Viability of Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate–Methyl Methacrylate-Microencapsulated PC12 Cells after Omental Pouch Implantation within Agarose Gels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydroxyethyl methacrylate-methyl methacrylate (HEMA-MMA, 75 mol% HEMA). Microcapsules containing viable PC12 cells (as an allogeneic transplant model) were implanted into omental pouches in Wistar rats. Two different capsule preparations were tested, based on differences in polymer solutions during extrusion: 10% HEMA-MMA in TEG, and 9% HEMA-MMA in TEG with 30% poly(vinyl pyrrolidone) (PVP). The omental pouch proved to be an ideal transplant site in terms of implantation, recovery, and blood vessel proximity (nutrient supply). To minimize the fibrous overgrowth and damaged capsules previously seen on implantation of individual capsules, agarose gels were used to embed the capsules before implantation. Cells proliferated within the microcapsule-agarose device during the first 7 days of implantation, but overall cell viability declined over the 3-week period, when compared with similar capsules maintained in vitro. Nonetheless, approximately 50% of the initial encapsulated cells were still viable after 3 weeks in vivo. This approach to HEMA-MMA microcapsule implantation improved cell viability and capsule integrity after 3 weeks in vivo, compared with capsules implanted without agarose.
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".