Mucoadhesive Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery to the Anterior Eye
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the use of topical drops for the delivery of drugs to the anterior of the eye is well accepted, it is far from efficient with as little as 5% of the drug instilled on the eye actually reaching the target tissue. The ability to prolong the residence time on the eye is desirable. Based on the acceptability of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate based polymers in contact lens applications, the current work focuses on the development of a poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)) nanoparticle system. The particles were modified to allow for degradation and to permit mucoadhesion. Size and morphological analysis of the final polymer products showed that nano-sized, spherical particles were produced. FTIR spectra demonstrated that the nanoparticles comprised poly(HEMA) and that 3-(acrylamido)phenylboronic acid (3AAPBA), as a mucoadhesive, was successfully incorporated. Degradation of nanoparticles containing N,N'-bis(acryloyl)cystamine (BAC) after incubation with DL-dithiothreitol (DTT) was confirmed by a decrease in turbidity and through transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Nanoparticle mucoadhesion was shown through an in-vitro zeta potential analysis.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".