Blood Compatibility of Hydrophilic Polyphosphoesters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polyphosphoesters (PPEs) are a class of versatile degradable polymers. Despite the high potential of this class of polymers in biomedical applications, little is known about their blood interaction and compatibility. We evaluated the hemocompatibility of water-soluble PPEs (with different hydrophilicities and molar masses) and PPE-coated model nanocarriers. Overall, we identified high hemocompatibility of PPEs, comparable to poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG), currently used for many applications in nanomedicine. Hydrophilic PPEs caused no significant changes in blood coagulation, negligible platelet activation, the absence of red blood cells lysis, or aggregation. However, when a more hydrophobic copolymer was studied, some changes in the whole blood clot strength at the highest concentration were detected, but only concentrations above that are typically used for biomedical applications. Also, the PPE-coated model nanocarriers showed high hemocompatibility. These results contribute to defining hydrophilic PPEs as a promising platform for degradable and biocompatible materials in the biomedical field.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".