Design and optimization of nano invasomal gel of Glibenclamide and Atenolol combination: in vitro and in vivo evaluation

Future Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Table 2 Observed responses in Box–Behnken design for development and optimization of NI formulations

	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Response 1	Response 2	Response 3	Response 4
Run	A:Phospholipid	B:Ethanol	C:D-Limonene	EE of GLB	EE of ATN	Flux of GLB	Flux of ATN
	% w/w	%	%	%	%	μg/cm²/h	μg/cm²/h
1	9	7.5	1	72.54 ± 0.83	69.54 ± 1.45	144.3 ± 0.98	355.8 ± 1.24
2	11.5	7.5	1.5	77.96 ± 0.92	75.54 ± 1.23	177.9 ± 1.34	436.7 ± 0.97
3	11.5	10	2	70.97 ± 1.54	67.76 ± 2.34	160.8 ± 1.43	380.2 ± 0.76
4	11.5	5	2	80.83 ± 2.23	78.43 ± 1.23	185.8 ± 1.67	442.6 ± 0.45
5	9	5	1.5	72.54 ± 1.43	70.54 ± 0.89	164.3 ± 2.45	365.8 ± 0.89
6	11.5	10	1	72.86 ± 2.54	71.56 ± 0.97	150.3 ± 1.68	405.6 ± 0.65
7	11.5	7.5	1.5	77.84±1.76	75.76 ± 1.45	180.8 ± 1.34	440.9 ± 1.34
8	11.5	5	1	78.97 ± 2.65	76.76 ± 1.34	190.8 ± 2.56	375.2 ± 2.98
9	9	10	1.5	65.95 ± 2.87	62.98 ± 1.45	120.3 ± 2.90	325.5 ± 2.67
10	14	10	1.5	90.93 ± 0.98	87.65 ± 2.18	215.8 ± 2.78	465.3 ± 1.34
11	11.5	7.5	1.5	78.33 ± 1.34	76.98 ± 1.47	185.4 ± 1.69	450.7 ± 1.56
12	9	7.5	2	74.94 ± 1.56	72.43 ± 1.45	147.9 ± 1.34	400.4 ± 1.67
13	14	5	1.5	97.62 ± 0.78	95.76 ± 1.67	249.3 ± 0.98	480.1 ± 2.45
14	11.5	7.5	1.5	70.97 ± 1.56	68.76 ± 0.67	175.8 ± 0.78	425.2 ± 2.09
15	14	7.5	2	94.93 ± 0.96	91.65 ± 0.57	240.8 ± 0.67	479.3 ± 1.76
16	11.5	7.5	1.5	77.84 ± 1.26	75.98 ± 1.36	186.9 ± 0.56	444.4 ± 2.76
17	14	7.5	1	95.94 ± 0.56	92.65 ± 1.35	239.8 ± 0.65	471.5 ± 1.45