Anti-adherent composition against DNA viruses and method of inhibiting the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

Disclosed is a composition with anti-adherent properties. More specifically, disclosed is a composition that includes an anti-adherent agent that inhibits the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface. The composition may be applied to or incorporated into articles such as wipes, or into ointments, lotions, creams, salves, aerosols, gels, suspensions, sprays, foams, washes, or the like.

BACKGROUND OF THE DISCLOSURE

Communicable human infections pass from person to person through various means such as food, aerosols, surfaces and hands. For example, in the United States, foodborne pathogens alone cause an estimated 76 million cases of illness, 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths per year. This results in the spending or loss of several billion dollars due to absenteeism, cost of medication, and hospitalization.

Foodborne pathogens are typically a result of poor cleaning of hands and surfaces on which food is prepared. In fact, the kitchen is one of the most contaminated sites in the home. High fecal and coliform concentrations can be found in sponges, dishcloths, and the kitchen sink. Of course, there are other pathogens lurking elsewhere in the home, at the office, and in public places such as public bathrooms, restaurants, malls, theaters, health-care facilities, etc. Such pathogens include bacteria, protein, active enzymes, viruses, and many other microbes that can lead to health problems. DNA viruses, including the adenovirus, are among these pathogens that can be spread and lead to health problems, such as the common cold, sore throats, pneumonia, and diarrhea. Other DNA viruses include herpes viruses, such as HSV-1, HSV-2, cytomegalovirus, and Epstein-Barr. Other DNA viruses can lead to diseases such as smallpox and chickenpox. DNA viruses, like other pathogens, can be commonly spread by shaking hands with infected people or touching a surface or object with DNA viruses on it.

There are products used today that are used to clean skin and hard surfaces where pathogens may be deposited, such as soaps, hand sanitizers, sprays and wipes. However, even the most diligent efforts to keep clean can be hindered by factors such as surface topography, the presence of hair, and the like. These factors can cause pathogens to better adhere to a surface. Other limiting factors include skin sensitivity due to the handling of cleaning products or the application thereof.

There remains a need for compositions that can be applied to surfaces or incorporated into articles, wherein the compositions inhibit the adherence of DNA viruses. Desirably, the compositions are skin friendly, cost effective, and convenient to use.

SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE

In one aspect of the disclosure, a composition for inhibiting the attachment of DNA viruses to a surface can include a liquid carrier, an anti-adherent agent, and a humectant. The anti-adherent agent can include C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose.

In another aspect of the disclosure, a method for inhibiting the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface can include providing a composition. The composition can include an anti-adherent agent. The anti-adherent agent can include C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose. The method can further include applying the composition to the surface to inhibit the adherence of DNA viruses to the surface.

In still another aspect of the disclosure a wipe for inhibiting the attachment of DNA viruses to a surface can include a nonwoven substrate and a composition. The composition can include a composition including a liquid carrier and an anti-adherent agent. The anti-adherent agent can include C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DISCLOSURE

The present disclosure is directed to an anti-adherent composition containing an anti-adherent agent and a carrier that inhibits the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface and a method of inhibiting the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface. The composition may be applied to a surface in the form of a liquid, gel, or foam; or incorporated into a wash. In addition, the composition may be applied to a surface with a vehicle such as a wipe.

The anti-adherent composition may be used on biotic surfaces such as skin or plants; or abiotic surfaces such as food prep surfaces; hospital and clinic surfaces; household surfaces; automotive, train, ship and aircraft surfaces; and the like; as long as the surface is compatible with the ingredients of the composition. Applying the anti-adherent composition to such surfaces can help prevent the amount or the likelihood that DNA viruses will adhere to those surfaces, thus, lessening the likelihood of further transferring of the virus.

Importantly, some embodiments of the anti-adherent composition of the present disclosure are not antimicrobial. In other words, in some embodiments the anti-adherent composition does not include any antimicrobial agents. In such embodiments, the anti-adherent composition seeks to prevent attachment of DNA viruses to a surface, not eradicate the DNA viruses and any other microbes. This distinction can provide a benefit for the effectiveness for preventing the further spreading of DNA viruses as concerns grow about the increasing microbial resistance to common antimicrobial treatments. However, in some embodiments, as will be discussed further below, it is contemplated that the anti-adherent composition can include antimicrobial agents.

According to the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface (discussed further below), the anti-adherent composition reduces adherence of DNA viruses to a surface by at least 0.25 Log, or by at least 0.29 Log.

Anti-Adherent Agents for DNA Viruses

Anti-adherent agents suitable for use in the composition can include C_12-16Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose. C_12-16Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose is a hydrophobically modified ethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose (HM-EHEC) commercially available under the name STRUCTURE CEL 500 HM from AkzoNobel. As shown in the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface (as discussed further below), C_12-16Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose was the only agent of many different agents tested that provided the unique result of inhibiting the attachment of DNA viruses to a surface but providing an increase in adherence of bacteria to a surface. Most of the agents that provided an increase in adherence to bacteria provided an increase in adherence of DNA viruses as well, as expected. Additionally, most of the agents that inhibited the adherence of bacteria, also inhibited the adherence of DNA viruses. Thus, the anti-adherent effect of C^12-16Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose against DNA viruses provided a surprising result.

Some embodiments of the anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure can be suitably made with an anti-adherent agent in an amount of from about 0.01% (by the total weight of the composition), to about 20% (by total weight of the composition), or preferably from about 0.05% (by total weight of the composition) to about 15% (by total weight of the composition), or more preferably from about 0.1% (by total weight of the composition) to about 10% (by total weight of the composition). In one preferred embodiment, the anti-adherent composition included 1.5% of an anti-adherent agent by total weight of the composition.

Carriers

The anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure may be formulated with one or more conventional and compatible carrier materials. The anti-adherent composition may take a variety of forms including, without limitation, aqueous solutions, gels, balms, lotions, suspensions, creams, milks, salves, ointments, sprays, emulsions, oils, resins, foams, solid sticks, aerosols, and the like. Liquid carrier materials suitable for use in the instant disclosure include those well-known for use in the cosmetic and medical arts as a basis for ointments, lotions, creams, salves, aerosols, gels, suspensions, sprays, foams, washes, and the like, and may be used in their established levels.

Non-limiting examples of suitable carrier materials include water, emollients, humectants, polyols, surfactants, esters, perflurocarbons, silicones, and other pharmaceutically acceptable carrier materials. In one embodiment, the carrier is volatile, allowing for immediate deposition of the anti-adherent ingredient to the desired surface while improving overall usage experience of the product by reducing drying time. Non-limiting examples of these volatile carriers include 5 cst Dimethicone, Cyclomethicone, Methyl Perfluoroisobutyl Ether, Methyl Perfluorobutyl Ether, Ethyl Perfluoroisobutyl Ether and Ethyl Perfluorobutyl Ether. Unlike conventional volatile carriers such as ethanol or isopropyl alcohol, these carriers have no antimicrobial effect.

In one embodiment, the anti-adherent compositions can optionally include one or more emollients, which typically act to soften, soothe, and otherwise lubricate and/or moisturize the skin. Suitable emollients that can be incorporated into the compositions include oils such as alkyl dimethicones, alkyl methicones, alkyldimethicone copolyols, phenyl silicones, alkyl trimethylsilanes, dimethicone, dimethicone crosspolymers, cyclomethicone, lanolin and its derivatives, fatty esters, glycerol esters and derivatives, propylene glycol esters and derivatives, alkoxylated carboxylic acids, alkoxylated alcohols, fatty alcohols, and combinations thereof.

Some embodiments of the anti-adherent compositions may include one or more emollients in an amount of from about 0.01% (by total weight of the composition) to about 20% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.05% (by total weight of the composition) to about 10% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.10% (by total weight of the composition) to about 5% (by total weight of the composition).

In another embodiment the anti-adherent compositions include one or more esters. The esters may be selected from cetyl palmitate, stearyl palmitate, cetyl stearate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl myristate, isopropyl palmitate, and combinations thereof. The fatty alcohols include octyldodecanol, lauryl, myristyl, cetyl, stearyl, behenyl alcohol, and combinations thereof. Ethers such as eucalyptol, ceteraryl glucoside, dimethyl isosorbic polyglyceryl-3 cetyl ether, polyglyceryl-3 decyltetradecanol, propylene glycol myristyl ether, and combinations thereof can also suitably be used as emollients. Other suitable ester compounds for use in the anti-adherent compositions or the present disclosure are listed in the International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook, 11th Edition, CTFA, (January, 2006) ISBN-10: 1882621360, ISBN-13: 978-1882621361, and in the 2007 Cosmetic Bench Reference, Allured Pub. Corporation (Jul. 15, 2007) ISBN-10: 1932633278, ISBN-13: 978-1932633276, both of which are incorporated by reference herein to the extent they are consistent herewith.

Humectants that are suitable as carriers in the anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure include, for example, glycerin, glycerin derivatives, hyaluronic acid, hyaluronic acid derivatives, betaine, betaine derivatives amino acids, amino acid derivatives, glycosaminoglycans, glycols, polyols, sugars, sugar alcohols, hydrogenated starch hydrolysates, hydroxy acids, hydroxy acid derivatives, salts of PCA and the like, and combinations thereof. Specific examples of suitable humectants include honey, sorbitol, hyaluronic acid, sodium hyaluronate, betaine, lactic acid, citric acid, sodium citrate, glycolic acid, sodium glycolate, sodium lactate, urea, propylene glycol, butylene glycol, pentylene glycol, ethoxydiglycol, methyl gluceth-10, methyl gluceth-20, polyethylene glycols (as listed in the International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook such as PEG-2 through PEG 10), propanediol, xylitol, maltitol, or combinations thereof. Humectants are beneficial in that they prevent or reduce the chance that the anti-adherent film, formed after the anti-adherent agent is applied to a surface, will crack.

The anti-adherent compositions of the disclosure may include one or more humectants in an amount of about 0.01% (by total weight of the composition) to about 20% (by total weight of the composition), or about 0.05% (by total weight of the composition) to about 10% by total weight of the composition), or about 0.1% (by total weight of the composition) to about 5.0% (by total weight of the composition).

The anti-adherent compositions may include water. For instance, where the anti-adherent composition is a wetting composition, such as described below for use with a wet wipe, the composition will typically include water. The anti-adherent compositions can suitably comprise water in an amount of from about 0.01% (by total weight of the composition) to about 99.98% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 1.00% (by total weight of the composition) to about 99.98% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 50.00% (by total weight of the composition) to about 99.98% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 75.00% (by total weight of the composition) to about 99.98% (by total weight of the composition).

In an embodiment where the anti-adherent composition serves as a wash (e.g. shampoo; surface cleaner; or hand, face, or body wash), the anti-adherent composition will include one or more surfactants. These may be selected from anionic, cationic, nonionic, zwitterionic, and amphoteric surfactants. Amounts may range from 0.1 to 30%, or from 1 to 20%, or from 3 to 15% by total weight of the composition.

Suitable anionic surfactants include, but are not limited to, C₈to C₂₂alkane sulfates, ether sulfates and sulfonates. Among the suitable sulfonates are primary C₈to C₂₂alkane sulfonate, primary C₈to C₂₂alkane disulfonate, C₈to C₂₂alkene sulfonate, C₈to C₂₂hydroxyalkane sulfonate or alkyl glyceryl ether sulfonate. Specific examples of anionic surfactants include ammonium lauryl sulfate, ammonium laureth sulfate, triethylamine lauryl sulfate, triethylamine laureth sulfate, triethanolamine lauryl sulfate, triethanolamine laureth sulfate, monoethanolamine lauryl sulfate, monoethanolamine laureth sulfate, diethanolamine lauryl sulfate, diethanolamine laureth sulfate, lauric monoglyceride sodium sulfate, sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium laureth sulfate, potassium laureth sulfate, sodium lauryl sarcosinate, sodium lauroyl sarcosinate, potassium lauryl sulfate, sodium trideceth sulfate, sodium methyl lauroyl taurate, sodium lauroyl isethionate, sodium laureth sulfosuccinate, sodium lauroyl sulfosuccinate, sodium tridecyl benzene sulfonate, sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate, sodium lauryl amphoacetate and mixtures thereof. Other anionic surfactants include the C₈to C₂₂acyl glycinate salts. Suitable glycinate salts include sodium cocoylglycinate, potassium cocoylglycinate, sodium lauroylglycinate, potassium lauroylglycinate, sodium myristoylglycinate, potassium myristoylglycinate, sodium palmitoylglycinate, potassium palmitoylglycinate, sodium stearoylglycinate, potassium stearoylglycinate, ammonium cocoylglycinate and mixtures thereof. Cationic counter-ions to form the salt of the glycinate may be selected from sodium, potassium, ammonium, alkanolammonium and mixtures of these cations.

Suitable cationic surfactants include, but are not limited to alkyl dimethylamines, alkyl amidopropylamines, alkyl imidazoline derivatives, quaternised amine ethoxylates, and quaternary ammonium compounds.

Suitable nonionic surfactants include, but are not limited to, alcohols, acids, amides or alkyl phenols reacted with alkylene oxides, especially ethylene oxide either alone or with propylene oxide. Specific nonionics are C₆to C₂₂alkyl phenols-ethylene oxide condensates, the condensation products of C₈to C₁₃aliphatic primary or secondary linear or branched alcohols with ethylene oxide, and products made by condensation of ethylene oxide with the reaction products of propylene oxide and ethylenediamine. Other nonionics include long chain tertiary amine oxides, long chain tertiary phosphine oxides and dialkyl sulphoxides, alkyl polysaccharides, amine oxides, block copolymers, castor oil ethoxylates, ceto-oleyl alcohol ethoxylates, ceto-stearyl alcohol ethoxylates, decyl alcohol ethoxylates, dinonyl phenol ethoxylates, dodecyl phenol ethoxylates, end-capped ethoxylates, ether amine derivatives, ethoxylated alkanolamides, ethylene glycol esters, fatty acid alkanolamides, fatty alcohol alkoxylates, lauryl alcohol ethoxylates, mono-branched alcohol ethoxylates, natural alcohol ethoxylates, nonyl phenol ethoxylates, octyl phenol ethoxylates, oleyl amine ethoxylates, random copolymer alkoxylates, sorbitan ester ethoxylates, stearic acid ethoxylates, stearyl amine ethoxylates, synthetic alcohol ethoxylates, tall oil fatty acid ethoxylates, tallow amine ethoxylates and trid tridecanol ethoxylates.

Suitable zwitterionic surfactants include, for example, alkyl amine oxides, silicone amine oxides, and combinations thereof. Specific examples of suitable zwitterionic surfactants include, for example, 4-[N,N-di(2-hydroxyethyl)-N-octadecylammonio]-butane-1-carboxylate, S-[S-3-hydroxypropyl-S-hexadecylsulfonio]-3-hydroxypentane-1-sulfate, 3-[P,P-diethyl-P-3,6,9-trioxatetradexopcylphosphonio]-2-hydroxypropane-1-phosphate, 3-[N,N-dipropyl-N-3-dodecoxy-2-hydroxypropylammonio]-propane-1-phosphonate, 3-(N,N-dimethyl-N-hexadecylammonio)propane-1-sulfonate, 3-(N,N-dimethyl-N-hexadecylammonio)-2-hydroxypropane-1-sulfonate, 4-[N,N-di(2-hydroxyethyl)-N-(2-hydroxydodecyl)ammonio]-butane-1-carboxylate, 3-[S-ethyl-S-(3-dodecoxy-2-hydroxypropyl)sulfonio]-propane-1-phosphate, 3-[P,P-dimethyl-P-dodecylphosphonio]-propane-1-phosphonate, 5-[N,N-di(3-hydroxypropyl)-N-hexadecylammonio]-2-hydroxy-pentane-1-sulfate, and combinations thereof.

Suitable amphoteric surfactants include, but are not limited to, derivatives of aliphatic quaternary ammonium, phosphonium, and sulfonium compounds, in which the aliphatic radicals can be straight or branched chain, and wherein one of the aliphatic substituents contains from about 8 to about 18 carbon atoms and one substituent contains an anionic group, e.g., carboxy, sulfonate, sulfate, phosphate, or phosphonate. Illustrative amnphoterics are coco dimethyl carboxymethyl betaine, cocoamidopropyl betaine, cocobetaine, oleyl betaine, cetyl dimethyl carboxymethyl betaine, lauryl bis-(2-hydroxyethyl) carboxymethyl betaine, stearyl bis-(2-hydroxypropyl) carboxymethyl betaine, oleyl dimethyl gamma-carboxypropyl betaine, lauryl bis-(2-hydroxypropyl)alpha-carboxyethyl betaine, cocoamphoacetates, and combinations thereof. The sulfobetaines may include stearyl dimethyl sulfopropyl betaine, lauryl dimethyl sulfoethyl betaine, lauryl bis-(2-hydroxyethyl) sulfopropyl betaine and combinations thereof.

Rheology Modifier

Optionally, one or more rheology modifiers, such as thickeners, may be added to the anti-adherent compositions. Suitable rheology modifiers are compatible with the anti-adherent agent. As used herein, “compatible” refers to a compound that, when mixed with the anti-adherent agent, does not adversely affect the anti-adherent properties of same.

A thickening system is used in the anti-adherent compositions to adjust the viscosity and stability of the compositions. Specifically, thickening systems prevent the composition from running off of the hands or body during dispensing and use of the composition. When the anti-adherent composition is used with a wipe product, a thicker formulation can be used to prevent the composition from migrating from the wipe substrate.

The thickening system should be compatible with the compounds used in the present disclosure; that is, the thickening system, when used in combination with the anti-adherent compounds, should not precipitate out, form a coacervate, or prevent a user from perceiving the conditioning benefit (or other desired benefit) to be gained from the composition. The thickening system may include a thickener which can provide both the thickening effect desired from the thickening system and a conditioning effect to the user's skin.

Thickeners may include, cellulosics, gums, acrylates, starches and various polymers. Suitable examples include are not limited to hydroxethyl cellulose, xanthan gum, guar gum, potato starch, and corn starch. In some embodiments, PEG-150 stearate, PEG-150 distearate, PEG-175 diisostearate, polyglyceryl-10 behenate/eicosadioate, disteareth-100 IPDI, polyacrylamidomethylpropane sulfonic acid, butylated PVP, and combinations thereof may be suitable.

While the viscosity of the compositions will typically depend on the thickener used and the other components of the compositions, the thickeners of the compositions suitably provide for a composition having a viscosity in the range of greater than 10 cP to about 30,000 cP or more. In another embodiment, the thickeners provide compositions having a viscosity of from about 100 cP to about 20,000 cP. In yet another embodiment, thickeners provide compositions having a viscosity of from about 200 cP to about 15,000 cP.

Typically, the anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure include the thickening system in an amount of no more than about 20% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.01% (by total weight of the composition) to about 20% (by total weight of the composition). In another aspect the thickening system is present in the anti-adherent composition in an amount of from about 0.10% (by total weight of the composition) to about 10% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.25% (by total weight of the composition) to about 5% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.5% (by total weight of the composition) to about 2% (by total weight of the composition).

Foaming Agents

In one embodiment, the anti-adherent compositions can be delivered as a foam. In accordance with the present disclosure, in order to make the composition foamable, the composition is combined with a foaming agent such as at least one derivatized dimethicone.

The foaming agent is capable of causing the compositions to foam when the compositions are combined with air using, for instance, a manual pump dispenser. Although the anti-adherent compositions may be dispensed from an aerosol container, an aerosol is not needed in order to cause the compositions to foam. Also of particular advantage, the compositions are foamable without having to include fluorinated surfactants.

Various different derivatized dimethicone foaming agents may be used in the compositions of the present disclosure. The derivatized dimethicone, for instance, may comprise a dimethicone copolyol, such as an ethoxylated dimethicone. In one embodiment, the derivatized dimethicone is linear, although branched dimethicones may be used.

The amount of foaming agent present in the foaming compositions can depend upon various factors and the desired result. In general, the foaming agent can be present in an amount from about 0.01% to about 10% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.1% to about 5% (by total weight of the composition), or from about 0.1% to about 2% (by total weight of the composition).

When an anti-adherent composition is made foamable, it may be contained in an aerosol container. In an aerosol container, the composition is maintained under pressure sufficient to cause foam formation when dispensed.

Emulsifiers

In one embodiment, the anti-adherent compositions may include hydrophobic and hydrophilic ingredients, such as a lotion or cream. Generally, these emulsions have a dispersed phase and a continuous phase, and are generally formed with the addition of a surfactant or a combination of surfactants with varying hydrophilic/lipopiliclipophilic balances (HLB). Suitable emulsifiers include surfactants having HLB values from 0 to 20, or from 2 to 18. Suitable non-limiting examples include Ceteareth-20, Cetearyl Glucoside, Ceteth-10, Ceteth-2, Ceteth-20, Cocamide MEA, Glyceryl Laurate, Glyceryl Stearate, PEG-100 Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate SE, Glycol Distearate, Glycol Stearate, lsosteareth-20, Laureth-23, Laureth-4, Lecithin, Methyl Glucose Sesquistearate, Oleth-10, Oleth-2, Oleth-20, PEG-100 Stearate, PEG-20 Almond Glycerides, PEG-20 Methyl Glucose Sesquistearate, PEG-25 Hydrogenated Castor Oil, PEG-30 Dipolyhydroxystearate, PEG-4 Dilaurate, PEG-40 Sorbitan Peroleate, PEG-60 Almond Glycerides, PEG-7 Olivate, PEG-7 Glyceryl Cocoate, PEG-8 Dioleate, PEG-8 Laurate, PEG-8 Oleate, PEG-80 Sorbitan Laurate, Polysorbate 20, Polysorbate 60, Polysorbate 80, Polysorbate 85, Propylene Glycol Isostearate, Sorbitan Isostearate, Sorbitan Laurate, Sorbitan Monostearate, Sorbitan Oleate, Sorbitan Sesquioleate, Sorbitan Stearate, Sorbitan Trioleate, Stearamide MEA, Steareth-100, Steareth-2, Steareth-20, Steareth-21. The compositions can further include surfactants or combinations of surfactants that create liquid crystalline networks or liposomal networks. Suitable non-limiting examples include OLIVEM 1000 (INCI: Cetearyl Olivate (and) Sorbitan Olivate (available from HallStar Company (Chicago, IL)); ARLACEL LC (INCI: Sorbitan Stearate (and) Sorbityl Laurate, commercially available from Croda (Edison, NJ)); CRYSTALCAST MM (INCI: Beta Sitosterol (and) Sucrose Stearate (and) Sucrose Distearate (and) Cetyl Alcohol (and) Stearyl Alcohol, commercially available from MMP Inc. (South Plainfield, NJ)); UNIOX CRISTAL (INCI: Cetearyl Alcohol (and) Polysorbate 60 (and) Cetearyl Glucoside, commercially available from Chemyunion (Sao Paulo, Brazil)). Other suitable emulsifiers include lecithin, hydrogenated lecithin, lysolecithin, phosphatidylcholine, phospholipids, and combinations thereof.

Adjunct Ingredients

The anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure may additionally include adjunct ingredients conventionally found in pharmaceutical compositions in an established fashion and at established levels. For example, the anti-adherent compositions may comprise additional compatible pharmaceutically active and compatible materials for combination therapy, such as antioxidants, anti-parasitic agents, antipruritics, antifungals, antiseptic actives, biological actives, astringents, keratolytic actives, local anaesthetics, anti-stinging agents, anti-reddening agents, skin soothing agents, external analgesics, film formers, skin exfoliating agents, sunscreens, and combinations thereof.

Other suitable additives that may be included in the anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure include compatible colorants, deodorants, emulsifiers, anti-foaming agents (when foam is not desired), lubricants, skin conditioning agents, skin protectants and skin benefit agents (e.g., aloe vera and tocopheryl acetate), solvents, solubilizing agents, suspending agents, wetting agents, pH adjusting ingredients (a suitable pH range of the compositions can be from about 3.5 to about 8), chelators, propellants, dyes and/or pigments, and combinations thereof.

Another component that may be suitable for addition to the anti-adherent compositions is a fragrance. Any compatible fragrance may be used. Typically, the fragrance is present in an amount from about 0% (by weight of the composition) to about 5% (by weight of the composition), and more typically from about 0.01% (by weight of the composition) to about 3% (by weight of the composition). In one desirable embodiment, the fragrance will have a clean, fresh and/or neutral scent to create an appealing delivery vehicle for the end consumer.

Organic sunscreens that may be present in the anti-adherent compositions include ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate, avobenzone, octocrylene, benzophenone-4, phenylbenzimidazole sulfonic acid, homosalate, oxybenzone, benzophenone-3, ethylhexyl salicylate, and mixtures thereof.

As previously noted, in some embodiments, antimicrobial agents can be added to the anti-adherent compositions. For example, suitable antimicrobials include biocides such as a short-chain alcohol, benzoalkonium chloride (“BAC”), didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride (“DDAC”), and zeolite (“CWT-A”). Other possible antimicrobial agents include: isothiazolone, alkyl dimethyl ammonium chloride, a triazine, 2-thiocyanomethylthio benzothiazol, methylene bis thiocyanate, acrolein, dodecylguanidine hydrochloride, a chlorophenol, a quaternary ammonium salt, gluteraldehyde, a dithiocarbamate, 2-mercatobenzothiazole, para-chloro-meta-xylenol, silver, chlorohexidine, polyhexamthylene biguanide, a n-halamine, triclosan, a phospholipid, an alpha hydroxyl acid, 2,2-dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide, 2-bromo-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol, farnesol, iodine, bromine, hydrogen peroxide, chlorine dioxide, a botanical oil, a botanical extract, benzalkonium chloride, chlorine, sodium hypochlorite, or combinations thereof. In some embodiments, the antimicrobial agent can be antibacterial. In some embodiments, the antimicrobial agent can be antiviral. In some embodiments, the antimicrobial agent can be antibacterial and antiviral.

When present, the amount of the antimicrobial agent in the anti-adherent compositions can be in an amount between about 0.01% to about 5% (by total weight of the composition), or in some embodiments between about 0.05% to about 3% (by total weight of the composition).

Preservatives

The anti-adherent compositions may include various preservatives to increase shelf life. Some suitable preservatives that may be used in the present disclosure include, but are not limited to phenoxyethanol, capryl glycol, glyceryl caprylate, sorbic acid, gallic acid, KATHON CG®, which is a mixture of methylchloroisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone, (available from Rohm & Haas Company, Philadelphia, PA); DMDM hydantoin (e.g., GLYDANT, available from Lonza, Inc., Fair Lawn, NJ); EDTA and salts thereof; iodopropynyl butylcarbamate; benzoic esters (parabens), such as methylparaben, propylparaben, butylparaben, ethylparaben, isopropylparaben, isobutylparaben, benzylparaben, sodium methylparaben, and sodium propylparaben; 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol; benzoic acid; and the like. Other suitable preservatives include those sold by Sutton Labs Inc., Chatham, NJ, such as “GERMALL 115” (imidazolidinyl urea), “GERMALL II” (diazolidinyl urea), and “GERMALL PLUS” (diazolidinyl urea and iodopropynyl butylcarbonate).

The amount of the preservative in the anti-adherent compositions is dependent on the relative amounts of other components present within the composition. For example, in some embodiments, the preservative is present in the compositions in an amount between about 0.001% to about 5% (by total weight of the composition), in some embodiments between about 0.01 to about 3% (by total weight of the composition), and in some embodiments, between about 0.05% to about 1.0% (by total weight of the composition).

Preparation of Anti-adherent Compositions

The anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure may be prepared by combining ingredients at room temperature and mixing.

In one embodiment, when the anti-adherent composition is to be applied to the skin of an individual, the composition includes the anti-adherent agent, a hydrophilic carrier and a hydrophilic thickener. Suitable hydrophilic carriers can be, for example, water, glycerin, glycerin derivatives, glycols, water-soluble emollients, and combinations thereof. Suitable examples of glycerin derivatives could include, but are not to be limited to, PEG-7 glyceryl cocoate. Suitable glycols could include, but are not to be limited to, propylene glycol, butylene glycol, pentylene glycol, ethoxydiglycol, dipropylene glycol, propanediol, and PEG-8. Suitable examples of water-soluble emollients could include, but are not to be limited to, PEG-6 Caprylic Capric Glycerides, Hydrolyzed Jojoba Esters, and PEG-10 Sunflower Glycerides.

Delivery Vehicles

The anti-adherent compositions of the present disclosure may be used in combination with a product. For example, the composition may be incorporated into or onto a substrate, such as a wipe substrate, an absorbent substrate, a fabric or cloth substrate, a tissue or paper towel substrate, or the like. In one embodiment, the anti-adherent composition may be used in combination with a wipe substrate to form a wet wipe or may be a wetting composition for use in combination with a wipe which may be dispersible. In other embodiments, the anti-adherent composition may be incorporated into wipes such as wet wipes, hand wipes, face wipes, cosmetic wipes, cloths and the like. In yet other embodiments, the anti-adherent compositions described herein can be used in combination with numerous personal care products, such as absorbent articles. Absorbent articles of interest are diapers, training pants, adult incontinence products, feminine hygiene products, and the like; bath or facial tissue; and paper towels. Personal protective equipment articles of interest include but are not limited to masks, gowns, gloves, caps, and the like.

In one embodiment, the wet wipe may comprise a nonwoven material that is wetted with an aqueous solution termed the “wetting composition,” which may include or be composed entirely of the anti-adherent compositions disclosed herein. As used herein, the nonwoven material comprises a fibrous material or substrate, where the fibrous material or substrate comprises a sheet that has a structure of individual fibers or filaments randomly arranged in a mat-like fashion. Nonwoven materials may be made from a variety of processes including, but not limited to, airlaid processes, wet-laid processes such as with cellulosic-based tissues or towels, hydroentangling processes, staple fiber carding and bonding, melt blown, and solution spinning.

The fibers forming the fibrous material may be made from a variety of materials including natural fibers, synthetic fibers, and combinations thereof. The choice of fibers may depend upon, for example, the intended end use of the finished substrate and the fiber cost. For instance, suitable fibers may include, but are not limited to, natural fibers such as cotton, linen, jute, hemp, wool, wood pulp, etc. Similarly, suitable fibers may also include: regenerated cellulosic fibers, such as viscose rayon and cuprammonium rayon; modified cellulosic fibers, such as cellulose acetate; or synthetic fibers, such as those derived from polypropylenes, polyethylenes, polyolefins, polyesters, polyamides, polyacrylics, etc. Regenerated cellulose fibers, as briefly discussed above, include rayon in all its varieties as well as other fibers derived from viscose or chemically modified cellulose, including regenerated cellulose and solvent-spun cellulose, such as Lyocell. Among wood pulp fibers, any known papermaking fibers may be used, including softwood and hardwood fibers. Fibers, for example, may be chemically pulped or mechanically pulped, bleached or unbleached, virgin or recycled, high yield or low yield, and the like. Chemically treated natural cellulosic fibers may be used, such as mercerized pulps, chemically stiffened or crosslinked fibers, or sulfonated fibers.

In addition, cellulose produced by microbes and other cellulosic derivatives may be used. As used herein, the term “cellulosic” is meant to include any material having cellulose as a major constituent, and, specifically, comprising at least 50 percent by weight cellulose or a cellulose derivative. Thus, the term includes cotton, typical wood pulps, non-woody cellulosic fibers, cellulose acetate, cellulose triacetate, rayon, thermomechanical wood pulp, chemical wood pulp, debonded chemical wood pulp, milkweed, or bacterial cellulose. Blends of one or more of any of the previously described fibers may also be used, if so desired.

The fibrous material may be formed from a single layer or multiple layers. In the case of multiple layers, the layers are generally positioned in a juxtaposed or surface-to-surface relationship and all or a portion of the layers may be bound to adjacent layers. The fibrous material may also be formed from a plurality of separate fibrous materials wherein each of the separate fibrous materials may be formed from a different type of fiber.

Airlaid nonwoven fabrics are particularly well suited for use as wet wipes. The basis weights for airlaid nonwoven fabrics may range from about 20 to about 200 grams per square meter (gsm) with staple fibers having a denier of about 0.5 to about 10 and a length of about 6 to about 15 millimeters. Wet wipes may generally have a fiber density of about 0.025 g/cc to about 0.2 g/cc. Wet wipes may generally have a basis weight of about 20 gsm to about 150 gsm. More desirably the basis weight may be from about 30 to about 90 gsm. Even more desirably the basis weight may be from about 50 gsm to about 75 gsm.

Processes for producing airlaid non-woven basesheets are described in, for example, published U.S. Pat. App. No. 2006/0008621, herein incorporated by reference to the extent it is consistent herewith.

As a result of the present disclosure, it has been discovered that an anti-adherent composition including an anti-adherent agent can be employed to inhibit the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface. Thus, in one embodiment, the anti-adherent composition can be applied to a surface (e.g., countertop, wall, table, skin, etc.) to reduce the amount of DNA viruses that will adhere to that surface. By reducing the amount of DNA viruses that will adhere to that surface, the anti-adherent composition can be used to reduce the likelihood that individuals come into contact with the DNA viruses, and thereby reduce the spreading of the DNA viruses. This benefit could be provided whether the anti-adherent composition was provided in the form of a liquid, gel, or foam; or incorporated into a wash, or is provided on or in a delivery vehicle such as a fibrous substrate (e.g., a wipe).

As shown by the examples and testing described further below, and specifically in Table 1, the use of the anti-adherent agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose provided a reduction of the attachment of DNA viruses to a polystyrene surface by at least 0.20 Log of viruses, or at least 0.25 Log of viruses, or at least 0.29 Log of viruses, according to the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface, discussed below. As will be discussed further below, this result is surprising from the standpoint that the composition including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose when tested against Gram negative bacteria (Escherichia coli) provided an increase in adherence of the Gram negative bacteria to a polystyrene surface, as noted in Table 5, as well as an increase in adherence of RNA viruses to a polystyrene surface, as noted in Table 2. Additionally, this composition provided an unexpected result from the standpoint that various other compositions including agents that led to anti-adherent properties to DNA viruses exhibited anti-adherent properties against bacteria, and not adherent properties against bacteria as did C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose.

This dichotomy of properties of inhibiting adherence of DNA viruses but increasing the adherence of Gram negative bacteria can provide a benefit in an embodiment where compositions including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose are applied to a surface and then at least some of agent is removed from the surface, for example with a substrate. For example, compositions including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose can be applied to the surface by spraying a liquid or foam composition and then wiped off with a fibrous substrate. Alternatively, compositions including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose could be incorporated into a wipe and the agent could be applied to the surface by contacting the surface with the wipe. In either format, at least some of the composition including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose can remain on the surface, in which the anti-adherent properties of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose can provide a reduction of adherence of DNA viruses to that surface. The agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose provides the additional benefit in these examples that can help to remove Gram negative bacteria (e.g., Escherichia coli). Thus, compositions including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose can help prevent DNA viruses from adhering and collecting on the surface, but at the same time help remove potentially harmful Gram negative bacteria from that same surface, which can then be disposed by the fibrous substrate. This is true whether the compositions including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose are applied to the surface as a liquid, gel, foam, etc. and then wiped off the surface with a fibrous substrate or whether the compositions including the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose are incorporated into a substrate (e.g., a wetting composition in a wipe) and then applied to the surface.

The disclosure will be more fully understood upon consideration of the following non-limiting examples described in the following section on testing.

TESTING

Attachment Against DNA Viruses

The anti-adherent composition that inhibits the attachment of DNA viruses to a surface, including the anti-adherent agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose, was discovered through testing a variety of compounds as anti-adherent agents against DNA viruses via the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface. Table 1 below shows the variety of compounds that were tested as agents in a composition, as well as the results that related to the percent reduction in viruses, the Logarithmic Reduction compared to growth controls, the T-Test Value, and whether the Logarithmic Reduction was statistically significant (S for significant, NS for not significant). As will be discussed in further detail below, a positive logarithmic reduction in viruses equates to anti-adherent properties against DNA viruses (e.g., inhibits attachment), and a negative logarithmic reduction in viruses equates to adherent properties against DNA viruses (e.g., increases attachment).

As can be seen from Table 1, several of the compounds exhibited positive logarithmic reductions in testing against DNA viruses, and thus, can help to inhibit adherence of a DNA virus to a surface. However, almost all of the compounds exhibiting positive logarithmic reductions in testing against DNA viruses also exhibited positive logarithmic reductions in testing against bacteria (see results shown in Tables 3-6). Surprisingly, C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose (Compound No. 6 in Table 1) was the only agent of those tested that inhibited adherence of a DNA virus to a surface, but also increased adherence to bacteria. In other words, all of the remaining agents that inhibited adherence to DNA viruses, also exhibited similar anti-adherent behavior towards either Gram negative bacteria, Gram positive bacteria, or both. Looking specifically at the agent of C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose, the logarithmic reduction in DNA viruses was 0.29, but this agent provided a logarithmic reduction of −4.2 for Gram negative bacteria, thus it was inhibiting adherence to DNA viruses, but increasing adherence to Gram negative bacteria. This result of anti-adherent properties against DNA viruses for the composition including C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose is further surprising from the standpoint that when a composition including C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose was tested against RNA viruses (see Table 2), the compound increased adherence (logarithmic reduction of −0.18).

The DNA virus that the compositions were tested against for attachment behaviors was Phi X 174. Bacteriophage are commonly utilized as surrogates of mammalian viruses in both medical and virology applications. Phi X174 is commonly utilized as a viral surrogate because of its size, morphology, environmental stability, and non-human infectivity, and the ability for use in high throughput assays. Phi X174 has been previously been used to study barrier efficacy, making it an ideal surrogate to study attachment to a surface (See, Hamann and Nelson, Am J Infect Control, 1993, 21:289-96, O'Connell, et al, Clin Microb Infect, 2004, 10:322-6, ASTM F1671/F1671M-13, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Materials Used in Protective Clothing to Penetration by Blood-Borne Pathogens Using Phi X174 Bacteriophage Penetration as a Test System). Thus, it is well accepted by those of ordinary skill in the art that Phi X 174 serves as a surrogate for other DNA viruses, and the compositions including the adherent agents noted above would act in a substantially similar behavior to other DNA viruses as they did against Phi X 174.

TABLE 1

Compounds and corresponding Log Reduction of DNA virus using the High

Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface

Log R

(PFU/mL)

Compound
Con.

compared

Statistical

Compound
Name
Wt.

Percent
to growth
T-Test
Signif.

#
Type
(Manufacturer)
%*
INCI Name
Reduction
controls
Value
e(p < 0.05)

1
Modified
Sigma HPMC
3
Hydroxypropyl
85.06%
0.83
0
S

cellulose
(Sigma Aldrich)

methylcellulose

2
Modified
Benecel A4c
1
Methylcellulose
90.70%
1.03
0
S

cellulose
(Ashland Inc.)

3
Modified
Benecel E15
1
Hydroxypropyl-
91.22%
1.06
0
S

cellulose
(Ashland Inc.)

cellulose

4
Modified
Natrosol LR
1
Hydroxyethyl-
97.41%
1.59
0
S

cellulose
(Ashland Inc.)

cellulose

5
Polysaccharide
Structure Cel
3
Methyl
−162.21%
−0.42
0
S

8000

Hydroxyethyl

(AkzoNobel)

Cellulose (MHEC)

6
Polysaccharide
Structure Cel
1.5
C_12-16Alkyl PEG-2
48.84%
0.29
0
S

500

Hydroxypropyl

(AkzoNobel)

Hydroxyethyl

Ethylcellulose

7
Polymeric
Aristoflex Velvet
0.4
Polyacrylate
50.37%
0.3
0.01
S

sulfonic acid,
(Clariant)

Crosspolymer-11

neutralized

8
Hydrophobically
Aculyn 22
2
Acrylates/Steareth-
94.14%
1.23
0
S

modified
(Dow Chemicals)

20 Methacrylate

acrylate

Copolymer

9
Synthetic
Eastman AQ
5
Polyester-5
98.72%
1.89
0
S

polymer
(Eastman

Chemical Co.)

10
Synthetic
Pluronic 62
5
Ethylene
96.57%
1.46
0
S

polymer
(BASF

Oxide/Propylene

Corporation)

Oxide Block

Copolymer

11
Modified
Arlasilk PLN
5
Linoleamidopropyl
84.51%
0.81
0
S

silicone
(Croda, Inc.)

PG-Dimonium

Chloride

Phosphate

Dimethicone

12
Hydrophobically
Aculyn 38
2
Acrylates/Vinyl
75.38%
0.61
0
S

modified
(Dow Chemicals)

Neodecanoate

acrylate

Crosspolymer

13
anionic
SESAFLASH
5
Glycerin⁺,
89.07%
0.96
0
S

polymeric
(Seppic)

Acrylates

emulsifier

Copolymer,

VP/Polycarbamyl

Polyglycol Ester,

Hydrolyzed

Sesame Protein

PG-Propyl

Methylsilanediol⁺

14
Synthetic
Pecogel GC-310
5
VP/Dimethylamino
−32.41%
−0.12
0.11
NS

polymer
(Phoenix

ethylmethacrylate/

Chemicals)

Polycarbamyl

Polyglycol Ester

15
Silicone
DC 193 Fluid
6
PEG-12
97.90%
1.68
0
S

(Dow Chemicals)

Dimethicone

16
Synthetic
Sepimax ZEN
0.4
Polyacrylate
70.51%
0.53
0
S

polymer
(Fairfield)

Crosspolymer-6

17
Synthetic
Ultrez 10
0.4
Carbomer
74.08%
0.59
0
S

polymer
(Lubrizol

Corporation)

18
Silicone
Dow Corning
100
Dimethicone
78.79%
0.67
0
S

200 (100 cst)

(Dow Corning)

19
Polysaccharide
Protanal Ester
4
Propylene Glycol
94.43%
1.25
0
S

BV 3750

Alginate

20
Modified
Polyderm PPI-
5
Bis-PEG-15
97.64%
1.63
0
S

silicone
SI-WS (Alzo)

Dimethicone/IPDI

Copolymer

21
Silicone
KF889s
5
Amodimethicone
97.97%
1.69
0
S

22
Modified
Silsoft 875
5
PEG-12
95.17%
1.32
0
S

silicone
(Momentive)

Dimethicone

23
Synthetic
Flexithix
5
PVP
92.85%
1.15
0
S

polymer
(Ashland Inc.)

24
Hydrophilic film
Polyolpre-
15
PEG-8/SMDI
99.43%
2.24
0
S

former
polymer-15

Copolymer

(Barnet)

25
Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
C10-30 Alkyl
83.27%
0.78
0
S

polymer
(Lubrizol)

Acrylate

Crosspolymer

*Con. Wt. % = Concentration of Compound in 5% glycerin and QS water, by total weight of solution, percent (unless otherwise noted)

⁺Carriers for the agent

Attachment Against RNA Viruses

Testing was also conducted of various compositions against RNA viruses using the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface Test Method as described herein. As noted above, the composition including C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose provided adherent properties to RNA viruses, as shown in Composition No. 6 in Table 2 below.

The RNA virus that the compositions were tested against for attachment behaviors was MS2. Bacteriophage are commonly utilized as surrogates of mammalian viruses in both medical and virology applications. MS2 phage is commonly utilized as a viral surrogate because of its size, morphology, environmental stability, non-human infectivity, and the ability for use in high throughput assays. Additionally, MS2 is commonly used as a surrogate to study the spread of human Norovirus (See, Tung-Thompson, et al, PLoS One, 2015, 10(8): e0134277, Dawson D J, et al, J App Micro, 2005, 98: 203-209, Jones, et al, J Hosp Infect, 1991, 17:279-85). The use of MS2 phage in hand sanitizer studies makes it an ideal surrogate to study the interaction of personal care products and viral attachment. It is believed that compositions including the adherent agents noted above would act in a substantially similar behavior to other RNA viruses as they did against MS2.

TABLE 2

Compounds and corresponding Log Reduction of RNA virus using the High

Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface

Log R

(PFU/mL)

Compound
Con.

compared

Statistical

Compound
Name
Wt.

Percent
to growth
T-Test
Signif.

#
Type
(Manufacturer)
%*
INCI Name
Reduction
controls
Value
e(p < 0.05)

1
Modified
Sigma HPMC
3
Hydroxypropyl
26.35%
0.13
0.32
NS

cellulose
(Sigma Aldrich)

methylcellulose

2
Modified
Benecel A4c
1
Methylcellulose
−438.40%
−0.73
0.01
S

cellulose
(Ashland Inc.)

3
Modified
Benecel E15
1
Hydroxypropyl-
80.17%
0.70
0.02
S

cellulose
(Ashland Inc.)

cellulose

4
Modified
Natrosol LR
1
Hydroxyethyl-
80.20%
0.70
0.01
S

cellulose
(Ashland Inc.)

cellulose

5
Polysaccharide
Structure Cel
3
Methyl
−1391.29%
−1.17
0
S

8000

Hydroxyethyl

(AkzoNobel)

Cellulose (MHEC)

6
Polysaccharide
Structure Cel
1.5
C_12-16Alkyl PEG-2
−51.65%
−0.18
0.27
NS

500

Hydroxypropyl

(AkzoNobel)

Hydroxyethyl

Ethylcellulose

7
Polymeric
Aristoflex Velvet
0.4
Polyacrylate
99.01%
2.00
0
S

sulfonic acid,
(Clariant)

Crosspolymer-11

neutralized

8
Hydrophobically
Aculyn 22
2
Acrylates/Steareth-
20.14%
0.10
0.21
NS

modified
(Dow Chemicals)

20 Methacrylate

acrylate

Copolymer

9
Synthetic
Eastman AQ
5
Polyester-5
−133.58%
−0.37
0
S

polymer
(Eastman

Chemical Co.)

10
Synthetic
Pluronic 62
5
Ethylene
99.17%
2.08
0
S

polymer
(BASF

Oxide/Propylene

Corporation)

Oxide Block

Copolymer

11
Modified
Arlasilk PLN
5
Linoleamidopropyl
95.08%
1.31
0
S

silicone
(Croda, Inc.)

PG-Dimonium

Chloride

Phosphate

Dimethicone

12
Hydrophobically
Aculyn 38
2
Acrylates/Vinyl
−37.97%
−0.14
0.25
NS

modified
(Dow Chemicals)

Neodecanoate

acrylate

Crosspolymer

13
anionic
SESAFLASH
5
Glycerin⁺,
91.27%
1.06
0
S

polymeric
(Seppic)

Acrylates

emulsifier

Copolymer,

VP/Polycarbamyl

Polyglycol Ester,

Hydrolyzed

Sesame Protein

PG-Propyl

Methylsilanediol⁺

14
Synthetic
Pecogel GC-310
5
VP/Dimethylamino
82.37%
0.75
0
S

polymer
(Phoenix

ethylmethacrylate/

Chemicals)

Polycarbamyl

Polyglycol Ester

15
Silicone
DC 193 Fluid
6
PEG-12
95.99%
1.40
0
S

(Dow Chemicals)

Dimethicone

16
Synthetic
Sepimax ZEN
0.4
Polyacrylate
78.58%
0.67
0
S

polymer
(Fairfield)

Crosspolymer-6

17
Synthetic
Ultrez 10
0.4
Carbomer
79.17%
0.68
0
S

polymer
(Lubrizol

Corporation)

18
Silicone
Dow Corning
100
Dimethicone
96.88%
1.51
0
S

200 (100 cst)

(Dow Corning)

19
Polysaccharide
Protanal Ester
4
Propylene Glycol
83.69%
0.79
0
S

BV 3750

Alginate

20
Modified
Polyderm PPI-
5
Bis-PEG-15
93.24%
1.17
0
S

silicone
SI-WS (Alzo)

Dimethicone/IPDI

Copolymer

21
Silicone
KF889s
5
Amodimethicone
47.62%
0.28
0.06
NS

22
Modified
Silsoft 875
5
PEG-12
27.70%
0.14
0.26
NS

silicone
(Momentive)

Dimethicone

23
Synthetic
Flexithix
5
PVP
−167.22%
−0.43
0.04
S

polymer
(Ashland Inc.)

24
Hydrophilic film
Polyolpre-
15
PEG-8/SMDI
50.29%
0.30
0.08
NS

former
polymer-15

Copolymer

(Barnet)

25
Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
C10-30 Alkyl
−8.93%
−0.04
0.43
NS

polymer
(Lubrizol)

Acrylate

Crosspolymer

*Con. Wt. % = Concentration of Compound in 5% glycerin and QS water, by total weight of solution, percent (unless otherwise noted)

⁺Carriers for the agent

Attachment Against Bacteria

Of the agents tested against DNA and RNA viruses, almost all of the same agents were also tested in compositions against bacteria using either a High Throughput Attachment Test (results shown in Tables 3, 5, and 6) or a Viable Count Attachment Test (results shown in Table 4). The High Throughput Attachment Test and the Viable Count Attachment Test are discussed in further detail below. Unless noted to the contrary, the agents were tested against Gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus, and Gram-negative Escherichia coli. The pH of the compositions for this testing between 3 to 10 pH, or about 4 to about 8 pH.

TABLE 3

Compounds and corresponding Log Reduction of E. coli and

S. aureus using the High Throughput Attachment Test Method.

Average
Average

Con.

Log reduction
Log reduction

Wt.

E. coli

S. aureus

Compound
%*
INCI Name
ATCC** 11229
ATCC** 6538

ACULYN 22
2
Acrylates/Steareth-20
1.3
1.6

Methacrylate Copolymer

ARISTOFLEX VELVET
0.40
Polyacrylate Crosspolymer-11
2.6
2.1

HPMC
3
Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose
2.6
2.5

PECOGEL GC-310
5
VP/Dimethylaminoethylmethacrylate/
1.3
1.8

Polycarbamyl Polyglycol

Ester

POLYOL-
10
PEG-8 SMDI Copolymer
1.2
1.4

PREPOLYMER 15

SESAFLASH
5
Glycerin⁺, Acrylates
1.1
1.0

Copolymer, VP/Polycarbamyl

Polyglycol Ester, Hydrolyzed

Sesame Protein PG-Propyl

Methylsilanediol⁺

Dow Corning 200
100
Dimethicone
Not tested
1.8

(100 cst)

*Con. Wt. % = Concentration of Compound in 5% glycerin and QS water, by total weight of solution, percent (unless otherwise noted)

**“ATCC” is the acronym for the American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA

⁺Carriers for the agents

TABLE 4

Compounds and corresponding Log Reduction of E. coli and S. aureus using the Viable Count

Attachment Test Method. Unless specified, the final pH of the agents was between 5 and 7.5.

Average
Average

Con.

Log reduction
Log reduction

Wt.

E. coli

S. aureus

Compound
%*
INCI
ATCC** 11229
ATCC** 6538

ACULYN 38
1
Acrylates/Vinyl Neodecanoate
0.74
Not tested

Crosspolymer

ACULYN 38⁺⁺
1
Acrylates/Vinyl Neodecanoate
0.62
0.67

Crosspolymer

BENECEL A4C
1
Methylcellulose
1.39
1.08

BENECEL E-15
1
Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose
2.34
1.58

NATROSOL 250 LR
1
Hydroxyethylcellulose
1.00
1.13

PROTANAL ESTER BV-
4
Propylene Glycol Alginate
0.76
0.70

3750

POLYDERM PPI-SI-WS
5
Bis-PEG-15 Dimethicone/IPDI
0.51
1.09

Copolymer

EASTMAN AQ 38
5
Polyester-5
0.90
0.71

FLEXITHIX
5
PVP
0.61
0.59

PLURONIC L 62
5
Ethylene Oxide/Propylene
1.86
1.72

Oxide Block Copolymer

SILSOFT 875
5
PEG-12 Dimethicone
0.55
1.46

SEPIMAX ZEN⁺⁺
0.4
Polyacrylate Crosspolymer-6
0.51
0.70

ARLASILK PLN
5
Linoleamidopropyl PG-
1.08
0.87

Dimonium Chloride Phosphate

Dimethicone

*Con. Wt. % = Concentration of Compound in 5% glycerin and QS water, by total weight of solution, percent (unless otherwise noted)

**“ATCC” is the acronym for the American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA

⁺⁺Provided with 60% ethanol, 5% glycerin (by total weight of the composition), QS water

Tables 5 and 6 provide additional attachment testing against bacteria. Table 5 provides the results of the attachment of Gram negative Escherichia coli to a polystyrene surface treated with various compositions including different compounds according to the High Throughput Attachment Test. Table 6 provides the results of the attachment of Gram positive Staphylococcus aureus to a polystyrene surface treated with various compositions including different compounds according to the High Throughput Attachment Test.

TABLE 5

Compounds and corresponding Log Reduction of

E. coli using the High Throughput Attachment Test

Average Log

Con.

reduction

Compound
Compound
Wt.

E. coli

Type
Name
%*
pH
INCI Name
(ATCC** 11229)

Polysaccharide
Structure Cel
1.5

Methyl Hydroxyethyl
−11.4

8000 M

Cellulose (MHEC)

Silicone
KF 889s
5.0

Amodimethicone
−8.4

Synthetic
Ultrez 10
5.0
4.4
Carbomer
−5.8

polymer

Polysaccharide
Structure Cel 500
3.0

C_12-16Alkyl PEG-2
−4.2

HM

Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl

Ethylcellulose

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
3.39
C_10-30Alkyl Acrylate
−1.0

Polymer

Crosspolymer

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
6.30
C_10-30Alkyl Acrylate
−0.9

Polymer

Crosspolymer

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2

C_10-30Alkyl Acrylate
−0.3

Polymer
Neutralized

Crosspolymer

Silicone
DC 193
5.0

PEG-12 Dimethicone
0.6

Polysaccharide
HPMC
3.0

Hydroxy Propyl Methyl
2.5

Cellulose

*Con. Wt. % = Concentration of Compound in 5% glycerin and QS water, by total weight of solution, percent (unless otherwise noted)

**“ATCC” is the acronym for the American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA

TABLE 6

Compounds and corresponding Log Reduction of Staphylococcus aureus

using the High Throughput Attachment Test

Average Log

reduction

Con.

S. aureus

Compound
Compound
Wt.

(ATCC**

Type
Name
%*
pH
INCI Name
6538)

Synthetic
Ultrez 10
5.0
4.4
Carbomer
−5.8

polymer

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
6.3
C_10-30Alkyl
−3.2

polymer

Acrylate

Crosspolymer

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
7.3
C_10-30Alkyl
−0.9

Polymer

Acrylate

Crosspolymer

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2
5.4
C_10-30Alkyl
−0.4

Polymer

Acrylate

Crosspolymer

Synthetic
Pemulen TR-2
0.2

C_10-30Alkyl
−0.1

Polymer
Neutralized

Acrylate

Crosspolymer

*Con. Wt. % = Concentration of Compound in 5% glycerin and QS water, by total weight of solution, percent (unless otherwise noted)

**“ATCC” is the acronym for the American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA

TEST METHODS

High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface

1.0 Test Methods:

Growth and purification of phage is outlined in the following steps.

- 1.1 Subculture: (these steps ensured that the organism are less than 5 generations removed from the original clinical isolate):
  - 1.1.1 Using a cryogenic stock (at −70° C.), a first sub-culture of the bacterial organisms listed above is streaked out on appropriate media.
  - 1.1.2 The plate is incubated at 36±2° C. for 24 hours and store the plate is wrapped in parafilm at 4° C.
  - 1.1.3 From the first sub-culture, a second sub-culture is streaked out on appropriate media. It is incubated at 36±2° C. for 24 hours. The second sub-culture is used within 24 hours starting from the time it is first removed from incubation.
  - 1.1.4 Organism(s) from the second sub-culture are inoculated into 30-200 mL OSB and incubated at 36±2° C. on a rotary shaker (at approximately 150 rpm) for 16-18 hours. This is to achieve an inoculum density of approximately 10⁹CFU/ml.
- 1.2 Prepare Top Agar:
  - 1.2.1 Top Agar is prepared by preparing 200 mL of OSB according to manufacturer's directions and adding 0.7% agar. After sterilization, the sterilized mix is stored in a water bath set at 49° C.
  - 1.2.2 The top agar solution is aliquoted by moving 4 mL into sterile tubes. The tubes are kept at 49 C until needed for use.
- 1.3 Preparation of bacterial host:
  - 1.3.1 40 mL of broth culture is moved to a centrifuge tube.
  - 1.3.2 The overnight broth culture is centrifuged at 4000×g for 5 minutes.
  - 1.3.3 The supernatant is decanted and the cells were re-suspended in the same volume (40 mL for example) of BPB.
  - 1.3.4 Steps 4.2.2 to 4.2.3 are repeated one more time.
- 1.4 Propagation of the Phage:
  - 1.4.1 The OSA plates to be used are warmed to room temperature.
  - 1.4.2 The top agar tubes are inoculated with 200 μL of concentrated phage stock from either an ATCC or a previously stored concentrated stock. For frozen stock 500 μL of TSB warmed to 49° C. is added before adding to the Top Agar.
  - 1.4.3 100 μL of the washed broth culture is added and swirled gently to mix.
  - 1.4.4 Each inoculated top agar tube is poured onto one prepared OSA plate. The plate is tilted to ensure that the top agar was spread across the entire surface.
  - 1.4.5 The top agar is allowed to solidify, was inverted and placed in an incubator at 37° C. for overnight growth.
  - 1.4.6 Following overnight growth the plates should show complete clearing.
  - 1.4.7 The SM Buffer solution is warmed to 49° C.
  - 1.4.8 2 mL of warmed SM Buffer is added to each plate and the top agar is scraped using sterile white Teflon policeman. A pipette is used to transfer all the SM buffer and top agar to a sterile tube. This is done for every plate.
  - 1.4.9 The collected top agar tubes are vortexed for 10-15 seconds.
  - 1.4.10 The vortexed tubes are centrifuged at 1000×g for 25 minutes.
  - 1.4.11 From each centrifuged tube the supernatants are pooled in one new sterile tube.
  - 1.4.12 A sterile 0.20 filter is prepared by flushing 2-3 mL of 3% w/v cold (4 C) beef extract through the filter and discarded.
  - 1.4.13 The prepared filter is used to filter the pooled recovered top agar into a fresh sterile tube.
  - 1.4.14 The collected filtrate is the purified phage. Plaque Forming Units (PFU) are checked by serially diluting and spot plating using the method described in section 4.5.
- 1.5 Phage (MS2 and PhiX 174) Enumeration:
  - 1.5.1 Phage is prepared for use from the stock by diluting 1:1 in BPB.
  - 1.5.2 Spot Plate Method:
  - 1.5.2.1 A cell dilution of ˜10⁶CFU/mL of E. coli (E. coli K12 is used for MS2 phage and E. coli C is used for PhiX 174) is prepared from the prepared washed broth culture by diluting in sterile BPB.
  - 1.5.2.2 An inoculum check is performed on the bacterial dilution in triplicate.
  - 1.5.2.3 In a 96 well plate, columns 1-12 are filled with 180 μL of the 10⁶CFU/ml E. coli suspension in BPB
  - 1.5.2.4 20 μL of the samples to be diluted is added in column 1.
  - 1.5.2.5 10-fold (10× Dilution) in BPB is performed from 10¹-10¹²by moving 20 μL from column 1 to column 2 and mixing. This is repeated, moving down the columns until column 12.
  - 1.5.2.6 20 μL (or 10 if agar permits) is spot plated on a large labelled OSA plate (spot plate every second column to avoid cross merging of spot plated phages.
  - 1.5.2.7 Plates are inverted & incubated for 24 h at 37° C.
  - 1.5.2.8 After 24 h the number of PFU is counted.
- 1.6 Preparation of the Challenge plates:

TABLE 7

The challenge will be tested using the specified

contact time (Total of 6 challenge plates). SC

wells are sterility controls for each experiment.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

A
A
B
C
D
E
F
SC-A
GC
GC

B
A
B
C
D
E
F
SC-B
GC
GC

C
A
B
C
D
E
F
SC-C
GC
GC

D
A
B
C
D
E
F
SC-D
GC
GC

E
A
B
C
D
E
F
SC-E
GC
GC

F
A
B
C
D
E
F
SC-F
GC
GC

G
A
B
C
D
E
F

GC
GC

H
A
B
C
D
E
F

GC
GC

- - 1.6.1 Preparation of compounds and coating compounds onto MBEC plate lid
  - 1.6.2 Using a positive displacement pipette aseptically add 200 μL of compounds to be tested to a sterile 96-well microplate according to the plate layout described below.
  - 1.6.3 Add 200 μL of each code to the appropriate well for sterility controls.
  - 1.6.4 Place the MBEC plate lid, peg side down into the 96-well microplate containing the test compound solutions.
  - 1.6.5 Allow the plate to sit at room temperature (25±3° C.) for 2 hrs.
  - 1.6.6 Remove the MBEC plate lid and allow the lid to dry at room temperature (25±3° C.) overnight in a laminar flow hood by spacing the MBEC plate lid from the MBEC plate trough with two 10 μL disposable loops.
- 1.7 Phage attachment to MBEC Lids:
  - 1.7.1 Using the phage prepared in 1:1 BPB from stock 100 μL is added to the wells indicated by the plate layout of the sterile 96 well plate.
  - 1.7.2 The sterile MBEC lid is placed into the wells.
  - 1.7.3 The plate is allowed to incubate for 1 hour at room temperature without shaking.
  - 1.7.4 Rinse plates, 3 plates per MBEC lid, by adding 200 μL of PBS to wells indicated by the plate layout of a sterile 96 well plate.
- 1.8 Phage recovery:
  - 1.8.1 Using flamed pliers the pegs are removed from the MBEC lid and placed in a tube containing 5 mL BPB.
  - 1.8.2 Vortex for 1 minute.
  - 1.8.3 Perform a serial dilution on the recovery solution.
  - 1.8.4 Enumerate the PFU by using one of the methods indicated previously.
- 1.9 LOG₁₀Reduction:
  - 1.9.1 In a 96 well plate, columns 1-12 are filled with 180 μL of the 10E6 CFU/ml of the appropriate E. coli suspension in BPB
  - 1.9.2 20 μL of the samples to be diluted is added in column 1.
  - 1.9.3 10-fold (10× Dilution) in BPB is performed from 10E1-10e12 by moving 20 μL from column 1 to column 2 and mixing. This is repeated, moving down the columns until column 12.
  - 1.9.4 20 μL (or 10 if agar permits) is spot plated on a large labelled OSA plate (spot plate every second column to avoid cross merging of spot plated phages.
  - 1.9.5 Plates are inverted & incubated for 24 h at 37° C.
  - 1.9.6 After 24 h the number of PFU is counted.
  - 1.9.7 Cell Enumeration:
    - 1.9.7.1 Count the appropriate number of colonies according to the plating method used.
    - 1.9.7.2 Calculate the arithmetic mean of the colonies counted on the plates.
      
      The log density for one peg is calculated as follows:
      
      LOG₁₀(PFU/peg)=LOG₁₀[(X/B)(D)] where:
- X=mean PFU,
- B=volume plated (0.02 mL)
- and D=dilution.
  
  Calculate the overall attached bacteria accumulation by calculating the mean of the log densities calculated.
  
  Calculate the LOG₁₀reduction for each dilution as follows: LOG 10 Reduction=Mean LOG₁₀Growth Control−Mean LOG₁₀Test.
  
  Calculate the Percent Reduction by calculating (Log₁₀(PFU/Peg) of the growth control pegs-Log₁₀(PFU/Peg) of the treated pegs)/Log₁₀(PFU/Peg) of the growth control pegs)×100
- 1.10 Accept or reject criteria
  - 1.10.1 Growth controls for the phage are between 4 and 6 Log 10
  - 1.10.2 Sterility controls do not show any growth.
    
    High Throughput Attachment Test Method

This test method specifies the operational parameters required to grow and or prevent the formation of bacterial attachment using a high throughput screening assay. The assay device consists of a plastic lid with ninety-six (96) pegs and a corresponding receiver plate with ninety-six (96) individual wells that have a maximum 200 μL working volume. Biofilm is established on the pegs under static batch conditions (i.e., no flow of nutrients into or out of an individual well).

1. Terminology

- 1.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
- 1.2.2 peg, n—biofilm sample surface (base: 5.0 mm, height: 13.1 mm).
- 1.2.3 peg lid, n—an 86×128 mm plastic surface consisting of ninety-six (96) identical pegs.
- 1.2.4 plate, n—an 86×128 mm standard plate consisting of ninety-six (96) identical wells.
- 1.2.5 well, n—small reservoir with a 50 to 200 μL working volume capacity.

2. Acronyms

- 2.2 ATCC: American Type Culture Collection
- 2.3 CFU: colony forming unit
- 2.4 rpm: revolutions per minute
- 2.5 SC: sterility control
- 2.6 TSA: tryptic soy agar
- 2.7 TSB: tryptic soy broth
- 2.8 GC: growth control

3. Apparatus

- 3.2 Inoculating loop—nichrome wire or disposable plastic.
- 3.3 Petri dish—large labelled (100×150×15 mm, plastic, sterile) for plating.
- 3.4 Microcentrifuge tubes—sterile, any with a 1.5 mL volume capacity.
- 3.5 96-well microtiter plate—sterile, 86×128 mm standard plate consisting of ninety-six (96) identical flat bottom wells with a 200 μL working volume
- 3.6 Vortex—any vortex that will ensure proper agitation and mixing of microfuge tubes.
- 3.7 Pipette—continuously adjustable pipette with volume capability of 1 mL.
- 3.8 Micropipette—continuously adjustable pipette with working volume of 10 μL-200 μL.
- 3.9 Sterile pipette tips—200 uL and 1000 uL volumes.
- 3.10 Sterile reagent reservoir—50 mL polystyrene.
- 3.11 Sterilizer—any steam sterilizer capable of producing the conditions of sterilization.
- 3.12 Colony counter—any one of several types may be used. A hand tally for the recording of the bacterial count is recommended if manual counting is done.
- 3.13 Environmental incubator—capable of maintaining a temperature of 35±2° C. and relative humidity between 35 and 85%.
- 3.14 Reactor components—the MBEC Assay device available from Innovotech, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
- 3.15 Sterile conical tubes—50 mL, used to prepare initial inoculum.
- 3.16 Appropriate glassware—as required to make media and agar plates.
- 3.17 Erlenmeyer flask—used for growing broth inoculum.
- 3.18 Positive Displacement pipettes capable of pipetting 200 μL.
- 3.19 Sterile pipette tips appropriate for Positive Displacement pipettes.

4. Reagents and Materials

- 4.2 Purity of water—all references to water as diluent or reagent shall mean distilled water or water of equal purity.
- 4.3 Culture media:
- 4.4 Bacterial growth broth—Tryptic soy broth (TSB) prepared according to manufacturer's directions.
- 4.5 Bacterial plating medium—Tryptic soy agar (TSA) prepared according to manufacturer's directions.
- 4.6 Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS)—
- 4.7 Rinse Solution: Sterile PBS and TWEEN 80 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) 1% w/v.

5. Microorganisms

5.1 E. coli ATCC 11229 and S. aureus ATCC 6538

6. Test Method Overview: The Experimental Process for the High-Throughput Anti-Adherence Test Method. This Standard Protocol May be Broken into a Series of Small Steps, Each of which is Detailed in the Sections Below

- 6.1 Culture Preparation
- 6.1.1 E. coli ATCC 11229 and S. aureus ATCC 6538 are the organisms used in this test.
- 6.1.2 Using a cryogenic stock (at −70° C.), streak out a subculture of the above listed microorganisms on organism's specific agar (TSA).
- 6.1.3 Incubate at 35±2° C. for the period of time of 22±2 hours.
- 6.1.4 Aseptically remove isolated colony from streak plate and inoculate 20 mL of sterile TSB.
- 6.1.5 Incubate flask at 35±2° C. and 175±10 rpm for 16 to 18 hours (E. coli and S. aureus). Viable bacterial density should be 10⁹CFU/mL and should be checked by serial dilution and plating.
- 6.1.6 Pipette 10 mL from the incubation flask of E. coli and S. aureus into a 50 mL conical tube and spin down at 5 minutes at 4,000×g. Then remove supernatant and Resuspend in 10 mL sterile PBS. Approximate cell density should be 10⁷-10⁹CFU/mL. Vortex the sample for approximately 30 seconds to achieve a homogeneous distribution of cells.
- 6.1.7 Perform 10-fold serial dilutions of the inoculum in triplicate.
- 6.1.8 Plate appropriate dilutions on appropriately labelled TSA plates. Incubate the plates at 35±2° C. for 22±2 hours depending on the isolates growth rate and enumerate.
- 6.2 Preparation of the Challenge plates:
- 6.2.1 Preparation of compounds and coating compounds onto MBEC plate lid
- 6.2.1.1.1 Using a positive displacement pipette aseptically add 200 μL of compounds and control to be tested to a sterile 96-well microplate according to the plate layout of Table 4.

TABLE 8

Sample layout of 96-well MBEC plate.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

E. coli

A
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T1-SC

E. coli

B
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T2-SC

E. coli

C
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T3-SC

E. coli

D
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T4-SC

S. aureus

E
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T5-SC

S. aureus

F
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T6-SC

S. aureus

G
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T7-SC

S. aureus

H
AC
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
NT-GC
T8-SC

AC = Attachment Control

SC = Sterility Control

NT-GC = No Treatment Growth Control

T1-T8 = Test Codes

- 6.2.1.1.2 Add 200 μL of each code to the appropriate well for sterility controls.
- 6.2.1.1.3 Place the MBEC plate lid, peg side down into the 96-well microplate containing the test compound solutions.
- 6.2.1.1.4 Allow the plate to sit at room temperature (25±3° C.) for 2 hours.
- 6.2.1.1.5 Remove the MBEC plate lid and allow the lid to dry at room temperature (25±3° C.) overnight in a laminar flow hood.

7.1 Bacterial Adherence Challenge

- 7.1.1 Add 100 μL of diluted bacteria to the appropriate wells in a sterile 96-well microplate as indicated in the plate layout in Table 4.
- 7.1.2 Add 200 μL of sterile PBS to the sterility controls.
- 7.1.3 The MBEC containing dried compounds is then inserted into the bacterial inoculated 96 well flat bottom microplate from section 9.3.1 7.1.4 Incubate stationary at room temperature (25±3° C.) for 15 minutes.
- 7.1.5 Remove the MBEC lid and place into a 96-well microplate containing 200 μL PBS+1% w/v TWEEN 80. Incubate stationary at room temperature (25±3° C.) for 15 seconds.
- 7.1.6 Repeat step 7.1.5 for two additional washes for a total of 3 washes.

7.2 Method to Determine Number of Attached Bacteria

- 7.2.1 Transfer the washed MBEC plate lid to a 96-well plate containing 200 μL ALAMARBLUE reagent (prepared according to manufacturer's directions, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA) in each well to be tested.
- 7.2.2 The final plate is transferred to a SPECTRAMAX GEMINI EM microplate reader (Molecular Devices, Inc. Sunnyvale, CA USA) for a 20 hour kinetic, bottom read with an excitation of 560 nm and emission of 590 nm. The rate of fluorescence development (relative fluorescence units (RFU)/minute) is determined for each well.
- 7.2.3 Data was analyzed using a standard curve (described below) for each organism to determine the numbers of bacteria attached to the pegs (Log CFU/mL) present in each sample. Number of attached bacteria was quantified by incubating with an ALAMARBLUE reagent and measuring fluorescence development over time.
- 7.2.4 From these data, the Log CFU/mL reduction of each time point relative to the growth control is calculated to determine the activity of each code.

7.3 Method for Generating a Standard Curve with bacteria in an ALAMARBLUE Solution:

- 7.3.1 Standard curves were constructed for each organism to define the rate of fluorescence development as a function of bacterial concentration, as determined via viable plate counts. This standard curve provided the ability to relate rate of fluorescence development (RFU/minute) to the Log CFU/mL number of bacteria present in a given sample
- 7.3.2 Day 1:
- 7.3.2.1 Aseptically remove loopful of bacteria strain to be tested from freezer stock and place in 20 mL of TSB media in a culture flask.
- 7.3.2.2 Incubate with shaking (200 rpm) for 22±2 hours at 37±2° C.
- 7.3.3 Day 2:
- 7.3.3.1 Aseptically transfer 100 μL of the 22±2 hours freezer stock cultures into 20 mL of TSB media in a culture flask.
- 7.3.3.2 Incubate cultures on a gyrorotary shaker (200 rpm) for 22±2 hours at 37±2° C.
- 7.3.3.3 Perform a streak for isolation from the culture flask on TSA. Incubate plate for 22±2 hours at 37±2° C.
- 7.3.4 Day 3:
- 7.3.4.1 Prepare an ALAMARBLUE solution according to the manufacturer's directions.
- 7.3.4.2 Remove culture flask from shaking incubator after 22±2 hours. Pipette 1 mL of bacteria into a 1.7 mL microcentrifuge tube.
- 7.3.4.3 Centrifuge the bacteria at 4000×g.
- 7.3.4.4 Resuspend bacterial cells in sterile PBS. Perform a total of two washes.
- 7.3.4.5 Perform 1:10 serial dilutions with washed bacterial culture in 0.9 mL dilution blanks of sterile PBS (100 μL culture into 900 μL of sterile PBS).
- 7.3.4.6 Plate appropriate dilutions of prepared bacteria.
- 7.3.4.7 Add 270 μL of ALAMARBLUE solution to wells A-D: columns 1-7 of a 96-well plate.
- 7.3.4.8 Add 30 μL of bacterial dilution the wells of a 96-well plate (n=4 per dilution).
- 7.3.4.9 Add 30 μL of sterile PBS to wells A-D, column 8 for a background control.
- 7.3.4.10 Place plate in a bottom reading spectrophotometer that measures fluorescence. Set temp to 37° C. Perform assay at 37° C., read every 20 minutes for 24 hours at 560 excite and 590 emit.
- 7.3.4.11 Enumerate the dilutions.
- 7.3.4.12 Calculate the mean rate of fluorescence development.
- 7.3.4.13 Plot the mean rate of fluorescence development as a function of the mean CFU/mL of the dilutions.
  
  Viable Count Attachment Test Method

This test method specifies the operational parameters required to grow and or prevent the formation of bacterial attachment using viable counts. The assay device consists of a plastic lid with ninety-six (96) pegs and a corresponding receiver plate with ninety-six (96) individual wells that have a maximum 200 μL working volume. Biofilm is established on the pegs under static batch conditions (i.e., no flow of nutrients into or out of an individual well).

This test method is identical to the High Throughput Attachment Test Method except that Section 7.1 through 7.3.4.13 is replaced with the following:

A. Bacterial Adherence Challenge:

- A.1 Add 100 μL of diluted bacteria to the appropriate wells in a sterile 96-well microplate as indicated in the plate layout in Table 4.
- A.2 Add 200 μL of sterile PBS to the sterility controls.
- A.3 The MBEC containing dried compounds is then inserted into the bacterial inoculated 96 well flat bottom microplate from section 9.3.1

B. Recovery:

- B.1 After the 15 minute contact time, transfer the MBEC™ lid to the rinse plate where each well contains 200 μL for 15 seconds of saline and 1% Tween 80 to wash of any loosely attached planktonic cells. Repeat this for 3 separate wash plates.
- B.2 S. aureus Recovery:
  - B.2.1 Break the corresponding pegs from the MBEC™ lid using a sterile pliers and transfer them into 50 mL conical tubes containing 10 mL PBS.
  - B.2.2 Vortex the conical tubes for 10 seconds
  - B.2.3 Transfer the conical tubes to the sonicator and sonicate on high. Sonicate for 1 minute on. Then allow the tubes to rest for 1 minute. Repeat the sonication step for a total of 5 minutes of sonication to dislodge surviving attached bacteria. The conical tubes were placed in the sonicator water bath using a float.
  - B.2.4 Vortex the conical tubes again for 10 seconds.
- 8.3 E. coli Recovery:
  - B.3.1 Transfer the MBEC™ lid to a plate containing 200 μL PBS.
  - B.3.2 Transfer the plate to the sonicator and sonicate on high for 10 minutes to dislodge surviving attached bacteria. The plates are placed in a dry stainless steel insert tray which sits in the water of the sonicator. The vibrations created in the water by the sonicator transfer through the insert tray to actively sonicate the contents of the 96 well recovery plate(s).

C. LOG₁₀Reduction:

- C.1 Following sonication, place 100 μL from each well of the MBEC™ plate, into the first 12 empty wells of the first row of a 96 well-micro titer plate. Place 180 μL of sterile 0.9% saline in the remaining rows.
- C.2 Prepare a serial dilution (10⁰-10⁻⁷) by moving 20 μL down each of the 8 rows.
- C.3 Remove 10 μL from each well and spot plate on a prepared TSA plates.
- C.4 Plates are incubated at 37±1° C. and counted after approximately 24 h hours of incubation.
- C.5 Data will be evaluated as Log 10 CFU/peg.
- C.6 Cell Enumeration:
- C.7 Count the appropriate number of colonies according to the plating method used.
- C.8 Calculate the arithmetic mean of the colonies counted on the plates.
  - C.8.1 The log density for one peg is calculated as follows:
    
    Log₁₀(CFU/peg)=Log₁₀[(X/B)(D)] where:
    - X=mean CFU; B=volume plated (0.02 mL); and D=dilution.
  - C.9 Calculate the overall attached bacteria accumulation by calculating the mean of the log densities calculated.
  - C.10 Calculate the Log₁₀reduction for each dilution as follows: LOG 10 Reduction=Mean LOG₁₀Growth Control−Mean Log₁₀Test.
    
    Explanation of Log Decrease

The compositions of the present disclosure exhibit a decrease of DNA viruses on surfaces. Log decrease, for example, may be determined from the decrease of DNA viruses adhered to a surface according to the following correlations:

Fold Decrease of Viruses
LOG Decrease

1
0.5

10
1

100
2

1000
3

In other words, surface exhibiting a decrease of viruses of 1 Log means the number of viruses on the fibrous substrate has decreased 10-fold, a decrease of 2 Log means the number of viruses has decreased 100-fold, a decrease of 3 Log means the number of viruses has decreased 1000-fold, etc., as compared to the number of bacteria present on a surface that is not treated with the disclosed composition. A larger Log decrease thus corresponds with a composition that is able to more effectively repel viruses.

EMBODIMENTS

Embodiment 1: A composition for inhibiting the attachment of DNA viruses to a surface, the composition comprising: a liquid carrier; an anti-adherent agent comprising C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose; and a humectant.

Embodiment 2: The composition of embodiment 1, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: glycerin, glycerin derivatives, hyaluronic acid derivatives, betaine derivatives amino acids, amino acid derivatives, glycosaminoglycans, glycols, polyols, sugars, sugar alcohols, hydrogenated starch hydrolysates, hydroxy acids, hydroxy acid derivatives, salts of PCA, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 3: The composition of embodiment 1, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: honey, sorbitol, hyaluronic acid, sodium hyaluronate, betaine, lactic acid, citric acid, sodium citrate, glycolic acid, sodium glycolate, sodium lactate, urea, propylene glycol, butylene glycol, pentylene glycol, ethoxydiglycol, methyl gluceth-10, methyl gluceth-20, PEG-2, PEG-3, PEG-4, PEG-5, PEG-6, PEG-7, PEG-8, PEG-9, PEG-10, xylitol, maltitol, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 4: The composition of embodiment 1, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: glycerin, a glycerin derivative, and combinations thereof.

Embodiment 5: The composition of any one of the preceding embodiments, further comprising an ingredient selected from the group consisting of an emollient, a surfactant, an antimicrobial agent, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 6: The composition of any one of the preceding embodiments, wherein the anti-adherent agent reduces the attachment of DNA viruses to a polystyrene surface by at least 0.25 Log of viruses according to the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface as described herein.

Embodiment 7: The composition of any one of the preceding embodiments, wherein the anti-adherent agent reduces the attachment of DNA viruses to a polystyrene Surface by at least 0.29 log of bacteria according to the High Throughput Test to Quantify the Attachment of Phage to a Surface as described herein.

Embodiment 8: The composition of any one of the preceding embodiments, wherein the liquid carrier is hydrophilic.

Embodiment 9: The composition of any one of the preceding embodiments, wherein the anti-adherent agent is present in the amount of about 0.01% to about 20.0% by weight of the composition, and wherein the humectant is present in the amount of about 0.01% to about 20.0% by weight of the composition.

Embodiment 10: A method for inhibiting the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface, the method comprising: providing a composition, the composition comprising: an anti-adherent agent comprising C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose; and applying the composition to the surface to inhibit the adherence of DNA viruses to the surface.

Embodiment 11: The method of embodiment 10, wherein the composition further comprises a liquid carrier and a humectant.

Embodiment 12: The method of embodiment 11, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: glycerin, glycerin derivatives, hyaluronic acid derivatives, betaine derivatives amino acids, amino acid derivatives, glycosaminoglycans, glycols, polyols, sugars, sugar alcohols, hydrogenated starch hydrolysates, hydroxy acids, hydroxy acid derivatives, salts of PCA, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 13: The method of embodiment 11, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: honey, sorbitol, hyaluronic acid, sodium hyaluronate, betaine, lactic acid, citric acid, sodium citrate, glycolic acid, sodium glycolate, sodium lactate, urea, propylene glycol, butylene glycol, pentylene glycol, ethoxydiglycol, methyl gluceth-10, methyl gluceth-20, PEG-2, PEG-3, PEG-4, PEG-5, PEG-6, PEG-7, PEG-8, PEG-9, PEG-10, xylitol, maltitol, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 14: The method of embodiment 11, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: glycerin, a glycerin derivative, and combinations thereof.

Embodiment 15: The method of any one of embodiments 10-14, further comprising an ingredient selected from the group consisting of an emollient, a surfactant, an antimicrobial agent, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 16: The method of any one of embodiments 10-15, further comprising: removing at least some of the composition from the surface while allowing at least some of the composition to remain on the surface.

Embodiment 17: A wipe for inhibiting the attachment of DNA viruses to a surface, the wipe comprising: a nonwoven substrate; and a composition comprising: a liquid carrier; and an anti-adherent agent comprising C12-16 Alkyl PEG-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose.

Embodiment 18: The wipe of embodiment 17, wherein the composition further comprises a humectant.

Embodiment 19: The wipe of embodiment 18, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: glycerin, glycerin derivatives, hyaluronic acid derivatives, betaine derivatives amino acids, amino acid derivatives, glycosaminoglycans, glycols, polyols, sugars, sugar alcohols, hydrogenated starch hydrolysates, hydroxy acids, hydroxy acid derivatives, salts of PCA, and any combination thereof.

Embodiment 20: The wipe of embodiment 18, wherein the humectant is selected from the group consisting of: glycerin, a glycerin derivative, and combinations thereof.

When introducing elements of the present disclosure, the articles “a”, “an”, “the” and “said” are intended to mean that there are one or more of the elements. The terms “comprising”, “including” and “having” are intended to be inclusive and mean that there may be additional elements other than the listed elements. Many modifications and variations of the present disclosure can be made without departing from the spirit and scope thereof. Therefore, the exemplary embodiments described above should not be used to limit the scope of the disclosure.

Claims

1. A method for inhibiting the adherence of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) viruses to an abiotic surface, the method comprising: providing a composition, the composition comprising: an anti-adherent agent comprising C12-16 Alkyl Polyethylene Glycol (PEG)-2 Hydroxypropyl Hydroxyethyl Ethylcellulose;wherein the composition does not include any antimicrobial agent; andapplying the composition to the abiotic surface to inhibit the adherence of DNA viruses to the abiotic surface.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the composition further comprises a liquid carrier and a humectant.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: removing at least some of the composition from the abiotic surface while allowing at least some of the composition to remain on the abiotic surface.

PCT Information

Filing Document	Filing Date	Country	Kind
PCT/US2016/015292	1/28/2016	WO

Publishing Document	Publishing Date	Country	Kind
WO2017/131691	8/3/2017	WO	A

US Referenced Citations (225)

Number	Name	Date	Kind
1680584	Angell	Aug 1928	A
3241898	Propst	Mar 1966	A
3303048	Cooper et al.	Feb 1967	A
3338992	Kinney	Aug 1967	A
3341394	Kinney	Sep 1967	A
3494821	Franklin	Feb 1970	A
3502538	Claine	Mar 1970	A
3502763	Hartmann	Mar 1970	A
3542615	Dobo	Nov 1970	A
3692618	Carduck	Sep 1972	A
3802817	Goto	Apr 1974	A
3849241	Butin	Nov 1974	A
3954962	Prussin	May 1976	A
4007113	Ostreicher	Feb 1977	A
4100324	Anderson	Jul 1978	A
4144370	Boulton	Mar 1979	A
4340563	Appel	Jul 1982	A
4361486	Hou	Nov 1982	A
4624890	Lloyd	Nov 1986	A
4795668	Krueger	Jan 1989	A
5057361	Sayovitz	Oct 1991	A
5057368	Largman	Oct 1991	A
5069970	Largman	Dec 1991	A
5108820	Kaneko	Apr 1992	A
5162074	Hills	Nov 1992	A
5277976	Hogle	Jan 1994	A
5284703	Everhart	Feb 1994	A
5336552	Strack	Aug 1994	A
5350624	Georger	Sep 1994	A
5382400	Pike	Jan 1995	A
5413789	Hagiwara et al.	May 1995	A
5466410	Hills	Nov 1995	A
5512186	Wright	Apr 1996	A
5593599	Wright	Jan 1997	A
5736058	Wright	Apr 1998	A
5742943	Chen	Apr 1998	A
5762948	Blackburn et al.	Jun 1998	A
5785179	Buczwinski	Jul 1998	A
5855788	Everhart	Jan 1999	A
5908707	Cabell	Jun 1999	A
5935883	Pike	Aug 1999	A
5942219	Hendriks	Aug 1999	A
5951965	Ansari	Sep 1999	A
5964351	Zander	Oct 1999	A
5989004	Cook	Nov 1999	A
5989527	Siegfried et al.	Nov 1999	A
6030331	Zander	Feb 2000	A
6110381	Wright	Aug 2000	A
6123996	Larsson	Sep 2000	A
6158614	Haines	Dec 2000	A
6180584	Sawan	Jan 2001	B1
6200669	Marmon	Mar 2001	B1
6228385	Shick	May 2001	B1
6231719	Garvey	May 2001	B1
6241898	Wright	Jun 2001	B1
6248880	Karlson	Jun 2001	B1
6267996	Bombardelli	Jul 2001	B1
6269969	Huang	Aug 2001	B1
6269970	Huang	Aug 2001	B1
6273359	Newman	Aug 2001	B1
6274041	Williamson	Aug 2001	B1
6294186	Beerse	Sep 2001	B1
6306514	Weikel	Oct 2001	B1
6315864	Anderson	Nov 2001	B2
6340663	Deleo	Jan 2002	B1
6515095	Omura	Feb 2003	B1
6565749	Hou	May 2003	B1
6569828	Thomas	May 2003	B1
6630016	Koslow	Oct 2003	B2
6639066	Boström	Oct 2003	B2
6696070	Dunn	Feb 2004	B2
6770204	Koslow	Aug 2004	B1
6800354	Baumann et al.	Oct 2004	B2
6838005	Tepper	Jan 2005	B2
6916480	Anderson	Jul 2005	B2
6946196	Foss	Sep 2005	B2
7071152	McDonnell	Jul 2006	B2
7169304	Hughes	Jan 2007	B2
7192601	Walker	Mar 2007	B2
7287650	Koslow	Oct 2007	B2
7288513	Taylor	Oct 2007	B2
7384762	Drocourt	Jun 2008	B2
7432234	Ochomogo	Oct 2008	B2
7569530	Pan	Aug 2009	B1
7576256	Björnberg	Aug 2009	B2
7625844	Yang	Dec 2009	B1
7642395	Schroeder	Jan 2010	B2
7795199	Molinaro	Sep 2010	B2
7872051	Clarke	Jan 2011	B2
7985209	Villanueva	Jul 2011	B2
7993675	Oliver	Aug 2011	B2
8030226	Bradley	Oct 2011	B2
8034844	Fox	Oct 2011	B2
8293699	Fütterer	Oct 2012	B2
8318654	Hoffman	Nov 2012	B2
8343523	Toreki	Jan 2013	B2
8481480	Lam	Jul 2013	B1
8506978	Soerens	Aug 2013	B2
8530524	Wegner	Sep 2013	B2
8551518	Marsh et al.	Oct 2013	B2
8603771	Stanley	Dec 2013	B2
8685178	Do	Apr 2014	B2
8771661	MacDonald	Jul 2014	B2
8871722	Harding	Oct 2014	B2
8877882	Salamone et al.	Nov 2014	B1
9006163	Hourigan	Apr 2015	B2
9034346	Miller et al.	May 2015	B2
9119779	Marsh et al.	Sep 2015	B2
9226517	Pumarola Segura et al.	Jan 2016	B2
9254255	Chang et al.	Feb 2016	B2
9326924	Fourre et al.	May 2016	B1
9511206	Hofius et al.	Dec 2016	B2
9555141	Samadpour	Jan 2017	B2
9675717	Kim et al.	Jun 2017	B2
9969885	Engelbrecht	May 2018	B2
10028899	Chaudhary	Jul 2018	B2
10485742	Patel et al.	Nov 2019	B2
10792236	Pan et al.	Oct 2020	B2
10813948	Abbott et al.	Oct 2020	B2
10960012	Baker et al.	Mar 2021	B2
20010037100	Shanklin	Nov 2001	A1
20010040136	Wei	Nov 2001	A1
20010046525	Bombardelli	Nov 2001	A1
20020050016	Willman	May 2002	A1
20020189998	Haase	Dec 2002	A1
20030008791	Chiang	Jan 2003	A1
20030044446	Moro et al.	Mar 2003	A1
20030069317	Seitz	Apr 2003	A1
20030091540	Ahmad	May 2003	A1
20030162684	Huyhn et al.	Aug 2003	A1
20040009141	Koenig	Jan 2004	A1
20040024374	Hjorth	Feb 2004	A1
20050118237	Krzysik et al.	Jun 2005	A1
20050130870	Ochomogo	Jun 2005	A1
20050137540	Villanueva	Jun 2005	A1
20050182021	Nichols	Aug 2005	A1
20050242041	Cumberland	Nov 2005	A1
20050244480	Koenig	Nov 2005	A1
20050271595	Brown	Dec 2005	A1
20060008621	Gusky	Jan 2006	A1
20060134239	Weide	Jun 2006	A1
20060140899	Koenig	Jun 2006	A1
20060193789	Tamarkin	Aug 2006	A1
20060204466	Littau	Sep 2006	A1
20060205619	Mayhall	Sep 2006	A1
20060292086	Curtis	Dec 2006	A1
20070020649	Tseng	Jan 2007	A1
20070048344	Yahiaoui et al.	Mar 2007	A1
20070141934	Sayre	Jun 2007	A1
20070207104	Borish	Sep 2007	A1
20070237800	Lahann	Oct 2007	A1
20070253926	Tadrowski	Nov 2007	A1
20070286894	Marsh	Dec 2007	A1
20080102053	Childers	May 2008	A1
20080275113	Huetter	Nov 2008	A1
20080293613	Johnson	Nov 2008	A1
20080293826	Rose	Nov 2008	A1
20080312118	Futterer	Dec 2008	A1
20090004122	Modak	Jan 2009	A1
20090082472	Peters	Mar 2009	A1
20090087465	Doney	Apr 2009	A1
20090155325	Wenzel	Jun 2009	A1
20090155327	Martin	Jun 2009	A1
20090191248	Hoffman	Jul 2009	A1
20090226498	Flugge-Berendes	Sep 2009	A1
20100135916	Courel	Jun 2010	A1
20100297029	Biering	Nov 2010	A1
20110009309	Mertens	Jan 2011	A1
20110081528	Shannon	Apr 2011	A1
20110091393	Simmonds	Apr 2011	A1
20110217345	Huang et al.	Sep 2011	A1
20110236447	Yoshimura et al.	Sep 2011	A1
20110293681	Berlin	Dec 2011	A1
20120046362	Kawahara	Feb 2012	A1
20120121459	Edgington	May 2012	A1
20120164206	Soerens	Jun 2012	A1
20120189558	Prendergast	Jul 2012	A1
20120207805	Colman et al.	Aug 2012	A1
20120263805	Popp	Oct 2012	A1
20120269912	Roberts	Oct 2012	A1
20120294911	Redmond	Nov 2012	A1
20120302634	Veeger et al.	Nov 2012	A1
20130025500	Jones	Jan 2013	A1
20130037048	Edgington	Feb 2013	A1
20130079733	Burt et al.	Mar 2013	A1
20130209576	Brumeister	Aug 2013	A1
20130274110	Westbye	Oct 2013	A1
20130287724	Hoffman	Oct 2013	A1
20140014584	Cone	Jan 2014	A1
20140030198	Fares et al.	Jan 2014	A1
20140147402	Klug	May 2014	A1
20140170089	Thaggard	Jun 2014	A1
20140205546	Macoviak	Jul 2014	A1
20140256688	Lozinsky et al.	Sep 2014	A1
20140275255	Pedersen	Sep 2014	A1
20140301961	Gillbro et al.	Oct 2014	A1
20140309173	Dreher	Oct 2014	A1
20140356303	Rocco et al.	Dec 2014	A1
20150010490	Kim	Jan 2015	A1
20150059795	Vatter	Mar 2015	A1
20150252293	Vockenroth et al.	Sep 2015	A1
20150265507	Norman	Sep 2015	A1
20150290102	Cozean	Oct 2015	A1
20150352033	Hoffman et al.	Dec 2015	A1
20160051452	Nishizawa et al.	Feb 2016	A1
20170015947	Cermenati et al.	Jan 2017	A1
20170042787	Phukan et al.	Feb 2017	A1
20170208798	Chaudhary	Jul 2017	A1
20170210900	Engelbrecht	Jul 2017	A1
20170224596	Chaudhary	Aug 2017	A1
20170303535	Engelbrecht	Oct 2017	A1
20170367350	Koenig	Dec 2017	A1
20180098536	Koenig	Apr 2018	A1
20180311127	Padyachi et al.	Nov 2018	A1
20180371374	Hayward et al.	Dec 2018	A1
20190133126	Modak et al.	May 2019	A1
20190175464	Myers et al.	Jun 2019	A1
20190177667	Engelbrecht et al.	Jun 2019	A1
20190262254	Ansari et al.	Aug 2019	A1
20200121568	Foley	Apr 2020	A1
20200131454	Copeland et al.	Apr 2020	A1
20200148897	Kang et al.	May 2020	A1
20200206277	Whitlock et al.	Jul 2020	A1
20200338139	Majeed et al.	Oct 2020	A1
20200354591	Engelbrecht et al.	Nov 2020	A1

Foreign Referenced Citations (132)

Number	Date	Country
2010226857	Jul 2016	AU
2015297023	Nov 2019	AU
2019204536	May 2020	AU
2019204543	May 2020	AU
2014409811	Feb 2021	AU
102013009302	Nov 2014	BR
112015000275	Feb 2021	BR
2934499	Nov 2020	CA
101156830	May 2010	CN
101856389	Oct 2010	CN
102293802	Dec 2011	CN
102450972	May 2012	CN
102613214	Aug 2012	CN
102784079	Nov 2012	CN
102940590	Feb 2013	CN
103013307	Apr 2013	CN
103387894	Nov 2013	CN
103830226	Jun 2014	CN
103845244	Jun 2014	CN
103865692	Jun 2014	CN
104013682	Sep 2014	CN
104559580	Apr 2015	CN
103341204	Aug 2015	CN
105086747	Nov 2015	CN
105199602	Dec 2015	CN
103237538	Jan 2016	CN
103788812	Apr 2016	CN
104177970	Aug 2016	CN
105816345	Aug 2016	CN
105924604	Sep 2016	CN
106147306	Nov 2016	CN
106147539	Nov 2016	CN
106413670	Feb 2017	CN
106413674	Feb 2017	CN
107158485	Sep 2017	CN
107550826	Jan 2018	CN
108148474	Jun 2018	CN
108610892	Oct 2018	CN
108785119	Nov 2018	CN
109010090	Dec 2018	CN
109077946	Dec 2018	CN
109321054	Feb 2019	CN
109337508	Feb 2019	CN
109350556	Feb 2019	CN
109651907	Apr 2019	CN
110003703	Jul 2019	CN
110354296	Oct 2019	CN
110381973	Oct 2019	CN
110876715	Mar 2020	CN
111032011	Apr 2020	CN
111072098	Apr 2020	CN
106572954	Jun 2020	CN
108299667	Jul 2020	CN
111593434	Aug 2020	CN
108135876	Oct 2020	CN
112386559	Feb 2021	CN
1046390	Oct 2000	EP
1543823	Jun 2005	EP
1798279	Jun 2007	EP
1633193	May 2016	EP
1948124	May 2016	EP
3120831	Jan 2017	EP
3084066	Oct 2017	EP
3243861	Nov 2017	EP
3409112	Dec 2018	EP
3261609	Apr 2021	EP
1576136	Oct 1980	GB
2097811	Nov 1982	GB
2554000	Mar 2018	GB
203403	Nov 2010	IL
107652394	Feb 2018	IN
63007785	Jan 1988	JP
10218940	Aug 1998	JP
2000044419	Feb 2000	JP
2000110099	Apr 2000	JP
3965006	Aug 2007	JP
2011153101	Aug 2011	JP
2019119725	Jul 2019	JP
1020100094508	Aug 2010	KR
20110058754	Jun 2011	KR
101376474	Mar 2014	KR
101515865	May 2015	KR
2017051006	May 2017	KR
2059919	Dec 2019	KR
2135648	Jul 2020	KR
2021013582	Feb 2021	KR
2014007137	Sep 2014	MX
2452463	Jun 2012	RU
2013131391	Jan 2015	RU
2019110798	Nov 2020	RU
WO9400016	Jan 1994	WO
WO0128340	Apr 2001	WO
WO0132132	May 2001	WO
WO03066192	Aug 2003	WO
WO03092382	Nov 2003	WO
04010783	Feb 2004	WO
WO04062703	Jul 2004	WO
WO06085975	Aug 2006	WO
08123115	Oct 2008	WO
2009036030	Mar 2009	WO
WO09065023	May 2009	WO
WO10056685	May 2010	WO
2011079163	Jun 2011	WO
WO11083401	Jul 2011	WO
WO13016029	Jan 2013	WO
WO13052545	Apr 2013	WO
WO13066403	May 2013	WO
2013089720	Jun 2013	WO
WO14032696	Mar 2014	WO
2014098822	Jun 2014	WO
2014098824	Jun 2014	WO
2014098827	Jun 2014	WO
2014098829	Jun 2014	WO
14103475	Jul 2014	WO
WO14113269	Jul 2014	WO
WO14139904	Sep 2014	WO
14163075	Oct 2014	WO
2015014818	Feb 2015	WO
WO15166075	Nov 2015	WO
WO16018473	Feb 2016	WO
WO16018474	Feb 2016	WO
WO16018475	Feb 2016	WO
WO16018476	Feb 2016	WO
2016054021	Apr 2016	WO
2016083798	Jun 2016	WO
2016104602	Jun 2016	WO
2016186896	Nov 2016	WO
2017011665	Jan 2017	WO
2017011679	Jan 2017	WO
2017131691	Aug 2017	WO
2019108218	Jun 2019	WO
2019115806	Jun 2019	WO

Non-Patent Literature Citations (63)

Entry
Kohli R. Microbial Cleaning for Removal of Surface Contamination. Developments in Surface Contamination and Cleaning. 2013; 139-161. (Year: 2013).
Pitusiak, ip.com, Skin Care Formulation with Structure(R) Cell Thickeners, 2011, pp. 1-6. (Year: 2011).
Nalawade et al., Bactericidal activity of propylene glycol, glycerine, polyethylene glycol 400, and polyethylene glycol 1000 against selected microorganisms. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. Mar.-Apr. 2015;5(2):114-9. (Year: 2015).
Romanò CL, De Vecchi E, Bortolin M, Morelli I, Drago L. Hyaluronic Acid and Its Composites as a Local Antimicrobial/Antiadhesive Barrier. J Bone Jt Infect. Jan. 1, 2017;2(1):63-72. (Year: 2017).
Duan, P., Xu, Q., Zhang, X et al. Naturally occurring betaine grafted on cotton fabric for achieving antibacterial and anti-protein adsorption functions. Cellulose 27, 6603-6615 (2020). (Year: 2020).
A. Pinazo, M.A. Manresa, A.M. Marques, M. Bustelo, M.J. Espuny, L. Pérez, Amino acid-based surfactants: New antimicrobial agents, Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, vol. 228, 2016, pp. 17-39. (Year: 2016).
Kim, J. et al. (2016) “Candidacidal Activity of Xylitol and Sorbitol,” Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain. Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain. (Year: 2016).
Piquero-Casals, J., Morgado-Carrasco, D., Granger, C. et al. Urea in Dermatology: A Review of its Emollient, Moisturizing, Keratolytic, Skin Barrier Enhancing and Antimicrobial Properties. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) 11, 1905-1915 (2021). (Year: 2021).
Su LC, Xie Z, Zhang Y, Nguyen KT, Yang J. Study on the Antimicrobial Properties of Citrate-Based Biodegradable Polymers. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. Jul. 3, 2014;2:23. (Year: 2014).
Datasheet for WetFilm™ by Inolex (downloaded Sep. 14, 2019 from https://inolexcosmetics.ulprospector.com/en/na/personalcare/details (Year: 2019).
Trimethylpentanediol-adipic acid-glycerin crosspolymer—Google search Sep. 13, 2019 (Year: 2019).
“Soy Based Sauce”, Mintel GNPD, https://www.gnpd.com/sinatra/recordpage/2694235/?utm_source=fed_search, Published Sep. 2014.
“Ginkgo Green Tea Drink”, Mintel GNPD, https://www.gnpd.com/sinatra/recordpage/2683087/?utm_source=fed_search, Published Sep. 2014.
“June Premium Soy Sauce”, Mintel GNPD, https://www.gnpd.com/sinatra/recordpage/2696123/?utm_source=fed_search, Published Sep. 2014.
Shan et al, “Antibacterial properties of Polygonum cuspidatum roots and their major bioactive consitiuents,” Food Chemistry 109 (2008) 530-537.
Katsikogianni, M. and Y.F. Missirlis, “Concise Review of Mechanisms of Bacterial Adhesion to Biomaterials and of Techniques Used in Estimating Bacteria-Material Interactions,” European Cells and Materials, vol. 8, University of Patras, Patras, Greece, Dec. 2004, pp. 37-57.
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/011,248, filed Jun. 18, 2018, by Chaudhary et al. for “Anti-Adherent Alcohol-Based Composition.”
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/071,343, filed Jul. 19, 2018, by Engelbrecht et al. for “Adherent Composition for RNA Viruses and Method of Removing RNA Viruses from a Surface.”
Google Scholar Search, “Pyrogenic Silica Antimicrobial”, Aug. 3, 2020, (Year: 2020).
Google Scholar Search, “Pyrogenic Silica”, Aug. 3, 2020 (Year: 2020).
Hwang et al (Resveratrol antibacterial activity against Escherichia coli is mediated by Z-ring formation inhibition via suppression of FtsZ expression. Scientific Reports vol. 5, Article No. 10029 (2015) (Year: 2015).
Al-Waili et al (Honey and microbial infections: a review supporting the use of honey for microbial control. J Med Food. Oct. 2011; 14 (10):1079-96) (Year: 2011).
Pathak, Rahul et al., “Inhibition of bacterial attachment and biofilm formation by a novel intravenous catheter material using an in vitro percutaneous catheter insertion model”, Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 2018, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6305250/pdf/mder-11-427.pdf.
Engelbrecht, Kathleen C. et al., “The effect of select personal care ingredients and simple formulations on the attachment of bacteria on polystyrene”, Cosmetics, Jul. 10, 2018, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjrzJiBrf3wAhU_wTgGHS30AH4QFjABegQIAhAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mdpi.com%2F2079-9284%2F5%2F3%2F42%2Fpdf&usg=AOvVaw3ydupZOmoa9eFNSUaUskfW.
Wang, Yi et al., “Epigallocatechin gallate and gallic acid affect colonization of abiotic surfaces by oral bacteria”, Arch Oral Biol., Dec. 2020, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33045616/.
Sharifzadeh, Aghil et al. , “Anti-adherence and Anti-fungal Abilities of Thymol and Carvacrol Against Candida Species Isolated From Patients with Oral Candidiasis in Comparison with Fluconazole and Voriconazole”, Jundishapur Journal of Natural Pharmaceutical Products, Feb. 1, 2021, https://sites.kowsarpub.com/jnpp/articles/65005.html.
Romera, D. et al., “Reduction of Adherence of Strictly Anaerobic Bacteria on Fluorine-Doped Titanium”, Orthopaedic Proceedings, vol. 100-B, No. SUPP_3, Apr. 5, 2018, https://online.boneandjoint.org.uk/doi/abs/10.1302/1358-992X.2018.3.060.
He, Jiankang et al. , “Nanocomplexes of carboxymethyl chitosan/amorphous calcium phosphate reduce oral bacteria adherence and biofilm formation on human enamel surface”, J Dent. Jan. 2019, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30423355/.
Kemung, Hefa Mangzira et al., “An Optimized Anti-adherence and Anti-biofilm Assay: Case Study of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles versus MRSA Biofilm”, Research Gate, Jun. 2020, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342364559_An_Optimized_Anti-adherence_and_Anti-biofilm_Assay_Case_Study_of_Zinc_Oxide_Nanoparticles_versus_MRSA_Biofilm/link/5f2beb14299bf13404a61bda/download.
Simon, Gaelle et al., “Anti-biofilm and anti-adherence properties of novel cyclic dipeptides against oral pathogens”, Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 27, Issue 12, Jun. 2019, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968089618316547.
Abbas, Mohammed I. et al., “Surface Bacterial Adhesion Study of Novel Ternary PVC/ Polyester/ Bentonite Clay Nanocomposite Films”, Current Physical Chemistry, vol. 11, Issue 1, 2021, https://www.eurekaselect.com/node/182844/article/surface-bacterial-adhesion-study-of-novel-ternary-pvc-polyester-bentonite-clay-nanocomposite-films.
Wang, Xiaodie et al., “Casein phosphopeptide combined with fluoride enhances the inhibitory effect on initial adhesion of Streptococcus mutans to the saliva-coated hydroxyapatite disc”, BMC Oral Health, Article No. 169, 2020, https://bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12903-020-01158-8.
Kerk, Swat Kim et al., “Bacteria Display Differential Growth and Adhesion Characteristics on Human Hair Shafts”, Front Microbiol, 2018, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6137140/pdf/fmicb-09-02145.pdf.
Goc, Anna et al., “10-undecynoic acid is a new anti-adherent agent killing biofilm of oral Streptococcus spp.” Plos One, Apr. 18, 2019, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214763.
Prabha, Subramani et al., “Chitosan-Coated Surgical Sutures Prevent Adherence and Biofilms of Mixed Microbial Communities”, Current Microbiology, 2021, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00284-020-02306-7.
Jardak, Marwa et al., “Chemical composition, antibiofilm activities of Tunisian spices essential oils and combinatorial effect against Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm”, LWT, vol. 140, Apr. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0023643820316790.
Kurniawan, Febrian Hendra et al., “Hydrophobic and antibacterial bed sheet using ZnO nanoparticles: A large-scale technique”, Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology, vol. 62, Apr. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1773224721000204.
Irwin, Nicola J. et al., “Infection-Triggered, Self-Cleaning Surfaces with On-Demand Cleavage of Surface-Localized Surfactant Moieties” ACS Biomater Sci Eng. Feb. 8, 2021, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33502846/.
Sharifzadeh, Aghil et al., “Anti-adherence and anti-fungal abilities of thymol and carvacrol against Candida species Isolated from patients with oral candidiasis in comparison with fluconazole and voriconazole”, Jundishapur Journal of Natural Pharmaceutical Products, Feb. 1, 2021.
Dera, Ayed A. et al., “Synergistic efficacies of thymoquinone and standard antibiotics against multi-drug resistant isolates”, Saudi Med J., Feb. 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7989283/.
Lencova, Simona et al., “Bacterial biofilms on polyamide nanofibers: Factors influencing biofilm formation and evaluation”, ACS Publications, Dec. 7, 2020, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acsami.0c19016.
Rubini, Durairajan et al., “Chitosan coated catheters alleviates mixed species biofilms of Staphylococcus epidermidis and Candida albicans”, Carbogydr Polym, Jan. 15, 2021, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33183634/.
Habib, Salma et al., “Slippery liquid-infused porous polymeric surfaces based on natural oil with antimicrobial effect”, Polymers, Jan. 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7826890/pdf/polymers-13-00206.pdf.
Tektas, Sibel et al., “Initial bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation on aligner materials”, Antibiotics, Dec. 15, 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7765154/pdf/antibiotics-09-00908.pdf.
Li, Xin et al., “Synthesis and Characterization of Hydrophobic Polystyrene Microspheres Film”, Synthesis, Dec. 30, 2020, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S1560090420060056.
Zheng, Kaiyuan et al., “Synergistic Antimicrobial Titanium Carbide (MXene) Conjugated with Gold Nanoclusters”, Advanced Health Care Materials, Sep. 30, 2020, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/adhm.202001007.
Sautrot-BA, Pauline et al., “Photoinduced synthesis of antibacterial hydrogel from aqueous photoinitiating system”, European Polymer Journal, vol. 138, Sep. 5, 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014305720316505.
Singh, Amit Kumar et al., “Efficacy of Azadirachta indica essential oil bio-compounds against csuE among acinetobacter baumannii—An in-silico analysis”, I.K. Press, vol. 21, Issue 33-34, Aug. 26, 2020, https://www.ikprress.org/index.php/PCBMB/article/view/5371.
Nelson, Jakline et al., “The biosurfactants iturin, lichenysin and surfactin, from vaginally isolated lactobacilli, prevent biofilm formation by pathogenic Candida”, FEMS Microbiol Lett., Aug. 1, 2020, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32710776/.
Rodrigues, Jeisa Zielle de Souza et al., “Antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus fermentum TcUESC01 against Streptococcus mutans UA159”, Microb Pathog, Feb. 24, 2020, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32061821/.
Kokilakanit, P. et al., “A novel non-cytotoxic synthetic peptide, Pug-1, exhibited an antibiofilm effect on Streptococcus mutans adhesion”, Lett Appl Microbiol, Mar. 2020, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31837275/.
Modjinou, Tina et al., “Co-networks poly(Hydroxyalkanoates)-terpenes to enhance antibacterial properties”, Bioengineering, Mar. 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7148494/pdf/bioengineering-07-00013.pdf.
Boix-Lemonche, Gerard et al., “Covalent grafting of titanium with a cathelicidin peptide produces an osteoblast compatible surface with antistaphylococcal activity”, Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, vol. 185, Jan. 1, 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927776519307301.
Arenas-Vivo, Ana et al., “An Ag-loaded photoactive nano-metal organic framework as a promising biofilm treatment”, Acta Biomaterialia, vol. 97, Oct. 1, 2019, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1742706119305586.
Cui, Xinnan et al., “Bacterial Inhibition and Osteoblast Adhesion on Ti Alloy Surfaces Modified by Poly(PEGMA-r-Phosmer) Coating”, ACS Publications, Jun. 26, 2018, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acsami.8b07757.
Mortazavian, Hamid et al., “Understanding the role of shape and composition of star-shaped polymers and their ability to both bind and prevent bacteria attachment on oral relevant surfaces”, J Funct Biomater, Dec. 17, 2019, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963222/pdf/jfb-10-00056.pdf.
Marine, Jeannette et al., “Reduction of bacterial attachment on hydroxyapatite surfaces: Using hydrophobicity and chemical functionality to enhance surface retention and prevent attachment”, Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces, Jul. 1, 2018, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29730574/.
Mahyudin, Nor Ainy et al., “Bacterial attachment and biofilm formation on stainless steel surface and their in vitro inhibition by marine fungal extracts”, Journal of Food Safety, Mar. 1, 2018, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jfs.12456.
Pitusiak, Ewelina, “Skin Care Formulations with Structure (RTM) Cell Thickeners”, Nov. 18, 2011.
Al-Saedi, Fitua Minuar Aziz et al., “Development of a bacterial adhesin into a next generation antimicrobial agent” University of Birmingham, 2018, https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/8215/.
Draelos et al., “A New Proprietary Onion Extract Gel Improves the Appearance of New Scars,” Clinical Aesthetic Dermatology, Jun. 2012, vol. 6, No. 6. p. 18-24.
CVS, “Mederma Advanced Scar Gel Ingredients”, 2021, https://www.cvs.com/shop/ingredients/mederma-advanced-scar-gel-prodid-210683.
Greive, K.A. et al., “In vitro comparison of four treatments which discourage infestation by head lice”, Parasitol Res (2012) 110:1695-1699.

Related Publications (1)

	Number	Date	Country
	20210189167 A1	Jun 2021	US

Anti-adherent composition against DNA viruses and method of inhibiting the adherence of DNA viruses to a surface

Information

Patent Number

Date Filed

Date Issued

Inventors

Examiners

Agents

CPC

Field of Search

CPC

International Classifications

Term Extension