In the last few decades, several natural bioactive agents have been widely utilized in the treatment and prevention of many diseases owing to their unique and versatile therapeutic effects, including antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anticancer, and neuroprotective action. However, their poor aqueous solubility, poor bioavailability, low GIT stability, extensive metabolism as well as short duration of action are the most shortfalls hampering their biomedical/pharmaceutical applications. Different drug delivery platforms have developed in this regard, and a captivating tool of this has been the fabrication of nanocarriers. In particular, polymeric nanoparticles were reported to offer proficient delivery of various natural bioactive agents with good entrapment potential and stability, an efficiently controlled release, improved bioavailability, and fascinating therapeutic efficacy. In addition, surface decoration and polymer functionalization have opened the door to improving the characteristics of polymeric nanoparticles and alleviating the reported toxicity. Herein, a review of the state of knowledge on polymeric nanoparticles loaded with natural bioactive agents is presented. The review focuses on frequently used polymeric materials and their corresponding methods of fabrication, the needs of such systems for natural bioactive agents, polymeric nanoparticles loaded with natural bioactive agents in the literature, and the potential role of polymer functionalization, hybrid systems, and stimuli-responsive systems in overcoming most of the system drawbacks. This exploration may offer a thorough idea of viewing the polymeric nanoparticles as a potential candidate for the delivery of natural bioactive agents as well as the challenges and the combating tools used to overcome any hurdles.

A novel series of ciprofloxacin hybrids comprising various heterocycle derivatives has been synthesized and structurally elucidated using ¹H NMR, ¹³C NMR, and elementary analyses. Using ciprofloxacin as a reference, compounds 1–21 were screened in vitro against Gram-positive bacterial strains such as Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus subtilis and Gram-negative strains such as Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. As a result, many of the compounds examined had antibacterial activity equivalent to ciprofloxacin against test bacteria. Compounds 2–6, oxadiazole derivatives, were found to have antibacterial activity that was 88 to 120% that of ciprofloxacin against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. The findings showed that none of the compounds tested had antifungal activity against Aspergillus flavus, but did have poor activity against Candida albicans, ranging from 23% to 33% of fluconazole, with compound 3 being the most active (33% of fluconazole). The most potent compounds, 3, 4, 5, and 6, displayed an IC₅₀ of 86, 42, 92, and 180 nM against E. coli DNA gyrase, respectively (novobiocin, IC₅₀ = 170 nM). Compounds 4, 5, and 6 showed IC₅₀ values (1.47, 6.80, and 8.92 µM, respectively) against E. coli topo IV in comparison to novobiocin (IC₅₀ = 11 µM).