigated the possibility of the pulmonary delivery of TB drugs, consequently achieving higher drug concentrations in the lungs as well as comparable systemic levels after pulmonary delivery. The authors observed that pulmonary administration of 20 mg/kg rifampicin to guinea pigs exhibited the highest broncho-alveolar drug concentrations and similar systemic drug levels in comparison to the oral and intravenous administrations of 40 mg/kg rifampicin [].
Another excellent concept embraces the application of particulate systems for the targeted delivery of anti-TB drugs. Because the lungs are naturally endowed with alveolar macrophages, characterized by high phagocytic activity towards any foreign particles, this presents the use of inhalable particulate drug vehicles as a huge opportunity for targeting intramacrophage Mycobacterium tuberculosis [,]. This was demonstrated by the development of inhaled polylactic acid microparticles co-loaded with isoniazid and rifabutin, showing 20 times higher drug concentrations in infected alveolar macrophages than the pure drugs administered to mice using intratracheal, intravenous, and oral routes [].
Apart from the intramacrophage delivery concept, colloidal drug carriers have demonstrated the ability to co-encapsulate multiple anti-TB drugs and achieve prolonged drug release in the lungs, with huge potential for reducing the dosing frequency and improving compliance in patients with TB []. This was illustrated in a study in which it was observed that alginate-based nanoparticles containing four TB drugs, viz. rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, exhibited high drug accumulation at therapeutic levels for 7–11 days in plasma and for 15 days in the lungs, liver, and spleen, while the free drugs lasted only for 12–24 h []. There are many other studies that have reported the potential of nanoparticulate systems to enhance the solubility, stability, bioavailability, and biocompatibility of anti-TB drugs for improved therapeutic outcomes.
The present review summarizes the studies demonstrating the potential of lipid-based nanocarriers in improving the delivery of different anti-TB agents, with an emphasis on their biopharmaceutical attributes. For the purposes of this article, we mainly focus on lipid-based systems commonly investigated for TB drug delivery, including liposomes, niosomes, solid lipid nanoparticles, nanostructured lipid carriers, and emulsions. Manuscripts referenced in the current review were obtained from the Scopus and PubMed electronic databases, using the aforementioned keywords. The titles and abstracts of resultant articles were screened for relevance, following which duplicate and/or irrelevant articles were excluded. Consequently, the review article refers to 129 articles that have been published over 26 years (1995–2021).
We use the term nanoparticles to describe particles with dimensions in the nanometer range.

2. Pathogenesis and Management of Tuberculosis

2.1. Pathogenesis

TB is a fatal, airborne, chronic, infectious disease caused by M. tuberculosis complex, a generic term that includes all the mammalian tubercle bacilli consisting of very similar Mycobacterium species []. Of these, only M. tuberculosis causes human TB, along with M. canetti. The other species, such as M. bovis, M. africanum, M. microti, and M. pinnipedii, cause TB in domestic and wild animals, alongside the current TB vaccine strain, Bacillus Calmette-Guérin [,]. M. tuberculosis is mostly characterized by high lipid and mycolic acid contents in the cell wall, an incredibly low rate of division in vitro cell culture, and a naturally high speed of replication in host cells [,].
TB infection is initiated by the inhalation of M. tuberculosis, typically carried in aerosol droplets. Once in the deep lung, the tubercle bacillus is taken up by alveolar macrophages through endocytotic mechanisms [,]. Alveolar macrophages identify M. tuberculosis as a foreign particle and attempt to rid the body of the bacteria via phagocytosis, as depicted in Figure 1. Throughout phagocytosis, alveolar macrophages produce various antimicrobial agents, including proteases, lipases, reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, and a highly acidic environment hostile to the pathogen, as well as proinflammatory cytokines (e.g., Interleukin-6, -12, -18) to recruit other immune cells (i.e., monocytes, neutrophils, and dendritic cells) []. In this process, early formed sub-cellular units (named phagosomes) containing the mycobacterium undergo maturation through fusion with lysosomes, which contain the above-mentioned toxic chemicals to form phagolysosomes (mature phagosomes) for extensive digestion of the pathogen. However, the cell wall of M. tuberculosis often provides necessary protection that enables the bacillus to resist the immune stress, interfere with the phagolysosomes’ formation, and survive in the cytoplasm of the alveolar macrophages [,,]. In the dormant stage, the mycobacterium resides in the immune cell passively without any replication, leading to an asymptomatic infection commonly known as latent TB infection. In general, only 5–15% of latent cases evolve to active TB disease, with important clinical manifestations such as loss of appetite, chills, fever, night sweats, fatigue, weight loss, and nail clubbing. Nevertheless, the risk for the progression of latent TB infection to active TB disease increases by 10% per year in HIV-positive people and children aged less than 5 years who are household contacts of TB patients. In any case, a diagnosed active TB disease case requires an urgent anti-TB therapeutic regimen to ensure a survival chance of more than 44% for the patient [,,].
Figure 1. Illustrative description of TB pathogenesis in five consecutive steps: (1) mycobacteria entry, (2) interactions with alveolar macrophages, (3) recruitment and stimulation of immune cells, (4) mycobacteria containment in granuloma, (5) active TB disease. Adapted from [].

2.2. Therapeutic Management and Limitations

The treatment of TB relies on a lengthy multidrug therapy that aims to achieve complete cure while preventing transmission, relapse, and the development of drug resistance. The current anti-TB regimen initially involves simultaneous daily administrations of isoniazid (INH), rifampicin (RIF), pyrazinamide (PZA), and ethambutol (ETB) over 2 months. This initial intensive phase is followed by a continuation phase that maintains only INH and RIF for a further 4 months, completing the well-known 6-month regimen [,]. In this therapeutic composition, INH combined with ETB (or streptomycin) is expected to provide immediate bacterial clearance towards rapidly replicating tubercular bacilli. The action of PZA is expected to eliminate semi-dormant microorganisms and RIF is intended to supply a slow and permanent sterilizing action on low- or non-replicating bacilli []. Although all these antimicrobial agents make a good combination therapy, known as first-line anti-TB drugs, their prolonged frequent administration leads to severe adverse effects that compromise the adherence to the treatment. This often leads to both therapeutic failure and the emergence of new mycobacterium strains that are resistant to one or more of the above-mentioned drugs, leading to drug-resistant or multidrug-resistant TB [,]. The emergence of multidrug-resistant strains has led to the establishment of a second line of anti-TB drugs, including various antibiotics, such as ethionamide (prothionamide), kanamycin, amikacin, terizidone, cycloserine, capreomycin, viomycin, and para–aminosalicylic acid, and fluoroquinolones, viz. ofloxacin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin. Again, these drugs are almost always given in combinations to slow down the development of resistance; however, the implementation of these therapies has promoted more highly resistant strains to emerge. This continues to cause the rapid broadening of resistant strains that defy concomitant INH (or RIF), a fluoroquinolone analogue, and any other second-line anti-TB drug [,,]. Notably, the complexity of the current TB therapy shows that drug delivery systems that can accommodate multiple drugs are likely to be useful for a very long time to come.
When required for clinical success, the management of multidrug-resistant TB involves the surgical removal of TB lesions in combination with at least four selected therapeutic agents that show good activity against the microbial isolates. The duration of this regimen is extremely long, usually 24 months, which adversely affects patient adherence. Poor patient adherence is often considered to be a result of severe side effects [,]. This is particularly challenging for the pediatric populations, where frequent side effects of second-line anti-TB drugs are common and yet there are still insufficient therapeutically related safety data in this patient category. In addition, there is a lack of pediatric dosage forms for these drugs, which exposes children to potential inappropriate dosing, viz. sub-therapeutic or toxic doses []. Furthermore, the treatment of HIV-positive patients presents an additional challenge. Significant drug–drug interactions have been observed between the two classes of antimicrobial agents used for TB and HIV. It has been observed that the two therapies may be initiated consecutively. This approach recommends starting primarily with anti-TB agents to render TB tolerant to further dose adjustment, removal, or replacement of some anti-TB drugs prior to starting with anti-retroviral (ARV) therapy. As the problematic component of the TB regimen is one of the most potent anti-TB drugs (RIF), any therapeutic change may raise deep concerns regarding clinical success. The replacement of RIF by rifabutin for HIV–TB coinfection appears to be still limited due to the poor bioavailability and narrowed antimycobacterial spectrum of rifabutin []. This shows that while novel therapeutic agents are needed for tackling multidrug-resistant TB strains, it is paramount to find new drug delivery strategies to improve the therapeutic profiles of existing drugs in order to hinder the further emergence of resistant strains [].

3. Lipid-Based Systems as Carriers of Anti-TB Drugs

Lipid nanoparticles, as the latest innovation in drug delivery, have considerable potential in the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases including TB. Along with the use of these carriers, it has become possible to improve the apparent solubility and bioavailability of drugs while potentially reducing their toxicity, which are among the main obstacles in the treatment of TB. Lipid-based nanoparticles can be designed as sustained drug delivery systems, thus keeping the drugs in systemic circulation for extended periods. This can significantly reduce the dosing regimen and improve patient adherence. In this section, we provide an overview of some of the most important lipid-based carriers commonly used for the delivery of anti-TB drugs, which are depicted in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Schematic representation of lipid-based systems discussed herein.

3.1. Liposomes

Liposomes are the most investigated lipid nanocarriers for the delivery of various medical cargoes, including therapeutic and diagnostic agents. Liposomal particles are spherical vesicles composed of natural or synthetic phospholipids, which are amphiphilic molecules, and cholesterol, which improves in vitro and in vivo stability []. Upon aqueous dispersion, phospholipids spontaneously form a bilayer, with the polar head facing the aqueous phase and non-polar tails facing towards each other []. The resultant inner aqueous core incorporates hydrophilic molecules, while hydrophobic molecules are encapsulated in the lipid bilayer.
Morphologically, liposomes can be classified as small unilamellar vesicles (SUVs), large unilamellar vesicles (LUVs), giant unilamellar vesicles (GUVs), oligolamellar vesicles (OGVs), and multilamellar vesicles (MLVs) [,,]. Unilamellar vesicles are composed of a single lipid bilayer and can be subcategorized as small when the size is ≤100 nm, while large and giant vesicles are >100 nm but <1 μm, and ≥1 μm, respectively. Oligolamellar vesicles refer to vesicles containing two to five concentric lamellae, whereas multilamellar vesicles have more than five lamellae. These different structures can be distinguished using microscopy imaging. Unilamellar vesicles contain a large aqueous core and are suited for the encapsulation of hydrophilic drugs, whilst multilamelar vesicles are more suitable for lipophilic drugs [,].
Liposomes have been widely used as safe and effective drug delivery systems in various diseases, including TB. Their use improves the therapeutic index of anti-TB drugs thanks to their targeting abilities, particularly for pulmonary administration. The integrity of liposomes is severely compromised by the gastro-intestinal and blood environment, resulting in the rapid release of the encapsulated drug. Once administered, traditional liposomes are rapidly cleared from blood circulation by the macrophages’ reticuloendothelial system. Hydrophilic polymers such as polyethylene glycol (PEG) are increasingly used to provide a protective hydrophilic layer on the surface of the liposomes, thereby reducing their elimination from macrophages [].

3.2. Niosomes

Niosomes are similar to liposomes but are composed of non-ionic surfactants that form the bilayer. They are hydrated mixtures of non-ionic surfactants and cholesterol. Commonly used surfactants include polysorbates (Tweens®), sorbitan fatty acid esters (Spans®), and polyethoxy fatty ethers (Brijs®) []. As with liposomes, cholesterol is added to increase vesicle stability and bilayer rigidity. The addition of non-ionic surfactants has been reported to increase the particle size of the vesicles, which in turn causes an increase in encapsulation efficiency []. Hydrophilic drugs are incorporated into the aqueous core, whereas lipophilic compounds are encapsulated into the lipophilic bilayers. Niosomes are very similar to liposomes in terms of functionality in that they are capable of increasing drug solubility and bioavailability. However, they alleviate the issues associated with conventional liposomes, such as chemical stability and high cost [,]. In addition, they have higher penetration potential than conventional liposomes [,,].

3.3. Solid Lipid Nanoparticles

Solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN) are colloidal carriers made of biodegradable lipids that are solid at room and body temperature []. The lipids used in synthesizing SLN include long-chain triglycerides or partial glycerides, fatty acids, phospholipids, and waxes []. Depending on the lipid core, it is usually required to add a stabilizer such as a surfactant (e.g., polysorbate 80, poloxamer 188, lecithin) with a concentration ranging between 1 and 5% (w/v) []. Bioactive compounds, especially lipophilic molecules, are encapsulated into the solid lipid matrix and released in a controlled manner. SLN are generally spherical in shape, with particle sizes of 10–1000 nm [,]. The use of physiological lipids in the formulation improves their biosafety and bio-efficacy. SLN combine the advantages of the traditional drug carriers, including lipid and polymeric nanoparticles, and overcome the limitations associated with them. SLN have shown the potential to improve drug stability and bioavailability via different routes of administration.

3.4. Nanostructured Lipid Carriers

Nanostructured lipid carriers (NLC) have emerged as a promising second generation of lipid nanoparticles, the first one being SLN [,]. This new unstructured-matrix SLN is made up of a mixture of blended solid and liquid lipids as a core matrix, and an aqueous phase containing a surfactant or a mixture of surfactants [,,,]. Usually, solid lipids are mixed with liquid lipids in various ratios from 70:30 to 99.9:0.1, respectively, while the surfactant content ranges between 1.5 and 5% (w/v) [].
Due to the incorporation of biodegradable and compatible liquid lipids into the solid matrix, NLC were found to offer several advantages in drug delivery over SLN, in addition to the possibility of encapsulating both lipophilic and hydrophilic drugs. Other advantages include increased drug loading capacity and solubility, enhanced storage stability, improved permeability and bioavailability, as well as reduced adverse effects, prolonged half-life, and tissue-targeted delivery [,,].

3.5. Emulsions

3.5.1. Nano- and Microemulsions

Nano- and microemulsions are the most famous colloidal dispersions. They are colloidal systems composed of two immiscible liquids. Both of these systems comprise an aqueous phase, an oil, a surfactant, and a cosurfactant or cosolvent [,]. Their nanoparticles have some basic structures with hydrophobic and hydrophilic cores, which are arranged according to the external phase []. They are generally classified as water-in-oil and oil-in-water emulsions. They can be prepared through spontaneous emulsification or by high-energy methods, i.e., micro-fluidization or high-pressure homogenization [,].
Although they show many similarities, such as transparency, being isotropic, and low viscosity, they are naturally different. Nanoemulsions are conventional emulsions with particle size strictly <200 nm, while microemulsions are in fact “swollen micelle” systems in which the internal phase is incorporated into the core of surfactant micelles under specific environmental conditions and compositions [,,]. Physiochemically, nanoemulsions are thermodynamically unstable systems, while microemulsions are thermodynamically stable systems []. The free energy of nanoemulsions is higher than that of the separate formulation components, while the free energy of the separate components of microemulsions is higher than that of the microemulsion. Unlike microemulsions, nanoemulsions are kinetically stable systems: they present high-energy barriers and a slow mass transport phenomenon, which slow down their destabilization process [].
Nano- and microemulsions have been described as ideal carriers for the delivery of drugs via many administration routes, including oral, pulmonary, ocular, and parenteral [,,].

3.5.2. Self-Emulsifying Drug Delivery Systems

Although nano- and microemulsions are comparatively stable systems, certain factors such as poor palatability, drug hydrolysis, and long-term stability limit their use [,]. Issues related to nano- and microemulsions have been addressed by the introduction of self-(nano)emulsifying drug delivery systems (S(N)EDDS). They are defined as isotropic mixtures of oils, surfactants, and cosurfactants or cosolvents, which can spontaneously form a (nano)emulsion with droplet sizes of 200 nm or below upon contact with gastrointestinal fluids []. They consist of oils (<30% w/w) and high amounts of surfactants and cosurfactants (>60%). As they can be packed into capsules as a single dose and do not contain water, S(N)EDDS offer improved palatability, physical and chemical stability, and patient compliance. Specific advantages associated with S(N)EDDS include high drug loading, improved drug absorption, controlled delivery, targeting potential, and minimized variability resulting from food effects []. Not only can they improve drug bioavailability, but S(N)EDDS are made from excipients regarded as safe, and are easy to manufacture and scale up. S(N)EDDS are one of the technologies applied for the improved delivery of anti-TB drugs.

5. Conclusions

Tuberculosis (TB) remains a leading cause of death worldwide, and its treatment is challenging due to the poor pharmacokinetic profiles of existing TB drugs. In addition, the pathogen is highly infectious and very resilient to strong acids and bases because of its cell wall, which comprises approximately 40–60% complex lipids. Consequently, targeted therapy based on understanding the structure and biosynthesis of the bacterium is cardinal in effectively managing the disease as well as eradicating drug resistance. The current and traditional drug delivery systems require high-dose-frequency administration, which impacts negatively on patient adherence and consequently leads to treatment failure and the development of multidrug-resistant strains. Novel approaches such as the use of liposomes, niosomes, solid lipid nanoparticles, nanostructured lipid carriers, nano- and microemulsions, and self-emulsifying formulations have shown significant potential to improve the bioavailability, stability, and safety of TB drugs. The factors that influence the performance of targeted pulmonary delivery systems using lipid-based delivery systems have been highlighted. Overall, lipid-based systems have shown great promise in anti-TB drug delivery applications. While this underscores the need to fast-track the translational development of these drug delivery systems to tackle the deadly reputation of TB, it is important to note that there are few lipid-based nanomedicines available on the market due to scalability concerns, the overall cost to patients, and the need for highly specialized equipment. Further work may be required to be able to translate this valuable technology from bench to pharmaceutical market.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.I.N., P.B.M., A.M.B., A.B.B. and B.A.W.; data curation, writing—original draft preparation, C.I.N., A.M.B., A.B.B., B.A.W., C.M. and G.K.M.; writing—review and editing, C.I.N., B.A.W., C.M., P.B.M., G.K.M. and P.A.M.; supervision, C.I.N.; funding acquisition, P.A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the Research Office of Rhodes University (P.A.M.).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baranyai, Z.; Soria-Carrera, H.; Alleva, M.; Millán-Placer, A.C.; Lucía, A.; Martín-Rapún, R.; Aínsa, J.A.; de la Fuente, J.M. Nanotechnology-Based Targeted Drug Delivery: An Emerging Tool to Overcome Tuberculosis. Adv. Ther. 2021, 4, 2000113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. World Health Organization. Global Tuberculosis Report; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  3. Seki, M.; Choi, H.; Kim, K.; Whang, J.; Sung, J.; Mitarai, S. Tuberculosis: A persistent unpleasant neighbour of humans. J. Infect. Public Health 2021, 14, 508–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gao, Y.; Liu, M.; Chen, Y.; Shi, S.; Geng, J.; Tian, J. Association between tuberculosis and COVID-19 severity and mortality: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Med. Virol. 2021, 93, 194–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Motta, I.; Centis, R.; D’Ambrosio, L.; García-García, J.M.; Goletti, D.; Gualano, G.; Lipani, F.; Palmieri, F.; Sánchez-Montalvá, A.; Pontali, E.; et al. Tuberculosis, COVID-19 and migrants: Preliminary analysis of deaths occurring in 69 patients from two cohorts. Pulmonology 2020, 26, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chen, Y.; Wang, Y.; Fleming, J.; Yu, Y.; Gu, Y.; Liu, C.; Fan, L.; Wang, X.; Cheng, M.; Bi, L.; et al. Active or latent tuberculosis increases susceptibility to COVID-19 and disease severity. medRxiv 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Mousquer, G.T.; Peres, A.; Fiegenbaum, M. Pathology of TB/COVID-19 Co-Infection: The phantom menace. Tuberculosis 2021, 126, 102020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Witika, B.A.; Makoni, P.A.; Mweetwa, L.L.; Ntemi, P.V.; Chikukwa, M.T.R.; Matafwali, S.K.; Mwila, C.; Mudenda, S.; Katandula, J.; Walker, R.B. Nano-Biomimetic Drug Delivery Vehicles: Potential Approaches for COVID-19 Treatment. Molecules 2020, 25, 5952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nkanga, C.I.; Krause, R.W.M. Encapsulation of Isoniazid-conjugated Phthalocyanine-In-Cyclodextrin-In-Liposomes Using Heating Method. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 11485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hawn, T.R.; Matheson, A.I.; Maley, S.N.; Vandal, O. Host-Directed Therapeutics for Tuberculosis: Can We Harness the Host? Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2013, 77, 608–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Yuen, C.M.; Tolman, A.W.; Cohen, T.; Parr, J.B.; Keshavjee, S.; Becerra, M.C. Isoniazid-Resistant Tuberculosis in Children: A Systematic Review. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2013, 32, e217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mehanna, M.M.; Mohyeldin, S.M.; Elgindy, N.A. Respirable nanocarriers as a promising strategy for antitubercular drug delivery. J. Control. Release 2014, 187, 183–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Garcia Contreras, L.; Sung, J.; Ibrahim, M.; Elbert, K.; Edwards, D.; Hickey, A. Pharmacokinetics of Inhaled Rifampicin Porous Particles for Tuberculosis Treatment: Insight into Rifampicin Absorption from the Lungs of Guinea Pigs. Mol. Pharm. 2015, 12, 2642–2650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Akbarzadeh, A.; Rezaei-Sadabady, R.; Davaran, S.; Joo, S.W.; Zarghami, N.; Hanifehpour, Y.; Samiei, M.; Kouhi, M.; Nejati-Koshki, K. Liposome: Classification, preparation, and applications. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2013, 8, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Alexandru-flaviu, T.; Cornel, C. Macrophages Targeted Drug Delivery as a Key Therapy in Infectious Disease. Biotechnol. Mol. Biol. Nanomed. 2014, 2, 19–21. [Google Scholar]
  16. Muttil, P.; Kaur, J.; Kumar, K.; Yadav, A.B.; Sharma, R.; Misra, A. Inhalable microparticles containing large payload of anti-tuberculosis drugs. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2007, 32, 140–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Parikh, R.; Dalwadi, S.; Aboti, P.; Patel, L. Inhaled microparticles of antitubercular antibiotic for in vitro and in vivo alveolar macrophage targeting and activation of phagocytosis. J. Antibiot. 2014, 67, 387–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ahmad, Z.; Pandey, R.; Sharma, S.; Khuller, G.K. Alginate Nanoparticles as Antituberculosis Drug Carriers: Formulation Development, Pharmacokinetics and Therapeutic Potential. Indian J. Chest Dis. Allied Sci. 2006, 48, 171–176. [Google Scholar]
  19. Khawbung, J.L.; Nath, D.; Chakraborty, S. Drug resistant Tuberculosis: A review. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2021, 74, 101574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cousins, D.; Bastida, R.; Cataldi, A.; Quse, V.; Redrobe, S.; Dow, P.; Duignan, P.; Murray, A.; Dupont, C.; Ahmed, N.; et al. Tuberculosis in seals caused by a novel member of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex: Mycobacterium pinnipedii sp. nov. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2003, 53, 1305–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Kanabalan, R.D.; Lee, L.J.; Lee, T.Y.; Chong, P.P.; Hassan, L.; Ismail, R.; Chin, V.K. Human tuberculosis and Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex: A review on genetic diversity, pathogenesis and omics approaches in host biomarkers discovery. Microbiol. Res. 2021, 246, 126674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Parish, T.; Stoker, N.G. Mycobacteria: Bugs and bugbears (two steps forward and one step back). Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. Part B Mol. Biotechnol. 1999, 13, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. BM, M. Application of stains in clinical microbiology. Biotech. Histochem. 2001, 76, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kumar, V.; Abbas, A.K.; Fausto, N.; Mitchell, R.N. Robbins Basic Pathology, 8th ed.; Saunders Elsevier: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2007; pp. 516–522. [Google Scholar]
  25. Arch, G. Mainous III and Claire Pomoroy. In Management of Antimicrobials in Infectious Diseases, 2nd ed.; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  26. Zuñiga, J.; Torres-García, D.; Santos-Mendoza, T.; Rodriguez-Reyna, T.S.; Granados, J.; Yunis, E.J. Cellular and Humoral Mechanisms Involved in the Control of Tuberculosis. Clin. Dev. Immunol. 2012, 2012, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nuermberger, E.L.; Spigelman, M.K.; Yew, W.W. Current development and future prospects in chemotherapy of tuberculosis. Respirology 2010, 15, 764–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Piccini, P.; Chiappini, E.; Tortoli, E.; de Martino, M.; Galli, L. Clinical peculiarities of tuberculosis. BMC Infect. Dis. 2014, 14, S4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Kumar, N.; Kumar, P.; Kumar, P.; Kumar, M.; Kumar, R. Nanotechnology: A focus on treatment of Tuberculosis. Int. J. Drug Deliv. 2011, 3, 25–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Eker, B.; Ortmann, J.; Migliori, G.B.; Sotgiu, G.; Muetterlein, R.; Centis, R.; Hoffmann, H.; Kirsten, D.; Schaberg, T.; Ruesch-Gerdes, S.; et al. Multidrug- and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, Germany. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2008, 14, 1700–1706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mitnick, C.D.; Shin, S.S.; Seung, K.J.; Rich, M.L.; Atwood, S.S.; Furin, J.J.; Fitzmaurice, G.M.; Alcantara Viru, F.A.; Appleton, S.C.; Bayona, J.N.; et al. Comprehensive Treatment of Extensively Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008, 359, 563–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Caminero, J.A.; Sotgiu, G.; Zumla, A.; Migliori, G.B. Best drug treatment for multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2010, 10, 621–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chan, E.D.; Laurel, V.; Strand, M.J.; Chan, J.F.; Huynh, M.L.N.; Goble, M.; Iseman, M.D. Treatment and outcome analysis of 205 patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2004, 169, 1103–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Venturini, E.; Turkova, A.; Chiappini, E.; Galli, L.; de Martino, M.; Thorne, C. Tuberculosis and HIV co-infection in children. BMC Infect. Dis. 2014, 14, S5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Eleraky, N.E.; Allam, A.; Hassan, S.B.; Omar, M.M. Nanomedicine Fight against Antibacterial Resistance: An Overview of the Recent Pharmaceutical Innovations. Pharmaceutics 2020, 12, 142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Xu, Y.; Michalowski, C.B.; Beloqui, A. Advances in lipid carriers for drug delivery to the gastrointestinal tract. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 2021, 52, 101414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Pattni, B.S.; Chupin, V.V.; Torchilin, V.P. New Developments in Liposomal Drug Delivery. Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 10938–10966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Euliss, L.E.; DuPont, J.A.; Gratton, S.; DeSimone, J. Imparting size, shape, and composition control of materials for nanomedicine. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2006, 35, 1095–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kumar, S.; Dutta, J.; Dutta, P.K.; Koh, J. A systematic study on chitosan-liposome based systems for biomedical applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 160, 470–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Isalomboto Nkanga, C.; Murhimalika Bapolisi, A.; Ikemefuna Okafor, N.; Werner Maçedo Krause, R. General Perception of Liposomes: Formation, Manufacturing and Applications. In Liposomes—Advances and Perspectives; Catala, A., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2019; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
  41. Weber, C.; Voigt, M.; Simon, J.; Danner, A.K.; Frey, H.; Mailänder, V.; Helm, M.; Morsbach, S.; Landfester, K. Functionalization of Liposomes with Hydrophilic Polymers Results in Macrophage Uptake Independent of the Protein Corona. Biomacromolecules 2019, 20, 2989–2999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Bhardwaj, P.; Tripathi, P.; Gupta, R.; Pandey, S. Niosomes: A review on niosomal research in the last decade. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2020, 56, 101581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Babadi, D.; Dadashzadeh, S.; Osouli, M.; Daryabari, M.S.; Haeri, A. Nanoformulation strategies for improving intestinal permeability of drugs: A more precise look at permeability assessment methods and pharmacokinetic properties changes. J. Control. Release 2020, 321, 669–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Masjedi, M.; Montahaei, T. An illustrated review on nonionic surfactant vesicles (niosomes) as an approach in modern drug delivery: Fabrication, characterization, pharmaceutical, and cosmetic applications. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2021, 61, 102234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Witika, B.A.; Walker, R.B. Development, manufacture and characterization of niosomes for the delivery for nevirapine. Pharmazie 2019, 74, 91–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mishra, D.K.; Shandilya, R.; Mishra, P.K. Lipid based nanocarriers: A translational perspective. Nanomed. Nanotechnol. Biol. Med. 2018, 14, 2023–2050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kumar, R. Lipid-Based Nanoparticles for Drug-Delivery Systems. Nanocarriers Drug Deliv. 2019, 249–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Witika, B.A. The Development, Manufacture and Characterisation of Niosomes Intended to Deliver Nevirapine to the Brain. Master’s Thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  49. Makoni, P.A.; Kasongo, K.W.; Walker, R.B. Short Term Stability Testing of Efavirenz-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticle (SLN) and Nanostructured Lipid Carrier (NLC) Dispersions. Pharmaceutics 2019, 11, 397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Dumont, C.; Bourgeois, S.; Fessi, H.; Jannin, V. Lipid-based nanosuspensions for oral delivery of peptides, a critical review. Int. J. Pharm. 2018, 541, 117–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Barroso, L.; Viegas, C.; Vieira, J.; Ferreira-Pêgo, C.; Costa, J.; Fonte, P. Lipid-based carriers for food ingredients delivery. J. Food Eng. 2021, 295, 110451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mehnert, W.; Mäder, K. Solid lipid nanoparticles: Production, characterization and applications. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2012, 64, 83–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Abrishami, M.; Abrishami, M.; Mahmoudi, A.; Mosallaei, N.; Vakili Ahrari Roodi, M.; Malaekeh-Nikouei, B. Solid Lipid Nanoparticles Improve the Diclofenac Availability in Vitreous after Intraocular Injection. J. Drug Deliv. 2016, 2016, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Beloqui, A.; Solinís, M.Á.; Rodríguez-Gascón, A.; Almeida, A.J.; Préat, V. Nanostructured lipid carriers: Promising drug delivery systems for future clinics. Nanomed. Nanotechnol. Biol. Med. 2016, 12, 143–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Makoni, P.A.; Khamanga, S.M.; Walker, R.B. Muco-adhesive clarithromycin-loaded nanostructured lipid carriers for ocular delivery: Formulation, characterization, cytotoxicity and stability. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2020, 61, 102171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Weber, S.; Zimmer, A.; Pardeike, J. Solid Lipid Nanoparticles (SLN) and Nanostructured Lipid Carriers (NLC) for pulmonary application: A review of the state of the art. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2014, 86, 7–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Vieira, A.C.C.; Magalhães, J.; Rocha, S.; Cardoso, M.S.; Santos, S.G.; Borges, M.; Pinheiro, M.; Reis, S. Targeted macrophages delivery of rifampicin-loaded lipid nanoparticles to improve tuberculosis treatment. Nanomedicine 2017, 12, 2721–2736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Patil, T.S.; Deshpande, A.S. Nanostructured lipid carriers-based drug delivery for treating various lung diseases: A State-of-the-Art Review. Int. J. Pharm. 2018, 547, 209–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Callender, S.P.; Mathews, J.A.; Kobernyk, K.; Wettig, S.D. Microemulsion utility in pharmaceuticals: Implications for multi-drug delivery. Int. J. Pharm. 2017, 526, 425–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Singh, Y.; Meher, J.G.; Raval, K.; Khan, F.A.; Chaurasia, M.; Jain, N.K.; Chourasia, M.K. Nanoemulsion: Concepts, development and applications in drug delivery. J. Control. Release 2017, 252, 28–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Rehman, F.U.; Shah, K.U.; Shah, S.U.; Khan, I.U.; Khan, G.M.; Khan, A. From nanoemulsions to self-nanoemulsions, with recent advances in self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery systems (SNEDDS). Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2017, 14, 1325–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Sonneville-Aubrun, O.; Simonnet, J.T.; L’Alloret, F. Nanoemulsions: A new vehicle for skincare products. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2004, 108–109, 145–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Anton, N.; Vandamme, T.F. Nano-emulsions and micro-emulsions: Clarifications of the critical differences. Pharm. Res. 2011, 28, 978–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wennerström, H.; Balogh, J.; Olsson, U. Interfacial tensions in microemulsions. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2006, 291, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Gutiérrez, J.M.; González, C.; Maestro, A.; Solè, I.; Pey, C.M.; Nolla, J. Nano-emulsions: New applications and optimization of their preparation. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 2008, 13, 245–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Anton, N.; Vandamme, T.F. The universality of low-energy nano-emulsification. Int. J. Pharm. 2009, 377, 142–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Tadros, T.; Izquierdo, P.; Esquena, J.; Solans, C. Formation and stability of nano-emulsions. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2004, 108–109, 303–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ligório Fialho, S.; da Silva-Cunha, A. New vehicle based on a microemulsion for topical ocular administration of dexamethasone. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2004, 32, 626–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Rai, V.K.; Mishra, N.; Yadav, K.S.; Yadav, N.P. Nanoemulsion as pharmaceutical carrier for dermal and transdermal drug delivery: Formulation development, stability issues, basic considerations and applications. J. Control. Release 2018, 270, 203–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Agrawal, V.; Patel, R.; Patel, M.; Thanki, K.; Mishra, S. Design and evaluation of microemulsion-based efinaconazole formulations for targeted treatment of onychomycosis through transungual route: Ex vivo and nail clipping studies. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2021, 201, 111652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Nardin, I.; Köllner, S. Successful development of oral SEDDS: Screening of excipients from the industrial point of view. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2019, 142, 128–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Justo, O.R.; Moraes, Â.M. Incorporation of antibiotics in liposomes designed for tuberculosis therapy by inhalation. Drug Deliv. 2003, 10, 201–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Vyas, S.P.; Kannan, M.E.; Jain, S.; Mishra, V.; Singh, P. Design of liposomal aerosols for improved delivery of rifampicin to alveolar macrophages. Int. J. Pharm. 2004, 269, 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Pandey, R.; Sharma, S.; Khuller, G.K. Nebulization of liposome encapsulated antitubercular drugs in guinea pigs. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2004, 24, 93–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Gürsoy, A.; Kut, E.; Özkirimli, S. Co-encapsulation of isoniazid and rifampicin in liposomes and characterization of liposomes by derivative spectroscopy. Int. J. Pharm. 2004, 271, 115–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Chimote, G.; Banerjee, R. In vitro evaluation of inhalable isoniazid-loaded surfactant liposomes as an adjunct therapy in pulmonary tuberculosis. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B Appl. Biomater. 2010, 94, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Rojanarat, W.; Changsan, N.; Tawithong, E.; Pinsuwan, S.; Chan, H.K.; Srichana, T. Isoniazid proliposome powders for inhalation-preparation, characterization and cell culture studies. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2011, 12, 4414–4434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Manca, M.L.; Sinico, C.; Maccioni, A.M.; Diez, O.; Fadda, A.M.; Manconi, M. Composition influence on pulmonary delivery of rifampicin liposomes. Pharmaceutics 2012, 4, 590–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Patil-Gadhe, A.A.; Kyadarkunte, A.Y.; Pereira, M.; Jejurikar, G.; Patole, M.S.; Risbud, A.; Pokharkar, V.B. Rifapentine-proliposomes for inhalation: In vitro and in vivo toxicity. Toxicol. Int. 2014, 21, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Singh, C.; Koduri, L.V.S.K.; Singh, A.; Suresh, S. Novel potential for optimization of antitubercular therapy: Pulmonary delivery of rifampicin lipospheres. Asian J. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 10, 549–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Patil, J.; Devi, V.; Devi, K.; Sarasija, S. A novel approach for lung delivery of rifampicin-loaded liposomes in dry powder form for the treatment of tuberculosis. Lung India 2015, 32, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Bhardwaj, A.; Grobler, A.; Rath, G.; Kumar Goyal, A.; Kumar Jain, A.; Mehta, A. Pulmonary Delivery of Anti-Tubercular Drugs Using Ligand Anchored pH Sensitive Liposomes for the Treatment of Pulmonary Tuberculosis. Curr. Drug Deliv. 2016, 13, 909–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kaur, M.; Garg, T.; Narang, R.K. A review of emerging trends in the treatment of tuberculosis. Artif. Cells Nanomed. Biotechnol. 2016, 44, 478–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Poerio, N.; Bugli, F.; Taus, F.; Santucci, M.B.; Rodolfo, C.; Cecconi, F.; Torelli, R.; Varone, F.; Inchingolo, R.; Majo, F.; et al. Liposomes loaded with bioactive lipids enhance antibacterial innate immunity irrespective of drug resistance. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Nkanga, C.I.; Krause, R.W.; Noundou, X.S.; Walker, R.B. Preparation and characterization of isoniazid-loaded crude soybean lecithin liposomes. Int. J. Pharm. 2017, 526, 466–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Tian, M.; Zhou, Z.; Tan, S.; Fan, X.; Li, L.; Ullah, N. Formulation in DDA-MPLA-TDB liposome enhances the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a DNA vaccine against Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. Front. Immunol. 2018, 9, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Nkanga, C.I.; Walker, R.B.; Krause, R.W. pH-Dependent release of isoniazid from isonicotinic acid (4-hydroxy-benzylidene)-hydrazide loaded liposomes. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2018, 45, 264–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Miretti, M.; Juri, L.; Cosiansi, M.C.; Tempesti, T.C.; Baumgartner, M.T. Antimicrobial Effects of ZnPc Delivered into Liposomes on Multidrug Resistant (MDR)-Mycobacterium tuberculosis. ChemistrySelect 2019, 4, 9726–9730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Nkanga, C.I.; Noundou, X.S.; Walker, R.B.; Krause, R.W.M. Co-encapsulation of Rifampicin and Isoniazid in Crude Soybean Lecithin Liposomes. S. Afr. J. Chem. 2019, 72, 80–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Nkanga, C.I.; Roth, M.; Walker, R.B.; Noundou, X.S.; Krause, R.W.M. Co-loading of isoniazid-grafted phthalocyanine-in-cyclodextrin and rifampicin in crude soybean lecithin liposomes: Formulation, spectroscopic and biological characterization. J. Biomed. Nanotechnol. 2020, 16, 14–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Jain, C.P.; Vyas, S.P. Preparation and characterization of niosomes containing rifampicin for lung targeting. J. Microencapsul. 1995, 12, 401–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Karki, R.; Mamatha, G.C.; Subramanya, G.; Udupa, N. Preparation, characterization and tissue disposition of niosomes containing isoniazid. Rasayan J. Chem. 2008, 1, 224–227. [Google Scholar]
  93. El-Ridy, M.S.; Abdelbary, A.; Nasr, E.A.; Khalil, R.M.; Mostafa, D.M.; El-Batal, A.I.; Abd El-Alim, S.H. Niosomal encapsulation of the antitubercular drug, pyrazinamide. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2011, 37, 1110–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Singh, G.; Dwivedi, H.; Saraf, S.K.; Saraf, S.A. Niosomal delivery of isoniazid—Development and characterization. Trop. J. Pharm. Res. 2011, 10, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Mehta, S.K.; Jindal, N.; Kaur, G. Quantitative investigation, stability and in vitro release studies of anti-TB drugs in Triton niosomes. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2011, 87, 173–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Mehta, S.K.; Jindal, N. Formulation of Tyloxapol niosomes for encapsulation, stabilization and dissolution of anti-tubercular drugs. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2013, 101, 434–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. El-Ridy, M.S.; Yehia, S.A.; Kassem, M.A.E.M.; Mostafa, D.M.; Nasr, E.A.; Asfour, M.H. Niosomal encapsulation of ethambutol hydrochloride for increasing its efficacy and safety. Drug Deliv. 2015, 22, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  98. Pandey, R.; Khuller, G.K. Solid lipid particle-based inhalable sustained drug delivery system against experimental tuberculosis. Tuberculosis 2005, 85, 227–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Aboutaleb, E.; Noori, M.; Gandomi, N.; Atyabi, F.; Fazeli, M.R.; Jamalifar, H.; Dinarvand, R. Improved antimycobacterial activity of rifampin using solid lipid nanoparticles. Int. Nano Lett. 2012, 2, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Maretti, E.; Rossi, T.; Bondi, M.; Croce, M.A.; Hanuskova, M.; Leo, E.; Sacchetti, F.; Iannuccelli, V. Inhaled Solid Lipid Microparticles to target alveolar macrophages for tuberculosis. Int. J. Pharm. 2014, 462, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Maretti, E.; Rustichelli, C.; Romagnoli, M.; Balducci, A.G.; Buttini, F.; Sacchetti, F.; Leo, E.; Iannuccelli, V. Solid Lipid Nanoparticle assemblies (SLNas) for an anti-TB inhalation treatment—A Design of Experiments approach to investigate the influence of pre-freezing conditions on the powder respirability. Int. J. Pharm. 2016, 511, 669–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Gaspar, D.P.; Faria, V.; Gonçalves, L.M.D.; Taboada, P.; Remuñán-López, C.; Almeida, A.J. Rifabutin-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles for inhaled antitubercular therapy: Physicochemical and in vitro studies. Int. J. Pharm. 2016, 497, 199–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Vieira, A.C.C.; Chaves, L.L.; Pinheiro, S.; Pinto, S.; Pinheiro, M.; Lima, S.C.; Ferreira, D.; Sarmento, B.; Reis, S. Mucoadhesive chitosan-coated solid lipid nanoparticles for better management of tuberculosis. Int. J. Pharm. 2018, 536, 478–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Nemati, E.; Mokhtarzadeh, A.; Panahi-Azar, V.; Mohammadi, A.; Hamishehkar, H.; Mesgari-Abbasi, M.; Ezzati Nazhad Dolatabadi, J.; de la Guardia, M. Ethambutol-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticles as Dry Powder Inhalable Formulation for Tuberculosis Therapy. AAPS PharmSciTech 2019, 20, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Song, X.; Lin, Q.; Guo, L.; Fu, Y.; Han, J.; Ke, H.; Sun, X.; Gong, T.; Zhang, Z. Rifampicin loaded mannosylated cationic nanostructured lipid carriers for alveolar macrophage-specific delivery. Pharm. Res. 2015, 32, 1741–1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Banerjee, S.; Roy, S.; Bhaumik, K.N.; Pillai, J. Mechanisms of the effectiveness of lipid nanoparticle formulations loaded with anti-tubercular drugs combinations toward overcoming drug bioavailability in tuberculosis. J. Drug Target. 2020, 28, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Mehta, S.K.; Kaur, G.; Bhasin, K.K. Analysis of Tween based microemulsion in the presence of TB drug rifampicin. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2007, 60, 95–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Kaur, G.; Mehta, S.K. Probing location of anti-TB drugs loaded in brij 96 microemulsions using thermoanalytical and photophysical approach. J. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 103, 937–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Kaur, G.; Mehta, S.K.; Kumar, S.; Bhanjana, G.; Dilbaghi, N. Coencapsulation of Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Antituberculosis Drugs in Synergistic Brij 96 Microemulsions: A Biophysical Characterization. J. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 104, 2203–2212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Hussain, A.; Shakeel, F.; Singh, S.K.; Alsarra, I.A.; Faruk, A.; Alanazi, F.K.; Peter Christoper, G.V. Solidified SNEDDS for the oral delivery of rifampicin: Evaluation, proof of concept, in vivo kinetics, and in silico GastroPlusTM simulation. Int. J. Pharm. 2019, 566, 203–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Bulbake, U.; Doppalapudi, S.; Kommineni, N.; Khan, W. Liposomal Formulations in Clinical Use: An Updated Review. Pharmaceutics 2017, 9, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Lila, A.S.A.; Ishida, T. Liposomal delivery systems: Design optimization and current applications. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2017, 40, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Rudokas, M.; Najlah, M.; Alhnan, M.A.; Elhissi, A. Liposome Delivery Systems for Inhalation: A Critical Review Highlighting Formulation Issues and Anticancer Applications. Med. Princ. Pract. 2016, 25, 60–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Kaul, A.; Chaturvedi, S.; Attri, A.; Kalra, M.; Mishra, A.K. Targeted theranostic liposomes: Rifampicin and ofloxacin loaded pegylated liposomes for theranostic application in mycobacterial infections. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 28919–28926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Drummond, D.C.; Zignani, M.; Leroux, J.C. Current status of pH-sensitive liposomes in drug delivery. Prog. Lipid Res. 2000, 39, 409–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Karanth, H.; Murthy, R.S.R. pH-Sensitive liposomes-principle and application in cancer therapy. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2007, 59, 469–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Yokota, D.; Moraes, M.; Pinho, S.C. Characterization of lyophilized liposomes produced with non-purified soy lecithin: A case study of casein hydrolysate microencapsulation. Brazilian J. Chem. Eng. 2012, 29, 325–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  118. Nkanga, C.I.; Krause, R.W.M. Conjugation of isoniazid to a zinc phthalocyanine via hydrazone linkage for pH-dependent liposomal controlled release. Appl. Nanosci. 2018, 8, 1313–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kelly, C.; Jefferies, C.; Cryan, S.-A. Targeted Liposomal Drug Delivery to Monocytes and Macrophages. J. Drug Deliv. 2011, 2011, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Bermudez, L.E.; Goodman, J. Mycobacterium tuberculosis invades and replicates within type II alveolar cells. Infect. Immun. 1996, 64, 1400–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  121. Pinheiro, M.; Ribeiro, R.; Vieira, A.; Andrade, F.; Reis, S. Design of a nanostructured lipid carrier intended to improve the treatment of tuberculosis. Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 2016, 10, 2467–2475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  122. Carneiro, S.P.; Carvalho, K.V.; de Oliveira Aguiar Soares, R.D.; Carneiro, C.M.; de Andrade, M.H.G.; Duarte, R.S.; dos Santos, O.D.H. Functionalized rifampicin-loaded nanostructured lipid carriers enhance macrophages uptake and antimycobacterial activity. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2019, 175, 306–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Suciati, T.; Rachmawati, P.; Soraya, E.; Mahardhika, A.B.; Satrialdi, R.; Hartarti, R.; Anggadiredja, K. A novel acemannan-chitosan modified lipid nanoparticles as intracellular delivery vehicles of antibiotic. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci. 2018, 8, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  124. Kanwar, R.; Gradzielski, M.; Prevost, S.; Appavou, M.; Mehta, S. Experimental validation of biocompatible nanostructured lipid carriers of sophorolipid: Optimization, characterization and in-vitro evaluation. Colloids Surf. B. Biointerfaces 2019, 181, 845–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Banerjee, S.; Roy, S.; Nath Bhaumik, K.; Kshetrapal, P.; Pillai, J. Comparative study of oral lipid nanoparticle formulations (LNFs) for chemical stabilization of antitubercular drugs: Physicochemical and cellular evaluation. Artif. Cells Nanomed. Biotechnol. 2018, 46, 540–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  126. Da Silva, P.B.; Bonifácio, B.; Frem, R.; Godoy Netto, A.; Mauro, A.; Ferreira, A.; Lopes Ede, O.; Raddi, M.; Bauab, T.; Pavan, F.; et al. A Nanostructured Lipid System as a Strategy to Improve the in Vitro Antibacterial Activity of Copper(II) Complexes. Molecules 2015, 20, 22534–22545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Sato, M.R.; Junior, J.A.O.; Machado, R.T.; de Souza, P.C.; Campos, D.L.; Pavan, F.R.; da Silva, P.B.; Chorilli, M. Nanostructured lipid carriers for incorporation of copper(II) complexes to be used against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Drug Des. Dev. Ther. 2017, 11, 909–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  128. Sato, M.R.; Oshiro-Junior, J.A.; Souza, P.C.; Campos, D.L.; Pereira-da-Silva, M.A.; Pavan, F.R.; da Silva, P.B.; Chorilli, M. Copper(II) complex-loaded castor oil-based nanostructured lipid carriers used against Mycobacterium tuberculosis: Development, characterisation, in vitro and in vivo biological assays. Pharmazie 2019, 74, 715–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Mehta, S.K.; Kaur, G.; Bhasin, K.K. Incorporation of antitubercular drug isoniazid in pharmaceutically accepted microemulsion: Effect on microstructure and physical parameters. Pharm. Res. 2008, 25, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.