Innovative Nanocarriers for Plant-Derived Anti-Inflammatory Agents: Advances in Delivery Systems, Performance Stability, and Therapeutic Value

Fig 1: Molecular pathways of inflammation and modulation by phytoconstituents.

Fig 2: Types of Nanocarriers

5. STABILITY OF NANO-ENCAPSULATED PHYTOCONSTITUENTS:

Stability is one of the most critical determinants of nanoformulation quality and therapeutic performance. For nano-enabled delivery of anti-inflammatory phytoconstituents, stability must be considered at two interrelated levels: (1) physicochemical integrity of the nanocarrier system and (2) chemical stability of the encapsulated phytochemical. If either level is compromised during processing, storage, or biological transit, therapeutic efficacy may decline or adverse outcomes may emerge.

5.1.  Types of Stability Challenges

5.1.1. Colloidal Stability of Nanocarriers

Colloidal stability is a critical determinant of nanocarrier performance, as instability can lead to particle aggregation, sedimentation, or fusion over time, ultimately increasing particle size and altering drug release behaviour. This instability is strongly influenced by interparticle interactions, where insufficient electrostatic repulsion, typically reflected by low zeta potential values, promotes aggregation, while the absence of steric stabilization allows attractive forces such as van der Waals interactions to dominate. Environmental conditions, including fluctuations in temperature and pH, can further destabilize the system by affecting surfactant alignment or polymer conformation. Such physicochemical changes not only compromise formulation integrity but also reduce bioavailability, as aggregated nanoparticles are more readily recognized and cleared by phagocytic systems, limiting their ability to reach inflamed tissues (23).

5.1.2. Chemical Degradation of Encapsulated Phytoconstituents

The chemical stability of encapsulated phytoconstituents is another major concern, as many plant-derived compounds are inherently prone to degradation through oxidative, hydrolytic, and photolytic pathways. Polyphenols and flavonoids, for instance, are highly susceptible to oxidation, which diminishes their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity, while glycosidic compounds may undergo hydrolysis under acidic conditions, particularly in the gastrointestinal environment. In addition, exposure to light can accelerate the degradation of several phenolic constituents, further reducing their therapeutic effectiveness. Although nanocarriers are designed to provide a protective barrier, their ability to prevent degradation depends on the integrity of the encapsulating matrix, and any compromise in this protection can allow these degradation processes to persist.

5.1.3. Interactions Between Carrier and Active Compound

The stability of nanoformulations is also governed by physicochemical interactions between the carrier matrix and the encapsulated phytoconstituent, which influence both drug retention and release behaviour. In lipid-based systems such as solid lipid nanoparticles, gradual crystallization of the lipid matrix can lead to drug expulsion and reduced encapsulation efficiency over time. Similarly, in polymeric systems, incompatibility between components may result in phase separation, creating heterogeneous domains that promote premature drug release. These phenomena highlight the importance of understanding carrier–drug interactions at a molecular level and emphasize the need for careful formulation design and thorough characterization (24).

5.2. Strategies to Improve Stability

5.2.1. Surface Modification and Steric Stabilization

Surface modification is a widely employed strategy to enhance nanocarrier stability, particularly through the use of hydrophilic polymers such as polyethylene glycol (PEG), poloxamers, or zwitterionic coatings. These modifications introduce steric hindrance that prevents close particle–particle contact, thereby reducing aggregation and complementing electrostatic stabilization mechanisms. As a result, such systems exhibit improved dispersion stability across a range of physiological conditions and demonstrate prolonged circulation times by reducing recognition and clearance by the reticuloendothelial system.

5.2.2. Cryoprotectants and Lyophilization

Long-term storage stability of nanocarriers, especially lipid- and polymer-based systems, can be significantly improved through lyophilization in the presence of suitable cryoprotectants such as trehalose, sucrose, or mannitol. This process reduces water activity, thereby minimizing hydrolytic degradation and aggregation while preserving nanoparticle structure and encapsulated bioactive integrity. However, the success of this approach depends on careful optimization of formulation and processing conditions to prevent structural collapse or particle fusion during freeze-drying and reconstitution.

5.2.3. Antioxidants and Chelating Agents

Incorporating antioxidants and chelating agents into nanoformulations is an effective strategy to enhance the chemical stability of oxidation-sensitive phytoconstituents. Antioxidants such as vitamin E or butylated hydroxytoluene act by scavenging free radicals generated during processing and storage, whereas chelating agents like EDTA inhibit metal-catalyzed oxidation reactions. Together, these components help preserve the structural integrity and biological activity of encapsulated compounds over time.

5.2.4. Lipid Matrix Optimization

Optimizing the internal structure of lipid-based nanocarriers is another important approach to improving stability, particularly in systems such as solid lipid nanoparticles and nanostructured lipid carriers. The incorporation of liquid lipids into solid lipid matrices, as seen in nanostructured lipid carriers, reduces crystallinity and creates a less ordered structure that accommodates higher drug loading while minimizing drug expulsion during storage. This structural flexibility allows the system to maintain stability despite internal rearrangements, often resulting in better performance compared to conventional solid lipid nanoparticles.

5.3. Characterization of Stability

Comprehensive evaluation of nanocarrier stability requires systematic physicochemical and chemical characterization, as these parameters directly influence particle integrity, drug retention, and overall therapeutic performance during storage and administration. Standardized analytical techniques are therefore essential to monitor changes in formulation properties over time and under different environmental conditions (23).

5.3.1. Particle Size and Distribution (DLS & NTA)

Particle size and its distribution are critical determinants of nanocarrier stability and are routinely assessed using dynamic light scattering (DLS) and nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), which provide information on mean diameter and polydispersity index (PDI); a gradual increase in these parameters during storage typically indicates particle aggregation, coalescence, or instability within the system, ultimately affecting bioavailability and cellular uptake (23)(25).

5.3.2. Zeta Potential Measurements

Zeta potential serves as an important indicator of surface charge and colloidal stability, where higher absolute values generally correspond to stronger electrostatic repulsion between particles, thereby minimizing aggregation and enhancing dispersion stability in suspension; values above ±30 mV are often considered indicative of stable systems, although steric stabilization mechanisms may also contribute significantly in certain formulations (26).

5.3.3. Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC) and X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)

Thermal and structural characterization techniques such as differential scanning calorimetry and X-ray diffraction are widely employed to evaluate crystallinity, phase transitions, and molecular interactions within nanocarriers, enabling the identification of polymorphic changes, phase separation, or drug expulsion during storage, all of which can adversely affect formulation stability and drug release profiles (17)(27).

5.3.4. Chemical Stability (HPLC & LC-MS)

Chemical stability is assessed by monitoring the integrity of the encapsulated phytoconstituent under varying storage conditions using analytical techniques such as high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC-MS), where a decrease in peak intensity or the appearance of degradation products indicates chemical breakdown, thereby providing direct evidence of formulation instability (28).

5.4. Stability Under Physiological Conditions

In addition to storage stability, nanocarriers must retain their structural and functional integrity under physiological conditions, where interactions with serum proteins can lead to opsonization and rapid clearance by the reticuloendothelial system, enzymatic activity may trigger premature degradation, and variations in pH across different biological compartments can influence drug release behavior; therefore, evaluating formulations in simulated gastric fluid (SGF), simulated intestinal fluid (SIF), and plasma environments is essential to predict in vivo performance and therapeutic efficiency (29).

5.5. Regulatory Considerations for Stability

From a regulatory standpoint, stability assessment is a fundamental requirement for the development and approval of nanocarrier-based drug delivery systems, with agencies such as the FDA and EMA emphasizing adherence to International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) guidelines, particularly Q1A(R2), which outline protocols for long-term and accelerated stability testing under defined environmental conditions to establish shelf life, storage recommendations, and product quality; consequently, demonstrating both physicochemical and chemical stability in accordance with these standards is essential for advancing nano-phytochemical formulations toward clinical application and commercialization (30).

Accurate and comprehensive characterization of nanocarrier systems is essential for ensuring reproducibility, performance, and safety in nano-enabled drug delivery. The physicochemical properties of nanoparticles, including size, surface charge, morphology, and structural organization, play a decisive role in determining their biological behavior, stability, and therapeutic efficiency. Therefore, systematic evaluation using validated analytical techniques is necessary not only to confirm successful formulation but also to predict in vivo performance. This section outlines the key characterization tools commonly employed for nanocarriers designed for anti-inflammatory phytoconstituents (23).

6. CHARACTERIZATION TECHNIQUES FOR NANOCARRIERS:

6.1. Particle Size and Size Distribution

Particle size is a fundamental parameter that significantly influences the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic behaviour of nanocarriers, affecting cellular uptake, biodistribution, circulation time, and clearance pathways. Smaller nanoparticles generally exhibit enhanced permeability and deeper tissue penetration, while larger particles may be rapidly cleared by the reticuloendothelial system, highlighting the importance of precise size control during formulation (31).

6.1.1. Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS)

Dynamic light scattering is one of the most widely used techniques for determining the hydrodynamic diameter and polydispersity index (PDI) of nanoparticles in colloidal suspension. The method is based on the analysis of fluctuations in scattered light intensity caused by the Brownian motion of particles. A low PDI value, typically below 0.3, indicates a uniform particle population, whereas higher values suggest heterogeneity, which may compromise formulation stability and reproducibility. Due to its rapid analysis time, minimal sample preparation, and ability to measure particles in their native hydrated state, DLS remains a standard tool in nanocarrier characterization (25).

6.1.2.  Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA)

Nanoparticle tracking analysis provides a complementary approach to DLS by tracking the movement of individual particles under Brownian motion and calculating their size based on diffusion behaviour. Unlike DLS, which provides an intensity-weighted average, NTA offers number-based size distribution and allows direct visualization of particles in suspension. This makes it particularly useful for detecting polydisperse systems and identifying minor populations that may not be evident through conventional light scattering techniques (32).

6.2. Surface Charge (Zeta Potential)

Zeta potential is a key indicator of nanoparticle surface charge and plays a crucial role in determining colloidal stability, as it reflects the magnitude of electrostatic repulsion between particles. Systems exhibiting high absolute zeta potential values, typically greater than ±30 mV, are considered more stable due to reduced aggregation tendencies, whereas lower values may lead to particle clustering. Beyond stability, surface charge also influences interactions with biological membranes, protein adsorption, and immune recognition, thereby affecting biodistribution and cellular uptake in vivo (26).

6.3.  Morphological Analysis

Morphological characterization provides detailed insight into the shape, surface structure, and physical integrity of nanocarriers, all of which are critical for ensuring consistent drug delivery behaviour and predictable biological interactions.

6.3.1 Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)

Transmission electron microscopy enables high-resolution imaging of nanoparticles by passing an electron beam through ultra-thin samples, allowing visualization of internal structure, particle shape, and size at the nm scale. This technique is particularly valuable for confirming particle uniformity and verifying successful encapsulation or core–shell architecture in complex nanocarrier systems (33).

6.3.2. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

Scanning electron microscopy provides detailed information on surface morphology by scanning a focused electron beam across the sample surface, generating high-resolution images of external topography. SEM is especially useful for evaluating particle shape, surface smoothness, and structural integrity, as well as identifying defects such as aggregation, pores, or cracks that may influence drug release behaviour.

6.3.3. Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM)

Atomic force microscopy offers nanoscale surface analysis by scanning a sharp probe over the sample surface under ambient or liquid conditions, producing three-dimensional topographical images without the need for extensive sample preparation. This technique is particularly advantageous for analysing soft or delicate nanostructures and provides additional information on surface roughness, mechanical properties, and particle interactions at the nanoscale (34).

6.4. Encapsulation Efficiency and Drug Loading

Encapsulation efficiency and drug loading are critical parameters that determine the effectiveness of nanocarrier systems in delivering therapeutic concentrations of phytoconstituents. Encapsulation efficiency (EE%) represents the proportion of the active compound successfully incorporated within the nanocarrier relative to the initial amount used during formulation, whereas drug loading (%DL) indicates the quantity of drug present per unit mass of the carrier system. These parameters directly influence dosage requirements, therapeutic efficacy, and overall formulation feasibility. Achieving high encapsulation efficiency is particularly important for phytoconstituents, which are often limited by poor solubility and stability, as it ensures minimal drug loss during preparation and maximizes bioactive availability at the target site (35).

6.4.1. Quantification Techniques

The quantification of encapsulated phytoconstituents is typically performed using analytical techniques such as high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), UV–visible spectrophotometry, and liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC-MS), which enable precise measurement of drug content in both the nanoparticle fraction and the surrounding medium following separation methods like centrifugation or filtration. By comparing the amount of free drug in the supernatant with the total drug used, encapsulation efficiency and drug loading can be accurately calculated. Among these techniques, HPLC and LC-MS offer superior sensitivity and specificity, particularly for complex plant-derived compounds that may exist in multiple forms or undergo degradation (28).

6.5. In Vitro Release Profiles

In vitro release studies are essential for understanding the release behavior of phytoconstituents from nanocarrier systems under simulated physiological conditions, providing insight into how the formulation is likely to perform in vivo. These studies are commonly conducted by dispersing the nanoparticle formulation in an appropriate release medium, such as phosphate-buffered saline, and maintaining controlled conditions of temperature and agitation while sampling at predetermined time intervals. The cumulative release data are then analyzed using kinetic models, including zero-order, first-order, and Higuchi models, to determine the mechanism of drug release, whether it is diffusion-controlled, erosion-based, or a combination of both. For anti-inflammatory therapy, particularly in chronic conditions, sustained and controlled release profiles are highly desirable as they help maintain therapeutic drug levels over extended periods while minimizing dosing frequency and systemic side effects (36).

6.6. Thermal Analysis

Thermal analysis plays a crucial role in evaluating the physical state, stability, and compatibility of phytoconstituents within nanocarrier systems, providing valuable information about phase transitions and molecular interactions that may influence formulation performance.

6.6.1. Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC)

Differential scanning calorimetry is widely used to assess thermal transitions such as melting point, glass transition temperature, and crystallization behaviour, allowing researchers to determine whether the encapsulated phytoconstituent exists in a crystalline or amorphous state within the carrier matrix. A reduction or disappearance of the drug’s characteristic melting peak often indicates successful encapsulation or molecular dispersion within the carrier, while also providing evidence of potential interactions between the drug and excipients Shah (37).

6.6.2. Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)

Thermogravimetric analysis complements DSC by measuring changes in sample weight as a function of temperature, thereby providing insights into moisture content, thermal degradation patterns, and overall stability of the formulation. This technique is particularly useful for identifying decomposition temperatures and assessing the suitability of storage and processing conditions for sensitive phytoconstituents (38).

6.7. Structural Characterization

Structural characterization techniques are essential for understanding the molecular organization and interactions within nanocarrier systems, which directly influence drug stability, release behaviour, and overall performance.

6.7.1. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR)

Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy is commonly employed to identify functional groups and detect potential interactions between phytoconstituents and carrier materials by analyzing characteristic absorption bands. Shifts or changes in peak intensity can indicate hydrogen bonding, electrostatic interactions, or chemical modifications, thereby helping to confirm whether the drug is physically encapsulated or chemically associated with the nanocarrier matrix (39).

6.7.2. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)

X-ray diffraction analysis provides detailed information on the crystalline or amorphous nature of both the drug and the carrier system. The disappearance or reduction of distinct crystalline peaks of the free phytoconstituent in the nanoparticle formulation suggests successful incorporation into an amorphous or disordered state, which is often associated with enhanced solubility and improved dissolution characteristics (17).

6.8. Stability Testing

Stability testing involves systematic evaluation of nanocarrier formulations under various environmental stress conditions, including changes in temperature, humidity, and light exposure, to ensure that critical parameters such as particle size, zeta potential, drug content, and physical appearance remain within acceptable limits over time. These studies are conducted in accordance with regulatory guidelines, such as those outlined by the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH), to establish shelf life, storage conditions, and product reliability. Continuous monitoring of these parameters is essential to confirm that the formulation maintains its integrity and therapeutic performance throughout its intended lifecycle (30).

6.9. Biological Evaluation

In addition to physicochemical characterization, biological evaluation provides crucial insights into the functional performance of nanocarrier systems in biological environments. Cellular uptake studies, often conducted using confocal microscopy or flow cytometry, help determine the efficiency with which nanoparticles are internalized by target cells. Cytotoxicity assays, such as MTT or LDH assays, are employed to assess the safety profile of the formulation in vitro, ensuring that the carrier system does not induce significant cellular damage. Furthermore, protein corona studies examine the adsorption of serum proteins onto the nanoparticle surface, a phenomenon that can significantly influence biodistribution, immune recognition, and therapeutic efficacy. Together, these evaluations establish a direct link between formulation characteristics and biological response, which is essential for the rational design and optimization of nanocarrier-based delivery systems (40).

7. BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION: IN VITRO AND IN VIVO ANTI-INFLAMMATORY STUDIES:

7.1. Importance of Biological Evaluation

While physicochemical optimization is essential for designing efficient nanocarrier systems, it does not necessarily translate into therapeutic success unless supported by robust biological evidence. The ultimate goal of nano-enabled delivery of phytoconstituents is to achieve effective targeting of inflamed tissues, enhance intracellular delivery, and produce measurable suppression of inflammatory pathways without inducing toxicity. Therefore, biological evaluation serves as a critical bridge between formulation development and clinical applicability. Nanocarriers are expected to improve the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of plant-derived compounds by enhancing solubility, protecting them from premature degradation, and prolonging systemic circulation. These advantages often result in improved cellular uptake and sustained pharmacological action compared with free phytochemicals, which are typically limited by poor bioavailability and rapid metabolism (7). Consequently, both in vitro and in vivo studies are necessary to validate whether these theoretical advantages translate into meaningful anti-inflammatory outcomes.

7.2. In Vitro Anti-Inflammatory Studies

In vitro studies provide a controlled platform to evaluate the anti-inflammatory potential of nanocarrier formulations at the cellular level, allowing detailed investigation of mechanisms, dose–response relationships, and safety profiles before progressing to animal models. These studies typically involve the use of well-established cell lines that mimic inflammatory conditions and enable the quantification of specific biomarkers associated with inflammation.

7.2.1. Cell Line Models

A variety of cell culture models are employed to assess the anti-inflammatory activity of nanoformulated phytoconstituents, each offering specific advantages depending on the target tissue or disease condition. Murine macrophage cell lines such as RAW 264.7 are among the most widely used models due to their strong and reproducible inflammatory response, particularly in the production of nitric oxide and pro-inflammatory cytokines upon stimulation. Human-derived THP-1 monocytes and macrophages provide a more clinically relevant system for studying immune responses, allowing better extrapolation of results to human physiology. For dermatological applications, HaCaT keratinocyte cells are commonly used to investigate skin inflammation and evaluate topical nanoformulations. Similarly, Caco-2 intestinal epithelial cells serve as a valuable model for studying intestinal inflammation, permeability, and oral absorption of nanocarriers. In most cases, inflammation is experimentally induced using lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a bacterial endotoxin that activates immune signalling pathways and triggers the release of inflammatory mediators (41).

7.2.2. Key Inflammatory Markers Measured

The anti-inflammatory efficacy of nanocarrier systems is primarily evaluated by measuring their ability to suppress key inflammatory mediators and signalling pathways. Among these, nitric oxide (NO) production is commonly assessed as an indicator of macrophage activation, while pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), and interleukin-6 (IL-6) are quantified to evaluate the extent of immune response modulation. In addition, the expression levels of enzymes such as cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) are analyzed, as they play central roles in the inflammatory cascade. At the molecular level, inhibition of transcription factors such as nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) is often investigated, given its critical role in regulating inflammatory gene expression. Notably, nanoformulations frequently demonstrate greater inhibitory effects at lower concentrations compared with free phytochemicals, largely due to enhanced cellular uptake, improved stability, and sustained release characteristics (3).

7.2.3. Cellular Uptake Studies

Cellular uptake studies are essential for confirming that nanocarriers effectively deliver phytoconstituents into target cells, which directly influences their therapeutic performance. These studies are typically conducted using fluorescence-based techniques, such as confocal laser scanning microscopy or flow cytometry, where nanoparticles are labelled with fluorescent markers to track their internalization. Enhanced uptake of nanoformulated compounds compared with free drugs is frequently observed, which can be attributed to mechanisms such as endocytosis and improved interaction with the cell membrane. This increased intracellular accumulation is closely associated with improved anti-inflammatory activity, as higher concentrations of the active compound are delivered directly to the site of action within the cell (42).

7.2.4. Cytotoxicity Assessment

Evaluating the safety of nanocarrier systems is a crucial aspect of in vitro studies, as an effective formulation must reduce inflammation without causing damage to healthy cells. Cytotoxicity is commonly assessed using assays such as MTT, Alamar Blue, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release assays, which measure cell viability, metabolic activity, and membrane integrity, respectively. These tests help determine the concentration range within which the nanocarrier is both safe and effective. Ideally, nanoformulations should exhibit minimal cytotoxicity while maintaining strong anti-inflammatory effects, thereby demonstrating a favourable therapeutic index. This balance between efficacy and safety is particularly important for phytoconstituent-based systems, which are often developed with the expectation of improved biocompatibility compared to synthetic drugs (43).

7.3. In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Studies

In vivo studies play a vital role in validating the therapeutic potential of nanocarrier-based delivery systems by bridging the gap between in vitro findings and clinical applicability. While cellular models provide mechanistic insights, animal models offer a more complex biological environment that accounts for factors such as metabolism, biodistribution, immune interactions, and systemic toxicity. Evaluating nanocarriers in these models is therefore essential to determine whether improved physicochemical properties and cellular uptake translate into meaningful anti-inflammatory outcomes at the organism level. Notably, nanoformulations of phytoconstituents frequently demonstrate enhanced therapeutic efficacy compared to their free counterparts, primarily due to improved bioavailability, prolonged circulation, and targeted accumulation at inflamed sites (44).

7.3.1. Common Animal Models

A range of well-established animal models is employed to assess the anti-inflammatory activity of nanocarrier systems, each representing different aspects of inflammatory pathology. The carrageenan-induced paw edema model is widely used to study acute inflammation, as it involves biphasic inflammatory responses characterized by the release of histamine, serotonin, prostaglandins, and cytokines, allowing evaluation of both early and late inflammatory mediators. In contrast, the Complete Freund’s Adjuvant (CFA)-induced arthritis model mimics chronic inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, involving sustained immune activation, joint swelling, and tissue destruction, making it highly relevant for long-term therapeutic assessment.

For topical and dermatological applications, the 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA)-induced ear edema model is commonly used to evaluate anti-inflammatory effects in skin tissues, particularly in response to oxidative stress and cytokine-mediated inflammation. Similarly, dextran sulfate sodium (DSS)-induced colitis serves as a representative model for inflammatory bowel disease, characterized by epithelial damage, immune cell infiltration, and altered intestinal permeability. Across these models, nanocarrier-based formulations consistently demonstrate superior outcomes, including greater reduction in edema, decreased infiltration of inflammatory cells, and significant suppression of pro-inflammatory cytokines within affected tissues when compared with non-encapsulated phytoconstituents (45). These findings highlight the ability of nanocarriers to enhance the therapeutic performance of plant-derived compounds under physiologically relevant conditions.

7.3.2. Biochemical and Histological Markers

The evaluation of anti-inflammatory efficacy in animal models relies on a combination of biochemical and histopathological assessments that provide quantitative and qualitative insights into disease progression and treatment response. Myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity is commonly measured as a marker of neutrophil infiltration, reflecting the extent of acute inflammatory response within tissues. In parallel, levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 are quantified in serum or tissue homogenates using techniques like ELISA, offering a direct measure of immune activation. Histological analysis further complements these findings by enabling microscopic examination of tissue architecture, where parameters such as edema, cellular infiltration, necrosis, and structural damage are scored to assess the severity of inflammation. Importantly, nanoformulated phytoconstituents often show marked improvement across these indicators, demonstrating reduced tissue damage and enhanced resolution of inflammation. The sustained release properties of nanocarriers contribute to prolonged therapeutic action, which can reduce the need for frequent dosing and improve overall treatment outcomes. This combination of biochemical and histological evidence provides strong support for the potential of nanocarrier systems to enhance the in vivo efficacy of anti-inflammatory phytoconstituents (46).

7.4. Pharmacokinetic and Biodistribution Studies

Pharmacokinetic and biodistribution studies are essential for understanding how nanocarrier-based systems influence the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination of phytoconstituents in vivo. One of the key advantages of nano-encapsulation is its ability to prolong systemic circulation by protecting bioactive compounds from rapid metabolic degradation and clearance. This often results in an extended half-life and improved plasma concentration profiles compared with free phytochemicals. In addition, nanocarriers can preferentially accumulate at inflamed sites due to the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect, where increased vascular permeability in inflamed tissues allows nanoparticles to extravasate and localize more effectively. Surface modification strategies, such as PEGylation, further reduce opsonization and uptake by the reticuloendothelial system, thereby minimizing off-target distribution and enhancing therapeutic selectivity.

To investigate these behaviours, imaging and tracking techniques involving fluorescent or radiolabelled nanoparticles are commonly employed, enabling real-time visualization of biodistribution and tissue accumulation. These approaches provide critical insights into the in vivo fate of nanocarriers and help establish correlations between formulation design and therapeutic performance (31).

7.5. Comparative Performance: Free vs Nano-Encapsulated Phytoconstituents

A comparative evaluation between free phytoconstituents and their nano-encapsulated counterparts consistently highlights the advantages of nanocarrier-based delivery systems in anti-inflammatory therapy. Free phytochemicals are often limited by poor aqueous solubility, rapid metabolism, and low bioavailability, which necessitate higher doses to achieve therapeutic effects and may increase the risk of side effects. In contrast, nano-encapsulation significantly improves the physicochemical stability of these compounds, enhances their absorption, and enables controlled or sustained release, thereby maintaining therapeutic concentrations over extended periods. As a result, lower doses of nanoformulated phytoconstituents are often sufficient to achieve comparable or superior anti-inflammatory outcomes. Moreover, targeted delivery and reduced systemic exposure contribute to a more favourable safety profile, minimizing adverse effects such as gastrointestinal irritation commonly associated with conventional therapies. This improved therapeutic efficiency, combined with enhanced stability and prolonged duration of action, underscores the potential of nanocarrier systems to overcome the inherent limitations of plant-derived bioactive and maximize their clinical utility (3).

7.6. Safety and Toxicological Considerations

Despite the natural origin of phytoconstituents, their incorporation into nanocarrier systems necessitates thorough safety and toxicological evaluation, as nanoscale materials may exhibit unique biological interactions that differ from their bulk counterparts. Haemolysis studies are commonly conducted to assess the compatibility of nanocarriers with red blood cells, ensuring that they do not induce membrane disruption or haemoglobin release. In vivo toxicity is further evaluated through histopathological examination of major organs such as the liver, kidneys, spleen, and lungs to detect any signs of inflammation, necrosis, or structural damage. Biochemical markers, including liver enzymes (ALT, AST) and kidney function indicators (creatinine, urea), are also measured to monitor systemic toxicity. Importantly, factors such as particle size, surface charge, and composition play a significant role in determining the toxicity profile of nanocarriers, influencing cellular uptake, immune response, and biodistribution. Therefore, careful optimization of these parameters is essential to ensure that nanocarrier systems remain biocompatible while delivering enhanced therapeutic benefits (42).

7.7. Critical Discussion Points

A critical analysis of current research trends reveals that nanocarrier-based delivery systems consistently enhance the anti-inflammatory efficacy of phytoconstituents by improving solubility, protecting bioactive molecules from degradation, and facilitating targeted delivery to inflamed tissues. These advantages translate into improved pharmacokinetic profiles, greater therapeutic efficiency, and reduced dosing requirements. However, despite these promising outcomes, several challenges remain. Many preclinical studies rely on simplified animal models that may not fully capture the complexity of human inflammatory diseases, thereby limiting the predictive value of these findings. Additionally, there is a lack of comprehensive long-term toxicity data, particularly concerning repeated dosing and chronic exposure to nanomaterials.

Another significant limitation is the absence of standardized protocols for evaluating nanocarrier performance, which makes it difficult to compare results across different studies. Variations in experimental design, characterization methods, and biological assays often lead to inconsistencies in reported outcomes. Furthermore, although numerous nanoformulations have demonstrated strong efficacy in preclinical settings, their translation into clinical applications remains limited due to regulatory challenges, scalability issues, and insufficient clinical validation. Addressing these gaps will require a more integrated approach that combines advanced formulation strategies with standardized evaluation methods and robust clinical studies, ultimately enabling the successful translation of nano-enabled phytoconstituents into practical therapeutic interventions (46).

8. CLINICAL TRANSLATION, CHALLENGES, AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS:

8.1. Why Clinical Translation Matters

Nanocarrier-based delivery systems for phytoconstituents have demonstrated substantial promise in preclinical research, particularly in terms of enhancing solubility, improving chemical stability, and increasing the bioavailability of poorly water-soluble plant-derived compounds. These advantages often translate into superior anti-inflammatory effects in both in vitro models and animal studies, where nanoformulations consistently outperform their non-encapsulated counterparts. Despite these encouraging findings, only a limited number of such systems have successfully advanced to clinical evaluation or therapeutic use. This discrepancy between laboratory success and clinical application is commonly referred to as the “translational bottleneck,” a major challenge in the field of nanomedicine.

The transition from experimental research to clinical practice requires overcoming a complex set of scientific, technological, regulatory, and economic barriers. In addition to demonstrating efficacy, nanoformulations must meet stringent requirements related to safety, reproducibility, scalability, and quality control. Furthermore, clinical translation demands a clear understanding of pharmacokinetics, long-term toxicity, and patient-specific responses, all of which extend beyond the scope of conventional preclinical studies. Addressing these multifaceted challenges is essential for realizing the full therapeutic potential of nano-enabled phytoconstituents (Patra et al., 2018).

8.2. Key Barriers to Clinical Translation

8.2.1. Complexity of Phytoconstituents

One of the fundamental challenges in translating nano-formulated phytoconstituents into clinical applications arises from the intrinsic complexity of plant-derived compounds. Unlike synthetic drugs, which typically consist of single, well-defined molecules, phytoconstituents often exist as complex mixtures containing multiple bioactive components that may act synergistically. This compositional variability can lead to inconsistencies in pharmacological activity and therapeutic outcomes. Additionally, factors such as geographical origin, cultivation conditions, harvesting methods, and extraction processes can introduce significant batch-to-batch variability, complicating standardization efforts. From a regulatory perspective, precise identification and quantification of active components are essential for ensuring quality, safety, and efficacy. However, achieving such characterization is particularly challenging for multi-component herbal extracts. These limitations create significant hurdles in meeting the stringent requirements imposed by regulatory authorities, ultimately slowing the progression of nano-phytopharmaceuticals toward clinical approval (47).

8.2.2. Scale-Up Challenges

Another major barrier to clinical translation is the difficulty associated with scaling up nanocarrier production from laboratory to industrial levels. Formulation methods that perform well under controlled laboratory conditions often encounter reproducibility issues when applied to large-scale manufacturing. Variations in process parameters can lead to changes in particle size, distribution, encapsulation efficiency, and overall formulation stability. Maintaining batch-to-batch consistency is particularly challenging for nanocarrier systems, where slight deviations in preparation conditions can significantly impact product quality. Many nanofabrication techniques require specialized equipment and controlled environments, increasing production costs and limiting feasibility for commercial manufacturing. Techniques such as high-pressure homogenization and micro fluidization, although promising for scale-up, must undergo rigorous validation to comply with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards. The lack of standardized, scalable production methods remains a critical bottleneck in translating nanoformulations into clinically viable products (48).

8.2.3. Stability and Shelf Life

Although nano-encapsulation enhances the short-term stability of phytoconstituents by protecting them from environmental degradation, ensuring long-term stability during storage remains a significant challenge. Lipid-based nanocarriers, such as solid lipid nanoparticles, may undergo polymorphic transitions over time, leading to structural rearrangements that can expel the encapsulated drug. Similarly, polymeric systems may experience degradation or changes in molecular structure, which can alter drug release profiles and reduce therapeutic efficacy. Physical instability, including aggregation and sedimentation, can further compromise formulation performance by affecting particle size distribution and bioavailability. For pharmaceutical applications, products must meet strict stability requirements defined by International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) guidelines, including long-term and accelerated stability studies under controlled environmental conditions. However, many nanoformulations have yet to demonstrate adequate stability profiles to satisfy these regulatory expectations, limiting their progression toward commercialization (30).

8.2.4. Safety and Toxicity Concerns

The incorporation of phytoconstituents into nanocarrier systems introduces new considerations regarding safety and toxicity, as nanoscale materials often exhibit unique biological interactions that differ from their bulk counterparts. While many plant-derived compounds are generally regarded as safe in their conventional forms, nano-encapsulation can alter their biodistribution, leading to accumulation in organs such as the liver, spleen, or lungs. This raises concerns about potential long-term toxicity, particularly with repeated or chronic exposure. In addition, nanoparticles may interact with the immune system in unpredictable ways, potentially triggering inflammatory responses or immunogenic reactions. Issues such as oxidative stress, cellular damage, and interference with normal physiological processes must also be carefully evaluated. Regulatory agencies therefore require comprehensive toxicological assessments, including studies on acute and chronic toxicity, genotoxicity, immunotoxicity, and reproductive toxicity. The lack of extensive long-term safety data remains a major obstacle in advancing nano-phytopharmaceuticals to clinical use (49).

8.2.5. Regulatory Uncertainty

Regulatory challenges represent one of the most complex barriers in the clinical translation of nanocarrier-based systems. Nanomedicines often do not fit neatly into existing regulatory categories, as they may exhibit characteristics of drugs, biologics, and medical devices simultaneously. This ambiguity creates uncertainty in the approval process and complicates the development of standardized evaluation criteria. Major regulatory bodies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) require extensive documentation, including detailed physicochemical characterization, evidence of manufacturing reproducibility, comprehensive stability data, and robust preclinical and clinical safety profiles. However, specific regulatory frameworks tailored to nano-phytopharmaceuticals are still evolving, resulting in inconsistencies and delays in approval pathways. The absence of clear guidelines not only increases development timelines but also raises the cost and complexity of bringing these products to market. Addressing these regulatory gaps through harmonized standards and clearer guidance will be essential for facilitating the clinical translation of nanocarrier-based phytoconstituents (50).

8.3. Clinical Evidence So Far

Despite the extensive preclinical success of nanocarrier-based delivery systems for phytoconstituents, their progression into clinical evaluation remains relatively limited. Only a small number of nanoformulated plant-derived compounds have entered human studies, and even fewer have advanced to late-stage clinical trials. Among the most investigated examples, curcumin-based nanoformulations have shown improved bioavailability and enhanced therapeutic response in inflammatory conditions, including arthritis and metabolic disorders, where conventional curcumin formulations often fail due to poor absorption (51). Similarly, resveratrol-loaded nanocarriers have demonstrated improved pharmacokinetic profiles and anti-inflammatory effects in early-phase studies targeting metabolic inflammation and cardiovascular risk. Although these findings are encouraging, most available clinical data are derived from small-scale or short-duration studies, which limits their generalizability. Large, well-controlled clinical trials are still lacking, making it difficult to establish definitive conclusions regarding long-term efficacy, optimal dosing strategies, and safety profiles. This gap underscores the need for more rigorous clinical validation before nano-phytopharmaceuticals can be fully integrated into mainstream therapeutic practice.

8.4. Strategies to Overcome Translational Barriers

Addressing the challenges associated with clinical translation requires a multifaceted approach that integrates advances in formulation science, manufacturing, and regulatory strategy. One of the most effective starting points is the standardization of plant-derived materials, either by using purified phytoconstituents or well-characterized extracts with consistent chemical profiles, thereby reducing variability and improving reproducibility across batches. In parallel, the adoption of Quality by Design (QbD) principles allows for systematic identification and control of critical material attributes and process parameters, ensuring that nanocarrier systems meet predefined quality standards throughout development and scale-up. Emerging manufacturing technologies, such as microfluidic platforms and continuous processing systems, offer additional advantages by enabling precise control over particle formation and improving batch-to-batch consistency at larger scales. Furthermore, proactive engagement with regulatory authorities during early stages of development can help clarify expectations, streamline approval pathways, and reduce delays associated with compliance uncertainties. Together, these strategies create a more structured and predictable framework for advancing nano-enabled phytoconstituents from experimental research to clinically viable products (52).

8.5. Ethical and Economic Considerations

Beyond scientific and regulatory challenges, the successful implementation of nano-herbal therapies also depends on addressing ethical and economic factors that influence accessibility and real-world applicability. While nanocarrier systems offer clear therapeutic advantages, their development and production often involve sophisticated technologies and high manufacturing costs, which may limit affordability, particularly in low- and middle-income regions where traditional herbal medicine is most widely used. This creates a paradox in which advanced formulations derived from natural products may become inaccessible to the very populations that rely on them. In addition, ethical considerations related to patient safety, transparency in clinical evaluation, and equitable distribution of healthcare innovations must be carefully addressed. Ensuring that nano-phytopharmaceuticals are supported by robust clinical evidence and are priced in a manner that promotes accessibility will be critical for their broader acceptance and integration into healthcare systems. Balancing innovation with affordability remains a key challenge that must be considered alongside scientific advancement (50).

8.6. Future Perspectives

Looking ahead, the future of nano-enabled phytotherapy will depend on a deeper understanding of how nanocarriers interact with biological systems at the molecular and cellular levels, particularly in the context of chronic inflammation where long-term treatment is often required. Generating comprehensive safety data, including studies on repeated dosing and long-term exposure, will be essential for building confidence among clinicians and regulatory authorities. Progress in this field will also rely heavily on interdisciplinary collaboration, bringing together expertise from pharmacology, materials science, nanotechnology, and clinical medicine to design more effective and reliable delivery systems. At the same time, integrating traditional medicinal knowledge with modern nanotechnological approaches offers a unique opportunity to develop therapies that are both scientifically validated and culturally relevant. Although significant challenges remain, continued advancements in formulation strategies, analytical techniques, and regulatory frameworks suggest that nanocarrier-based delivery of phytoconstituents has the potential to transform plant-derived anti-inflammatory therapies into clinically dependable and widely accessible treatment options (44).

9. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE OUTLOOK:

9.1. Overall Conclusion

Over the past decade, nanocarrier-based strategies have reshaped how plant-derived anti-inflammatory compounds are viewed in pharmaceutical research. Phytoconstituents such as polyphenols, flavonoids, alkaloids, and terpenoids have long been recognized for their ability to regulate inflammatory pathways, including cytokine signalling, oxidative stress, and enzyme-mediated cascades. However, their transition into effective therapeutic agents has been consistently hindered by practical limitations, particularly poor aqueous solubility, rapid metabolic degradation, and insufficient bioavailability. The introduction of nanotechnology into this space has not merely offered incremental improvement but has fundamentally altered the delivery landscape. By embedding these bioactive within engineered carriers—ranging from polymeric nanoparticles and lipid-based systems to vesicular and hybrid platforms—it has become possible to control how, where, and for how long these compounds act within the body. What emerges from the collective body of research is a clear pattern: when appropriately designed, nanocarriers do not simply transport phytoconstituents but actively enhance their pharmacological relevance, enabling measurable and sustained anti-inflammatory responses in biological systems.

9.2. Key Takeaways from the Review

Several consistent insights can be drawn from the current literature. First, formulation design is not a secondary consideration but a central determinant of therapeutic performance; subtle variations in particle size, surface characteristics, and carrier composition can significantly influence cellular uptake, tissue distribution, and interaction with immune pathways. Second, stability—both of the carrier and the encapsulated compound—emerges as a critical factor that underpins efficacy, as even minor degradation or aggregation can compromise biological outcomes. Third, across a wide range of experimental models, nanoformulated phytoconstituents repeatedly demonstrate superior activity compared with their free forms, often achieving enhanced effects at reduced doses due to improved bioavailability and controlled release behaviour. At the same time, it becomes evident that progress at the preclinical level has not been matched by clinical advancement, with relatively few formulations progressing beyond early-stage evaluation. This imbalance highlights the need to shift focus from proof-of-concept studies toward translationally relevant research that addresses real-world constraints.

9.3. Current Gaps in the Field

Despite the promising trajectory of this field, several unresolved issues continue to limit its maturation. One of the most significant concerns is the lack of comprehensive long-term safety data, particularly regarding repeated exposure to nanomaterials and their potential accumulation within biological systems. In addition, the absence of standardized methodologies for evaluating nano-phytopharmaceuticals makes it difficult to compare findings across studies, leading to fragmentation in the evidence base. Another challenge lies in the variability of plant-derived materials themselves, where differences in source, extraction, and composition can influence both formulation behaviour and therapeutic response. Furthermore, while small-animal models provide useful initial insights, they often fail to replicate the complexity of human inflammatory diseases, underscoring the need for more advanced preclinical models and well-designed clinical investigations. Addressing these gaps will require a more rigorous and harmonized approach to research, where reproducibility and validation are prioritized alongside innovation.

9.4. Future Outlook

Looking forward, the evolution of nano-enabled phytotherapy is likely to be shaped by both technological refinement and conceptual shifts in how these systems are designed. There is growing interest in developing “smart” nanocarriers capable of responding to specific biological cues—such as pH changes, enzymatic activity, or oxidative stress—allowing for site-specific and condition-triggered drug release. Such approaches could be particularly valuable in chronic inflammatory disorders, where localized and sustained intervention is required. At the same time, advances in precision medicine are opening new possibilities for tailoring nanoformulations to individual patient profiles, taking into account variations in disease pathology and immune response. On the manufacturing side, innovations in scalable production techniques, including microfluidics and continuous processing, may help bridge the gap between laboratory feasibility and industrial applicability. Equally important is the need for closer collaboration across disciplines, as meaningful progress will depend on integrating expertise from pharmacology, materials science, clinical research, and even traditional medicine systems. As regulatory frameworks continue to evolve, clearer guidelines specific to nano-phytopharmaceuticals could further accelerate development and approval processes. Together, these directions suggest that the field is moving toward more sophisticated, reliable, and clinically relevant solutions.

9.5. Closing Statement

The convergence of nanotechnology and phytotherapy represents more than a technical advancement; it reflects a broader shift toward rethinking how natural compounds can be translated into modern therapeutic systems. While challenges related to safety, standardization, and regulatory approval remain substantial, the progress achieved so far indicates that these barriers are not insurmountable. With continued interdisciplinary effort and a stronger emphasis on translational research, nanocarrier-based delivery of anti-inflammatory phytoconstituents has the potential to evolve from an experimental concept into a practical and globally impactful treatment strategy, particularly in addressing chronic inflammatory diseases where current therapies often fall short.

REFERENCES

1. Vonk J;, Stevens LA;, Van Dongen HP;, Zhu W, Van Boxtel J, Vonk LA, et al. Mechanically Derived Tissue Stromal Vascular Fraction Acts Anti-inflammatory on TNF Alpha-Stimulated Chondrocytes In Vitro. Bioeng 2022, Vol 9, Page 345 [Internet]. 2022 Jul 27 [cited 2026 Apr 25];9(8):345. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/9/8/345/htm
2. Ghazanfari T, Salehi MR, Namaki S, Arabkheradmand J, Rostamian A, Rajabnia Chenary M, et al. Interpretation of Hematological, Biochemical, and Immunological Findings of COVID-19 Disease: Biomarkers Associated with Severity and Mortality. Iran J Allergy, Asthma Immunol [Internet]. 2021 Feb 14 [cited 2026 Apr 25];20(1):46–66. Available from: https://publish.kne-publishing.com/index.php/IJAAI/article/view/5412
3. Yao Y, Jiang P, Chao BN, Cagdas D, Kubo S, Balasubramaniyam A, et al. GIMAP6 regulates autophagy, immune competence, and inflammation in mice and humans. J Exp Med [Internet]. 2022 Jun 6 [cited 2026 Apr 25];219(6). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1084/jem.20201405
4. Meizlish ML, Franklin RA, Zhou X, Medzhitov R. Tissue Homeostasis and Inflammation. Annu Rev Immunol [Internet]. 2021 Apr 26 [cited 2026 Apr 25];39(Volume 39, 2021):557–81. Available from: https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-immunol-061020-053734
5. Yang Y, Liu Y, Wang Y, Chao Y, Zhang J, Jia Y, et al. Regulation of SIRT1 and Its Roles in Inflammation. Front Immunol [Internet]. 2022 Mar 11 [cited 2026 Apr 25];13:831168. Available from: www.frontiersin.org
6. Hani U, Choudhary VT, Ghazwani M, Alghazwani Y, Osmani RAM, Kulkarni GS, et al. Nanocarriers for Delivery of Anticancer Drugs: Current Developments, Challenges, and Perspectives. Pharm 2024, Vol 16, Page 1527 [Internet]. 2024 Nov 27 [cited 2026 Apr 25];16(12):1527. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4923/16/12/1527/htm
7. Kumar Singh S, Patra A. Evaluation of phenolic composition, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and anticancer activities of Polygonatum verticillatum (L.). J Integr Med [Internet]. 2018 Jul 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];16(4):273–82. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S209549641830044X
8. Bhattacharjee A, Madhusudan Rao P, Radha P. Polycaprolactone Nanocomposites: Recent developments in synthesis, blending, and engineering applications. Polym from Renew Resour [Internet]. 2026 Nov 18 [cited 2026 Apr 25]; Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1177/20412479261436664?download=true
9. Garg Y, Kapoor DN, Sharma AK, Bhatia A. Drug Delivery Systems and Strategies to Overcome the Barriers of Brain. Curr Pharm Des [Internet]. 2021 Dec 24 [cited 2026 Apr 25];28(8):619–41. Available from: https://www.benthamdirect.com/content/journals/cpd/10.2174/1381612828666211222163025
10. Hajar A, Kabdy H, Abdelmounaim B, Badaoui M, Karima R, Chafik T, et al. Phytochemical analysis, anti-inflammatory property, wound-healing, and anti-granuloma effect of Moroccan aqueous leave extract of Moringa oleifera. J Pharm Pharmacol [Internet]. 2025 Oct 30 [cited 2026 Apr 25];77(11):1523–33. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jpp/rgaf056
11. Mahor AK, Singh PP, Gupta R, Bhardwaj P, Rathore P, Kishore A, et al. Nanostructured Lipid Carriers for Improved Delivery of Therapeutics via the Oral Route. J Nanotechnol. 2023;2023.
12. George Kerry R, Ukhurebor KE, Kumari S, Maurya GK, Patra S, Panigrahi B, et al. A comprehensive review on the applications of nano-biosensor-based approaches for non-communicable and communicable disease detection. Biomater Sci [Internet]. 2021;9(10):3576–602. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0bm02164d
13. Wang L, He C. Nrf2-mediated anti-inflammatory polarization of macrophages as therapeutic targets for osteoarthritis. Front Immunol. 2022 Aug 12;13:967193.
14. Sunkara P, Alekhya Garikipati N, Nimmagadda R, Mahesh Kumar Cherukuri A, Anne H, Chakilam R, et al. Cardiovascular Outcomes of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Review of the Current Evidence. 2025;
15. Misra S, Ikbal AMA, Bhattacharjee D, Hore M, Mishra S, Karmakar S, et al. Validation of antioxidant, antiproliferative, and in vitro anti-rheumatoid arthritis activities of epigallo-catechin-rich bioactive fraction from Camellia sinensis var. assamica, Assam variety white tea, and its comparative evaluation with green tea frac…. J Food Biochem [Internet]. 2022 Dec 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];46(12):e14487. Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1111/jfbc.14487
16. Benavides S, Cortés P, Parada J, Franco W. Development of alginate microspheres containing thyme essential oil using ionic gelation. Food Chem [Internet]. 2016;204:77–83. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.02.104
17. Liedtke S, Wissing S, Müller RH, Mäder K. Influence of high pressure homogenisation equipment on nanodispersions characteristics. Int J Pharm [Internet]. 2000 Mar 10 [cited 2026 Apr 25];196(2):183–5. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378517399004172
18. Tiwari SB, Amiji MM. Nanoemulsion Formulations for Tumor-Targeted Delivery. Nanotechnol Cancer Ther [Internet]. 2006 Dec 19 [cited 2026 Apr 25];723–39. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9781420006636-35/nanoemulsion-formulations-tumor-targeted-delivery-sandip-tiwari-mansoor-amiji
19. Kantaria S, Rees GD, Lawrence MJ. Formulation of electrically conducting microemulsion-based organogels. Int J Pharm [Internet]. 2003 Jan 2 [cited 2026 Apr 25];250(1):65–83. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S037851730200491X
20. Varona S, Martín Á, Cocero MJ. Liposomal Incorporation of Lavandin Essential Oil by a Thin-Film Hydration Method and by Particles from Gas-Saturated Solutions. Ind Eng Chem Res [Internet]. 2011 Feb 16 [cited 2026 Apr 25];50(4):2088–97. Available from: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie102016r
21. Jung J, Perrut M. Particle design using supercritical fluids: Literature and patent survey. J Supercrit Fluids [Internet]. 2001 Aug 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];20(3):179–219. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S089684460100064X
22. Iravani S. Green synthesis of metal nanoparticles using plants. Green Chem [Internet]. 2011 Jan 10 [cited 2026 Apr 25];13(10):2638–50. Available from: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2011/gc/c1gc15386b
23. Danaei M, Dehghankhold M, Ataei S, Hasanzadeh Davarani F, Javanmard R, Dokhani A, et al. Impact of Particle Size and Polydispersity Index on the Clinical Applications of Lipidic Nanocarrier Systems. Pharm 2018, Vol 10, Page 57 [Internet]. 2018 May 18 [cited 2026 Apr 25];10(2):57. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4923/10/2/57/htm
24. Jang YH, Lee KC, Lee SJ, Kim DW, Lee WJ. HR-1 mice: A new inflammatory acne mouse model. Ann Dermatol. 2015;27(3):257–64.
25. Bhattacharjee S. DLS and zeta potential – What they are and what they are not? J Control Release [Internet]. 2016 Aug 10 [cited 2026 Apr 25];235:337–51. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168365916303832
26. Honary S, Zahir F. Effect of Zeta Potential on the Properties of Nano-Drug Delivery Systems - A Review (Part 2). Trop J Pharm Res [Internet]. 2013 May 9 [cited 2026 Apr 25];12(2):265–73. Available from: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/tjpr/article/view/88556
27. Parida P, Mishra SC, Sahoo S, Behera A, Nayak BP. Development and characterization of ethylcellulose based microsphere for sustained release of nifedipine. J Pharm Anal [Internet]. 2016;6(5):341–4. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2014.02.001
28. Blessy M, Patel RD, Prajapati PN, Agrawal YK. Development of forced degradation and stability indicating studies of drugs—A review. J Pharm Anal [Internet]. 2014 Jun 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];4(3):159–65. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095177913001007
29. Peppas NA, Kavimandan NJ. Nanoscale analysis of protein and peptide absorption: Insulin absorption using complexation and pH-sensitive hydrogels as delivery vehicles. Eur J Pharm Sci [Internet]. 2006 Nov 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];29(3–4):183–97. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0928098706001175
30. Branch SK. Guidelines from the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). J Pharm Biomed Anal [Internet]. 2005 Aug 10 [cited 2026 Apr 25];38(5):798–805. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0731708505001561
31. Blanco E, Shen H, Ferrari M. Principles of nanoparticle design for overcoming biological barriers to drug delivery. Nat Biotechnol 2015 339 [Internet]. 2015 Sep 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];33(9):941–51. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.3330
32. Filipe V, Hawe A, Jiskoot W. Critical Evaluation of Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) by NanoSight for the Measurement of Nanoparticles and Protein Aggregates. Pharm Res 2010 275 [Internet]. 2010 Mar 4 [cited 2026 Apr 25];27(5):796–810. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11095-010-0073-2
33. Akhtar S, Khan FA, Buhaimed A. Functionalized magnetic nanoparticles attenuate cancer cells proliferation: Transmission electron microscopy analysis. Microsc Res Tech [Internet]. 2019 Jul 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];82(7):983–92. Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1002/jemt.23245
34. Hansma PK, Cleveland JP, Radmacher M, Walters DA, Hillner PE, Bezanilla M, et al. Tapping mode atomic force microscopy in liquids. Appl Phys Lett [Internet]. 1994 Mar 28 [cited 2026 Apr 25];64(13):1738–40. Available from: /aip/apl/article/64/13/1738/63013/Tapping-mode-atomic-force-microscopy-in-liquids
35. Mohamed EA, Abu Hashim II, Yusif RM, Suddek GM, Shaaban AAA, Badria FAE. Enhanced in vitro cytotoxicity and anti-tumor activity of vorinostat-loaded pluronic micelles with prolonged release and reduced hepatic and renal toxicities. Eur J Pharm Sci [Internet]. 2017 Jan 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];96:232–42. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0928098716303943
36. Siepmann J, Siepmann F. Mathematical modeling of drug release from lipid dosage forms. Int J Pharm [Internet]. 2011 Oct 10 [cited 2026 Apr 25];418(1):42–53. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378517311006466
37. Ding S, Shah RM, Nguyen H V., Saha T. Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC) in Solid-State Characterization of Solid Dispersions: A Practical Guide. AAPS PharmSciTech 2025 271 [Internet]. 2025 Nov 6 [cited 2026 Apr 25];27(1):20-. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1208/s12249-025-03240-2
38. Atkinson JL, Vyazovkin S. Non-oxidative thermal degradation of poly(glycidol), poly(glycidol)-g-L- lactide, and poly(glycidol)-g-glycolide. Macromol Chem Phys [Internet]. 2011 Oct 4 [cited 2026 Apr 25];212(19):2103–13. Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1002/macp.201100243
39. Stuart B. Infrared spectroscopy?: fundamentals and applications. 2004 [cited 2026 Apr 25];224. Available from: https://books.google.com/books/about/Infrared_Spectroscopy.html?id=xQVog8RrJKcC
40. Monopoli MP, Aberg C, Salvati A, Dawson KA. Biomolecular Coronas Provide the Biological Identity of Nanosized Materials. Nano-Enabled Med Appl [Internet]. 2020 Nov 23 [cited 2026 Apr 25];205–29. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9780429399039-7/biomolecular-coronas-provide-biological-identity-nanosized-materials-marco-monopoli-christoffer-aberg-anna-salvati-kenneth-dawson
41. Park SJ, Garcia C V., Shin GH, Kim JT. Development of nanostructured lipid carriers for the encapsulation and controlled release of vitamin D3 [Internet]. Vol. 225, Food Chemistry. 2017. 213–219 p. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.01.015
42. Behzadi S, Serpooshan V, Tao W, Hamaly MA, Alkawareek MY, Dreaden EC, et al. Cellular uptake of nanoparticles: journey inside the cell. Chem Soc Rev [Internet]. 2017 Jul 17 [cited 2026 Apr 25];46(14):4218–44. Available from: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2017/cs/c6cs00636a
43. Mosmann T. Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: Application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Methods [Internet]. 1983 Dec 16 [cited 2026 Apr 25];65(1–2):55–63. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0022175983903034
44. Patra JK, Das G, Fraceto LF, Campos EVR, Rodriguez-Torres MDP, Acosta-Torres LS, et al. Nano based drug delivery systems: recent developments and future prospects. J Nanobiotechnology 2018 161 [Internet]. 2018 Sep 19 [cited 2026 Apr 25];16(1):71-. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12951-018-0392-8
45. Zhang HE, Henderson JM, Gorrell MD. Animal models for hepatocellular carcinoma. Biochim Biophys Acta - Mol Basis Dis [Internet]. 2019 May 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];1865(5):993–1002. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925443918302941
46. Li YH, Dai JM, Yang C, Jiang MY, Xiong Y, Li YK, et al. Phenylpropanoid and Iridoid Glucosides from the Whole Plant of Hemiphragma heterophyllum and Their alpha-Glucosidase Inhibitory Activities. Planta Med. 2020;86(3):205–11.
47. Heinrich K, Miller-Phillips L, Ziemann F, Hasselmann K, Rühlmann K, Flach M, et al. Lessons learned: the first consecutive 1000 patients of the CCCMunichLMU Molecular Tumor Board. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2022 1495 [Internet]. 2022 Jul 7 [cited 2026 Apr 25];149(5):1905–15. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00432-022-04165-0
48. Makadia HK, Siegel SJ. Poly Lactic-co-Glycolic Acid (PLGA) as Biodegradable Controlled Drug Delivery Carrier. Polym 2011, Vol 3, Pages 1377-1397 [Internet]. 2011 Aug 26 [cited 2026 Apr 25];3(3):1377–97. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/3/3/1377/htm
49. Fadeel B, Garcia-Bennett AE. Better safe than sorry: Understanding the toxicological properties of inorganic nanoparticles manufactured for biomedical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev [Internet]. 2010 Mar 8 [cited 2026 Apr 25];62(3):362–74. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169409X09003469
50. Ventola CL. Progress in Nanomedicine: Approved and Investigational Nanodrugs. Pharm Ther [Internet]. 2017 Dec 1 [cited 2026 Apr 25];42(12):742. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5720487/
51. Anand P, Kunnumakkara AB, Newman RA, Aggarwal BB. Bioavailability of Curcumin: Problems and Promises. Mol Pharm [Internet]. 2007 Nov [cited 2026 Apr 25];4(6):807–18. Available from: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/mp700113r
52. Raza K, Singh B, Singal P, Wadhwa S, Katare OP. Systematically optimized biocompatible isotretinoin-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) for topical treatment of acne. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces. 2013;105:67–74.