Effect of liposomal confinement on photochemical properties of photosensitizers with varying hydrophilicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preferential tumor localization and the aggregation state of photosensitizers (PSs) can depend on the hydrophilic/hydrophobic nature of the molecule and affect their phototoxicity. In this study, three PSs of different hydrophilicity are introduced in liposomes to understand the structure-photochemistry relationship of PSs in this cellular model system. Absorbance and fluorescence spectra of amphiphilic aluminum (III) phthalocyanine disulfonate chloride adjacent isomer (Al-2), hydrophilic aluminum (III) phthalocyanine chloride tetrasulfonic acid (Al-4), and lipophilic 2-(1-hexyloxyethyl)-2-devinyl pyropheophorbide (HPPH) are compared in a liposomal confined state with free PS in bulk solution. For fluorescence measurements, a broad range of concentrations of both bulk and liposomal confined PSs are examined to track the transition from monomers to dimers or higher order aggregates. Epifluorescence microscopy, absorbance, and fluorescence measurements all confirm different localization of the PSs in liposomes, depending on their hydrophilicity. In turn, the localization affects the aggregation of molecules inside the liposome cell model. Data obtained with such cellular models could be useful in optimizing the photochemical properties of photosensitizing drugs based on their structure-dependent interactions with cellular media and subcellular organelles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".