Poly(ethyleneimine)/arginine–glycine–aspartic acid conjugates prepared with <i>N</i>‐succinimidyl 3‐(2‐pyridyldithio)propionate: An investigation of peptide coupling and conjugate stability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Poly(ethylene imine) (PEI), a highly cationic polymer, is being used for deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) complexation and delivery into cells. To enhance the cellular uptake of polymer/DNA complexes, arginine–glycine–aspartic acid (RGD) peptides have been conjugated to PEI with N ‐succinimidyl 3‐(2‐pyridyldithio)propionate (SPDP). This coupling scheme creates a disulfide‐linked conjugate, the stability of which in the presence of thiols is uncertain. We have investigated the conjugation of an RGD peptide, glycine–arginine–glycine–aspartic acid–serine–proline–cysteine (GRGDSPC), to PEI with SPDP and subsequently assessed the stability of the conjugates in the presence of two thiol compounds, mercaptoethanol and cysteine. SPDP effectively controls the extent of GRGDSPC substitution on PEI. The conjugates, however, are readily cleaved in the presence of the thiols; the cleavage is rapid (∼50% cleavage in 2–4 h) and inversely related to the degree of peptide substitution on the polymers. The peptide coupling is stable in the absence of thiols, and its cleavage is strongly dependent on the pH of the medium but not on the ionic strength of the medium. We conclude that RGD peptides coupled to PEI are labile in the presence of physiological concentrations of thiols, and this should be taken into account when such polymer–peptide conjugates are used for DNA delivery. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part A: Polym Chem 42: 6143–6156, 2004
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".