Table 3.
Quantitative data referring tumor development and total HAF (hepatic altered foci) area among different group of experimental animals
| Treatment Groups | Number of the rat developed tumour post treatment | Average tumour volume (n = 6) (mm)3 |
Number of HAF area per cm2 under microscopic observation on treatment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gr A | 0/6 | – | – |
| Gr B | 6/6 | 1502.89 ± 9.98# | 86.74 ± 5.90# |
| Gr C | 6/6 | 1261.5 8 ± 8.09#$ | 67.89 ± 8.09#^ |
| Gr D | 5/6 | 821.08 ± 4.67#$ | 56.89 ± 6.06#^ns |
| Gr E | 3/6 | 786.73 ± 5.56#$ns | 49.97 ± 0.58#^** |
| Gr F | 2/6 | 35.89 ± 7.56#$*** | 12.63 ± 0.43#^*** |
| Gr G | 0/6 | – | – |
#Data represented mean ± SD (where, n = 6 in each group of animals)
$,^ indicated significant (p < 0.05) reduction of tumor volume and HAF observed in (Gr C-Gr F) in comparison to positive control group Gr- B. Again, compared among the test nanoliposome (Gr D, Gr E, and Gr F), in Gr F (aptamer conjugated nanoliposome treated group) significant (p < 0.05) reduction of both tumor volume and HAF were observed mentioned in figure (***); while in Gr E (PEG-NLCs treated group showed non-significant (ns) amount of tumor volume reduction, (**) significant amount of HAF reduction and Gr D (NLCs treated animal group) showed non-significant (ns) amount of HAF reduction