MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microfluidic Processing Approach to Controlling Drug Delivery Properties of Curcumin-Loaded Block Copolymer Nanoparticles

2018· article· en· W2890584367 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruyao Chen, Jeremy E. Wulff, Matthew G. Moffitt

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Pharmaceutics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCurcumin's Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCopolymerCurcuminMicrofluidicsNanoparticleDrug deliveryNanotechnologyChemistryDrug carrierDrugMaterials sciencePharmacologyPolymerOrganic chemistryBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply gas–liquid microfluidic reactors containing flow-variable, high-shear “hot spots” to produce curcumin-loaded polymer nanoparticles (CUR-PNPs) comprised of poly(caprolactone)- block -poly(ethylene oxide) (PCL- b -PEO) block copolymers at various flow rates and CUR loading ratios. CUR-PNPs prepared using the conventional nanoprecipitation method (bulk method) showed decreased encapsulation efficiency and increased drug precipitation as the loading ratio increased. However, CUR-PNPs prepared by microfluidic manufacturing showed both increased encapsulation efficiency and increased drug loading as either the flow rate or the loading ratio increased. This enabled microfluidic CUR loading percentages of up to 30% to be achieved in this study, which to our knowledge is a record for block copolymer PNPs. As well, it is shown that increased flow rate of microfluidic manufacturing leads to decreased mean CUR-PNP sizes (down to ∼50 nm) and narrower size distributions, along with significantly different CUR release kinetics compared to CUR-PNPs prepared at slower flow rates. In vitro antiproliferation experiments against MDA-MB-231 cells give an average IC 50 value of 24 μM for CUR-PNPs compared to 13 μM for free CUR at the same incubation time of 72 h. Compared to conventional bulk and single-phase microfluidic strategies, this unique two-phase reactor represents an exciting manufacturing platform for optimizing polymeric CUR nanomedicines though flow-directed shear processing.

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 score0.005

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations41
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular PharmaceuticsSame topicCurcumin's Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207