A comparison of covalent and noncovalent strategies for paclitaxel release using poly(ester amide) graft copolymer micelles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Micelles formed from amphiphilic copolymers are promising for the delivery of drug molecules, potentially leading to enhanced properties and efficacies. Critical aspects of these systems include the use of biocompatible, biodegradable polymer backbones as well as the ability to control the incorporation of drugs and their release rates. In this work, a poly(ester amide)–poly(ethylene oxide) graft copolymer with paclitaxel conjugated via ester linkages was prepared and assembled into micelles. For comparison, micelles with physically encapsulated paclitaxel were also prepared. The release rates of these two systems were studied, and the micelles with covalently conjugated paclitaxel exhibited a prolonged release of the drug in comparison to the noncovalent system, which rapidly released the payload. In vitro studies suggested that the poly(ester amide)–poly(ethylene oxide) copolymers were nontoxic, whereas the toxicities of the drug-loaded micelles were dependent on their release rates. Overall, these systems are promising for further development as anticancer drug carriers.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".