MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1516156578 · doi:10.3390/jfb6020439

Controlled Delivery of Human Cells by Temperature Responsive Microcapsules

2015· article· en· W1516156578 on OpenAlexaff
Wing Cheung Mak, K. Olesen, Petter Sivlér, C.J. Lee, Inés Moreno-Jiménez, Elle Edin, David W. Courtman, Mårten Skog, May Griffith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Functional Biomaterials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsGelatinMaterials scienceAgaroseRegenerative medicineCellCapsuleUmbilical veinViability assayCell encapsulationCell therapyCell cultureNanotechnologyBiomedical engineeringBiophysicsSelf-healing hydrogelsChemistryChromatographyMedicineBiologyIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell therapy is one of the most promising areas within regenerative medicine. However, its full potential is limited by the rapid loss of introduced therapeutic cells before their full effects can be exploited, due in part to anoikis, and in part to the adverse environments often found within the pathologic tissues that the cells have been grafted into. Encapsulation of individual cells has been proposed as a means of increasing cell viability. In this study, we developed a facile, high throughput method for creating temperature responsive microcapsules comprising agarose, gelatin and fibrinogen for delivery and subsequent controlled release of cells. We verified the hypothesis that composite capsules combining agarose and gelatin, which possess different phase transition temperatures from solid to liquid, facilitated the destabilization of the capsules for cell release. Cell encapsulation and controlled release was demonstrated using human fibroblasts as model cells, as well as a therapeutically relevant cell line-human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). While such temperature responsive cell microcapsules promise effective, controlled release of potential therapeutic cells at physiological temperatures, further work will be needed to augment the composition of the microcapsules and optimize the numbers of cells per capsule prior to clinical evaluation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Functional BiomaterialsSame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207