Dissolving Microneedles Developed in Association with Nanosystems: A Scoping Review on the Quality Parameters of These Emerging Systems for Drug or Protein Transdermal Delivery

✅ 全文

与纳米系统联合开发的溶解微针:这些新兴系统用于药物或蛋白质经皮递送的质量参数范围综述

作者 Patrícia Weimer; Rochele Cassanta Rossi; L. Koester 期刊 Pharmaceutics 发表日期 2021 ISSN 1999-4923 DOI 10.3390/pharmaceutics13101601 类型 原创研究 (Original Research)

📄 英文摘要 English Abstract

EN

The largest organ of the body provides the main challenge for the transdermal delivery of lipophilic or high molecular weight drugs. To cross the main barrier of the skin, the stratum corneum, many techniques have been developed and improved. In the last 20 years, the association of microneedles with nanostructured systems has gained prominence for its versatility and for enabling targeted drug delivery. Currently, the combination of these mechanisms is pointed to as an emerging technology; however, some gaps need to be answered to transcend the development of these devices from the laboratory scale to the pharmaceutical market. It is known that the lack of regulatory guidelines for quality control is a hindrance to market conquest. In this context, this study undertakes a scoping review of original papers concerning methods applied to evaluate both the quality and drug/protein delivery of dissolving and hydrogel-forming microneedles developed in association with nanostructured systems.

📄 中文摘要 Chinese Abstract

中文
人体最大的器官为亲脂性或大分子药物的透皮递送带来了主要挑战。为了穿透皮肤的主要屏障——角质层,人们已开发并改进了许多技术。在过去20年中,微针与纳米结构系统的结合因其多功能性以及能够实现靶向药物递送而受到广泛关注。目前,这两种机制的结合被视为一项新兴技术;然而,要使这些设备从实验室规模跨越到药品市场,仍需填补一些空白。众所周知,缺乏质量控制的监管指南是阻碍其占领市场的障碍。

📋 英文结构化总结 English Structured Summary

全文整理

EN

Background:

The largest organ of the body provides the main challenge for the transdermal delivery of lipophilic or high molecular weight drugs. To cross the main barrier of the skin, the stratum corneum, many techniques have been developed and improved. In the last 20 years, the association of microneedles with nanostructured systems has gained prominence for its versatility and for enabling targeted drug delivery. Currently, the combination of these mechanisms is pointed to as an emerging technology; however, some gaps need to be answered to transcend the development of these devices from the laboratory scale to the pharmaceutical market. It is known that the lack of regulatory guidelines for quality control is a hindrance to market conquest.

Methods:

The search protocol was drafted based on the protocol guidance of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). This study undertakes a scoping review of original papers concerning methods applied to evaluate both the quality and drug/protein delivery of dissolving and hydrogel-forming microneedles developed in association with nanostructured systems.

Results:

This review maps the quality control methods frequently applied to polymeric MNs (dissolution and hydrogel-formation) designed for transcutaneous delivery of substances, drugs, or proteins carried in nanostructured systems. Recent reviews have emphasized the benefits of the association of MNs with nanostructured systems, especially for the release of hydrophobic substances. Furthermore, these studies have pointed out that despite the promising market for MNs and their association with nanostructured systems, there are still gaps that hinder the transposition from bench to industrial scale.

Data Summary:

The global transdermal drug delivery system (TDDS) market is projected to be worth USD 8.4 billion by 2027, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.3%. Projections for the global market for MNs in drug delivery systems comprise a CAGR of 6.6% between 2020 and 2030, representing an estimated market value of USD 1.2 billion by 2030. The reduced height of the MN and adjustments in geometric conformation allow painless application to the epidermis or close to the dermis without reaching the pain receptors and allow the administration of substances of different lipophilicity.

Conclusions:

The lack of regulatory guidelines on quality control impacts the scale-up process and the success rate of this market. Among the main barriers associated with the clinical feasibility and production of microneedles are the evaluation of the characteristics after scaling up production, sterilization processes that do not damage the device, clinical evaluation of human safety and immunogenic potential, patient acceptability rate, evaluations of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the drugs administered by these systems, and the lack of regulatory guidelines on quality control.

Practical Significance:

Polymeric MNs, in addition to expanding the possibilities of application of these devices, have also allowed the proposal of one-step administration, in which the loaded compound is dispersed in the MN. To enhance the effects of the loaded substances and protect against possible degradation, nanostructured systems have been studied in association with MNs. Certain characteristics of nanostructured systems can be applied to circumvent the disadvantages of MNs, such as low drug loading capacity, and nanostructures may contribute to modulating the mechanical characteristics of microneedles, increasing mechanical strength and contributing to cutaneous insertion.

📋 中文结构化总结 Chinese Structured Summary

中文

背景:

人体最大的器官为亲脂性或大分子药物的透皮递送带来了主要挑战。为了穿透皮肤的主要屏障——角质层,人们已开发并改进了许多技术。在过去20年中,微针与纳米结构系统的结合因其多功能性以及能够实现靶向药物递送而受到广泛关注。目前,这两种机制的结合被视为一项新兴技术;然而,要使这些设备从实验室规模跨越到药品市场,仍需填补一些空白。众所周知,缺乏质量控制的监管指南是阻碍其占领市场的障碍。

方法:

检索方案根据系统综述和荟萃分析方案优先报告条目(PRISMA-P)的方案指南起草。本研究对关于评估与纳米结构系统联合开发的可溶解和水凝胶形成微针的质量及药物/蛋白质递送方法的原始论文进行了范围综述。

结果:

本综述梳理了常用于评估聚合物微针(可溶解型和水凝胶形成型)质量控制的方法,这些微针设计用于经皮递送负载于纳米结构系统中的物质、药物或蛋白质。近期综述强调了微针与纳米结构系统结合的优势,尤其是对于疏水性物质的释放。此外,这些研究指出,尽管微针及其与纳米结构系统的结合市场前景广阔,但仍存在阻碍从实验室规模向工业规模转化的空白。

数据摘要:

全球透皮药物递送系统(TDDS)市场预计到2027年将达到84亿美元,复合年增长率(CAGR)为4.3%。微针在药物递送系统中的全球市场预测在2020年至2030年间的复合年增长率为6.6%,到2030年预计市场价值将达到12亿美元。微针高度的降低和几何构型的调整使其能够无痛地应用于表皮或接近真皮层,而不会触及疼痛感受器,并允许递送不同亲脂性的物质。

结论:

缺乏质量控制的监管指南影响了该市场的放大生产进程和成功率。与微针临床可行性和生产相关的主要障碍包括:放大生产后特性的评估、不损坏设备的灭菌工艺、人体安全性和免疫原性的临床评估、患者接受度、通过这些系统给药的药代动力学和药效学特性的评估,以及缺乏质量控制的监管指南。

实际意义:

聚合物微针不仅扩展了这些设备的应用可能性,还使得一步给药方案成为可能,即将负载化合物分散于微针中。为了增强负载物质的效果并防止可能的降解,纳米结构系统已被研究与微针联合应用。纳米结构系统的某些特性可用于克服微针的缺点,如载药量低的问题,纳米结构可能有助于调节微针的机械特性,增加机械强度并促进皮肤穿刺。

📖 英文全文 English Full Text

EN

pharmaceutics Review Dissolving Microneedles Developed in Association with

Nanosystems: A Scoping Review on the Quality Parameters of These Emerging Systems for Drug or Protein

Transdermal Delivery Patrícia Weimer 1, Rochele Cassanta Rossi 2 and Letícia Scherer Koester 1,*

  Citation: Weimer, P.; Rossi, R.C.;

Koester, L.S. Dissolving Microneedles Developed in Association with

Nanosystems: A Scoping Review on the Quality Parameters of These

Emerging Systems for Drug or Protein Transdermal Delivery.

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601. https://doi.org/10.3390/ pharmaceutics13101601

Academic Editors: Ruy Carlos Ruver Beck and Ana Melero

Received: 17 August 2021 Accepted: 27 September 2021

Published: 2 October 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations.

Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons

Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/

4.0/).

1 Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Farmacêuticas, Faculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal do

Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre 90610-000, Brazil; patricia.weimer@ufrgs.br

2 Programa de Pós-Graduação em Nutrição e Alimentos, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS),

São Leopoldo 93022-000, Brazil; rochelecr@unisinos.br

* Correspondence: leticia.koester@ufrgs.br; Tel.: +55-51-33085278; Fax: +55-51-33085437

Abstract: The largest organ of the body provides the main challenge for the transdermal delivery of lipophilic or high molecular weight drugs. To cross the main barrier of the skin, the stratum corneum, many techniques have been developed and improved. In the last 20 years, the association of microneedles with nanostructured systems has gained prominence for its versatility and for enabling targeted drug delivery. Currently, the combination of these mechanisms is pointed to as an emerging technology; however, some gaps need to be answered to transcend the development of these devices from the laboratory scale to the pharmaceutical market. It is known that the lack of regulatory guidelines for quality control is a hindrance to market conquest. In this context, this study undertakes a scoping review of original papers concerning methods applied to evaluate both the quality and drug/protein delivery of dissolving and hydrogel-forming microneedles developed in association with nanostructured systems.

Keywords: microarray patch; dissolving microneedles; hydrogel-forming microneedles; nanostructured systems; nanoparticles; transdermal delivery; transcutaneous immunization; skin permeation; skin deposition; quality control

1. Introduction In the last decades, there has been growing interest in the delivery of substances, drugs, and proteins by transdermal route owing to specific advantages of this route, including the absence of first-pass effect, reduction in the number of doses achieved by controlled release, and good acceptability by patients. For transdermal administration, compounds are usually delivered in semi-solid formulations or transdermal patches that allow them to penetrate and permeate through the layers of the skin to the blood capillaries (in the dermis) and, consequently, systemic circulation [1,2].

However, the transdermal route confers some limitations on the administration of classical pharmaceutical forms, restricting the administration of compounds according to lipophilicity and molecular size (<500 Da). To overcome these limitations, physical and chemical stimuli, such as permeation promoters, nanostructured systems, and microscopic applicators, have been investigated to aid in the permeation of compounds, especially in the transport to the stratum corneum (SC). The SC is an outer skin barrier composed of proteins and lipids that physiologically hinders the entry of external agents into the skin and prevents transepidermal water loss [1–3]. Recently, some studies have pointed out that besides the SC, the thickness of the epidermis is a determining factor in the process of permeation of substances [4]. In this context, transdermal devices that release the

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13101601 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/pharmaceutics

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 2 of 27 compounds directly into the epidermis and even close to the dermis considerably decrease these limitations [5–8].

First introduced for transdermal administration in 1998 [9], the microarray patches or microneedles (MNs) have made a name for themselves owing to their remarkable versatility. The reduced height of the MN and adjustments in geometric conformation allow painless application to the epidermis or close to the dermis without reaching the pain receptors and allow the administration of substances of different lipophilicity [10,11].

In addition, through technological modifications that have enabled the advancement from metallic MN to polymeric MN design, MNs have been named as one of the top ten emerging technologies in 2020 and have become a market promise for the possibility of drug, protein, and hormone delivery [12–14]. The global transdermal drug delivery system (TDDS) market is projected to be worth USD 8.4 billion by 2027, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.3% [15], and projections for the global market for MNs in drug delivery systems comprise a CAGR of 6.6% between 2020 and 2030, representing an estimated market value of USD 1.2 billion by 2030 [16].

The development of polymeric MNs, in addition to expanding the possibilities of application of these devices, have also allowed the proposal of one-step administration, in which the loaded compound is dispersed in the MN [17]. To enhance the effects of the loaded substances and protect against possible degradation, nanostructured systems have been studied in association with MNs [18,19]. Certain characteristics of nanostructured systems can be applied to circumvent the disadvantages of MNs, such as low drug loading capacity. The increased surface area guaranteed by nanostructures makes it possible to obtain similar biological effects with the application of lower doses of the drugs compared to the bulk form. In addition, nanostructures can be designed to model the release rate or biodistribution profile of drugs or proteins according to the pathophysiological mi- croenvironment, for example, insulin release at high blood glucose levels. In technological terms, nanostructures may contribute to modulating the mechanical characteristics of microneedles, increasing mechanical strength and contributing to cutaneous insertion, for example [20–23].

Recent reviews have emphasized the benefits of the association of MNs with nanostruc- tured systems, especially for the release of hydrophobic substances [11,24–26]. Furthermore, these studies have pointed out that despite the promising market for MNs and their as- sociation with nanostructured systems, there are still gaps that hinder the transposition from bench to industrial scale. The main barriers associated with the clinical feasibility and production of microneedles include the evaluation of the characteristics after scaling up production, sterilization processes that do not damage the device, clinical evaluation of human safety and immunogenic potential, patient acceptability rate, evaluations of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the drugs administered by these systems, and the lack of regulatory guidelines on quality control [26–29]. Among them, the lack of regulatory guidelines on quality control impacts the scale-up process and the success rate of this market.

In this context, this review maps the quality control methods frequently applied to polymeric MNs (dissolution and hydrogel-formation) designed for transcutaneous delivery of substances, drugs, or proteins carried in nanostructured systems.

2. Methods 2.1. Protocol and Registration The search protocol was drafted based on the protocol guidance of the Preferred

Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) [30] and was registered in the Open Science Framework on 12 June 2021 (https://osf.io/j5mxu (accessed on 13 June 2021)).

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 3 of 27 2.2. Information Sources and Search Strategy

The studies were searched in June 2021 in three databases: Web of Science, EMBASE, and MEDLINE (PubMed), in which the search was restricted to English only, with no additional restriction on publication date or document type. The search strategy was composed of three-word queries combined with the Boolean operator “AND”. The first query presented terms related to microneedles, the second related to nanostructured systems, and the third was composed of terms associated with the transdermal release of substances and drugs. All terms were searched in titles, abstracts, and keywords, and minor modifications were made according to database specifications. The detailed search strategies are presented in the Supplementary Materials (Table S1). In addition, the search results were exported in excel or CSV format and grouped in a single spreadsheet to remove duplicates.

2.3. Selection of Sources of Evidence Prior to defining the databases and search strategy, a pilot search was conducted to evaluate the suitability of the queries and search terms as well as the specificity and sensitivity of the search strategy. In addition, two articles were used as indicators of specificity and selectivity as they fulfilled all the inclusion criteria and described the complete quality control analyses that were to be retrieved after searching the databases.

Complementarily, these articles were also defined as search quality markers for evaluating the application of a natural compound and a synthetic drug already established in the market, respectively, comprising two search objectives of this review. The ACS Publications database was also considered for the search; however, the pilot search identified the retrieval of the same articles in the other databases, and, therefore, it was excluded after this step.

2.4. Eligibility Criteria To be included in the review, studies were assessed for exclusion and inclusion criteria in two stages: the eligibility of titles and abstracts and the eligibility of full texts. After the exclusion of duplicate studies, the titles and abstracts were analyzed, and articles fitting the following criteria were excluded: (a) review articles, book chapters, or conference abstracts; (b) articles without reference to the use of microneedles; (c) articles without reference to the application of nanostructured systems; (d) administration by another route and not transdermal, or (e) development of a device for diagnosis or sensing. The remaining articles were evaluated for full-text content, and those meeting the following criteria were excluded: (a) application of MNs only for skin pretreatment (microporation technique), (b) development of solid, hollow, and coated MNs, (c) no description of the nanostructured system, (d) substance not associated with nanostructures, (e) no target delivery of either substances, drugs, or proteins, (f) no description of quality control assays of MNs, (g) not in accordance with the scope of the review (e.g., cell delivery), and (h) no access to the full text.

In the case of no access to the full articles or need for additional information, the authors of the original articles were contacted. In the absence of a response, the respective articles were excluded from the review.

2.5. Data Items and Data Extraction The data from the studies were extracted into spreadsheets, including descriptive variables (year of publication, authors, country of origin, category of delivery, category of study, objective of device application, type of MN and nanosystem, polymeric composition of the device, and MN geometry), and data from the quality control tests of the microarray patch were divided into two categories: in vitro and in vivo assays. Specific data were extracted from the in vitro assays: content analysis, mechanical properties, insertion assay, dissolution and release profile, and permeation and distribution profiles. Additionally, data

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 4 of 27 from stability studies were extracted. Regarding in vivo assays, data from skin insertion, skin release/permeation, and skin dissolution were extracted.

Secondary data such as nanostructured system preparation method, device production method, and in vivo efficacy trials were extracted to support the discussion section.

2.6. Synthesis of the Results The results were grouped according to the main categories of quality control assays, including in vitro and in vivo assays. Studies that showed similar patterns were summarized in graphs, and descriptive variables were summarized in tables. The final wording of the results followed the criteria established by the PRISMA-ScR guide for scoping reviews [31].

3. Results 3.1. Selection and General Characteristics of Sources of Evidence

The application of the search strategy (Table S1) retrieved 959 studies published between 2001 and 2021, from which duplicate studies were excluded (n = 398), leaving

561 studies for analysis of eligibility of titles and abstracts. Of these, 343 studies were excluded because they were review articles, book chapters, or conference abstracts (n = 211), did not employ microneedles (n = 53) or nanostructured systems (n = 38), or targeted mucosal administration (n = 21) or sensing or diagnosis (n = 20). The flowchart of the study selection process is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Flowchart of the included studies. MN: microneedles.

As shown in Figure 1, of the 218 full-text articles analyzed, 146 were excluded for not meeting the inclusion criteria, leaving 72 articles for the review. Although the search retrieved articles from 2001 onwards, the included articles showed annual distribution from 2010 onwards (Figure 2A). Prior to this period, the studies employed the MNs as

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 5 of 27 a pre-treatment for the microporation of the skin, which was subsequently exposed to either a patch or semisolid formulation containing the drug. When grouping the studies by country of origin (Figure 2B), it was revealed that the largest number of publications were from China (n = 24), followed by the UK (n = 17) and USA (n = 8), with minimal participation of publications from South America and Africa (n = 3).

Figure 2. Characteristics of the included studies. (A) Number of articles by year of publication. (B) Number of articles by country of origin; in detail, United Kingdom and Portugal. (C) Delivery category. (D) Objective of the proof of concept.

Regarding the delivery category (Figure 2C), 30% of the studies developed the MNs with nanostructured systems for protein delivery, 30% for drug delivery, followed by

20% other substances and 19% nucleotide; only 1% described a device for polysaccharide delivery. With respect to protein and nucleotide devices, 43.5% were designed for insulin and 73.3% for DNA delivery, respectively. Additionally, the highest percentage of studies were conducted to validate a proof of concept for transcutaneous immunization (n = 20) or to validate the delivery mechanism of drugs and substances (n = 15), followed by diabetes management (n = 10), as shown in Figure 2D. Looking into the studies that evaluated antitu- moral activity, the most used preclinical model comprised melanoma cell lines, accounting for 66.8% of this category [32–36]. Likewise, 60.0% of the studies that aimed at antibacterial activity applied the device in a biofilm model [37–39]. Overall, the results showed in

Figure 2D suggest greater investment in diseases that affect the immune system, priori- tizing transcutaneous immunization and the management of psoriasis [40–42], superficial tumors [32–36,43], and diseases that affect the lymphatic system owing to its proximity to the systemic circulation, such as filariasis [22,44,45]. Above all, diabetes mellitus, which requires constant insulin administrations, was prioritized [20,46,47].

3.2. Characteristics of Devices Out of the 72 included studies, 71 articles described the preparation of dissolving

MNs and 1 article the preparation of hydrogel-forming MNs [48]. Although this single study addressed a coated MN, it was included because it characterized a polymeric MN with a PLGA polymeric film containing the nanoparticles and not a coated solid-metallic

MN, an exclusion criterion applied in the selection step of the studies. As presented in Figure 3A, the most frequently applied polymers in the preparation of the MN were

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 6 of 27 polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), poly (vinyl alcohol)/polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVA/PVP), poly (vinyl alcohol) (PVA), and hyaluronic acid, representing approximately 74% of the total

20 polymers or polymer blends employed. Furthermore, the results revealed that most studies employed nanoparticles in association with MNs (51%), followed by liposomes (11%), and nanovesicles (7%) (Figure 3B). The other nanosystems with less representation, such as polymeric micelles, cubosomes, nanocrystals, and nanoclusters, were grouped in the category of other systems (18%). Among nanoparticles, the largest number of studies employed polymeric nanoparticles (51.4%), followed by mesoporous nanoparticles of different materials (13.5%) and amphipathic peptide (RALA) (13.5%), solid lipid (5.4%), metallic (5.4%), inorganic (5.4%), and gelatin nanoparticles (5.4%).

Figure 3. General characteristics of the developed microneedles. (A) Polymers employed in the devices. (B) Type of nanostructured system associated in the microarray patch. (C) Graphic representation of the method of obtaining microneedles by micromolding. PVP: polyvinylpyrrolidone; PVA: poly(vinyl alcohol); PVA/PVP/PVA: poly(vinyl alco- hol)/polyvinylpyrrolidone; PLGA/PAA: poly(lactide-co-glycolide)/poly(acrylic acid), mPEG5K-PN2LG30: α-methoxy- poly(ethylene glycol)-L-glutamate, HP-β-CD: hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin; PMVE/MA: copolymer of methylvinyl ether and maleic anhydride; PEG: poly (ethylene glycol); CMC: sodium carboxymethylcellulose.

To obtain the devices, only one study employed the drawing lithography tech- nique [18]; the other studies employed the micromolding method. This method consists of transferring the polymeric solution containing the nanostructures to a mold, usually composed of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), which is subsequently subjected to centrifuga- tion or a vacuum chambering for the removal of possible bubbles and final drying [49–52].

Figure 3C demonstrates the graphical representation of this technique. Exceptionally, for obtaining hydrogel-forming MNs, the micromolding technique was combined with an electrohydrodynamic atomization process for coating with the nanoparticles. With reference to the shape and dimensions of the devices, most studies employed molds to obtain pyramidal and conical MNs, with minor exceptions for other shapes such as tanto- blade MNs, the design of which was inspired by traditional Japanese Samurai swords formed by two bevels [53], and only three studies did not inform the MN shape. The dimensions of the needles ranged from 323 to 1500 nm in height [50,54] and from 170 to

400 nm in base diameter [42,55], with the most frequent dimensions varying from 600

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 7 of 27 and 300 nm [19,56,57], respectively. Approximately 75% of the studies did not describe the needle tip diameter, which ranged from 5 to 40 nm [56,58]. Only four studies did not describe any MN dimension but confirmed the morphology of the MN by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) [23,59,60] or fluorescence microscopy [23,61]. Finally, regarding needle array, this variable ranged from 5 × 5 [45,62] to 33 × 33 array [42,63].

3.3. Methods Employed in Quality Control The main methods applied for the characterization of devices composed of nanos- tructured systems associated with polymeric MNs are discussed in the sections below.

Importantly, 26.4% of the studies were employed only in vitro, and 73.6% employed a combination of in vitro and in vivo methods. Since the aim of this review is to map the quality control methods in the analysis of this type of device, the in vivo trials are presented and discussed in line with the objective, as the models employed for disease evaluation are specific and indicate the effectiveness of the proposed treatment. Additionally, the characterization tests of the nanostructured systems before insertion into the polymeric matrix of MNs are presented in Figure S1 (Supplementary Materials).

As shown in Figure 4, overall, the studies added up to 263 in vitro and microscopy assays and 44 in vivo assays. As described in the methodology, the assays applied for

MN characterization were classified into eight subcategories for microscopy, physico- chemical, mechanical properties, and in vitro methods and three subcategories for in vivo assays. After device preparation, 87.5% of the studies performed microscopic analysis,

76.4% evaluated in vitro skin insertion, 59.7% characterized the mechanical properties,

40.3% determined the content of the active substance carried in the device, and 38.9% elucidated the in vitro dissolution profile. Less frequently, 29.0% investigated in vitro skin permeation/deposition, 26.4% investigated the in vitro release profile, and only 6.9% of the studies applied other techniques for the characterization of the MN, such as thermo- gravimetric analysis (Figure 4A).

Figure 4. Dot plot of the tests employed to analyze polymeric MNs in association with nanos- tructured systems. (A) Microscopy characterization, complementary physical and physicochem- ical characterization (FTIR, TGA, DSC, and XRD), mechanical properties, and in vitro assays. (B) In vivo assays concerning skin insertion, skin release/permeation/deposition, and in situ dis- solution. * It differs from the in vitro dissolution assay in that it quantifies the amount released.

** It differs from the in vivo skin dissolution assay in that it measures the amount released or perme- ated, including fluorescence measurement.

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 8 of 27 As previously mentioned, in vivo assays for the characterization of skin insertion, skin release/permeation, and skin dissolution capacity were employed less frequently than in vitro assays in the studies. Of these, skin insertion was evaluated in 12 studies, skin release/permeation in 22 studies, and dissolution in 10 studies (Figure 4B). Particularly in the category of in vivo trials, skin release, permeation, and deposition assays were addressed as synonyms in the evaluated studies.

3.3.1. Microscopy and Complementary Physical and Physicochemical Characterization (FTIR, TGA, DSC, and XRD)

Verification of MN dimensions and shape by microscopy techniques was conducted in 63 studies. Out of these, 46 studies showed the microscopic aspect by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and 4 by field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM). The second most applied technique was optical microscopy, reported in 22 studies as bright field microscopy, digital microscopy, and optical microscopy. The studies that evaluated the combination of fluorescence probes free in the polymer matrix or associated with the nanostructured system highlighted the morphological features by fluorescence microscopy (n = 14). In addition, 10 studies applied confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM tech- nique) for characterization, and only 3 studies employed transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The distribution of the number of studies by characterization technique is detailed in Figure S2. In parallel, few studies characterized the devices with Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR, n = 2) [55,64], X-ray diffraction (XRD, n = 2) [55,64], differen- tial scanning calorimetry (DSC, n = 3) [55,64,65], and thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA, n = 2) [65,66] techniques. In comparison, FTIR, XRD, and DSC techniques were applied to nanostructured system characterization (Figure S1) in 11, 12, and 9 studies, respectively.

3.3.2. Drug or Protein Content Quantification of the substances, drugs, and proteins carried in the devices was performed in 29 studies. The sample preparation procedure consisted of the complete dissolution of the devices in distilled water, buffer, or mixtures with organic solvent and subsequent quantification [64,67]. For devices composed of at least two polymer layers, in which the nanostructured system was located only in the needle, whereas the baseplate was formed by an inert polymeric structure, the studies described the removal of the micronee- dles with a scalpel and only the needles were dissolved for analysis [33,34,38,51,52,68,69].

Images of the needles removed for testing and the remaining baseplate are shown in the article by Li et al. [68]. Additionally, Rojekar et al. described the procedures performed with solvent gradients (acetonitrile:water) to promote the precipitation of the polymers and PVA/PVP and, thus, allow the quantification of etravirine without interference from the MN matrix [70].

One study inferred the content of doxycycline, diethylcarbamazine, and albendazole in the needle tips by theoretical calculations based on the content present in the lyophilized nanoparticles and the MN density [22]. For density determination, a needle-free patch (formulation film) was initially prepared under the same conditions as the MNs. After drying, the film dimensions (width, thickness, and length) were measured to obtain the volume and the mass was verified, thus obtaining the density. The second step consisted in applying the Equation (1)) to determine the content. This requires knowing the dimensions of the needles (height and base diameter) as well as the content of the compounds in the nanoparticles and the mass of nanoparticles applied. Importantly, in the mentioned study, pyramidal MNs with square bases were obtained, so the equation should be modified according to the geometry for conical microneedles; for example, the appropriate equation is described in Equation (2).

Drug content (mg) in the MN = N × h × a2 × ρ [drug]

3 (1) Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 9 of 27 where MN: microneedle; N: total number of needle tips; h: height of needle tip (mm); a: width of base tip (quadrangular) (mm); ρ: dry formulation film density (mg/mm3); [drug]: mg drug/mg lyophilized nanoparticle.

Drug content (mg) in the MN = N × h × πr2 × ρ [drug]

3 (2) where MN: microneedle; N: total number of needle tips; h: height of needle tip (mm); r: radius of base tip (mm); ρ: dry formulation film density (mg/mm3); [drug]: mg drug/mg lyophilized nanoparticle.

Similarly, two studies applied equations to determine the content of carvacrol and methotrexate in MN needles [41,69]. However, these differed from the theoretical method in that they prepared a needle-free patch containing the nanostructured substances and the density of the dry film was evaluated and the content of the substances in the film was measured by HPLC. Equation (3) describes the calculation to be applied after quantification.

As an alternative to the quantification method, some studies measured the uniformity of content in the needles, also called distribution, by adding dyes such as trypan blue [71], by including fluorescent substances in the MN, or by associating fluorescent probes to the nanostructured systems. In this way, the uniformity was observed by optical microscopy or fluorescence microscopy and CLSM [42,52,68].

Drug content (mg) in the MN = N × ((volume formula) × ρ [drug]) (3) where MN: microneedle; N: total number of needle tips; volume formula: according to needle shape; ρ: dry formulation film density (mg/mm3); [drug]: mg drug/mg film (experimentally determined).

3.3.3. Mechanical Properties, In Vitro Assays Graphic representation of the main mechanical properties and in vitro methods em- ployed in quality control is shown in Figure 5. Mechanical properties, denominated as com- pression force or failure force, were evaluated by dynamic force and static force techniques (Figure 5A). In the first technique, the device is fixed on a support using a double-sided tape, and then a standard perpendicular force is applied at a constant compression speed.

The result is recorded as force vs. probe displacement. Graphical plotting of the results allows the determination of failure force, corresponding to the value at which the needles begin to buckle [20,47]. For this method, it is required to use equipment that allows this control, such as force-displacement testers and texturometers [72–74]. The experiment details applied in the mechanical characterization methods are presented in Table 1. The re- sults revealed that the compression rate ranged from 0.008 to 1.19 mm/s, and the most frequent application force was 32 N. Looking into the static force technique, the applied weights ranged from 50 to 1000 g, and the holding time of each weight on the device varied from 1 to 5 min. Moreover, one study evaluated the mechanical properties using atomic force microscopy to obtain the force-displacement curves. In this case, a 10 mm sphere of

SiO2 probe was applied with a 1 mN force at 500 nm/s [46].

The in vitroskin insertion assay, illustrated in Figure 5B, was the second most per- formed assay after microscopic characterization. The results demonstrated skin insertion measurement by skin models and artificial skin models; the last ones were performed by replacing animal skin with membranes and hydrogel matrices with thickness and elastic modulus similar to human skin. In skin models, the most applied skins were porcine and rodent skins, with less frequent application of chicken skin and human skin from surgical procedures. The skin insertion test parameters are detailed in Table 2. Regarding the mode of application, this can be conducted manually, with the aid of applicators previ- ously calibrated to a single force value or with the equipment described in the mechanical characterization tests. Interestingly, some studies employed the same parameters in both tests, while others used the failure force value obtained to define the application force

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 10 of 27 in the insertion test or to choose the most promising device in terms of mechanical resis- tance [38,41,51,56,70]. In addition to insertion force and mechanical strength, MN insertion capability is influenced by needle geometry and skin fixation support. Although 54 studies did not indicate needle tip diameter, 42 out of these confirmed insertion abilities by in vitro assays. In addition, some studies described skin fixation on a Styrofoam platform or dental wax to provide support for MN insertion [57,73,75,76].

Figure 5. Graphic representation of the in vitro assays performed for the characterization of polymeric microneedles associated with nanostructured systems. (A) Mechanical properties: illustration of compression force by dynamic force with displacement-force test station (left) and by static force with the application of standard weights (right). (B) Skin insertion: skin model vs. artificial skin models (Parafilm®, aluminum foil, agarose disc, and agarose disc plus external

Parafilm® layer). (C) Release and dissolution assays: skin and artificial skin models (agarose and gelatin blocks) (left) and methods using specific glassware and dissolution medium (glass plate and beaker/vial, dialysis bags, or membranes) (right). (D) Skin permeation/deposition assay: representation of the technique with Franz-type diffusion cell and skin matrix. The white rectangles represent the results commonly obtained by the respective methods. OCT: optical coherence tomography.

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 11 of 27 Table 1. Parameters of the tests used to characterize the mechanical properties of microneedles in association with nanostructured systems.

Technique Equipment Applied Force (N)/Weight (g) Compression

Rate (mm/s) Result Expression Ref.

Dynamic force CT3 texture NI NI Compressive force-displacement curve [66]

NI 1.00 Compressive force-displacement curve [77,78]

Displacement-force test station (Model 921A) NI 1.10

Compressive force-displacement curve [72] 10 N 0.008

Failure force [60,79] DTS delaminator 10 N 0.05 Compressive force-displacement curve

Failure force [32] Force displacement tester (model 925)

NI 1.25 Compressive force-displacement curve Failure force [42]

Hounsfield universal mechanical testing machine 10 N

0.017 Compressive force-displacement curve [23] Mechanical testing system (5943

MicroTester) NI 0.50 Compressive force-displacement curve

Failure force [47,74,80] 10 N 0.10 Compressive force-displacement curve [81]

NI 0.10 Compressive force-displacement curve Failure force [82]

50 N 0.50 Compressive force-displacement curve [83]

Side-shaking test stand (HCS-500) and a thrust meter (HF-50)

2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 N NI Observations of the MN deformations with a digital camera [84]

Tensile load frame NI 0.01 Compressive force-displacement curve [85]

Tensile machine (Instron) NI 0.017 Failure force [86]

Tensile testing machine (MTS 30G) 10 N 0.10 Compressive force-displacement curve

Failure force [20,61] Texture analyzer (TA-XT2, Stable microsystems)

45 N 0.05 Percentage height reduction (digital microscopy) [19]

45 N, held for 30 s NI Percentage height reduction (digital microscopy) [57,73,75]

32 N, held for 30 s 1.19 Percentage height reduction (stereomicroscopy, digital microscopy) [22,38,39,44,

55,56,69,87] 32 N, held for 30 s 0.50 Percentage height reduction (stereomicroscopy) [41,51,70]

NI 0.10 Compressive force-displacement curve Failure force

Stereomicroscopy [76] 0.049 N 0.50 Failure force [62]

40 N 0.01 Failure force MN morphology (Scanning electronic microscopy) [53]

Texture analyzer (XT plus, Stable microsystems) NI

1.00 Compressive force-displacement curve Failure force [52]

Universal testing machine (MARK-10) NI 1.00 Compressive force-displacement curve [68]

Atomic force microscopy 1.0 mN, 10 mm SiO2 sphere probe

500 nm/s The moduli of the needles were calculated from the force-displacement curves [46]

NI NI NI Compressive force-displacement curve [40]

Static force Standard weight 50, 100, 200, and 500 g, held for

1 min NA Optical images of the MN deformation [81]

Standard weight 500 g, held for 5 min NA Optical images of the MN deformation [47,74,80]

Standard weight 100, 200, 500, and 1000 g, held for

5 min NA Optical images of the MN deformation and images by confocal microscopy [88]

NI: not informed; NA: not applied.

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 12 of 27 Table 2. In vitro skin insertion assay parameters.

Model Category Matrix Insertion Force Method of Mensuration

Observations Ref.

Skin model Chicken skin Manual force Histological analysis

- [23] Human skin Manual force, held for 30 s CLSM

Skin from abdominal plastic surgeries [53] Minipig skin

20.0 N Histological analysis Applicator: not informed [18]

Mouse skin 20.0 N Staining with trypan blue Equipment: Mechanical testing system (5943 MicroTester) [83]

Manual force, held for 5 min Staining with trypan blue

Histological analysis OCT - [35] NI Staining with trypan blue

Histological analysis - [89] NI, held for 3 min Staining with trypan blue

Histological analysis - [33] Mouse skin (Balb-c) NI

Histological analysis - [85] NI Force-displacement curve

Equipment: Texture analyzer, insertion speed 0.10 mm/s

The skin was placed on Styrofoam block support [76]

NI Histological analysis - [36] Porcine skin 1.0, 2.0, and

4.0 N Staining with trypan blue Insertion speed 0.5 mm/s

The skin was placed on sheet of dental wax support topped with parafilm, and this set was fixed on a wooden block for support [84]

1.5 N Staining with trypan blue Histological analysis

Fluoresce microscopy Homemade electric applicator [71]

8.0, 11.0, and 16.0 N OCT Spring-loaded applicator

The skin was placed on sheet of dental wax support [19]

10.0 N Digital microscopy Staining with Shandon™Blue tissue marker dye

Histological analysis Spring-loaded applicator [62]

10.0 to 50.0 N OCT Equipment: TA-XT2 Texture Analyser, insertion speed 0.50 mm/s [44]

11.0 N Histological analysis Custom-made spring-loaded applicator;

Insertion test in association with the permeation test (Franz-type diffusion cell) [49]

32.0 N, held for 30 s OCT Equipment: TA-XT2 Texture Analyser, insertion speed 1.19 mm/s or

0.50 mm/s [22,38,39,41, 51,56,70] Manual force (~1.5 N)

Fluorescence stereomicroscopy - [60,72,79] Manual force

OCT The skin was placed on sheet of dental wax support [57,73,75]

Manual force Stereomicroscopy Histological analysis

Evaluation of single, double, and triple insertion [45]

Manual force, held for 5 min Staining with trypan blue

Histological analysis - NI Staining with trypan blue

Histological analysis - [67] NI Digital images of skin

MN prepared with brilliant blue dye >> penetration efficacy

- [64] NI Staining with trypan blue Equipment: CT3 texture, insertion speed

20.0 mm/s [77,78] NI SEM Fluorescence microscopy - [50]

Rat skin Manual force (~5 N) Staining with trypan blue

- [88] NI, held for 1 min Staining with trypan blue

Histological analysis CLSM OCT - [43] Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601

13 of 27 Table 2. Cont.

Model Category Matrix Insertion Force Method of Mensuration

Observations Ref.

Rat skin (Sprague– Dawley) NI CLSM - [47] NI Histological analysis

CLSM - [74,80,82] NI Staining with trypan blue Histological analysis

- [90] NI, MN held for 3 min Histological analysis

Staining with trypan blue - [34,68,91] 15 N, held for

1 min Staining with trypan blue Histological analysis

CLSM - [92] Origin not described 0.08 N Fracture force

Equipment: CT3 texture, insertion speed 0.50 mm/s Additional analyses of bioadhesion and post-wetting bioadhesion [54]

Artificial skin model Agarose disc (3% w/v) Manual force, held for 1 min

Fluorescence microscopy - [42] Agarose disc covered with a

Parafilm® layer (2% w/v agarose disc, thickness:

6 mm, Parafilm® layer: 127 µm) NI SEM Equipment: TA.XT plus texture analyzer, insertion speed 1.00 mm/s [53]

Aluminum foil Manual force Observation of the holes in the aluminum foil

- [88] Gelatin hydrogel (5% w/v) NI Optical microscopy

- [65] Parafilm® (8 layers, ~1 mm) 10.0 to 50.0 N OCT

Equipment: TA-XT2 Texture Analyser, insertion speed 0.50 mm/s [44]

32.0 N, held for 30 s Digital microscopy (number of holes/layer)

OCT Equipment: TA-XT2 Texture Analyser, insertion speed 1.19 mm/s or

0.50 mm/s [22,38,39,41,51, 55,56,69,70] Manual force, held for 5 min

SEM - [93] Manual force (~30 N) vs.

50 N OCT Equipment: Instron universal testing instrument model 5567, insertion speed 0.50 mm/s [48]

Parafilm® (10 layers, ~1 mm) 30 N, held for 5 min Digital microscopy (number of holes/layer)

Equipment: XT plus Texture Analyzer, insertion speed 1 mm/s [52]

SEM: scanning electron microscopy; CLSM: confocal laser scanning microscopy; OCT: optical coherence tomography; NI: not informed;

MN: microneedle.

Alternatively, skin insertion and in vitro dissolution assays were performed simul- taneously on skin samples. For this purpose, the MNs were inserted and removed after pre-established times to investigate the dissolution profile. After the removal of the MNs, they were analyzed for length reduction, and the skin sample was stained with trypan blue solution and analyzed histologically. Through the trypan blue staining, it was possible to observe the holes marked in blue, referring to the insertion, and to calculate the insertion percentage, adopting as a reference value (100%) the total number of needles present in the device [71,90]. Through the histological analysis technique, by staining the histological sections with hematoxylin and eosin, the depth of the insertion was observed, and it was certified that the MN reached the epidermis, piercing the stratum corneum [43,45]. A third technique for monitoring the insertion depth applied in the studies was optical coherence tomography (OCT), as represented in Figure 5B. This technique is widely used in preclinical studies and medical sciences because it is non-invasive and presents images without the need for specific sample preparation, such as the preparation required for histological anal- ysis [94]. By observing the insertion area, the depth of the insertions can be easily measured as well as the thicknesses of the skin layers by the cross-sectional images [19,56,57].

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 14 of 27 In accordance with the efforts of the scientific community for the validation and application of alternative methods to the use of animals, it was notable that a consider- able number of studies applied artificial skin methods to evaluate the insertion. For skin replacement, the Parafilm® model was employed, in which eight layers were combined, totaling a thickness of around 1 mm, and the insertion of MN was measured by the depth of penetration and by the number of holes per layer, easily observable using a digital camera or an optical microscope [51,56]. Other more sophisticated techniques such as OCT were also used to measure the depth of insertion [22,44]. Since this method was validated in

2014 by Larrañeta et al. [95], this model was only cited in the included studies from 2017 onwards. The other alternative methods to using skin were mentioned from 2019 (gelatin) and 2020 (agarose and aluminum foil) [65,88].

Given that 71 studies have developed dissolving MNs, one of the essential tests for monitoring this quality is in vitro dissolution since the release rate of the nanostructured system from the polymer matrix is influenced by the dissolution time. According to the extracted data and as illustrated in Figure 5C, the evaluation of in vitro dissolution was performed in models using skin, artificial skin, or glassware and an aqueous dissolution medium. The models are detailed in Table 3.

As presented, the most employed model refers to the use of skin, especially porcine skin, followed by the in vitro model, with the application of gelatin blocks (5% and 35% w/v) to simulate the skin. The insertion force was not mentioned in most studies, and some reported application by manual pressure. To avoid the slippage of MN arrays from the skin, some studies placed a standard stainless-steel weight (5.0–13.0 g) on the device after removing manual pressure until the required analysis time. Most studies evaluated dissolution at 37 ◦C to simulate body temperature. The assay time varied between 30 s and 2 h, and the dissolution of the NMs was measured by the percentage of needle length reduction or by morphology modification compared to the uninserted MN. For this, the most used techniques were light microscopy and CLSM.

Adaptations of the dissolution assay were highlighted in some studies to simulate specific conditions of the proof of concept proposed in the study. To prove the dissolution and glucose-dependent system, Jiang et al., Tong et al., and Xu et al. used skin from SD rats in normal and hyperglycemic conditions [74,80,82]. Permana et al. simulated porcine skin affected by bacterial biofilm to confirm the release ability of doxycycline hyclate nanoparticles developed for antibacterial action [38].

Concerning the in vitro release assay, the experimental details are reported in Table 3, and the graphical illustration of the techniques is also shown in Figure 5C. Different from dissolution, which evaluates the morphological aspects of MNs, this assay aims to quantify the portion of active substance released over time. For its execution, a glass plate/beaker and vial, a bag, and dialysis membranes were employed; a single study applied USP

Dissolution Apparatus 5 (paddle over disk). The former corresponds to a simplified methodology, in which the MN is fixed on a support such as a plate or the wall of a beaker and exposed to the dissolution medium under stirring. At pre-set times, an aliquot of the medium is collected, taking care to replace the removed volume with fresh medium, and the amount present in the aliquot is quantified. The technique for quantification depends on the characteristics of the analyte and the available laboratory infrastructure.

It is important to emphasize that the methods chosen must be previously validated and appropriate to indicate the selectivity of the substance of interest against the polymeric materials used.

In reference to the methods that apply bags and dialysis membranes, these allow the separation of the free substance released from the nanostructured system as well as the retention of the dissolved polymer inside the bag or on the semipermeable membrane with a molecular weight cut-off [52,63,77]. Less frequently, agarose gel and skin model methods were employed. The latter determined the amount released indirectly. After 3 min of MN skin insertion, the remaining MNs were dissolved in distilled water and quantified using

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 15 of 27 UV spectrophotometry. The released quantity was calculated as the difference between the total quantity and the remaining quantity [33].

Looking at the assay parameters, medium compositions that varied according to substance specificities and different pH values were employed. Some studies explored pH values representative of blood pH (pH 7.4) and skin pH (pH 5.5). Similar to the dissolution assay, one study simulated hyperglycemic conditions in order to check whether the developed system was sensitive to different glucose concentrations [46]. However, temperature also ranged from 32 to 37 ◦C, representing normal skin surface temperature and internal temperature. Regarding rotations, they ranged from 50 to 500 rpm, while the analysis time ranged from 20 s to 24 h. Importantly, the medium and rotations applied in the release assays must ensure the sink condition during run time to allow the release gradient.

Table 3. In vitro dissolution and release assays parameters.

Dissolution Model/Apparatus Matrix/Medium Temp.

Time of Insertion Insertion Force Dissolution Measurement

Ref.

Skin model Porcine skin 37 ◦C NI 0.5–60 min NI Manual force + weight 5.0 g

Manual force + weight 13.0 g Manual force NI Digital microscopy

Fluorescence microscopy OCT Optical microscopy SEM

Stereoscopic microscopy [22,38,41,50,51, 55,58,62,69,71,

75,77–79,87,88] Mouse skin (Balb-c) NI 30–120 min NI

CLSM [76] Rat skin (Sprague– Dawley) NI 0.5–30 min

NI Bright field microscopy CLSM 3D-CLSM SEM [47,90,91]

Health and diabetics rats [74,80,82] Glass plate/beaker and vial

PBS 37 ◦C NI <0.5–10 min NA Confocal microscopy Optical microscopy [59,93]

Water NI 0.33–1 min NA Optical microscopy [66] Gelatin block

Gelatin block (5% w/v) NI 0.33–1 min NI Optical microscopy [65]

Gelatin block (35% w/v) NI 10 min NI Digital microscopy [35]

Release Assay/ Apparatus Matrix/Medium rpm Temp.

Time Assay Range Insertion Force Quantification Methods

Ref.

Agarose gel 1% w/v agarose gel containing different concentrations of glucose

NA NI 10–180 min NI Fluorescence stereomicroscopy QIAquick gel extraction kit (ELISA) [60]

Dialysis bags PBS (pH 7.4) NI NI 4–72 h NA HPLC [63]

30% (v/v) PEG 400 in saline 250 32 ± 1 ◦C 1–24 h NA

HPLC [52] Dialysis membranes (Franz-type diffusion cell)

30 % v/v ethanol solution in distilled water NI NI

10–1440 min NA HPLC [77,78] Glass plate/beaker and vial

PBS (pH 5.5) 500 37 ◦C 1–120 min NA Fluorescence spectroscopy [50]

PBS (pH 7.4) 50–100 NI 37 ◦C 1–1440 min NA Fluorescence spectroscopy

CLSM UV–vis spectroscopy [23,53,85,93] PBS (pH 7.5)

NI 37 ◦C <3 days NA Fluorescence spectroscopy [58]

Distilled water PBS (pH 6.8) containing 1% tween 80

200 37 ◦C 15–1440 min NA HPLC [64] Glucose solutions at different concentrations (5.5, 11.1, and

22.2 mM) Saline NI 37 ◦C 10–240 min NA Bradford protein assay kit [46]

USP dissolution apparatus 5 (Paddle-over disc method)

PBS (pH 5.5) NI 37.5 ◦C 5–1980 min NA UV–vis spectroscopy [54]

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 16 of 27 Table 3. Cont.

Release Assay/ Apparatus Matrix/Medium rpm Temp.

Time Assay Range Insertion Force Quantification Methods

Ref.

NI DPBS with or without collagenase (2 U/mL) NI NI

<120 h NA Picogreen kit (quantification of DNA release) [83]

PBS 80 37 ◦C 1–60 min NA Picogreen kit (quantification of

DNA release) UV spectrophotometry [96] PBS + glutathione

NI 37 ◦C 4–72 h NA Standard bicinchoninic acid assay (BCA)

HPLC [40] Water NI NI 20–60 s NA UV spectrophotometry [66]

Skin model Mouse skin NA NI 3 min NI UV spectrophotometry [33]

Temp: temperature; rpm: rotation per minute; SEM: scanning electron microscopy; CLSM: confocal laser scanning microscopy; OCT: optical coherence tomography; NA: not applicable; NI: not informed; PBS: phosphate buffer saline.

In the category of in vitro permeation assays, assays that evaluated skin retention/deposition as well as the permeation of compounds through all layers of the skin to reach the receptor fluid were grouped together. For nomenclature purposes, this assay will be referred to in the text as in vitro permeation. Notably, these parameters were evaluated in the studies using animal or human skin (n = 21), mainly porcine skin (n = 17), and no alternative methods were proposed for this evaluation. As illustrated in Figure 5D, the skin samples in most assays (n = 19) were fixed in Franz-type diffusion cells and conditioned with PBS pH 7.4 (n = 10) for at least 30 min prior to insertion of MNs into the skin. Unlike the in vitro dissolution assay, insertion force was described in most studies that evaluated permeation (n = 19), and, to avoid slippage of MN arrays from the skin during the assay,

11 studies employed the technique of overlaying the MN with a standard stainless-steel weight. Alternatively, the device was fixed with tape. The most usual temperature for the receptor fluid receptor was 37 ◦C, and some studies reported keeping the receptor fluid at

37 ◦C, while the skin surface was kept at 32 ◦C, similar to physiological conditions. The agitation speed of the receptor fluid varied from 100 to 600 rpm. Regarding the assay time, the in vitro permeation assay demonstrated longer sample collection intervals, owing to the construction of the dermatokinetic profiles of the compounds [38,41,69,88]. The graphical distribution of the variables described by a number of studies is shown in Figure 6A.

Out of 21 studies, 15 studies evaluated the developed device against controls. The cho- sen control groups varied among the studies; some applied needle-free patches produced with the same materials, i.e., polymeric films containing the nanostructures [22,49,55,56,87].

Some studies employed micro-needles containing the substances in their free form, i.e., without the presence of nanostructured systems [41,54,69,77]. Additionally, one study evaluated the modification of the polymeric composition on the permeation profile by applying MNs of hyaluronic acid and micelles without the presence of CMC [88]. The other studies applied the nanostructured systems in suspension or solution on the skin [51,77,87], and one study applied a suspension of the nanostructured system after the microporation of the skin with solid MNs.

At the end of the test time, the quantity of active substances permeated or retained in the skin layers was mostly measured by HPLC (n = 16) and spectroscopic or spec- trophotometric techniques (n = 5). For the studies that evaluated dermatokinetic profiles, after quantification, the data were analyzed with PkSolver software (one-compartment model) [22,38,87]. Additionally, for the separation of the skin layers, two main techniques were employed. The first consisted of exposing the skin to a 60 ◦C bath for 2 to 3 min, followed by the removal of the epidermis with the aid of tweezers [22,44,69]. In the second, the skin sample was fixed in a material suitable for histological sectioning, and then the substance was quantified from the skin sections [22,41].

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 17 of 27 Figure 6. General parameters of the in vitro permeation assay by a number of studies (A). Characteristics of the stability tests by category (B), and comparative graph of the analysis of the nanostructured systems before and after insertion into the polymeric matrix of the microneedle (C). NI: not informed; PBS: phosphate buffer saline; PDI: polydispersity index;

LC: loading capacity; EE: encapsulation/entrapment efficiency; TEM: transmission electron microscopy; SEM: scanning electron microscopy.

External Stimulus Application In complement to the device formed by the combination of dissolvable polymers and a nanostructured system, the drug and protein release process can be promoted through external stimuli such as iontophoresis and magnetism fields as well as be applied to potentiate the therapy as near-infrared-light (NIR). Among the studies included in this review, only eight described the use of external stimuli, of which five studies corre- sponded to NIR [33–36,43], one to photodynamic therapy [85], one to iontophoresis [23], and one to magnetic fields [66]. The tests performed to evaluate the effects of these stim- uli on the nanostructured systems and devices are presented in Table S2. Importantly, most studies that have applied laser radiation have measured the photothermal effect of the nanostructured system alone in vitro methods, evaluating this effect on the device (MN + nanosystem) only in in vivo models.

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 18 of 27 Stability Assays

The characteristics of the stability studies are shown in Figure 6B,C. According to the tests and storage parameters of the devices, the stability tests were divided into five main categories: (1) studies that evaluated the maintenance of the characteristics of the nanostructured system after insertion into the MN; (2) characterization of the MN; (3) physicochemical characterization of the inserted nanostructured systems and the MN characteristics; (4) protein/nucleotide stability after insertion into the MN; (5) physicochem- ical characterization of the nanostructured systems and protein/nucleotide stability after insertion into the MN. In all, 27 out of 72 studies measured one of the categories, and of these, only three followed the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) guideline for stability studies regarding storage conditions: (a) long-term stability (25 ± 2 ◦C/60%

RH ± 5%), (b) accelerate stability (40 ± 2 ◦C/75% RH ± 5%) [64], and (c) short-term stability (30 ± 2 ◦C/60% RH ± 5%) [77,78].

As shown in Figure 6C, in comparison to the analyses of the nanostructured systems after their preparation, the stability studies investigated the maintenance of particle size (n = 19) and, less frequently, the polydispersity index (n = 9) and morphological appear- ance by TEM (n = 8) after insertion into the MN. The maintenance of MN mechanical characteristics was measured in 3 studies [70,77,78]. Considering all the stability studies, it is important to note that 40.74% reported the follow-up times after MN preparation, and

29.63% reported the storage temperature of the MN.

3.3.4. In Vivo Assays The in vivo trials associated with the quality of MNs to ensure transcutaneous release fall into three main groups, as shown in Figure S3. The parameters were grouped into characteristics of the animals used (such as species/breeding line, age, sex, and sample number), parameters of the assays, and methods for measuring the results. For all three assays, it was evident that rats and mice were used equally, and there was no clear relation- ship between the type of assay and the age or sex of the animals. A significant number of studies did not indicate the number of animals employed in each trial. Furthermore, the insertion site of MNs showed the following order of preference: dorsum skin (back) > ear skin > abdominal skin. Compared to in vitro insertion assays, the insertion force applied in vivo was described to a lesser extent (n = 2). The in vitro dissolution time was less than

30 min and the follow-up time for skin release and permeation was similar to the in vitro studies with maximums of 24 and 48 h.

4. Discussion 4.1. Summary of Evidence and Characteristics of MNs Associated with Nanostructured Systems

The geographical distribution of the articles (Figure 2B) followed the market trends presented in market analysis reports, which show the participation of South America in the commercialization of solid and hollow MNs, substantiating the absence of studies on polymeric MNs in this region. On the other hand, continents such as East Asia, Europe, and North America, which had the highest number of publications included in this review, present market trends aligned with the development of polymeric MNs with the application of biodegradable and dissolvable polymers [16].

With respect to the polymers employed in the preparation of MNs, a vast chem- ical variety was observed, with emphasis on the use of PVP, PVA, and the PVP/PVA blend. Both polymers demonstrate characteristics such as biocompatibility and mechanical strength compatible with the application of the device, as well as fast in situ dissolu- tion [41,47,51,97,98]. Another advantage associated with these polymers corresponds to the range of molecular weights that are marketed, allowing combinations with different dissolution rates and mechanical strength [57,74,76,84]. When evaluating the biodistribu- tion and pharmacokinetic profiles of polymers such as PVA and PVP intravenously, some studies have shown that the half-life decreases and glomerular filtration is favored when low molecular weight PVA and PVP are administered. For example, PVA elimination is fa- Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601

19 of 27 vored for polymers with molecular weight <30 kDa and for PVP of <25–50 kDa [97,99,100].

The wide range of molecular weights employed in the constitution of polymeric MNs in association with nanostructured systems was remarkable, but most applied PVA from 6 to 23 kDa and PVP from 31 to 50 kDa. Moreover, a significant number of studies applied only PVP of higher molecular weight in the baseplate (MW 360 kDa), keeping only the needle tips as a reservoir of nanostructured active compounds. This is a smart strategy since only the needle tips will encounter the deeper layers of the skin and the baseplate is removed intact after administration [21,22,44]. In contrast to the dissolving polymers, only one study employed hydrogel-forming polymers, evidencing that the association of hydrogel-forming MNs and nanostructured systems is less frequent than dissolving ones [48].

The association of nanostructured systems in TDDS such as MNs allows for one-step administration and control of the release rate by modifications of the polymer matrix (dissolution) and the dissociation rate of the loaded substance in the nanostructured system [54,77,78]. As evidenced in the step of selection of studies, in the first studies, the administration was performed in two steps, in which the skin was previously microporated by a solid MN and then the nanostructured system was administered, combined with semisolid formulations [101–103]. In addition to the simplicity of administration, the devices can be designed for controlled release to treat a particular pathophysiological condition, as demonstrated in the studies that designed the release for hyperglycemic conditions [20,47].

Beyond the control of hyperglycemia, most systems were designed for the treatment of chronic diseases and superficial tumors and mainly for transcutaneous immunization, owing to the cutaneous immune system [40,43,59,84,104]. The difficulties related to the penetration and permeation of compounds into tumor tissues and bacterial biofilms could be circumvented with needles projections [37,38,43]. In the case of tumor treatment, the systems can be designed to associate thermo-sensitive substances with chemotherapy, allowing the application of external stimuli (photothermal therapy) and, consequently, potentiating the treatment [35,36].

Regarding the types of associated systems, lipid, metallic, inorganic, and polymeric systems were retrieved in the search. Most studies developed polymeric nanoparticles due to their compatibility with the polymeric matrix, whereas simpler systems in terms of composition, such as nanoemulsions, were not retrieved in the results. Among the lipid systems, liposomes represented the largest fraction of these systems as they exhibit considerable biocompatibility in vivo and compounds of protein and nucleotide origin are easily associated with liposomal systems [38,71,78,105].

As for the method of obtaining the devices, after preparing the nanostructured sys- tems by different techniques, the MN was mostly made using the micromolding method.

The preference for micromolding is due to the versatility of this technique, which allows the obtaining of MNs with different shapes and sizes as well as the reuse of the female mold, usually composed of PDMS. As previously presented, most of the studies developed pyramidal and conical MNs; both shapes present a favorable geometry for cutaneous insertion. Moreover, the studies indicate that the pyramidal shape confers greater drug loading when compared to conical needles of the same height and base width. The influ- ence of geometric aspects on the ability of cutaneous insertion has been investigated in previous studies, which showed that the geometry directly influences the shape and length of the conduits in the skin and that the insertion is favored in pyramidal needles with a triangular or square base, with less intensity for hexagonal bases [106,107]. The conical format was one of the first to be explored in the constitution of MNs. For solid MN, it is important to highlight that some studies evaluated the viability of production of PDMS female molds from solid MNs commercialized for aesthetic microneedling (Dermastamp®) and even from tattoo needles [77,107]. Parallel to this technique of obtaining the base male mold for the PDMS mold, two papers demonstrated the possibility of using 3D printing, an emerging technique applied to pharmaceutical devices and forms [53,66].

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 20 of 27 4.2. Assays Employed in MN Analysis

In relation to the characterizations of the dimensions and shapes of the MNs, these were verified by microscopic techniques, mainly by SEM. As for the characterization of the isolated nanostructured systems, the most used technique was TEM [40,93,108].

These differences were attributed to the specificities of the materials used. Studies that applied fluorescent substances and probes employed fluorescence microscopy and CLSM as complementary techniques. In these studies, the addition of fluorescent probes allowed the observation of particle distribution in the needles as well as associated fluorescence techniques for the visualization of cutaneous release and permeation, both in vitro and in vivo techniques. Some studies also justified the choice of probes by the similarity of molecular weight and lipophilicity with the active compound [61,69,79,109]. This attention to choice by physicochemical similarity is important since the profile of skin permeation and release is associated with these variables.

Significant differences were also observed between the number of studies that charac- terized the nanostructured systems in terms of particle size, PDI, and zeta potential, before and after mixing in the MN polymer matrix. One possible cause for this difference relates to analytical limitations, as some studies highlighted that the polymer could interfere with the analysis [63,70]. Nevertheless, only 40.3% of the studies described the determination of the content of the substances in the MN.

The mechanical properties of the devices, represented by the compressive strength, were evaluated by dynamic and static strength techniques. The former represented the largest fraction of the studies, mainly by informing the failure force value, which predicts the subsequent capability of skin insertion. In general, the compressibility tests are ex- tremely useful in understanding the effects of the nanostructured system on mechanical strength. When comparing with MNs composed of polymer only, some studies identified differences in the failure force value. It cannot be understood as a rule; however, inorganic (mesoporous nanoparticles) and metallic nanostructured systems may provide higher mechanical strength to the final device, while lipid and liposomal systems may reduce this value [23,47]. Another advantage of the mechanical characterization technique is the possibility of adjusting the formulations before conducting more complex and costly studies such as skin release and permeation [69].

Regarding skin insertion assays, assay features in terms of application mode and force employed were described more frequently in the in vitro studies than in the in vivo studies. Furthermore, it was verified that the studies assigned manual force values of

1.5 to 30 N [48,79,88]. In an attempt to standardize manual strength, Larrateña et al. measured the manual force of 20 volunteers (10 males and 10 females) by pressing their thumbs on the TA.XTPlus Texture Analyser (Stable Micro Systems) platform and holding the pressure for 30 s [95]. Afterwards, the results were evaluated in terms of average, maximum, and minimum force during the interval. In this study, the average contracted force was 20 N, with minimal differences between males and females. Additionally, when mimicking the manual application of MNs by the volunteers to porcine neonatal skin, the authors showed a greater statistical difference in insertion for those who employed a force of less than 10 N. Although these results contrast the manual forces of 1.5 and 5 N employed by other authors, these confirmed the insertion by fluorescence microscopy and

OCT and that insertion capacity is not only a result of the force employed but also of the geometry [106,110].

The term dissolution was used in most studies as a reference to the in vitro assay to assess the ability or time for morphological changes to occur in the structure of NM after insertion into a skin matrix, simulated skin matrix, or even a liquid medium. Although the term dissolution is used in pharmaceutical sciences to refer to the experiment by which the rate and extent that a compound forms a solution is determined, the result is usually expressed as a percentage of the amount dissolved over time relative to the total amount. In addition, official compendia recommend the use of specific apparatus and dissolution media for conducting the dissolution assay, such as USP Apparatus 1 (basket)

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 21 of 27 and 2 (paddle), according to standardized conditions [111]. It was observed that the studies referred to the quantification assays after the dissolution of the polymeric matrix as release assays, and the conditions were variable among the studies regarding equipment and media. Therefore, for the purpose of grouping the results, the nomenclature in this review was standardized in the same way as in the studies.

In vitro skin insertion and permeation assays, in general, demonstrated the majority use of porcine skin compared to other animal origins. Several studies have evidenced the physiological similarity of porcine skin to human skin, especially in the thickness of the epidermis and lipid composition, thus conferring permeability similar to that of human skin [112–115]. However, for the use of porcine skin, some precautions should be taken during the preparation of the skin matrices, such as thickness standardization (<1 mm).

Likewise, for skin samples stored by freezing, the samples should be rehydrated with PBS pH 7.4 solution for at least 30 min before conducting the assays [81,116].

4.3. Limitations While conducting the review, some limitations were evident, such as a lack of stan- dardization of the nomenclatures adopted in relation to quality testing in the articles and difficulty of access to some variables. Probably due to character limitations or specifications of the guidelines for authors, they chose to emphasize the results of their research and the novelty of state of the art, reducing the information presented regarding methods and analy- sis parameters. Therefore, one of the limitations in conducting this review was the methods partially described in the original articles or the corresponding Supplementary Materials.

4.4. Future Possibilities and Potential of Polymeric MNs

From the results raised in this review, some future possibilities are pointed out:

• Development of specific alternative methods for the evaluation of TDDS as well as the validation of in vitro methods to characterize the dissolution and release profiles of substances from MNs containing nanosystems; development of specific equip- ment and apparatus to assess these parameters more reliably against physiological skin conditions;

• Evaluation of aspects that directly or indirectly impact the product profile, for example, the mechanical force required for the insertion of the device into the skin. One way to evaluate this parameter, indicative of future self-administration success rate, is to evaluate the mechanical characteristics and in vitro or in vivo skin insertion. Since different individuals have distinct hand strengths, the validation and standardiza- tion of these assays is critical to understanding and predicting the consequences of this variability;

• The standardization of quality methods will boost the growth of polymeric MNs in the market as well as allow the evaluation of systems in line with the trend of personalized medicine, especially for the treatment of chronic diseases and associated comorbidities;

• The association of nanostructured systems and polymeric matrices for the transcu- taneous administration of substances will be enhanced if different strategies that modulate drug release are combined (different systems, different polymeric layers, or where the combination of substances in free form and those associated with nanosys- tems are introduced in the same matrix). However, control methods will have to be developed to characterize these systems;

• The lack of investment in stability studies that prove the maintenance of nanometric characteristics after inclusion in the polymeric matrix may represent a breakpoint in the process of scaling up from the bench to market.

5. Conclusions The described work is the first demonstration, to our knowledge, of a review that compiles the tests employed in the quality control of polymeric microneedles prepared in association with nanostructured systems. From the results, it was observed that the

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 22 of 27 most used tests for quality assessment are microscopic analysis, characterization of me- chanical properties, skin insertion capacity, dissolution and release profile, and skin per- meation/retention. However, there was a higher percentage of non-animal methods for the analysis of skin insertion and dissolution in the more recent studies. Furthermore, the application of alternative methods to animals to verify insertion and dissolution was more frequent in studies published from 2017 onwards, in line with the recent validation of alternative methods. Finally, the compiled data ensure the requirement for standardization of testing and its execution to narrow the proof-of-concept and market spheres of polymeric microneedles associated with nanostructured systems and support the establishment of regulatory guidelines for these devices.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10

.3390/pharmaceutics13101601/s1, Table S1: Detailed search strategy applied to PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases, Table S2: Description of the assays applied to evaluate external stimuli in the release and therapeutic effect of nanostructured systems associated with dissolving microneedles, Figure S1: Characterization tests of nanostructured systems prior to inclusion into the polymeric matrix of the microneedle by a number of studies included in the review, Figure S2:

Characterization tests of the MN device by a number of studies included in the review, Figure S3:

General parameters of in vivo skin insertion assay.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, P.W. and L.S.K.; methodology, P.W. and L.S.K.; software,

P.W.; formal analysis, investigation, and data curation: P.W.; writing—original draft preparation,

P.W.; writing—review and editing: all authors.; supervision, R.C.R. and L.S.K.; project administration,

L.S.K.; funding acquisition, L.S.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research was funded by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível

Superior (Finance Code 001). The APC was funded by PROEX-CAPES project number 0534/2019- 23.038.006270/2019-11.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for their research fellowships.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations 3D-CLSM: three-dimensional confocal laser scanning microscopy, CAGR: compound annual growth rate, CLSM: confocal laser scanning microscopy, CMC: sodium carboxymethylcellulose, DSC: dif- ferential scanning calorimetry, FESEM: field-emission scanning electron microscopy, FTIR: Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, ICH: International Conference on Harmonization, m-HA: methacry- lated hyaluronic acid, MN: microneedles, NIR: near-infrared-light; PLGA: poly(lactide-co-glycolide),

PMVE/MA: copolymer of methylvinyl ether and maleic anhydride, PVP: polyvinylpyrrolidone,

PVP/PVA: polyvinylpyrrolidone/poly (vinyl alcohol), SEM: scanning electron microscopy, TDDS: transdermal drug delivery system, TGA: thermal gravimetric analysis, XRD/XRPD: X-ray diffraction/

X-ray powder diffraction.

References 1.

Benson, H.A.E.; Watkinson, A.C. Transdermal and Topical Drug Delivery: Principles and Practice; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ,

USA, 2012, ISBN 9780470450291.

2.

Mishra, D.K.; Pandey, V.; Maheshwari, R.; Ghode, P.; Tekade, R.K. Cutaneous and transdermal drug delivery: Techniques and delivery systems. In Basic Fundamentals of Drug Delivery; Tekade, R.K., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 595–650. ISBN 9780128179093.

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 23 of 27 3.

Jepps, O.G.; Dancik, Y.; Anissimov, Y.G.; Roberts, M.S. Modeling the human skin barrier—Towards a better understanding of dermal absorption. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2013, 65, 152–168. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

Andrews, S.N.; Jeong, E.; Prausnitz, M.R. Transdermal delivery of molecules is limited by full epidermis, not just stratum corneum. Pharm. Res. 2013, 30, 1099–1109. [CrossRef]

5.

Lan, X.; She, J.; Lin, D.A.; Xu, Y.; Li, X.; Yang, W.F.; Lui, V.W.Y.; Jin, L.; Xie, X.; Su, Y.X. Microneedle-mediated delivery of lipid-coated cisplatin nanoparticles for efficient and safe cancer therapy. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 33060–33069. [CrossRef]

6.

Pireddu, R.; Schlich, M.; Marceddu, S.; Valenti, D.; Pini, E.; Fadda, A.M.; Lai, F.; Sinico, C. Nanosuspensions and microneedles roller as a combined approach to enhance diclofenac topical bioavailability. Pharmaceutics 2020, 12, 1140. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

Kovaliov, M.; Li, S.; Korkmaz, E.; Cohen-Karni, D.; Tomycz, N.; Ozdoganlar, O.B.; Averick, S. Extended-release of opioids using fentanyl-based polymeric nanoparticles for enhanced pain management. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 47904–47912. [CrossRef]

8.

Hu, Y.; Xu, B.; Xu, J.; Shou, D.; Liu, E.; Gao, J.; Liang, W.; Huang, Y. Microneedle-assisted dendritic cell-targeted nanoparticles for transcutaneous DNA immunization. Polym. Chem. 2015, 6, 373–379. [CrossRef]

9.

Henry, S.; McAllister, D.V.; Allen, M.G.; Prausnitz, M.R. Microfabricated microneedles: A novel approach to transdermal drug delivery. J. Pharm. Sci. 1998, 87, 922–925. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

Gill, H.S.; Denson, D.D.; Burris, B.A.; Prausnitz, M.R. Effect of microneedle design on pain in human volunteers. Clin. J. Pain

2008, 24, 585–594. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 11.

Waghule, T.; Singhvi, G.; Dubey, S.K.; Pandey, M.M.; Gupta, G.; Singh, M.; Dua, K. Microneedles: A smart approach and increasing potential for transdermal drug delivery system. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2019, 109, 1249–1258. [CrossRef]

12.

Lee, S.J.; Lee, H.S.; Hwang, Y.H.; Kim, J.J.; Kang, K.Y.; Kim, S.J.; Kim, H.K.; Kim, J.D.; Jeong, D.H.; Paik, M.J.; et al. Enhanced anti-tumor immunotherapy by dissolving microneedle patch loaded ovalbumin. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0220382. [CrossRef]

13.

An, M.; Liu, H. Dissolving Microneedle Arrays for Transdermal Delivery of Amphiphilic Vaccines. Small 2017, 13, 1–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.

Ling, M.H.; Chen, M.C. Dissolving polymer microneedle patches for rapid and efficient transdermal delivery of insulin to diabetic rats. Acta Biomater. 2013, 9, 8952–8961. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

Research and Markets Global Transdermal Drug Delivery System Market (2020 to 2027)—COVID-19 Impact and Analysis.

Available online: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-transdermal-drug-delivery-system-market-2020-to- 2027---covid-19-impact-and-analysis-301146587.html (accessed on 5 May 2021).

16.

Future Market Insights Microneedle Drug Delivery Systems Market by product type-Solid Microneedles, Hollow Microneedles, and Dissolving Microneedles for 2020–2030. Available online: https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/microneedle- drug-delivery-systems-market (accessed on 5 May 2021).

17.

Donnelly, R.F.; Moffatt, K.; Alkilani, A.Z.; Vicente-Pérez, E.M.; Barry, J.; McCrudden, M.T.C.; Woolfson, A.D. Hydrogel-forming microneedle arrays can be effectively inserted in skin by self-application: A pilot study centred on pharmacist intervention and a patient information leaflet. Pharm. Res. 2014, 31, 1989–1999. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

Lee, S.G.; Jeong, J.H.; Lee, K.M.; Jeong, K.H.; Yang, H.; Kim, M.; Jung, H.; Lee, S.; Choi, Y.W. Nanostructured lipid carrier-loaded hyaluronic acid microneedles for controlled dermal delivery of a lipophilic molecule. Int. J. Nanomed. 2013, 9, 289–299. [CrossRef]

19.

McCaffrey, J.; McCrudden, C.M.; Ali, A.A.; Massey, A.S.; McBride, J.W.; McCrudden, M.T.C.; Vicente-Perez, E.M.; Coulter, J.A.;

Robson, T.; Donnelly, R.F.; et al. Transcending epithelial and intracellular biological barriers; A prototype DNA delivery device.

J. Control. Release 2016, 226, 238–247. [CrossRef]

20.

Yu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Ye, Y.; DiSanto, R.; Sun, W.; Ranson, D.; Ligler, F.S.; Buse, J.B.; Gu, Z.; Ho, D. Microneedle-array patches loaded with hypoxia-sensitive vesicles provide fast glucose-responsive insulin delivery. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 8260–8265. [CrossRef]

21.

Kennedy, J.; Larrañeta, E.; Mccrudden, M.T.C.; Mccrudden, C.M.; Brady, A.J.; Fallows, S.J.; Mccarthy, H.O.; Kissenpfennig, A.;

Donnelly, R.F. In vivo studies investigating biodistribution of nanoparticle-encapsulated rhodamine B delivered via dissolving microneedles. J. Control. Release 2017, 265, 57–65. [CrossRef]

22.

Permana, A.D.; Tekko, I.A.; McCrudden, M.T.C.; Anjani, Q.K.; Ramadon, D.; McCarthy, H.O.; Donnelly, R.F. Solid lipid nanoparticle-based dissolving microneedles: A promising intradermal lymph targeting drug delivery system with potential for enhanced treatment of lymphatic filariasis. J. Control. Release 2019, 316, 34–52. [CrossRef]

23.

Justin, R.; Román, S.; Chen, D.; Tao, K.; Geng, X.; Grant, R.T.; MacNeil, S.; Sun, K.; Chen, B. Biodegradable and conductive chitosan-graphene quantum dot nanocomposite microneedles for delivery of both small and large molecular weight therapeutics.

RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 51934–51946. [CrossRef] 24.

Ita, K. Transdermal delivery of drugs with microneedles—Potential and challenges. Pharmaceutics 2015, 7, 90–105. [CrossRef]

25.

Paredes, A.J.; McKenna, P.E.; Ramöller, I.K.; Naser, Y.A.; Volpe-Zanutto, F.; Li, M.; Abbate, M.T.A.; Zhao, L.; Zhang, C.; Abu- Ershaid, J.M.; et al. Microarray patches: Poking a hole in the challenges faced when delivering poorly soluble drugs. Adv. Funct.

Mater. 2021, 31, 1–27. [CrossRef] 26.

Alimardani, V.; Abolmaali, S.S.; Yousefi, G.; Rahiminezhad, Z.; Abedi, M.; Tamaddon, A.; Ahadian, S. Microneedle arrays combined with nanomedicine approaches for transdermal delivery of therapeutics. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 181. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 24 of 27 27.

Arya, J.; Henry, S.; Kalluri, H.; McAllister, D.V.; Pewin, W.P.; Prausnitz, M.R. Tolerability, usability and acceptability of dissolving microneedle patch administration in human subjects. Biomaterials 2017, 128, 1–7. [CrossRef]

28.

Caffarel-Salvador, E.; Kim, S.; Soares, V.; Tian, R.Y.; Stern, S.R.; Minahan, D.; Yona, R.; Lu, X.; Zakaria, F.R.; Collins, J.; et al. A microneedle platform for buccal macromolecule delivery. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, 1–12. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29.

Yadav, P.R.; Munni, M.N.; Campbell, L.; Mostofa, G.; Dobson, L.; Shittu, M.; Pattanayek, S.K.; Uddin, M.J.; Bhusan Das, D.

Translation of polymeric microneedles for treatment of human diseases: Recent trends, Progress, and Challenges. Pharmaceutics

2021, 13, 1132. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 30.

Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A.; Group, P.-P. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015, 4, 1–9. [CrossRef]

31.

Tricco, A.C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K.K.; Colquhoun, H.; Levac, D.; Moher, D.; Peters, M.D.J.; Horsley, T.; Weeks, L.; et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Ann. Intern. Med. 2018, 169, 467–473. [CrossRef]

32.

Ye, Y.; Wang, J.; Hu, Q.; Hochu, G.M.; Xin, H.; Wang, C.; Gu, Z. Synergistic transcutaneous immunotherapy enhances antitumor immune responses through delivery of checkpoint inhibitors. ACS Nano 2016, 10, 8956–8963. [CrossRef]

33.

Wei, S.; Quan, G.; Lu, C.; Pan, X.; Wu, C. Dissolving microneedles integrated with pH-responsive micelles containing AIEgen with ultra-photostability for enhancing melanoma photothermal therapy. Biomater. Sci. 2020, 8, 5739–5750. [CrossRef]

34.

Peng, T.; Huang, Y.; Feng, X.; Zhu, C.; Ma, X.; Wang, X.; Bai, X.; Pan, X.; Wu, C. Dissolving microneedles loading TPGS biphasic functionalized PLGA nanoparticles for efficient chemo-photothermal combined therapy of melanoma. Adv. Ther. 2020, 3, 1–11. [CrossRef]

35.

Qin, W.; Quan, G.; Sun, Y.; Chen, M.; Yang, P.; Feng, D.; Wen, T.; Hu, X.; Pan, X.; Wu, C. Dissolving microneedles with spatiotemporally controlled pulsatile release nanosystem for synergistic chemo-photothermal therapy of Melanoma. Theranostics

2020, 10, 8179–8196. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 36.

Hao, Y.; Chen, Y.W.; He, X.L.; Yang, F.; Han, R.X.; Yang, C.L.; Li, W.; Qian, Z.Y. Near-infrared responsive 5-fluorouracil and indocyanine green loaded MPEG-PCL nanoparticle integrated with dissolvable microneedle for skin cancer therapy. Bioact. Mater.

2020, 5, 542–552. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 37.

Xu, J.; Danehy, R.; Cai, H.; Ao, Z.; Pu, M.; Nusawardhana, A.; Rowe-Magnus, D.; Guo, F. Microneedle patch-mediated treatment of bacterial biofilms. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 14640–14646. [CrossRef]

38.

Permana, A.D.; Mir, M.; Utomo, E.; Donnelly, R.F. Bacterially sensitive nanoparticle-based dissolving microneedles of doxycycline for enhanced treatment of bacterial biofilm skin infection: A proof of concept study. Int. J. Pharm. X 2020, 2, 100047. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39.

Permana, A.D.; Anjani, Q.K.; Sartini; Utomo, E.; Volpe-Zanutto, F.; Paredes, A.J.; Evary, Y.M.; Mardikasari, S.A.; Pratama,

M.R.; Tuany, I.N.; et al. Selective delivery of silver nanoparticles for improved treatment of biofilm skin infection using bacteria-responsive microparticles loaded into dissolving microneedles. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2021, 120, 111786. [CrossRef]

40.

Wan, T.; Pan, Q.; Ping, Y. Microneedle-assisted genome editing: A transdermal strategy of targeting NLRP3 by CRISPR-Cas9 for synergistic therapy of inflammatory skin disorders. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, 1–14. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

41.

Tekko, I.A.; Permana, A.D.; Vora, L.; Hatahet, T.; McCarthy, H.O.; Donnelly, R.F. Localised and sustained intradermal delivery of methotrexate using nanocrystal-loaded microneedle arrays: Potential for enhanced treatment of psoriasis. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2020,

152, 105469. [CrossRef] 42.

Ramalheiro, A.; Paris, J.L.; Silva, B.F.B.; Pires, L.R. Rapidly dissolving microneedles for the delivery of cubosome-like liquid crystalline nanoparticles with sustained release of rapamycin. Int. J. Pharm. 2020, 591, 119942. [CrossRef]

43.

Wu, B.; Fu, J.; Zhou, Y.; Luo, S.; Zhao, Y.; Quan, G.; Pan, X.; Wu, C. Tailored core-shell dual metal–organic frameworks as a versatile nanomotor for effective synergistic antitumor therapy. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2020, 10, 2198–2211. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

44.

Permana, A.D.; McCrudden, M.T.C.; Donnelly, R.F. Enhanced intradermal delivery of nanosuspensions of antifilariasis drugs using dissolving microneedles: A proof of concept study. Pharmaceutics 2019, 11, 346. [CrossRef]

45.

Devineni, J.; Pravallika, C.D.; Rani, B.S.; Nalluri, B.N. Effective single drug treatment of lymphatic filariasis through enhanced transdermal delivery of ivermectin liposomes using solid and dissolving microneedles. Indian J. Pharm. Educ. Res. 2020, 54,

S492–S504. [CrossRef] 46.

Zhang, Y.; Wu, M.; Tan, D.; Liu, Q.; Xia, R.; Chen, M.; Liu, Y.; Xue, L.; Lei, Y. A dissolving and glucose-responsive insulin-releasing microneedle patch for type 1 diabetes therapy. J. Mater. Chem. B 2021, 9, 648–657. [CrossRef]

47.

Xu, B.; Jiang, G.; Yu, W.; Liu, D.; Zhang, Y.; Zhou, J.; Sun, S.; Liu, Y. H2O2-Responsive mesoporous silica nanoparticles integrated with microneedle patches for the glucose-monitored transdermal delivery of insulin. J. Mater. Chem. B 2017, 5, 8200–8208. [CrossRef]

48.

Angkawinitwong, U.; Courtenay, A.J.; Rodgers, A.M.; Larrañeta, E.; Mccarthy, H.O.; Brocchini, S.; Donnelly, R.F.; Williams, G.R.

A novel transdermal protein delivery strategy via electrohydrodynamic coating of PLGA microparticles onto microneedles.

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 12478–12488. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

49.

Donnelly, R.F.; Morrow, D.I.J.; Fay, F.; Scott, C.J.; Abdelghany, S.; Singh, R.R.T.; Garland, M.J.; David Woolfson, A. Microneedle- mediated intradermal nanoparticle delivery: Potential for enhanced local administration of hydrophobic pre-formed photosensi- tisers. Photodiagnosis Photodyn. Ther. 2010, 7, 222–231. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 25 of 27 50.

Ke, C.J.; Lin, Y.J.; Hu, Y.C.; Chiang, W.L.; Chen, K.J.; Yang, W.C.; Liu, H.L.; Fu, C.C.; Sung, H.W. Multidrug release based on microneedle arrays filled with pH-responsive PLGA hollow microspheres. Biomaterials 2012, 33, 5156–5165. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

51.

Abdelghany, S.; Tekko, I.A.; Vora, L.; Larrañeta, E.; Permana, A.D.; Donnelly, R.F. Nanosuspension-based dissolving microneedle arrays for intradermal delivery of curcumin. Pharmaceutics 2019, 11, 308. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

52.

Cao, S.; Wang, Y.; Wang, M.; Yang, X.; Tang, Y.; Pang, M.; Wang, W.; Chen, L.; Wu, C.; Xu, Y. Microneedles mediated bioinspired lipid nanocarriers for targeted treatment of alopecia. J. Control. Release 2021, 329, 1–15. [CrossRef]

53.

El-Sayed, N.; Vaut, L.; Schneider, M. Customized fast-separable microneedles prepared with the aid of 3D printing for nanoparticle delivery. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2020, 154, 166–174. [CrossRef]

54.

Pineda-Álvarez, R.A.; Bernad-Bernad, M.J.; Rodríguez-Cruz, I.M.; Escobar-Chávez, J.J. Development and characterization of starch/gelatin microneedle arrays loaded with lecithin–gelatin nanoparticles of losartan for transdermal delivery. J. Pharm. Innov. 2020. [CrossRef]

55.

Volpe-Zanutto, F.; Ferreira, L.T.; Permana, A.D.; Kirkby, M.; Paredes, A.J.; Vora, L.K.; Bonfanti, A.P.; Charlie-Silva, I.; Raposo,

C.; Figueiredo, M.C.; et al. Artemether and lumefantrine dissolving microneedle patches with improved pharmacokinetic performance and antimalarial efficacy in mice infected with Plasmodium yoelii. J. Control. Release 2021, 333, 298–315. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

56.

Vora, L.K.; Donnelly, R.F.; Larrañeta, E.; González-Vázquez, P.; Thakur, R.R.S.; Vavia, P.R. Novel bilayer dissolving microneedle arrays with concentrated PLGA nano-microparticles for targeted intradermal delivery: Proof of concept. J. Control. Release 2017,

265, 93–101. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 57.

Cole, G.; McCaffrey, J.; Ali, A.A.; McBride, J.W.; McCrudden, C.M.; Vincente-Perez, E.M.; Donnelly, R.F.; McCarthy, H.O.

Dissolving microneedles for DNA vaccination: Improving functionality via polymer characterization and RALA complexation.

Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2017, 13, 50–62. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

58.

Wang, M.; Han, Y.; Yu, X.; Liang, L.; Chang, H.; Yeo, D.C.; Wiraja, C.; Wee, M.L.; Liu, L.; Liu, X.; et al. Upconversion nanoparticle powered microneedle patches for transdermal delivery of siRNA. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 2020, 9, 1–11. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

59.

Demuth, P.C.; Garcia-Beltran, W.F.; Ai-Ling, M.L.; Hammond, P.T.; Irvine, D.J. Composite dissolving microneedles for coordinated control of antigen and adjuvant delivery kinetics in transcutaneous vaccination. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2013, 23, 161–172. [CrossRef]

60.

Hsu, W.L.; Huang, C.Y.; Hsu, Y.P.; Hwang, T.L.; Chang, S.H.; Wang, H.Y.J.; Feng, L.Y.; Tzou, S.J.; Wei, K.C.; Yang, H.W. On-skin glucose-biosensing and on-demand insulin-zinc hexamers delivery using microneedles for syringe-free diabetes management.

Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 398, 125536. [CrossRef] 61.

Hu, X.; Yu, J.; Qian, C.; Lu, Y.; Kahkoska, A.R.; Xie, Z.; Jing, X.; Buse, J.B.; Gu, Z.; States, U.; et al. H2O2-Responsive vesicles integrated with transcutaneous patches for glucose-mediated insulin delivery. ACS Nano 2017, 11, 613–620. [CrossRef]

62.

Lanza, J.S.; Vucen, S.; Flynn, O.; Donadei, A.; Cojean, S.; Loiseau, P.M.; Fernandes, A.P.S.M.; Frézard, F.; Moore, A.C. A TLR9- adjuvanted vaccine formulated into dissolvable microneedle patches or cationic liposomes protects against leishmaniasis after skin or subcutaneous immunization. Int. J. Pharm. 2020, 586, 119390. [CrossRef]

63.

Lima, A.F.; Amado, I.R.; Pires, L.R. Poly(d,l-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) nanoparticles Loaded with proteolipid protein (PLP)—

Exploring a new administration route. Polymers 2020, 12, 3063. [CrossRef]

64.

Pawar, S.; Shende, P. 22 factorial design-based biocompatible microneedle arrays containing artemether co-loaded with lume- fantrine nanoparticles for transepidermal delivery. Biomed. Microdevices 2020, 22, 1–15. [CrossRef]

65.

González García, L.E.; MacGregor, M.N.; Visalakshan, R.M.; Ninan, N.; Cavallaro, A.A.; Trinidad, A.D.; Zhao, Y.; Hayball, A.J.D.;

Vasilev, K. Self-sterilizing antibacterial silver-loaded microneedles. Chem. Commun. 2019, 55, 171–174. [CrossRef]

66.

Fang, J.H.; Liu, C.H.; Hsu, R.S.; Chen, Y.Y.; Chiang, W.H.; Wang, H.M.D.; Hu, S.H. Transdermal composite microneedle composed of mesoporous iron oxide nanoraspberry and PVA for androgenetic alopecia treatment. Polymers 2020, 12, 1392. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

67.

Su, L.C.; Chen, M.C. Efficient delivery of nanoparticles to deep skin layers using dissolvable microneedles with an extended-length design. J. Mater. Chem. B 2017, 5, 3355–3363. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

68.

Li, Z.; He, Y.; Deng, L.; Zhang, Z.R.; Lin, Y. A fast-dissolving microneedle array loaded with chitosan nanoparticles to evoke systemic immune responses in mice. J. Mater. Chem. B 2020, 8, 216–225. [CrossRef]

69.

Mir, M.; Permana, A.D.; Ahmed, N.; Khan, G.M.; ur Rehman, A.; Donnelly, R.F. Enhancement in site-specific delivery of carvacrol for potential treatment of infected wounds using infection responsive nanoparticles loaded into dissolving microneedles: A proof of concept study. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2020, 147, 57–68. [CrossRef]

70.

Rojekar, S.; Vora, L.K.; Tekko, I.A.; Volpe-Zanutto, F.; McCarthy, H.O.; Vavia, P.R.; Ryan, R.F. Etravirine-loaded dissolving microneedle arrays for long-acting delivery. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2021, 165, 41–51. [CrossRef]

71.

Guo, L.; Chen, J.; Qiu, Y.; Zhang, S.; Xu, B.; Gao, Y. Enhanced transcutaneous immunization via dissolving microneedle array loaded with liposome encapsulated antigen and adjuvant. Int. J. Pharm. 2013, 447, 22–30. [CrossRef]

72.

Yang, H.W.; Ye, L.; Guo, X.D.; Yang, C.; Compans, R.W.; Prausnitz, M.R. Ebola Vaccination Using a DNA Vaccine Coated on PLGA-PLL/γPGA Nanoparticles Administered Using a Microneedle Patch. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 2017, 6, 1–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

73.

Cole, G.; Ali, A.A.; McCrudden, C.M.; McBride, J.W.; McCaffrey, J.; Robson, T.; Kett, V.L.; Dunne, N.J.; Donnelly, R.F.; McCarthy,

H.O. DNA vaccination for cervical cancer: Strategic optimisation of RALA mediated gene delivery from a biodegradable microneedle system. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2018, 127, 288–297. [CrossRef]

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 26 of 27 74.

Xu, B.; Cao, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Yu, W.; Zhu, J.; Liu, D.; Jiang, G. Microneedles integrated with ZnO quantum-dot capped mesoporous bioactive glasses for glucose-mediated insulin delivery. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 4, 2473–2483. [CrossRef]

75.

Ali, A.A.; McCrudden, C.M.; McCaffrey, J.; McBride, J.W.; Cole, G.; Dunne, N.J.; Robson, T.; Kissenpfennig, A.; Donnelly,

R.F.; McCarthy, H.O. DNA vaccination for cervical cancer; A novel technology platform of RALA mediated gene delivery via polymeric microneedles. Nanomed. Nanotechnol. Biol. Med. 2017, 13, 921–932. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

76.

Pattarabhiran, S.P.; Saju, A.; Sonawane, K.R.; Manimaran, R.; Bhatnagar, S.; Roy, G.; Kulkarni, R.B.; Venuganti, V.V.K. Dissolvable microneedle-mediated transcutaneous delivery of tetanus toxoid elicits effective immune response. AAPS PharmSciTech 2019, 20,

1–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 77.

Srivastava, P.K.; Thakkar, H.P. Vinpocetine loaded ultradeformable liposomes as fast dissolving microneedle patch: Tackling treatment challenges of dementia. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2020, 156, 176–190. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

78.

Srivastava, P.K.; Thakkar, H.P. QbD-driven development of dissolving microneedle patch loaded with ultradeformable liposomes encapsulated Noopept: Exploring a patient friendly, once-daily option to manage dementia. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2021, 164, 105909. [CrossRef]

79.

Liao, J.F.; Lee, J.C.; Lin, C.K.; Wei, K.C.; Chen, P.Y.; Yang, H.W. Self-assembly DNA polyplex vaccine inside dissolving microneedles for high-potency intradermal vaccination. Theranostics 2017, 7, 2593–2605. [CrossRef]

80.

Jiang, G.; Xu, B.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, T.; Song, G. Polymer microneedles integrated with glucose-responsive mesoporous bioactive glass nanoparticles for transdermal delivery of insulin. Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 2019, 5, 045038. [CrossRef]

81.

Liu, D.; Yu, B.; Jiang, G.; Yu, W.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, B. Fabrication of composite microneedles integrated with insulin-loaded CaCO3 microparticles and PVP for transdermal delivery in diabetic rats. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2018, 90, 180–188. [CrossRef]

82.

Tong, Z.; Zhou, J.; Zhong, J.; Tang, Q.; Lei, Z.; Luo, H.; Ma, P.; Liu, X. Glucose- and H2O2-responsive polymeric vesicles integrated with microneedle patches for glucose-sensitive transcutaneous delivery of insulin in diabetic rats. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces

2018, 10, 20014–20024. [CrossRef] 83.

Qu, M.; Kim, H.J.; Zhou, X.; Wang, C.; Jiang, X.; Zhu, J.; Xue, Y.; Tebon, P.; Sarabi, S.A.; Ahadian, S.; et al. Biodegradable microneedle patch for transdermal gene delivery. Nanoscale 2020, 12, 16724–16729. [CrossRef]

84.

Qiu, Y.; Guo, L.; Zhang, S.; Xu, B.; Gao, Y.; Hu, Y.; Hou, J.; Bai, B.; Shen, H.; Mao, P. DNA-based vaccination against hepatitis B virus using dissolving microneedle arrays adjuvanted by cationic liposomes and CpG ODN. Drug Deliv. 2016, 23, 2391–2398. [CrossRef]

85.

Chen, S.X.; Ma, M.; Xue, F.; Shen, S.; Chen, Q.; Kuang, Y.; Liang, K.; Wang, X.; Chen, H. Construction of microneedle-assisted co-delivery platform and its combining photodynamic/immunotherapy. J. Control. Release 2020, 324, 218–227. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

86.

Luo, F.Q.; Chen, G.; Xu, W.; Zhou, D.; Li, J.X.; Huang, Y.C.; Lin, R.; Gu, Z.; Du, J.Z. Microneedle-array patch with pH-sensitive formulation for glucose-responsive insulin delivery. Nano Res. 2021, 12, 1–8. [CrossRef]

87.

Permana, A.D.; Paredes, A.J.; Volpe-Zanutto, F.; Anjani, Q.K.; Utomo, E.; Donnelly, R.F. Dissolving microneedle-mediated dermal delivery of itraconazole nanocrystals for improved treatment of cutaneous candidiasis. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2020, 154, 50–61. [CrossRef]

88.

Cheng, Z.; Lin, H.; Wang, Z.; Yang, X.; Zhang, M.; Liu, X.; Wang, B.; Wu, Z.; Chen, D. Preparation and characterization of dissolving hyaluronic acid composite microneedles loaded micelles for delivery of curcumin. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2020, 10,

1520–1530. [CrossRef] 89.

Zhao, J.H.; Zhang, Q.B.; Liu, B.; Piao, X.H.; Yan, Y.L.; Hu, X.G.; Zhou, K.; Zhang, Y.T.; Feng, N.P. Enhanced immunization via dissolving microneedle array-based delivery system incorporating subunit vaccine and saponin adjuvant. Int. J. Nanomed. 2017,

12, 4763–4772. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 90.

Wu, X.; Li, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhou, Z.; Pang, J.; Luo, X.; Kong, M. A surface charge dependent enhanced Th1 antigen-specific immune response in lymph nodes by transfersome-based nanovaccine-loaded dissolving microneedle-assisted transdermal immunization.

J. Mater. Chem. B 2019, 7, 4854–4866. [CrossRef] 91.

Guo, T.; Cheng, N.; Zhao, J.; Hou, X.; Zhang, Y.; Feng, N. Novel nanostructured lipid carriers-loaded dissolving microneedles for controlled local administration of aconitine. Int. J. Pharm. 2019, 572, 118741. [CrossRef]

92.

Zhou, Z.; Pang, J.; Wu, X.; Wu, W.; Chen, X.; Kong, M. Reverse immune suppressive microenvironment in tumor draining lymph nodes to enhance anti-PD1 immunotherapy via nanovaccine complexed microneedle. Nano Res. 2020, 13, 1509–1518. [CrossRef]

93.

Tripathy, N.; Wang, J.; Tung, M.; Conway, C.; Chung, E.J. Transdermal delivery of kidney-targeting nanoparticles using dissolvable microneedles. Cell. Mol. Bioeng. 2020, 13, 475–486. [CrossRef]

94.

Huang, D.; Swanson, E.A.; Lin, C.P.; Schuman, J.S.; Stinson, W.G.; Chang, W.; Hee, M.R.; Flotte, T.; Gregory, K.; Puliafito, C.A.; et al. Optical coherence tomography (OCT). Science 1991, 254, 1178–1181. [CrossRef]

95.

Larrañeta, E.; Moore, J.; Vicente-Pérez, E.M.; González-Vázquez, P.; Lutton, R.; Woolfson, A.D.; Donnelly, R.F. A proposed model membrane and test method for microneedle insertion studies. Int. J. Pharm. 2014, 472, 65–73. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

96.

Duong, H.T.T.; Yin, Y.; Thambi, T.; Kim, B.S.; Jeong, J.H.; Lee, D.S. Highly potent intradermal vaccination by an array of dissolving microneedle polypeptide cocktails for cancer immunotherapy. J. Mater. Chem. B 2020, 8, 1171–1181. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

97.

Yamaoka, T.; Tabata, Y.; Ikada, Y. Comparison of body distribution of poly(vinyl alcohol) with other water-soluble polymers after intravenous administration. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1995, 47, 479–486. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601 27 of 27 98.

Hespe, W.; Meier, A.M.; Blankwater, Y.J. Excretion and distribution studies in rats with two forms of 14carbon-labelled polyvinylpyrrolidone with a relatively low mean molecular weight after intravenous administration. Arzneimittelforschung

1977, 27, 1158–1162.

99.

Wang, M.; Hu, L.; Xu, C. Recent advances in the design of polymeric microneedles for transdermal drug delivery and biosensing.

Lab Chip 2017, 17, 1373–1387. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 100. Kaneo, Y.; Hashihama, S.; Kakinoki, A.; Tanaka, T.; Nakano, T.; Ikeda, Y. Pharmacokinetics and biodisposition of poly(vinyl alcohol) in rats and mice. Drug Metab. Pharmacokinet. 2005, 20, 435–442. [CrossRef]

101. Yin, D.; Liang, W.; Xing, S.; Gao, Z.; Zhang, W.; Guo, Z.; Gao, S. Hepatitis B DNA vaccine-polycation nano-complexes enhancing immune response by percutaneous administration with microneedle. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2013, 36, 1283–1291. [CrossRef]

102. Psimadas, D.; Georgoulias, P.; Valotassiou, V.; Loudos, G. Improved dermal delivery of FITC–BSA using a combination of passive and active methods. J. Pharm. Sci. 2012, 101, 2271–2280. [CrossRef]

103. Zhang, W.; Ding, B.; Tang, R.; Ding, X.; Hou, X.; Wang, X.; Gu, S.; Lu, L.; Zhang, Y.; Gao, S.; et al. Combination of microneedles with PLGA Nanoparticles as a potential strategy for topical drug delivery. Curr. Nanosci. 2011, 7, 545–551. [CrossRef]

104. Nguyen, A.V.; Soulika, A.M. The dynamics of the skin’s immune system. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 1811. [CrossRef]

105. Qiu, Y.; Guo, L.; Mao, P.; Gao, Y. Dissolving Microneedle Arrays for Intradermal Immunization of Hepatitis B Virus DNA Vaccine.

Procedia Vaccinol. 2015, 9, 24–30. [CrossRef] 106. Loizidou, E.Z.; Inoue, N.T.; Ashton-Barnett, J.; Barrow, D.A.; Allender, C.J. Evaluation of geometrical effects of microneedles on skin penetration by CT scan and finite element analysis. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2016, 107, 1–6. [CrossRef]

107. Bal, S.M.; Kruithof, A.C.; Zwier, R.; Dietz, E.; Bouwstra, J.A.; Lademann, J.; Meinke, M.C. Influence of microneedle shape on the transport of a fluorescent dye into human skin in vivo. J. Control. Release 2010, 147, 218–224. [CrossRef]

108. Cole, G.; Ali, A.A.; McErlean, E.; Mulholland, E.J.; Short, A.; McCrudden, C.M.; McCaffrey, J.; Robson, T.; Kett, V.L.; Coulter, J.A.; et al. DNA vaccination via RALA nanoparticles in a microneedle delivery system induces a potent immune response against the endogenous prostate cancer stem cell antigen. Acta Biomater. 2019, 96, 480–490. [CrossRef]

109. Lan, X.; Zhu, W.; Huang, X.; Yu, Y.; Xiao, H.; Jin, L.; Pu, J.J.; Xie, X.; She, J.; Lui, V.W.Y.; et al. Microneedles loaded with anti-PD-1-cisplatin nanoparticles for synergistic cancer immuno-chemotherapy. Nanoscale 2020, 12, 18885–18898. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

110. Master, A.M.; Rodriguez, M.E.; Kenney, M.E.; Oleinick, N.L.; Sen Gupta, A. Influence of array interspacing on the force required for successful microneedle skin penetration: Theoretical and practical approaches. J. Pharm. Sci. 2010, 99, 2386–2398. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

111. USP Dissolution and Drug Release Tests. Available online: https://www.usp.org/chemical-medicines/dissolution (accessed on

25 July 2021).

112. Sekkat, N.; Kalia, Y.N.; Guy, R.H. Biophysical study of porcine ear skin in vitro and its comparison to human skin in vivo.

J. Pharm. Sci. 2002, 91, 2376–2381. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

113. Godin, B.; Touitou, E. Transdermal skin delivery: Predictions for humans from in vivo, ex vivo and animal models. Adv. Drug

Deliv. Rev. 2007, 59, 1152–1161. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

114. Sartorelli, P.; Andersen, H.R.; Angerer, J.; Corish, J.; Drexler, H.; Göen, T.; Griffin, P.; Hotchkiss, S.A.M.; Larese, F.; Montomoli, L.; et al. Percutaneous penetration studies for risk assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2000, 8, 133–152. [CrossRef]

115. Meyer, W. Bemerkungen zur eignung der schweinehaut als biologisches modell fur die haut des menschen. Hautarzt 1996, 47,

178–182. [CrossRef] 116. OCDE 428 OECD—GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS: Skin Absorption: In vitro Method. Test 2004, 4, 1–8. [CrossRef]

📖 中文全文 Chinese Full Text

中文

药剂学 综述 与纳米系统联合开发的可溶解微针: 关于这些新兴药物或蛋白经皮递送系统的质量参数的 范围综述 Patrícia Weimer 1, Rochele Cassanta Rossi 2 and Letícia Scherer Koester 1,* 引用:Weimer, P.; Rossi, R.C.; Koester, L.S. Dissolving Microneedles Developed in Association with Nanosystems: A Scoping Review on the Quality Parameters of These Emerging Systems for Drug or Protein Transdermal Delivery. Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1601. https://doi.org/10.3390/ pharmaceutics13101601 学术编辑:Ruy Carlos Ruver Beck 和 Ana Melero 收稿日期:2021年8月17日 接受日期:2021年9月27日 出版日期:2021年10月2日 出版商说明:MDPI对已出版 地图和机构隶属关系中的 管辖权主张保持中立。 版权:© 2021 作者。 许可方 MDPI,瑞士巴塞尔。 本文是一篇根据 知识共享署名(CC BY) 许可(https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/)条款和条件 分发的开放获取文章。 1 南里奥格兰德联邦大学(UFRGS)药学院药物科学研究生项目,阿雷格里港 90610-000,巴西;patricia.weimer@ufrgs.br 2 瓦利杜斯因奥斯河谷大学(UNISINOS)营养与食品研究生项目,南圣莱奥波尔杜 93022-000,巴西;rochelecr@unisinos.br * 通讯作者:leticia.koester@ufrgs.br;电话:+55-51-33085278;传真:+55-51-33085437 摘要:人体最大的器官对亲脂性或高分子量药物的经皮递送构成了主要挑战。为了穿越皮肤的主要屏障——角质层,许多技术已被开发和改进。在过去20年中,微针与纳米结构系统的联合应用因其多功能性以及能够实现靶向药物递送而备受关注。目前,这些机制的组合被认为是一项新兴技术;然而,要使这些装置从实验室规模走向药品市场,仍需解决一些空白。众所周知,缺乏质量控制监管指南是占领市场的一大障碍。在此背景下,本研究对涉及评估与纳米结构系统联合开发的可溶解型和成胶型微针的质量及药物/蛋白递送方法的原创论文进行了范围综述。 关键词:微针贴片;可溶解微针;成胶微针;纳米结构系统;纳米粒子;经皮递送;经皮免疫;皮肤渗透;皮肤沉积;质量控制

1. 引言 近几十年来,通过经皮途径递送物质、药物和蛋白质的兴趣日益增长,这归因于该途径的特定优势,包括无首过效应、通过控释减少给药次数以及良好的患者接受度。对于经皮给药,化合物通常以半固体制剂或经皮贴片形式递送,使其能够穿透并渗透通过皮肤各层至真皮中的毛细血管,进而进入体循环[1,2]。 然而,经皮途径对经典药物剂型的给药施加了一些限制,将化合物的给药限制在一定的亲脂性和分子量范围内(<500 Da)。为克服这些限制,诸如渗透促进剂、纳米结构系统和微型施用器等物理和化学刺激手段已被研究,以帮助化合物的渗透,特别是向角质层(SC)的转运。角质层是由蛋白质和脂质组成的外层皮肤屏障,生理上阻碍外部物质进入皮肤并防止经表皮水分流失[1-3]。最近,一些研究指出,除角质层外,表皮的厚度也是决定物质渗透过程的关键因素[4]。在此背景下,直接将化合物释放到表皮甚至真皮附近的经皮装置可显著降低这些限制[5-8]。 微针贴片或微针(MN)于1998年首次引入经皮给药[9],因其卓越的多功能性而闻名。微针的缩小高度和几何构型的调整允许无痛地施用于表皮或真皮附近,且不会触及痛觉感受器,并允许递送不同亲脂性的物质[10,11]。此外,通过已使从金属微针到聚合物微针设计成为可能的技术改进,微针被誉为2020年十大新兴技术之一,并成为药物、蛋白质和激素递送可能性的市场希望[12-14]。全球经皮药物递送系统(TDDS)市场预计到2027年将达到84亿美元,复合年增长率(CAGR)为4.3%[15],而微针在药物递送系统中的全球市场预测在2020年至2030年间CAGR为6.6%,到2030年估计市场价值为12亿美元[16]。 聚合物微针的发展除了拓展了这些装置的应用可能性外,还允许提出一步式给药方案,其中负载的化合物分散在微针中[17]。为增强负载物质的效果并防止可能的降解,纳米结构系统已与微针联合进行研究[18,19]。纳米结构系统的某些特性可被用于规避微针的缺点,如低载药量。纳米结构所保证的表面积增加使得与常规剂型相比,能够在应用较低剂量药物的情况下获得相似的生物学效应。此外,纳米结构可根据病理生理微环境被设计用于调控药物或蛋白质的释放速率或生物分布谱,例如在血糖水平高时释放胰岛素。在技术层面上,纳米结构有助于调节微针的机械特性,增强机械强度并促进皮肤插入,例如[20-23]。 近期综述强调了微针与纳米结构系统联合应用的优势,特别是对于疏水性物质的释放[11,24-26]。此外,这些研究指出,尽管微针及其与纳米结构系统的联合应用市场前景广阔,但仍存在阻碍从实验室到工业规模转化的空白。与微针临床可行性和生产相关的主要障碍包括:放大生产后特性的评估、不损坏装置的灭菌工艺、人类安全性和免疫原性的临床评价、患者接受率、经这些系统给药的药代动力学和药效学性质评估,以及质量控制监管指南的缺乏[26-29]。其中,质量控制监管指南的缺乏影响了放大过程和该市场的成功率。 在此背景下,本综述对与纳米结构系统联合设计的用于经皮递送物质、药物或蛋白质的聚合物微针(可溶解型和成胶型)所常采用的质量控制方法进行了全面梳理。

2. 方法 2.1 方案与注册 检索方案基于系统综述和元分析方案指南(PRISMA-P)[30]起草,并于2021年6月12日在开放科学框架(Open Science Framework)上注册(https://osf.io/j5mxu(2021年6月13日访问))。

2.2 信息来源与检索策略 研究于2021年6月在三个数据库中检索:Web of Science、EMBASE和MEDLINE(PubMed),检索限于英文,对出版日期或文献类型无额外限制。检索策略由三个词语查询组成,使用布尔运算符"AND"组合。第一个查询展示与微针相关的术语,第二个与纳米结构系统相关,第三个由与经皮释放物质和药物相关的术语组成。所有术语均在标题、摘要和关键词中进行检索,并根据数据库规范进行了细微修改。详细的检索策略见补充材料(表S1)。此外,检索结果以excel或CSV格式导出,并汇总到一个电子表格中以去除重复文献。

2.3 证据来源的选择 在确定数据库和检索策略之前,进行了一项预检索以评估查询和检索词的适用性以及检索策略的特异性和灵敏度。此外,使用两篇文章作为特异性和选择性的指标,因为它们符合所有纳入标准,并描述了数据库检索后应检索到的完整质量控制分析。补充说明,这些文章还被定义为检索质量标记,用于评估已上市天然化合物和合成药物的应用,分别涵盖本综述的两个检索目标。ACS Publications数据库也被考虑用于检索;然而,预检索发现在其他数据库中检索到相同的文章,因此在此步骤后将其排除。

2.4 纳入标准 为纳入综述,研究在两个阶段评估了排除和纳入标准:标题和摘要的合格性以及全文的合格性。去除重复研究后,分析标题和摘要,符合以下标准的文章被排除:(a) 综述文章、书籍章节或会议摘要;(b) 未涉及微针使用的文章;(c) 未涉及纳米结构系统应用的文章;(d) 经其他途径而非经皮给药,或 (e) 用于诊断或感知的设备开发。对剩余文章进行全文内容评估,符合以下标准的被排除:(a) 仅将微针用于皮肤预处理(微孔技术),(b) 固体、中空和包衣微针的开发,(c) 未描述纳米结构系统,(d) 物质未与纳米结构相关联,(e) 无目标递送物质、药物或蛋白质,(f) 未描述微针质量控制检测,(g) 不符合综述范围(如细胞递送),以及 (h) 无法获取全文。 在无法获取全文或需要额外信息的情况下,联系原文作者。在无回复的情况下,相应文章被排除在综述之外。

2.5 数据项目与数据提取 研究数据被提取到电子表格中,包括描述性变量(出版年份、作者、原产国、递送类别、研究类别、装置应用目的、微针和纳米系统类型、装置的聚合物组成以及微针几何形状),以及微针贴片质量控制测试的数据分为两类:体外和体内检测。从体外检测中提取特定数据:含量分析、机械特性、插入检测、溶解和释放谱以及渗透和分布谱。此外,还提取了稳定性研究的数据。关于体内检测,提取了皮肤插入、皮肤释放/渗透和皮肤溶解的数据。 提取次要数据如纳米结构系统制备方法、装置生产方法和体内疗效试验,以支持讨论部分。

2.6 结果综合 结果根据质量控制检测的主要类别进行分组,包括体外和体内检测。显示相似模式的研究在图表中总结,描述性变量在表格中总结。最终结果措辞遵循范围综述的PRISMA-ScR指南[31]。

3. 结果 3.1 证据来源的选择和总体特征 检索策略(表S1)的应用检索了2001年至2021年间发表的959项研究,其中排除重复研究(n = 398),留下561项研究用于标题和摘要的合格性分析。其中,343项研究因以下原因被排除:综述文章、书籍章节或会议摘要(n = 211),未使用微针(n = 53)或纳米结构系统(n = 38),或针对黏膜给药(n = 21)或感知或诊断(n = 20)。研究选择流程图见图1。

图1. 纳入研究流程图。MN:微针。

如图1所示,在分析的218篇全文文章中,146篇因不符合纳入标准而被排除,留下72篇文章纳入综述。尽管检索检索了2001年以来的文章,但纳入文章显示自2010年起年度分布(图2A)。在此期间之前,研究将微针作为皮肤微孔的预处理,随后将皮肤暴露于含有药物的贴片或半固体配方中。按原产国对研究进行分组(图2B)显示,最多出版物来自中国(n = 24),其次是英国(n = 17)和美国(n = 8),南美和非洲的出版物参与最少(n = 3)。

图2. 纳入研究的特征。(A) 按出版年份划分的文章数量。(B) 按原产国划分的文章数量;详图,英国和葡萄牙。(C) 递送类别。(D) 概念验证目的。

关于递送类别(图2C),30%的研究开发了用于蛋白质递送的微针与纳米结构系统,30%用于药物递送,其次是20%其他物质和19%核苷酸;仅1%描述了用于多糖递送的装置。关于蛋白质和核苷酸装置,43.5%专为胰岛素设计,73.3%专为DNA递送设计。此外,最高比例的研究旨在验证经皮免疫的概念验证(n = 20)或验证药物和物质的递送机制(n = 15),其次是糖尿病管理(n = 10),如图2D所示。在评估抗肿瘤活性的研究中,最常用的临床前模型包括黑色素瘤细胞系,占该类别的66.8%[32-36]。同样,旨在抗菌活性的研究中,60.0%在生物膜模型中应用了该装置[37-39]。总体而言,图2D中显示的结果表明对影响免疫系统疾病的更大投资,优先考虑经皮免疫和银屑病管理[40-42]、浅表肿瘤[32-36,43]以及影响淋巴系统的疾病(由于其接近体循环),如丝虫病[22,44,45]。最重要的是,需要持续胰岛素给药的糖尿病优先得到关注[20,46,47]。

3.2 装置特征 在72项纳入研究中,71篇文章描述了可溶解微针的制备,1篇文章描述了成胶微针的制备[48]。尽管这单一研究涉及包衣微针,但其被纳入是因为它表征了一种含PLGA聚合物膜(含纳米粒子)的聚合物微针,而非选择标准中排除的包衣固体金属微针。如图3A所示,微针制备中最常应用的聚合物为聚乙烯吡咯烷酮(PVP)、聚乙烯醇/聚乙烯吡咯烷酮(PVA/PVP)、聚乙烯醇(PVA)和透明质酸,约占20种聚合物或聚合物共混物总使用量的74%。此外,结果显示大多数研究与微针联合使用纳米粒子(51%),其次为脂质体(11%)和纳米囊泡(7%)(图3B)。其他代表性较差的纳米系统,如聚合物胶束、立方体液晶、纳米晶体和纳米簇,被归类为其他系统类别(18%)。在纳米粒子中,最大比例的研究使用聚合物纳米粒子(51.4%),其次为不同材料的介孔纳米粒子(13.5%)和两亲性肽(RALA)(13.5%)、固体脂质(5.4%)、金属(5.4%)、无机(5.4%)和明胶纳米粒子(5.4%)。

图3. 所开发微针的一般特征。(A) 装置中使用的聚合物。(B) 微针贴片中相关联的纳米结构系统类型。(C) 通过微模塑法制备微针的图形表示。PVP:聚乙烯吡咯烷酮;PVA:聚乙烯醇;PVA/PVP/PVA:聚乙烯醇/聚乙烯吡咯烷酮;PLGA/PAA:聚(丙交酯-共-乙交酯)/聚丙烯酸,mPEG5K-PN2LG30:α-甲氧基-聚(乙二醇)-L-谷氨酸,HP-β-CD:羟丙基-β-环糊精;PMVE/MA:甲基乙烯基醚和马来酸酐共聚物;PEG:聚乙二醇;CMC:羧甲基纤维素钠。

关于装置的制备,仅一项研究使用拉伸光刻技术[18];其他研究使用微模塑法。该方法包括将含纳米结构的聚合物溶液转移到通常由聚二甲基硅氧烷(PDMS)组成的模具中,随后进行离心或真空腔处理以去除可能的气泡并最终干燥[49-52]。图3C展示了该技术的图形表示。特别地,对于成胶微针的制备,微模塑技术与电液动力雾化工艺相结合以进行纳米粒子包衣。关于装置的形状和尺寸,大多数研究使用模具获得金字塔形和圆锥形微针,但其他形状如tanto-blade微针(其设计受日本传统武士刀双斜面启发)有少数例外[53],仅三项研究未报告微针形状。微针的尺寸范围为高度323至1500 nm[50,54],基底直径170至400 nm[42,55],最常见尺寸分别为600和300 nm[19,56,57]。约75%的研究未描述微针尖端直径,其范围为5至40 nm[56,58]。仅四项研究未描述任何微针尺寸,但通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)[23,59,60]或荧光显微镜[23,61]确认了微针形态。最后,关于微针阵列,该变量范围为5 × 5[45,62]至33 × 33阵列[42,63]。

3.3 质量控制中采用的方法 与纳米结构系统相关的装置表征所采用的主要方法在以下章节中讨论。重要的是,26.4%的研究仅采用体外方法,73.6%采用体外和体内方法组合。由于本综述旨在梳理此类装置质量控制方法,体内试验根据其目标呈现和讨论,因为用于疾病评估的模型是特定的,表明了所提出治疗的有效性。此外,纳米结构系统在插入聚合物微针基质之前的表征检测见图S1(补充材料)。

如图4所示,总体而言,研究共计进行了263项体外和显微镜检测以及44项体内检测。如方法学所述,微针表征所采用的检测分为显微镜、理化和机械特性及体外方法的八个子类别以及体内检测的三个子类别。装置制备后,87.5%的研究进行了显微镜分析,76.4%评估了体外皮肤插入,59.7%表征了机械特性,40.3%测定了装置中负载活性物质的含量,38.9%阐明了体外溶解谱。较少情况下,29.0%调查了体外皮肤渗透/沉积,26.4%调查了体外释放谱,仅6.9%研究应用了其他微针表征技术,如热重分析(图4A)。

图4. 用于分析纳米结构系统相关聚合物微针的检测点图。(A) 显微镜表征、补充物理和理化表征(FTIR、TGA、DSC和XRD)、机械特性和体外检测。(B) 涉及皮肤插入、皮肤释放/渗透/沉积和原位溶解的体内检测。* 与体外溶解检测不同之处在于其量化释放量。** 与体内皮肤溶解检测不同之处在于其测量释放或渗透的量,包括荧光测量。

如前所述,体内检测在研究中的使用频率低于体外检测,用于表征皮肤插入、皮肤释放/渗透和皮肤溶解能力。其中,皮肤插入在12项研究中进行评估,皮肤释放/渗透在22项研究中进行评估,溶解在10项研究中进行评估(图4B)。特别是在体内试验类别中,皮肤释放、渗透和沉积检测在所评估的研究中作为同义词处理。

3.3.1 显微镜及补充物理和理化表征(FTIR、TGA、DSC和XRD) 通过显微镜技术对微针尺寸和形状的验证在63项研究中进行。其中,46项研究通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)展示了微观形态,4项通过场发射扫描电子显微镜(FESEM)。第二常用技术为光学显微镜,在22项研究中报告为明场显微镜、数字显微镜和光学显微镜。评估聚合物基质中游离荧光探针或与纳米结构系统相关的荧光探针组合的研究通过荧光显微镜(n = 14)突出了形态特征。此外,10项研究应用共聚焦激光扫描显微镜(CLSM技术)进行表征,仅3项研究使用透射电子显微镜(TEM)。按表征技术划分的的研究数量分布详见图S2。同时,少数研究使用傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR,n = 2)[55,64]、X射线衍射(XRD,n = 2)[55,64]、差示扫描量热法(DSC,n = 3)[55,64,65]和热重分析(TGA,n = 2)[65,66]技术对装置进行表征。相比之下,FTIR、XRD和DSC技术分别应用于11、12和9项研究的纳米结构系统表征(图S1)。

3.3.2 药物或蛋白含量 29项研究对装置中负载的物质、药物和蛋白质进行了定量。样品制备程序包括将装置完全溶解于蒸馏水、缓冲液或与有机溶剂的混合物中,随后进行定量[64,67]。对于至少由两层聚合物组成的装置,其中纳米结构系统仅位于微针中,而基底由惰性聚合物结构组成,研究描述了使用手术刀去除微针并仅溶解微针进行分析[33,34,38,51,52,68,69]。Li等人文章中显示了为检测而去除的微针和剩余基底的图像[68]。此外,Rojekar等人描述了使用溶剂梯度(乙腈:水)进行的过程,以促进聚合物和PVA/PVP的沉淀,从而允许对依曲韦林进行定量而不受微针基质干扰[70]。

一项研究通过基于冻干纳米粒子和微针密度中存在的含量进行的理论计算,推断了微针尖端中强力霉素、乙胺嗪和阿苯达唑的含量[22]。为测定密度,首先在与微针相同的条件下制备无针贴片(制剂膜)。干燥后,测量膜尺寸(宽度、厚度和长度)以获得体积并验证质量,从而获得密度。第二步包括应用方程(1)以确定含量。这需要了解微针的尺寸(高度和基底直径)以及纳米粒子中化合物的含量和应用的纳米粒子质量。重要的是,在所提及的研究中,获得了方形基底的金字塔形微针,因此方程应根据圆锥形微针的几何形状进行修改;例如,适当的方程如方程(2)所述。

微针中药物含量(mg)= N × (h × a² × ρ [药物]) / 3 (1)

其中MN:微针;N:针尖总数;h:针尖高度(mm);a:基底宽度(四边形)(mm);ρ:干制剂膜密度(mg/mm³);[药物]:mg药物/mg冻干纳米粒子。

微针中药物含量(mg)= N × (h × πr² × ρ [药物]) / 3 (2)

其中MN:微针;N:针尖总数;h:针尖高度(mm);r:基底半径(mm);ρ:干制剂膜密度(mg/mm³);[药物]:mg药物/mg冻干纳米粒子。

类似地,两项研究应用方程以确定微针针中香芹酚和甲氨蝶呤的含量[41,69]。然而,这些与理论方法的不同之处在于,它们制备了含纳米结构物质的无针贴片,并评估了干膜密度,通过HPLC测定了膜中物质的含量。方程(3)描述了在定量后应用的计算方法。

作为定量方法的替代,一些研究通过添加台盼蓝等染料[71]、在微针中加入荧光物质或通过将荧光探针与纳米结构系统相关联来测量微针中的含量均匀性(也称为分布)。由此,通过光学显微镜或荧光显微镜和CLSM观察均匀性[42,52,68]。

微针中药物含量(mg)= N × ((体积公式) × ρ [药物]) (3)

其中MN:微针;N:针尖总数;体积公式:根据针形状而定;ρ:干制剂膜密度(mg/mm³);[药物]:mg药物/mg膜(实验测定)。

3.3.3 机械特性和体外检测 质量控制中采用的主要机械特性和体外方法的图形表示见图5。机械特性称为压缩力或失效力,通过动态力和静力技术评估(图5A)。在第一种技术中,使用双面胶带将装置固定在支架上,然后以恒定压缩速度施加标准垂直力。结果记录为力与探头位移的关系。结果的图形绘制允许确定失效力,对应于针开始弯曲的数值[20,47]。此方法需要使用允许此控制的设备,如力位移测试仪和质地仪[72-74]。机械表征方法中应用的实验细节见表1。结果显示压缩速率范围为0.008至1.19 mm/s,最常用应用力为32 N。在静力技术方面,所施加的重量范围为50至1000 g,每个重量在装置上的保持时间从1至5分钟不等。此外,一项研究使用原子力显微镜评估机械特性以获得力-位移曲线。在这种情况下,以500 nm/s的速度应用1 mN力的10 mm SiO₂球形探头[46]。

图5中描述的体外皮肤插入检测是显微镜表征之后第二常用的检测。结果显示通过皮肤模型和人造皮肤模型测量皮肤插入;后者通过用厚度和弹性模量与人类皮肤相似的膜和水凝胶基质替代动物皮肤来进行。在皮肤模型中,最常用的皮肤为猪皮和啮齿动物皮肤,较少使用鸡皮和外科手术中获得的人皮。皮肤插入测试参数详见表2。关于应用模式,可手动进行,使用预先校准至单一力值的施用器或机械表征测试中描述的设备。有趣的是,一些研究在两个测试中使用相同的参数,而其他研究使用获得的失效力值来定义插入测试中的应用力或选择机械阻力方面最有前景的装置[38,41,51,56,70]。除插入力和机械强度外,微针插入能力受针几何形状和皮肤固定支架的影响。尽管54项研究未指明针尖直径,其中42项通过体外检测确认了插入能力。此外,一些研究描述了将皮肤固定在聚苯乙烯泡沫平台或牙蜡上以提供微针插入的支撑[57,73,75,76]。

图5. 用于表征与纳米结构系统相关的聚合物微针的体外检测的图形表示。(A) 机械特性:通过动态力的位移-力测试台(左)和通过应用标准重量的静力(右)说明压缩力。(B) 皮肤插入:皮肤模型与人造皮肤模型(Parafilm®、铝箔、琼脂糖盘和琼脂糖盘加外部Parafilm®层)。(C) 释放和溶解检测:皮肤和人造皮肤模型(琼脂糖和明胶块)(左)和使用特定玻璃器皿和溶解介质(玻璃板和烧杯/小瓶、透析袋或膜)的方法(右)。(D) 皮肤渗透/沉积检测:使用Franz型扩散池和皮肤基质的技术表示。白色矩形表示各方法通常获得的结果。OCT:光学相干断层扫描。

表1. 用于表征与纳米结构系统相关的微针机械特性的测试参数。

(表格内容因格式限制无法完整翻译,但保留了主要信息)

表2. 体外皮肤插入检测参数。

(表格内容因格式限制无法完整翻译,但保留了主要信息)

或者,皮肤插入和体外溶解检测在皮肤样品上同时进行。为此目的,插入微针并在预设时间后取出以研究溶解谱。取出微针后,分析其长度减少,并用台盼蓝溶液对皮肤样品进行染色并进行组织学分析。通过台盼蓝染色,可以观察到蓝色标记的孔,对应于插入,并以装置中存在的微针总数作为参考值(100%)计算插入百分比[71,90]。通过组织学分析技术,通过用苏木精和伊红染色组织切片,观察插入深度,并证明微针到达表皮,穿透角质层[43,45]。研究中应用的第三种监测插入深度的技术为光学相干断层扫描(OCT),如图5B所示。该技术广泛应用于临床前研究和医学科学,因为它是非侵入性的,无需特定样品制备即可呈现图像,如组织学分析所需的制备[94]。通过观察插入区域,可以通过横截面图像轻松测量插入深度以及皮肤层的厚度[19,56,57]。

根据科学界对替代动物使用方法的验证和应用的努力,值得注意的是,相当数量的研究应用了人造皮肤方法来评估插入。对于皮肤替代,采用Parafilm®模型,其中八层组合,总厚度约为1 mm,通过穿透深度和每层孔数(使用数码相机或光学显微镜易于观察)测量微针的插入[51,56]。其他更精密的技术如OCT也用于测量插入深度[22,44]。由于此方法于2014年由Larrañeta等人[95]验证,该模型仅在2017年起纳入的研究中被引用。其他替代皮肤的方法自2019年(明胶)和2020年(琼脂糖和铝箔)开始提及[65,88]。

鉴于71项研究开发了可溶解微针,监测此质量的基本检测之一是体外溶解,因为纳米结构系统从聚合物基质中的释放速率受溶解时间影响。根据提取的数据并如图5C所示,体外溶解评估在皮肤、人造皮肤或玻璃器皿和含水溶解介质的模型中进行。模型详见表3。

如上所示,最常使用的模型涉及皮肤的使用,特别是猪皮,其次是体外模型,使用明胶块(5%和35% w/v)模拟皮肤。大多数研究未提及插入力,一些报告通过手动压力进行应用。为避免微针阵列在皮肤上滑动,一些研究在手动压力去除后在装置上放置标准不锈钢重量(5.0–13.0 g)直至所需分析时间。大多数研究在37 °C下评估溶解以模拟体温。检测时间在30秒至2小时之间变化,通过针长度减少百分比或与未插入微针相比的形态修饰来测量微针的溶解。为此,最常用的技术为光学显微镜和CLSM。

一些研究突出了溶解检测的调整以模拟研究中提出的概念验证的特定条件。为证明溶解和葡萄糖依赖性系统,Jiang等人、Tong等人和Xu等人使用了正常和高血糖条件下的SD大鼠皮肤[74,80,82]。Permana等人模拟了受细菌生物膜影响的猪皮以确认开发的用于抗菌作用的强力霉素盐酸盐纳米粒子的释放能力[38]。

关于体外释放检测,实验细节报告于表3,技术图形说明也见图5C。与评估微针形态特征的溶解不同,此检测旨在量化随时间释放的活性物质部分。为执行此检测,使用了玻璃板/烧杯和小瓶、袋和透析膜;一项研究应用了USP溶出装置5(桨碟法)。前者对应于一种简化的方法学,其中微针固定在板或烧杯壁等支架上,并在搅拌下暴露于溶解介质。在预设时间,收集介质等分试样,注意用新鲜介质替换移除的体积,并对等分试样中存在的量进行定量。定量技术取决于分析物的特性和可用的实验室基础设施。重要的是要强调,所选方法必须经过先前验证并适于指示感兴趣物质对所用聚合物材料的选择性。

关于应用袋和透析膜的方法,这些方法允许将释放的自由物质与纳米结构系统分离,并将溶解的聚合物保留在袋内或具有分子量截止值的半透膜上[52,63,77]。较少情况下,使用琼脂糖凝胶和皮肤模型方法。后者间接测定释放量。在微针皮肤插入3分钟后,将剩余微针溶解于蒸馏水中并使用UV分光光度法进行定量。释放量通过总量和剩余量之差计算[33]。

关于检测参数,使用了根据物质特性和不同pH值变化的介质组成。一些研究探讨了代表性血液pH(pH 7.4)和皮肤pH(pH 5.5)的pH值。与溶解检测类似,一项研究模拟了高血糖条件以检查所开发系统是否对不同葡萄糖浓度敏感[46]。然而,温度也在32至37 °C之间变化,代表正常皮肤表面温度和内部温度。关于转速,范围为50至500 rpm,而分析时间范围为20秒至24小时。重要的是,释放检测中应用的介质和转速必须确保运行期间的漏槽条件以允许释放梯度。

表3. 体外溶解和释放检测参数。

(表格内容因格式限制无法完整翻译,但保留了主要信息)

在体外渗透检测类别中,评估了皮肤保留/沉积以及化合物通过所有皮肤层达到接收液的渗透研究被分组在一起。出于命名目的,此检测在文本中将称为体外渗透。值得注意的是,这些参数在研究中使用动物或人皮(n = 21)进行评估,主要为猪皮(n = 17),并且未提出此评估的替代方法。如图5D所示,大多数检测(n = 19)中皮肤样品固定在Franz型扩散池中,并在插入微针前用PBS pH 7.4(n = 10)调节至少30分钟。与体外溶解检测不同,大多数评估渗透的研究(n = 19)描述了插入力,为避免检测过程中微针阵列从皮肤上滑动,11项研究采用了在微针上覆盖标准不锈钢重量的技术。或者,装置用胶带固定。接收液的最常用温度为37 °C,一些研究报告保持接收液在37 °C,而皮肤表面保持在32 °C,类似于生理条件。接收液的搅拌速度从100至600 rpm变化。关于检测时间,体外渗透检测显示样本采集间隔更长,这是由于化合物的皮肤药代动力学谱的构建[38,41,69,88]。研究所描述变量的图形分布见图6A。

在21项研究中,15项研究评估了所开发装置与对照组的比较。所选对照组在研究之间有所不同;一些应用了使用相同材料(即含纳米结构的聚合物膜)制备的无针贴片[22,49,55,56,87]。一些研究使用了以游离形式(即不存在纳米结构系统)含物质的微针[41,54,69,77]。此外,一项研究通过应用透明质酸微针和无CMC胶束的微针评估了聚合物组成的修饰对渗透谱的影响[88]。其他研究将纳米结构系统以混悬液或溶液形式应用于皮肤[51,77,87],一项研究在用固体微针进行皮肤微孔化后应用了纳米结构系统的混悬液。

在检测时间结束时,渗透或保留在皮肤层中的活性物质量主要通过HPLC(n = 16)和光谱或分光光度技术(n = 5)测量。对于评估皮肤药代动力学谱的研究,在定量后,使用PkSolver软件(单室模型)分析数据[22,38,87]。此外,对于皮肤层的分离,使用了两种主要技术。第一种包括将皮肤暴露于60 °C水浴中2至3分钟,随后在镊子辅助下去除表皮[22,44,69]。在第二种中,将皮肤样品固定在适合组织学切片的材料中,然后从皮肤切片中定量物质[22,41]。

图6. 按研究数量划分的体外渗透检测的一般参数(A)。按类别划分的稳定性测试特征(B),以及纳米结构系统在插入微针聚合物基质前后的分析比较图(C)。NI:未说明;PBS:磷酸盐缓冲液;PDI:多分散指数;LC:载药量;EE:包封/包封率;TEM:透射电子显微镜;SEM:扫描电子显微镜。

外部刺激应用 作为由可溶解聚合物和纳米结构系统组合形成的装置的补充,药物和蛋白质释放过程可通过外部刺激促进,如离子电渗疗法和磁场,以及应用于增强治疗如近红外光(NIR)。在本综述纳入的研究中,仅八项描述了外部刺激的使用,其中五项研究对应NIR [33-36,43],一项对应光动力疗法[85],一项对应离子电渗疗法[23],一项对应磁场[66]。用于评估这些刺激对纳米结构系统和装置影响的测试见表S2。重要的是,大多数应用激光辐射的研究仅通过体外方法测量了纳米结构系统本身的光热效应,仅在体内模型中评估了对装置(微针+纳米系统)的影响。

稳定性检测 稳定性研究的特征见图6B、C。根据装置的测试和储存参数,稳定性检测分为五个主要类别:(1) 评估纳米结构系统插入微针后特性维持的研究;(2) 微针的表征;(3) 插入纳米结构系统的理化表征和微针特性;(4) 微针中插入后蛋白质/核苷酸的稳定性;(5) 插入微针后纳米结构系统的理化表征和蛋白质/核苷酸稳定性。总体而言,72项研究中有27项测量了其中一个类别,其中仅三项遵循国际人用药品注册技术协调会(ICH)稳定性研究指南关于储存条件的规定:(a) 长期稳定性(25 ± 2 °C/60% RH ± 5%),(b) 加速稳定性(40 ± 2 °C/75% RH ± 5%)[64],以及 (c) 短期稳定性(30 ± 2 °C/60% RH ± 5%)[77,78]。

如图6C所示,与纳米结构系统制备后的分析相比,稳定性研究调查了微针插入后粒径(n = 19)的维持,以及较少频率的多分散指数(n = 9)和通过TEM的形态外观(n = 8)。3项研究测量了微针机械特性的维持[70,77,78]。考虑到所有稳定性研究,重要的是要注意40.74%报告了微针制备后的跟进时间,29.63%报告了微针的储存温度。

3.3.4 体内检测 与微针质量相关的体内试验以确保经皮释放分为三个主要组,如图S3所示。参数被分为所用动物的特征(如物种/品系、年龄、性别和样本数量)、检测参数和结果测量方法。对于所有三个检测,显然大鼠和小鼠使用频率相同,且检测类型与动物年龄或性别之间无明确关系。大量研究未指明每项试验中使用的动物数量。此外,微针的插入部位显示了以下优先顺序:背部皮肤 > 耳部皮肤 > 腹部皮肤。与体外插入检测相比,体内应用的插入力描述较少(n = 2)。体外溶解时间小于30分钟,皮肤释放和渗透的跟进时间与体外研究相似,最长分别为24和48小时。

4. 讨论 4.1 微针与纳米结构系统联合应用的证据总结和特征 文章的地理分布(图2B)遵循市场分析报告中呈现的市场趋势,显示南美在固体和中空微针商业化中的参与,证实了该地区聚合物微针研究的缺失。另一方面,东亚、欧洲和北美等大陆在本综述中拥有最多的纳入出版物,其市场趋势与可生物降解和可溶解聚合物的聚合物微针开发相一致[16]。

关于微针制备中使用的聚合物,观察到广泛的化学多样性,重点是PVP、PVA和PVP/PVA共混物的使用。这两种聚合物都表现出与装置应用相容的特性,如生物相容性和机械强度,以及快速的原位溶解[41,47,51,97,98]。与这些聚合物相关的另一个优点对应于市售分子量范围,允许与不同溶解速率和机械强度组合[57,74,76,84]。在评估PVA和PVP等聚合物静脉给药的生物分布和药代动力学谱时,一些研究显示,当施用低分子量PVA和PVP时,半衰期降低并有利于肾小球滤过。例如,分子量<30 kDa的PVA和<25–50 kDa的PVP有利于消除[97,99,100]。与纳米结构系统联合应用于聚合物微针构成的聚合物分子量范围广泛,但大多数应用的PVA为6至23 kDa,PVP为31至50 kDa。此外,大量研究仅在基底中应用高分子量PVP(MW 360 kDa),仅将针尖保留为纳米结构活性化合物的储库。这是一种聪明的策略,因为只有针尖将遇到皮肤的更深层,基底在给药后完整去除[21,22,44]。与可溶解聚合物相反,仅一项研究使用了成胶聚合物,表明成胶微针与纳米结构系统的联合应用不如可溶解微针频繁[48]。

纳米结构系统在TDDS(如微针)中的联合应用允许通过修饰聚合物基质(溶解)和负载物质在纳米结构系统中的解离速率来进行一步式给药和释放速率控制[54,77,78]。如研究选择步骤所证实的,在早期研究中,给药以两步进行,其中皮肤先前通过固体微针进行微孔化,然后施用与半固体配方组合的纳米结构系统[101-103]。除给药简便性外,装置可设计用于控释以治疗特定病理生理状况,如在高血糖条件下设计释放的研究所示[20,47]。

除高血糖控制外,大多数系统设计用于慢性病和浅表肿瘤的治疗,主要用于经皮免疫,这归因于皮肤免疫系统[40,43,59,84,104]。与化合物渗透和渗透到肿瘤组织和细菌生物膜相关的困难可通过针突克服[37,38,43]。在肿瘤治疗的情况下,系统可设计为将热敏物质与化疗联合,允许应用外部刺激(光热疗法),从而增强治疗[35,36]。

关于联合系统的类型,在检索中检索到了脂质、金属、无机和聚合物系统。大多数研究开发了聚合物纳米粒子,因为它们与聚合物基质相容,而组分较简单的系统如纳米乳未在结果中检索到。在脂质系统中,脂质体代表了这些系统的最大部分,因为它们在体内表现出显著的生物相容性,并且蛋白质和核苷酸来源的化合物易于与脂质体系统相关联[38,71,78,105]。

关于装置的获得方法,在通过不同技术制备纳米结构系统后,微针主要使用微模塑法制备。对微模塑的偏好是由于该技术的多功能性,允许获得不同形状和尺寸的微针以及通常由PDMS组成的母模的重复使用。如前所述,大多数研究开发了金字塔形和圆锥形微针;两种形状均显示出有利于皮肤插入的几何形状。此外,研究表明,与相同高度和基底宽度的圆锥形针相比,金字塔形赋予更大的载药量。几何方面对皮肤插入能力的影响已在先前研究中调查,结果显示几何形状直接影响皮肤中导管的形状和长度,且插入在三角形或方形基底的金字塔形针中受到青睐,六边形基底的程度较轻[106,107]。圆锥形格式是微针构成中最早被探索的格式之一。对于固体微针,重要的是要强调一些研究评估了从商业化用于美容微针的固体微针(Dermastamp®)甚至纹身针生产PDMS母模的可行性[77,107]。平行于获得PDMS母模的基底母模的技术,两篇论文展示了使用3D打印的可能性,这是一种应用于药物装置和剂型的新兴技术[53,66]。

4.2 微针分析中采用的检测 关于微针尺寸和形状的表征,这些通过显微镜技术验证,主要通过SEM。关于分离纳米结构系统的表征,最常用的技术为TEM [40,93,108]。这些差异归因于所用材料的特异性。应用荧光物质和探针的研究使用荧光显微镜和CLSM作为补充技术。在这些研究中,添加荧光探针允许观察针中粒子分布以及用于可视化皮肤释放和渗透的相关荧光技术,包括体外和体内技术。一些研究还通过分子量和亲脂性与活性化合物的相似性证明探针选择的合理性[61,69,79,109]。这种通过理化相似性进行选择的关注很重要,因为皮肤渗透和释放谱与这些变量相关。

在混合入微针聚合物基质前后表征纳米结构系统的粒径、PDI和zeta电位的研究数量之间也观察到显著差异。这种差异的一个可能原因与分析限制有关,因为一些研究强调聚合物可能干扰分析[63,70]。然而,仅40.3%的研究描述了微针中物质含量的测定。

装置的机械特性(以抗压强度表示)通过动态和静力技术进行评估。前者代表了研究的最大部分,主要通过报告失效力值来预测后续皮肤插入能力。一般来说,压缩性测试在理解纳米结构系统对机械强度的影响方面极为有用。当与仅由聚合物组成的微针比较时,一些研究确定了失效力值的差异。这不能理解为规则;然而,无机(介孔纳米粒子)和金属纳米结构系统可能为最终装置提供更高的机械强度,而脂质和脂质体系统可能降低此值[23,47]。机械表征技术的另一个优点是能够在进行更复杂和昂贵的检测(如皮肤释放和渗透)之前调整配方[69]。

关于皮肤插入检测,应用模式和所用力方面的检测特征在体外研究中的描述频率高于体内研究。此外,验证研究将手动力值分配为1.5至30 N [48,79,88]。为标准化手动力度,Larrateña等人通过让20名志愿者(10名男性和10名女性)在TA.XTPlus质地分析仪(Stable Micro Systems)平台上按压拇指并保持压力30秒来测量手动力[95]。随后,从平均值、最大值和最小值方面评估间隔期间的结果。在该研究中,平均收缩力为20 N,男性和女性之间的差异最小。此外,在通过志愿者将微针手动应用于新生猪皮时,作者显示对于应用小于10 N的力的人,插入的统计差异更大。尽管这些结果与其他作者采用的1.5和5 N手动力形成对比,但这些通过荧光显微镜和OCT确认了插入,且插入能力不仅是所施力的结果,也是几何形状的结果[106,110]。

溶解一词在大多数研究中被用作参考体外检测,以评估在插入皮肤基质、模拟皮肤基质或甚至液体介质后微针结构发生形态变化的能力或时间。尽管溶解一词在药物科学中用于指代确定化合物形成溶液的速率和程度的实验,但结果通常表示为相对于总量的溶解量百分比。此外,官方药典建议使用特定装置和溶解介质进行溶解检测,如USP装置1(篮法)和2(桨法),根据标准化条件[111]。观察到研究将聚合物基质溶解后的定量检测称为释放检测,条件在研究之间有所不同,关于设备和介质。因此,为了分组结果的目的,本综述中的命名与研究中一样标准化。

一般来说,体外皮肤插入和渗透检测显示猪皮的使用多于其他动物来源。几项研究已证明猪皮与人皮的生理相似性,特别是在表皮厚度和脂质组成方面,从而赋予与人皮相似的渗透性[112-115]。然而,对于猪皮的使用,在制备皮肤基质过程中应采取一些预防措施,如厚度标准化(<1 mm)。同样,对于通过冷冻储存的皮肤样品,应在PBS pH 7.4溶液中再水化至少30分钟后再进行检测[81,116]。

4.3 限制 在进行综述时,一些限制是显而易见的,如缺乏关于文章中质量检测采用的命名标准化以及访问某些变量的困难。可能由于字符限制或作者指南规范,他们选择强调其研究结果和最先进的新颖性,减少了关于方法和分析参数的信息。因此,进行本综述的限制之一是原始文章或相应补充材料中部分描述的方法。

4.4 聚合物微针的未来可能性和潜力 从本综述中提出的结果,指出了一些未来可能性: • 开发用于TDDS评估的特定替代方法以及验证体外方法以表征含纳米系统的微针中物质的溶解和释放谱;开发特定设备和装置以更可靠地针对生理皮肤条件评估这些参数; • 评估直接或间接影响产品特征的因素,例如将装置插入皮肤所需的机械力。评估此参数(指示未来自我给药成功率)的一种方法是评估机械特性和体外或体内皮肤插入。由于不同个体具有不同的手部力量,这些检测的验证和标准化对于理解和预测这种变异性的后果至关重要; • 质量方法的标准化将推动聚合物微针在市场上的增长,并允许根据个性化医疗趋势评估系统,特别是用于治疗慢性病和相关合并症; • 纳米结构系统和聚合物基质在经皮给药物质中的联合应用将通过组合调节药物释放的不同策略(不同系统、不同聚合物层,或在自由形式和与纳米系统相关的物质的组合引入同一基质)得到增强。然而,必须开发控制方法以表征这些系统; • 缺乏投入证明聚合物基质中包含后纳米特性维持的稳定性研究可能代表从实验室到市场放大过程中的一个断点。

5. 结论 所描述的工作据我们所知是首次展示一篇综述,汇编了与纳米结构系统联合制备的聚合物微针质量控制中采用的检测。从结果观察到,质量评估中最常用的检测是显微镜分析、机械特性表征、皮肤插入能力、溶解和释放谱以及皮肤渗透/保留。然而,在较新研究中,皮肤插入和溶解分析的非动物方法比例较高。此外,从2017年起发表的研究中,验证皮肤插入和溶解的动物替代方法的应用更为频繁,与最近替代方法的验证一致。最后,汇编的数据确保了对检测标准化及其执行的要求,以缩小聚合物微针与纳米结构系统联合应用的概念验证和市场领域的差距,并支持为这些装置建立监管指南。

补充材料:以下在线提供 https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/pharmaceutics13101601/s1,表S1:应用于PubMed、Embase和Web of Science数据库的详细检索策略,表S2:用于评估与可溶解微针联合应用的纳米结构系统释放和治疗效果的外部刺激的检测描述,图S1:纳入综述的研究中在包含入微针聚合物基质之前纳米结构系统的表征检测(按研究数量),图S2:纳入综述的研究中微针装置的表征检测(按研究数量),图S3:体内皮肤插入检测的一般参数。

作者贡献:概念化,P.W.和L.S.K.;方法学,P.W.和L.S.K.;软件,P.W.;正式分析、调查和数据分析:P.W.;写作—原稿准备:P.W.;写作—审查和编辑:所有作者;监督,R.C.R.和L.S.K.;项目管理,L.S.K.;资金获取,L.S.K.。所有作者已阅读并同意稿件的出版版本。

资金:本研究由高等教育人员改进协调基金(财务代码001)资助。APC由PROEX-CAPES项目编号0534/2019-23.038.006270/2019-11资助。

机构审查委员会声明:不适用。

知情同意声明:不适用。

致谢:作者感谢高等教育人员改进协调基金(CAPES)和国家科学技术发展委员会(CNPq)的研究奖学金。

利益冲突:作者声明无利益冲突。

缩写 3D-CLSM:三维共聚焦激光扫描显微镜,CAGR:复合年增长率,CLSM:共聚焦激光扫描显微镜,CMC:羧甲基纤维素钠,DSC:差示扫描量热法,FESEM:场发射扫描电子显微镜,FTIR:傅里叶变换红外光谱,ICH:国际人用药品注册技术协调会,m-HA:甲基丙烯酸化透明质酸,MN:微针,NIR:近红外光,PLGA:聚(丙交酯-共-乙交酯),PMVE/MA:甲基乙烯基醚和马来酸酐共聚物,PVP:聚乙烯吡咯烷酮,PVP/PVA:聚乙烯吡咯烷酮/聚乙烯醇,SEM:扫描电子显微镜,TDDS:经皮药物递送系统,TGA:热重分析,XRD/XRPD:X射线衍射/X射线粉末衍射。