Well-Defined Cationic <i>N</i>-[3-(Dimethylamino)propyl]methacrylamide Hydrochloride-Based (Co)polymers for siRNA Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cationic glycopolymers have shown to be excellent candidates for the fabrication of gene delivery devices due to their ability to electrostatically interact with negatively charged nucleic acids and the carbohydrate residues ensure enhanced stability and low toxicity of the polyplexes. The ability to engineer the polymers for optimized compositions, molecular weights, and architectures is critical in the design of effective gene delivery vehicles. Therefore, in this study, the aqueous reversible addition–fragmentation chain transfer polymerization (RAFT) was used to synthesize well-defined cationic glycopolymers with various cationic segments. For the preparation of cationic parts, N -[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]methacrylamide hydrochloride (DMAPMA·HCl), water-soluble methacrylamide monomer containing tertiary amine, was polymerized to produce DMAPMA·HCl homopolymer, which was then used as macroCTA in the block copolymerization with two other methacrylamide monomers containing different pendant groups, namely, 2-aminoethyl methacrylamide hydrochloride (AEMA) (with primary amine) and N -(3-aminopropyl) morpholine methacrylamide (MPMA) (with morpholine ring). In addition, statistical copolymers of DMAPMA.HCl with either AEMA or MPMA were also synthesized. All resulting cationic polymers were utilized as macroCTA for the RAFT copolymerization with 2-lactobionamidoethyl methacrylamide (LAEMA), which consists of the pendent galactose residues to achieve DMAPMA·HCl-based glycopolymers. From the in vitro cytotoxicity study, the cationic glycopolymers showed better cell viabilities than the corresponding cationic homopolymers. Furthermore, complexation of the cationic polymers with siRNA, cellular uptake of the resulting polyplexes, and gene knockdown efficiencies were evaluated. All cationic polymers/glycopolymers demonstrated good complexation ability with siRNA at low weight ratios. Among these cationic polymer-siRNA polyplexes, the polyplexes prepared from the two glycopolymers, P(DMAPMA 65 - b -LAEMA 15 ) and P[(DMAPMA 65 - b -MPMA 63 )- b -LAEMA 16 ], showed outstanding results in the cellular uptake, high EGFR knockdown, and low post-transfection toxicity, suggesting the great potential in siRNA delivery of these novel glycopolymers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".