MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Magnetic carbon nanotube labelling for haematopoietic stem/progenitor cell tracking

2010· article· en· W2075592995 on OpenAlexafffund
Hilal Gül, Weibing Lu, Peng Xu, James Z. Xing, Jie Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueNanotechnology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for NanotechnologyUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHaematopoiesisProgenitor cellFluorescein isothiocyanateIn vivoCell biologyStem cellMaterials scienceNanotechnologyFluorescenceBiologyBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Haematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPC) research has significantly contributed to the understanding and harnessing of haematopoiesis for regenerative medicine. However, the methodology for real-time tracking HSPC in vivo is still lacking, which seriously restricts the progress of research. Recently, magnetic carbon nanotubes (mCNT) have generated great excitement because they have been successfully used as vehicles to deliver a lot of biomolecules into various cells. There is, however, no report about mCNT being used for tracking HSPC. In this paper, we investigated the uptake efficiency of fluorescein-isothiocyanate-labelled mCNT (FITC-mCNT) into HSPC and their effect on the cytotoxicity and differentiation of HSPC. We found that cellular uptake of FITC-mCNT was concentration-and time-dependent. The uptake of FITC-mCNT into HSPC reached up to 100% with the highest mean fluorescence (MF). More importantly, efficient FITC-mCNT uptake has no adverse effect on the cell viability, cytotoxicity and differentiation of HSPC as confirmed by colony-forming unit assay (CFU). In conclusion, the results reported here suggest the further tailoring of mCNT for their use in HSPC labelling/tracking in vivo or gene delivery into HSPC.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanotechnologySame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207