OBJECTIVES: The present study was aimed to fabricate the capecitabine as smart pH-responsive hydrogel network to efficiently facilitate its oral delivery while shielding its stability in the gastric media.

METHODS: The smart pH sensitive HP-β-CD/agarose-g-poly(MAA) hydrogel network was developed using an aqueous free radical polymerization technique. The developed hydrogels were characterized for drug-loading efficiency, structural and compositional features, thermal stability, swelling behaviour, morphology, physical form, and release kinetics. The pH-responsive behaviour of developed hydrogels was established by conducting the swelling and release behaviour at different pH values (1.2 and 7.4), demonstrating significantly higher swelling and release at pH 7.4 as compared with pH 1.2. The capecitabine-loaded hydrogels were also screened for acute oral toxicity in animals by analysing the body weight, water and food intake, dermal toxicity, ocular toxicity, biochemical analysis, and histological examination.

RESULTS: The characteristic evaluations revealed that capecitabine (anticancer agent) was successfully loaded into the hydrogel network. Capecitabine loading was ranged from 71.22% to 90.12%. An interesting feature of hydrogel was its pH-responsive behaviour which triggers release at basic pH (94.25%). Optimum swelling (95%) was seen at pH 7.4. Based upon regression coefficient R2 (0.96 - 0.99) best fit model was zero order. The extensive toxicity evaluations evidenced good safety profile with no signs of oral, dermal or ocular toxicities, as well as no variations in blood parameters and histology of vital organs.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of commercially available 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthrinse and dill seed oil mouthrinse on plaque levels and gingivitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized controlled, double blind parallel arm study was conducted over 90 days on 90 subjects. The subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups and baseline data was collected using Loe and Silness gingival index and Quigley Hein plaque index and oral prophylaxis was performed on all the subjects. The mouthrinses included in the present study were dill seed oil and Hexodent (0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate). Intervention regarding the mouthrinsing was given to the subjects and were followed up for 45 days and 90 days, after this post intervention changes were assessed using the respective indices.

RESULTS: It was observed that there is no significant difference in gingival & plaque scores among two mouthrinses from baseline to 45 days and 90 days. It was observed that there is statistical difference in gingival and plaque scores when compared with baseline to 45 days (p<0.001), baseline to 90 days (p<0.001) and 45 days to 90 days (p<0.001) when intergroup comparisons were done.