Fabrication of Calcium Phosphate‐Based Nanocomposites Incorporating DNA Origami, Gold Nanorods, and Anticancer Drugs for Biomedical Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract DNA origami is designed by folding DNA strands at the nanoscale with arbitrary control. Due to its inherent biological nature, DNA origami is used in drug delivery for enhancement of synergism and multidrug resistance inhibition, cancer diagnosis, and many other biomedical applications, where it shows great potential. However, the inherent instability and low payload capacity of DNA origami restrict its biomedical applications. Here, this paper reports the fabrication of an advanced biocompatible nano‐in‐nanocomposite, which protects DNA origami from degradation and facilities drug loading. The DNA origami, gold nanorods, and molecular targeted drugs are co‐incorporated into pH responsive calcium phosphate [Ca 3 (PO 4 ) 2 ] nanoparticles. Subsequently, a thin layer of phospholipid is coated onto the Ca 3 (PO 4 ) 2 nanoparticle to offer better biocompatibility. The fabricated nanocomposite shows high drug loading capacity, good biocompatibility, and a photothermal and pH‐responsive payload release profile and it fully protects DNA origami from degradation. The codelivery of DNA origami with cancer drugs synergistically induces cancer cell apoptosis, reduces the multidrug resistance, and enhances the targeted killing efficiency toward human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive cells. This nanocomposite is foreseen to open new horizons for a variety of clinical and biomedical applications.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".