MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793512502 · doi:10.1021/acsnano.7b06212

Effect of Cell Sex on Uptake of Nanoparticles: The Overlooked Factor at the Nanobio Interface

2018· article· en· W2793512502 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Serpooshan, Sara Sheibani, Pooja Pushparaj, Michal Wojcik, Albert Youngwoo Jang, Michelle Santoso, Joyce H. Jang, Haina Huang, Reihaneh Safavi‐Sohi, Niloofar Haghjoo, Hossein Nejadnik, Haniyeh Aghaverdi, Hojatollah Vali, Joseph M. Kinsella, John F. Presley, Ke Xu, Phillip C. Yang, Morteza Mahmoudi

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
FundersSchool of Medicine, Stanford University
KeywordsReprogrammingStem cellInduced pluripotent stem cellCellCell biologySomatic cellCell typeBiologyAndrologyChemistryMedicineBiochemistryEmbryonic stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cellular uptake of nanoparticles (NPs) depends on the nature of the nanobio system including the solid nanocomponents ( e. g., physicochemical properties of NPs), nanobio interfaces ( e. g., protein corona composition), and the cellular characteristics ( e. g., cell type). In this study, we document the role of sex in cellular uptake of NPs as an "overlooked" factor in nanobio interface investigations. We demonstrate that cell sex leads to differences in NP uptake between male and female human amniotic stem cells (hAMSCs), with greater uptake by female cells. hAMSCs are one of the earliest sources of somatic stem cells. The experiments were replicated with primary fibroblasts isolated from the salivary gland of adult male and female donors of similar ages, and again the extent of NP uptake was altered by cell sex. However, in contrast to hAMSCs, uptake was greater in male cells. We also found out that female versus male amniotic stem cells exhibited different responses to reprogramming into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by the Yamanaka factors. Thus, future studies should consider the effect of sex on the nanobio interactions to optimize clinical translation of NPs and iPSC biology and to help researchers to better design and produce safe and efficient therapeutic sex-specific NPs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations105
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207