Prediction of nanoparticles-cell association based on corona proteins and physicochemical properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular association of nanoparticles (NPs) in biological fluids is affected by proteins adsorbed onto the NP surface, forming a "protein corona", thereby impacting cellular bioactivity. Here we investigate, based on an extensive gold NPs protein corona dataset, the relationships between NP-cell association and protein corona fingerprints (PCFs) as well as NP physicochemical properties. Accordingly, quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) were developed based on both linear and non-linear support vector regression (SVR) models making use of a sequential forward floating selection of descriptors. The SVR model with only 6 serum proteins and zeta potential had higher accuracy (R(2) = 0.895) relative to the linear model (R(2) = 0.850) with 11 PCFs. Considering the initial pool of 148 descriptors, the APOB, A1AT, ANT3, and PLMN serum proteins along with NP zeta potential were identified as most significant to correlating NP-cell association. The present study suggests that QSARs exploration of NP-cell association data, considering the role of both NP protein corona and physicochemical properties, can support the planning and interpretation of toxicity studies and guide the design of NPs for biomedical applications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".