MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017070643 · doi:10.1002/jbm.a.31370

Human monocyte adhesion onto RGD and PHSRN peptides delivered to the surface of a polycarbonate polyurethane using bioactive fluorinated surface modifiers

2007· article· en· W2017070643 on OpenAlexaff
Mark J. Ernsting, Rosalind S. Labow, J. Paul Santerre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilk-based biomaterials and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceSurface modificationPolyurethaneAdhesionCell adhesionBiomaterialConjugated systemMonocyteCovalent bondBiophysicsChemical engineeringBiomedical engineeringNanotechnologyPolymerComposite materialOrganic chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorinated oligomers, when blended into polyurethane, have been shown to migrate to the surface and generate an interface that minimizes protein denaturation and reduces cell activation. This type of surface modification can be achieved with ppm quantities of a bioactive fluorinated surface modifier (BFSM), enabling the introduction of bioactive agents onto a surface in one manufacturing step. In the current study, two BFSMs were synthesized with covalently conjugated RGD and PHSRN peptides near the fluorine terminal groups, and were shown to be surface active in polyurethane blends. CyQuant cell enumeration, scanning electron microscopy, and cell viability assays all indicated that the bioactive (and fluorinated) substrates supported enhanced monocyte interaction. The simplicity of the surface modification technique and the demonstrated ability of the peptide BFSMs to influence cell attachment and spreading indicate the potential benefits and practical value of the BFSM technology in tailoring surfaces for biomaterial applications. This was specifically highlighted for human blood monocytes, a key cell involved in the early stages of wound healing.

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)0.010
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part ASame topicSilk-based biomaterials and applicationsFrench-language works237,207