Figures & data
Figure 3. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) (A) and Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) (B) characterization of curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs.
![Figure 3. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) (A) and Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) (B) characterization of curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs.](/cms/asset/ada1e85c-a2ef-409f-b853-bdd9627bc1bd/ianb_a_1408116_f0003_c.jpg)
Figure 4. Drug release profiles of curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs in PBS at pH 4.4 and 7.4. The data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3).
![Figure 4. Drug release profiles of curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs in PBS at pH 4.4 and 7.4. The data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3).](/cms/asset/2b643f5c-6d2d-4b09-a6c5-f258d56c4580/ianb_a_1408116_f0004_b.jpg)
Figure 5. Cellular uptake of free curcumin (A) and nanoformulated curcumin (B) after 24 h of treatment using confocal microscopy (DAPI-blue light, curcumin-green light).
![Figure 5. Cellular uptake of free curcumin (A) and nanoformulated curcumin (B) after 24 h of treatment using confocal microscopy (DAPI-blue light, curcumin-green light).](/cms/asset/cafc27cf-33cb-45cd-b3b4-a5fb5e5bb902/ianb_a_1408116_f0005_c.jpg)
Figure 6. Effect of different concentrations of free curcumin and nanoformulated curcumin for 24 h on peritoneal macrophage viability. Macrophage viability was determined by MTT assay. Data were expressed as the mean ± SD of 3 independent experiments. *p < .05 compared to 15 and 30 μM nano-curcumin.
![Figure 6. Effect of different concentrations of free curcumin and nanoformulated curcumin for 24 h on peritoneal macrophage viability. Macrophage viability was determined by MTT assay. Data were expressed as the mean ± SD of 3 independent experiments. *p < .05 compared to 15 and 30 μM nano-curcumin.](/cms/asset/198a1660-fc27-42b3-b90c-0140ee91909a/ianb_a_1408116_f0006_b.jpg)
Figure 7. In vitro polarization study. iNOS-2 (M1 marker) and Arg-1 (M2 marker) in M1 peritoneal macrophages treated with free curcumin and curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs in different concentration for 24 h. *p < .05 compared to M1 macrophages that were attained by stimulating macrophages with LPS/IFN-γ, n = 3.
![Figure 7. In vitro polarization study. iNOS-2 (M1 marker) and Arg-1 (M2 marker) in M1 peritoneal macrophages treated with free curcumin and curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs in different concentration for 24 h. *p < .05 compared to M1 macrophages that were attained by stimulating macrophages with LPS/IFN-γ, n = 3.](/cms/asset/27b9768c-38da-4a1d-8500-9ab58ec0d8b6/ianb_a_1408116_f0007_b.jpg)
Figure 8. In vitro anti-inflammatory study in peritoneal macrophages. expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines, TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 mRNA level at 24 h after treatment of macrophages with free curcumin and curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs, followed by stimulation with LPS/IFN-γ. qPCR was applied to measure mRNA levels. *p < .05 versus LPS/IFN-γ-treated group, n = 3.
![Figure 8. In vitro anti-inflammatory study in peritoneal macrophages. expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines, TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 mRNA level at 24 h after treatment of macrophages with free curcumin and curcumin-encapsulated HA–PLA NPs, followed by stimulation with LPS/IFN-γ. qPCR was applied to measure mRNA levels. *p < .05 versus LPS/IFN-γ-treated group, n = 3.](/cms/asset/1a169076-03d6-48f9-b445-04bb07985de9/ianb_a_1408116_f0008_b.jpg)