MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Characterization of the interaction of nanobubble ultrasound contrast agents with human blood components

2022· article· en· W4280500878 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioactive Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversitySt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMicrobubblesHuman bloodBiophysicsUltrasoundMaterials scienceWhole bloodChemistryNanotechnologyBiomedical engineeringConfocal microscopyOpticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanoscale ultrasound contrast agents, or nanobubbles, are being explored in preclinical applications ranging from vascular and cardiac imaging to targeted drug delivery in cancer. These sub-micron particles are approximately 10x smaller than clinically available microbubbles. This allows them to effectively traverse compromised physiological barriers and circulate for extended periods of time. While various aspects of nanobubble behavior have been previously examined, their behavior in human whole blood has not yet been explored. Accordingly, herein we examined, for the first time, the short and long-term effects of blood components on nanobubble acoustic response. We observed differences in the kinetics of backscatter from nanobubble suspensions in whole blood compared to bubbles in phosphate buffered saline (PBS), plasma, or red blood cell solutions (RBCs). Specifically, after introducing nanobubbles to fresh human whole blood, signal enhancement, or the magnitude of nonlinear ultrasound signal, gradually increased by 22.8 ± 13.1% throughout our experiment, with peak intensity reached within 145 s. In contrast, nanobubbles in PBS had a stable signal with negligible change in intensity (-1.7 ± 3.2%) over 8 min. Under the same conditions, microbubbles made with the same lipid formulation showed a -56.8 ± 6.1% decrease in enhancement in whole blood. Subsequent confocal, fluorescent, and scanning electron microscopy analysis revealed attachment of the nanobubbles to the surface of RBCs, suggesting that direct interactions, or hitchhiking, of nanobubbles on RBCs in the presence of plasma may be a possible mechanism for the observed effects. This phenomenon could be key to extending nanobubble circulation time and has broad implications in drug delivery, where RBC interaction with nanoparticles could be exploited to improve delivery efficiency.

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.

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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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