Innovative transdermal doxorubicin patches prepared using greenly synthesized iron oxide nanoparticles for breast cancer treatment

Figures & data

Table 1. Composition of the medicated gelling layer of the patches (surface area = 24.62 cm²).

Patch code	Volume ratio of (PVA: CP)	Volume taken from 1.5% CP (mL)	Volume taken from 0.5% PVA (mL)	Amount of DOX (mg)
M1	(1:5)	7.5	2.5	2 (conjugated in 300 mg DOX@St-IONPs)
M2	(1:1)	5.0	5.0	2 (conjugated in 300 mg DOX@St-IONPs)
M3	(1:1)	5.0	5.0	2 (free DOX)
M4	(1:5)	7.5	2.5	2 (free DOX)

Figure 1. FTIR diagrams of I) IONPs, II) St-IONPs, and III) DOX@St-IONPs.

Figure 2. X-ray diffraction of St-IONPs and DOX@St-IONPs.

Figure 3. %cancer cell viability using different treatments including plant extract, IONPs, St-IONPs, DOX@St-IONPs, DOX and FeCl₃.

Table 2. Physicochemical properties of M1-M4 patches.

Patch codes	Thickness Mean ± SD (mm)	Weight Mean ± SD (mg)	Drug content (%)	Surface pH	Percentage of swelling after 90 min (%)
M1	0.37 ± 0.01	0.28 ± 0.00	97.2	7.23	65.4
M2	0.38 ± 0.01	0.26 ± 0.00	97.4	7.42	58.3
M3	0.39 ± 0.00	0.25 ± 0.00	97.8	7.20	56.0
M4	0.39 ± 0.00	0.26 ± 0.00	97.6	7.10	68.0

Figure 4. The cumulative amount of DOX diffused per unit surface area across cellulose membrane (surface area = 1.77 cm²) from different patches (M1-M4).

Table 3. The diffusion parameters (flux and permeability) of DOX across cellulose membrane.

Patch code	Jss (µg/cm^2/h)	R^2	Initial concentration (Co) (µg/mL)	P = Jss/C0 (cm/h)
M1	11.21	0.9954	15.66	0.71
M2	14.85	0.9695	15.66	0.95
M3	2.98	0.9925	15.66	0.19
M4	3.71	0.9942	15.66	0.24

Figure 5. The postulated mechanism for controlled drug release from the patch.