MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031979429 · doi:10.1080/17458080500411965

Structural characterization of novel gemini non-viral DNA delivery systems for cutaneous gene therapy

2006· article· en· W2031979429 on OpenAlexaff
Marianna Földvári, Ildikó Badea, Shawn Wettig, Ronald E. Verrall, Mukasa Bagonluri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Nanoscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersBrookhaven National Laboratory
KeywordsTransfectionLamellar structureGene deliveryMaterials scienceDNACationic polymerizationSmall-angle X-ray scatteringAbsorption (acoustics)BiophysicsSelf-assemblyPulmonary surfactantCrystallographyScatteringNanotechnologyGenePolymer chemistryChemistryBiochemistryBiologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structural and physicochemical properties of novel cationic lipid-based DNA complexes have been investigated for the purpose of designing micro/nano-scale self-assembling delivery systems for cutaneous gene therapy. DNA/gemini surfactant (spacer n = 3–16; chain m = 12 or 16) complexes (1 : 10 charge ratio), with or without dioleoylphosphatidyl-ethanolamine (DOPE), designed for cellular transfection, were generally in the range of 100–200 nm as demonstrated by atomic force microscopy and particle size analysis. Small-angle X-ray scattering measurements indicated that the DNA/gemini complexes lacked long-range order, whereas DNA/gemini/DOPE complexes exhibited lamellar and polymorphic phases other than hexagonal. Correlation studies using transfection efficiency data in PAM 212 keratinocytes and in vitro skin absorption indicated that formulations containing gemini surfactants having the ability to induce structures other than lamellar in the resulting complexes, generally exhibited greater transfection activity and cutaneous absorption.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations67
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental NanoscienceSame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207