Assessing the Effect of Surface Chemistry on Gold Nanorod Uptake, Toxicity, and Gene Expression in Mammalian Cells
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through the use of various layer-by-layer polyelectrolyte (PE) coating schemes, such as the common poly(diallyldimethylammonium chloride)-poly(4-styrenesulfonic acid) (PDADMAC-PSS) system, the mammalian cellular uptake of gold nanorods can be tuned from very high to very low by manipulating the surface charge and functional groups of the PEs. The toxicity of these nanorods is also examined. Since the PE coatings are individually toxic, the toxicity of nanorods coated in these PEs is measured and cells are found to be greater than 90% viable in nearly all cases, even at very high concentrations. This viability assay may not be a complete indicator of toxicity, and thus gene-expression analysis is used to examine the molecular changes of cells exposed to PDADMAC-coated nanorods, which enter cells at the highest concentrations. Indicators of cell stress, such as heat-shock proteins, are not significantly up- or down-regulated following nanorod uptake, which suggests that PDADMAC-coated gold nanorods have negligible impact on cell function. Furthermore, a very low number of genes experience any significant change in expression (0.35% of genes examined). These results indicate that gold nanorods are well suited for therapeutic applications, such as thermal cancer therapy, due to their tunable cell uptake and low toxicity.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it