LAUSR

Abstract Much research has shown Bee venom to be an effective neuroprotective agent. However, the usual transdermal injection of bee venom poses many pharmacokinetic disadvantages. Here, we compared the administration of bee venom via subcutaneous injection (SC) and via Microneedle patch (MN). Both administrated routes produce significant recovery effects, however: the MN significantly prolongs the bio-significant-and-yet-lower concentration of bee venom in mice bodies. In contrast, SC could produce only a short period of much higher bee venom levels in the blood and brain. We also see that due to the concentration-response-curve of bee venom (represented by melittin): mice bodies do not require much higher bee venom concentration (seen in the SC group) to produce a much more significant neuroprotective effect (than seen in those treated with the MN method). Therefore, a MN could maintain bee venom levels in mice bodies at lower-yet-more-efficient concentrations. This is important, as bee venom can cause more adverse effects and pain sensations, at higher concentrations. For the first time, we confirmed that the pharmacokinetic advantages of MN delivered bee venom also guarantee a holistic neuroprotection effect (which was shown by SC delivered bee venom in previous research). This was proven via the results of the water maze experiments for long-term learning memory assessment and protein analysis of key neuronal regulatory proteins: BDNF, p-CREB, iNOS, and mArhR 1. In conclusion, for situations where we ought to administrate drugs at a more downward amount, such as bee venom, MN can keep the therapeutic concentrations at a lower, yet interestingly, more-efficient level.