Low Viscosity Poly(trimethylene carbonate) for Localized Drug Delivery: Rheological Properties and <i>in vivo</i> Degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the potential of low-molecular-weight poly(trimethylene carbonate) for localized delivery for acid-sensitive drugs. Poly(trimethylene carbonate) of various molecular weights is prepared by ring-opening polymerization initiated by octan-1-ol and co-initiated/catalyzed by tin 2-ethylhexanoate. The resultant polymers are amorphous with low glass transition temperatures and viscosities at 37 degrees C that permit their injection through an 18(1\2) G 1.5'' needle. Their biocompatibility and the influence of the molecular weight on the rate of degradation are assessed in vivo through subcutaneous implantation in rats over 40 weeks. The polymers are well tolerated in vivo, and degrade in a fashion dependent on their initial molecular weight. For very low initial molecular weight (620 Da) and for high initial molecular weight (2,400 Da), polymer mass loss is a result of dissolution of the soluble low molecular chains from the bulk. This is contrasted by the results obtained for an intermediate initial molecular weight (1,600 Da), for which polymer mass loss is a result of both dissolution and enzymatic hydrolysis or oxidation as a result of reactive species secreted by activated macrophages at the implant surface.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".