Atmospheric Spray Freeze Drying of Sugar Solution With Phage D29
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Therapeutic bacteriophages offer a potential alternative approach in the treatment of drug resistant bacteria. In the present study, we examine the ability of atmospheric spray freeze-drying to process bacteriophage D29 into a solid dry formulation. Bacteriophage D29 is of particular interest due to its infection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. A sugar solution containing bacteriophage D29 was sprayed and instantly frozen in a cold chamber. Cold drying gas was then passed through the chamber at a high flow rate and atmospheric pressure. Convective transport combined with the low temperature of the drying gas results in sublimation of ice, yielding a free-flowing, porous powder. The bacteriophages were atmospheric spray freeze-dried in solutions with varying concentrations of trehalose and mannitol. A solution of trehalose and mannitol at a mass ratio of 7:3 and a total mass concentration of 100 mg/mL led to powder with 4.9 ± 0.1 % moisture content and an acceptable titer reduction of ~0.6 logs. In comparison, a pure trehalose solution and a 1:1 ratio of trehalose and mannitol both had titer reductions of >1.5 logs. Spectroscopic analysis showed that trehalose in the powder was amorphous while mannitol completely crystallized, both of which are desirable for preserving phage viability in powders. The results highlight the potential for using atmospheric spray freeze-drying as an alternative process in preserving biopharmaceutical products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".