MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A peptide carrier for the delivery of elastin into fibroblast cells

2012· article· en· W1775449963 on OpenAlexaff
Saman Ahmad Nasrollahi, Shamileh Fouladdel, Changiz Taghibiglou, Ebrahim Azizi, Effat Sadat Farboud

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Dermatology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services
KeywordsElastinFibroblastPeptideFluorescence microscopeBiophysicsDermal fibroblastBiochemistryCell biologyChemistryMolecular biologyMedicineBiologyPathologyFluorescenceIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Transmembrane delivery of active peptides and proteins, including skin delivery of cosmeceutical proteins such as collagen and elastin, has been a challenging issue. Amphipathic cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) have been proposed as carrier peptides to mediate cellular uptake of proteins without covalent binding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we have used a short peptide, Pep-1, as our CPP to transport elastin into fibroblast cells. Different ratios of Pep-1/elastin complexes were produced by using a fixed amount of elastin and different molar ratio of Pep-1. The ability of transduction into cells was determined by fluorescence microscopy. The characteristics of Pep-1/elastin complexes were monitored using scanning electron microscopy and photon correlation spectroscopy. RESULTS: No cellular toxicity was observed in cells treated with Pep-1/elastin complex. Finally, we determined a Pep-1 : elastin ratio of 10 : 1 as the most effective ratio in cellular delivery of elastin. CONCLUSION: Pep-1 mediated fast and effective delivery of elastin as a cosmetic protein into fibroblast cells in the treatment of skin-aging symptoms.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of DermatologySame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207