MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091265779 · doi:10.1021/la702244w

Microporous Structure and Drug Release Kinetics of Polymeric Nanoparticles

2007· article· en· W2091265779 on OpenAlexaff
Shilpa Sant, Matthias Thommes, Patrice Hildgen

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCovalent Organic Framework Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroporous materialKineticsNanoparticleDrugChemistryChemical engineeringNanotechnologyMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryPharmacologyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the present study was to characterize pegylated nanoparticles (NPs) for their microporosity and study the effect of microporosity on drug release kinetics. Blank and drug-loaded NPs were prepared from three different pegylated polymers, namely, poly(ethylene glycol)1%-graft-poly(D,L)-lactide, poly(ethylene glycol)5%-graft-poly(D,L)-lactide, and the multiblock copolymer (poly(D,L)-lactide-block-poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(D,L)-lactide)n. These NPs were characterized for their microporosity using nitrogen adsorption isotherms. NPs of the multiblock copolymer showed the least microporosity and Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) surface area, and that of PEG1%-g-PLA showed the maximum. Based on these results, the structural organization of poly(D,L)-lactide (PLA) and poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) chains inside the NPs was proposed and was validated with differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) surface analysis. An in vitro drug release study revealed that PEG1%-g-PLA NPs exhibited slower release despite their higher surface area and microporosity. This was attributed to the presence of increased microporosity forming tortuous internal structures, thereby hindering drug diffusion from the matrix. Thus, it was concluded that the microporous structure of NPs, which is affected by the molecular architecture of polymers, determines the release rate of the encapsulated drug.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicCovalent Organic Framework ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207