MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609208998 · doi:10.17975/sfj-2017-007

<i>In Vivo</i> Potential of Manganese Chelated Porphysomes as MRI Contrast Agents

2017· article· en· W2609208998 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Chris J. Zhang, Michael S. Valic, Juan Chen, Gang Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueSTEM Fellowship Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn vivoChelationConjugated systemLiposomePorphyrinChemistryMoietyManganeseBiophysicsNanoparticleFluorescenceCombinatorial chemistryNuclear magnetic resonanceMaterials scienceNanotechnologyBiochemistryStereochemistryOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Porphysome nanoparticles are composed of porphyrin-conjugated lipids. The attachment of the porphyrin moiety to each phospholipid confers novel properties to the liposome-like nanoparticle, allowing it to perform a variety of diagnostic and therapeutic applications. The metal chelating properties of porphyrin can be used to bind manganese (Mn), transforming the porphysome into a contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Previous work has extensively characterized the properties of the Mn-porphysome. Herein, we build upon that work by demonstrating the bio-interactions of Mn-porphysomes in vitro to validate their study in vivo. Particle stability in serum was inferred from fluorescence quenching efficiency, and tolerability to cells was measured using an MTT assay. Mn-porphysomes remained &gt;80% quenched after 14H and showed no toxicity to cells at concentrations below 125 mM. These preliminary results suggest that the porphysome may be used to enhance MRI contrast in vivo.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTEM Fellowship JournalSame topicNanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207