1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
3.1. Materials
3.2. Synthesis of Zn2(BDC)2(DABCO)-Β-CD MOF
3.3. Drug Loading into the Zn2(BDC)2(DABCO)-Β-CD MOF Nanocomposite
3.4. Characterization
3.4.1. X-Ray Diffraction
3.4.2. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
3.4.3. Scanning Electron Microscopy and Transmission Electron Microscopy
3.4.4. Zeta Potential
3.4.5. Brunauer-Emmett-Teller Analysis
3.4.6. In Vitro Drug Loading and Release Studies
3.4.7. In Vitro Cytotoxicity Assay
3.4.8. In Vivo Wound Healing Studies
3.4.8.1. Animals and Ethical Approval
3.4.8.2. Wound Creation
3.4.8.3. Cytokine Analyses
4. Results
4.1. X-Ray Diffraction
4.2. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
4.3. Electron Microscopy
Histogram results from transmission electron microscopy (TEM) of the Zn2(BDC)2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposite (A) and drug-loaded Zn2(BDC)2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposites (B). Both graphs show a normal (Gaussian) distribution. The peak shifted from approximately 400 nm before loading to approximately 600 nm after loading, which may indicate an increase in particle size after loading.
4.4. Zeta Potential
4.5. Brunauer-Emmett-Teller Analysis
4.6. Drug Loading and Encapsulation Efficiency
4.6.1. In Vitro Drug Release Kinetics
A, Schematic representation of tetracycline release from the nanocomposite by methods UV spectroscopy and HPLC, showing the slopes corresponding to the rapid and sustained release phases. B, Schema tic representation of Indomethacin release from the nanocomposite by methods UV spectroscopy and HPLC, showing the slopes corresponding to the rapid and sustained release phases. C, Diagrams related to the release profile analysis in Model Higushi. In this model, the slope of the equation will be equal to the value of "K". D, Diagrams related to the release profile analysis in Model Korsmeyer-Peppas. In this model, the slope of the equation will be equal to the value of "n" and y-intercep will be "K".
| Items | Korsmeyer-Peppas model | Higuchi model | First-order kinetics | Zero-order kinetics |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 | 0.9043 | 0.9499 | 0.4926 | 0.8205 |
| K | 0.371 | 8.042 | 0.0189 | 0.563 |
| n | 0.8154 | - | - | - |
4.7. In Vitro Cytotoxicity Assays
MTT assay results in L929 fibroblast cells for Zn2(BDC) 2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposite (N), drug-loaded Zn2(BDC) 2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposites as a dual-drug-loaded nanocomposite (DDN), tetracycline-loaded nanocomposite (TDN), indomethacin-loaded nanocomposite (IDN), and pure drugs tetracycline (TETRA) and indomethacin (INDO). Cells treated with water for injection (WFI) served as the untreated control, and blank wells contained no cell line. All samples were incubated for 24 hours at 37°C.
4.8. In Vivo Wound Healing Efficacy
4.8.1. Macroscopic Wound Closure
Photograph of the mice on the sixth day after intervention. (A) Group 1, Zn2(BDC) 2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposite containing both tetracycline and indomethacin; (B) group 2, Zn2(BDC) 2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposite before drug loading; (C) group 4, tetracycline; (D) group 3, indomethacin; and (E) group 5, control group with untreated wounds.
Results of measuring inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokine levels in blood samples from mice on day 6 after completion of the designed treatment period. Group NC, Zn2(BDC)2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposite before drug loading; group DNC, Zn2(BDC)2(DABCO)-β-CD MOF nanocomposite containing both tetracycline and indomethacin; group TETRA, tetracycline; group INDO, indomethacin; and control, untreated wounds.
| Group | Day 0 Wound Closure (%) | Day 0 Weight (g) | Day 6 Wound Closure (%) | Day 6 Weight (g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOF-Tetra-Indo | 0.0 | 19.33 | 97.5 | 22 |
| Blank MOF | 0.0 | 19.66 | 72.4 | 22 |
| Indomethacin pure drug | 0.0 | 19.66 | 86.7 | 22 |
| Tetracycline pure drug | 0.0 | 19.66 | 72.7 | 21.6 |
| Control | 0.0 | 19.66 | 61.5 | 20 |
4.8.2. Effects on Inflammatory and Anti-Inflammatory Cytokine Levels
| Cytokine | Sample | MOF-Tetra-Indo | Blank MOF | Indomethacin Pure Drug | Tetracycline Pure Drug | Control |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFN-γ (pg/mg protein) | Try 1 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5.8 | 6 |
| IFN-γ (pg/mg protein) | Try 2 | 1.9 | 5.6 | 1.2 | 6 | 6 |
| IFN-γ (pg/mg protein) | Try 3 | 1.8 | 5.8 | 1.5 | 5 | 5 |
| IFN-γ (pg/mg protein) | Average | 1.9 | 5.466667 | 1.233333 | 5.6 | 5.666667 |
| IFN-γ (pg/mg protein) | SD | 0.1 | 0.42 | 0.25 | 0.52 | 0.58 |
| IFN-γ (pg/mg protein) | Range | 0.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| IL-10 (pg/mg protein) | Try 1 | 63 | 31 | 62 | 31 | 30 |
| IL-10 (pg/mg protein) | Try 2 | 51 | 31 | 51 | 31.5 | 31 |
| IL-10 (pg/mg protein) | Try 3 | 45 | 30 | 48 | 30 | 29.4 |
| IL-10 (pg/mg protein) | Average | 53 | 30.66667 | 53.66667 | 30.83333 | 30.13333 |
| IL-10 (pg/mg protein) | SD | 9.7 | 0.557 | 7.64 | 0.76 | 0.8 |
| IL-10 (pg/mg protein) | Range | 18 | 1.0 | 14.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |










