Pharmacokinetics of Intramuscularly Administered Thermoresponsive Polymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aqueous solutions of some polymers exhibit a lower critical solution temperature (LCST); that is, they form phase‐separated aggregates when heated above a threshold temperature. Such polymers found many promising (bio)medical applications, including in situ thermogelling with controlled drug release, polymer‐supported radiotherapy (brachytherapy), immunotherapy, and wound dressing, among others. Yet, despite the extensive research on medicinal applications of thermoresponsive polymers, their biodistribution and fate after administration remained unknown. Thus, herein, they studied the pharmacokinetics of four different thermoresponsive polyacrylamides after intramuscular administration in mice. In vivo, these thermoresponsive polymers formed depots that subsequently dissolved with a two‐phase kinetics (depot maturation, slow redissolution) with half‐lives 2 weeks to 5 months, as depot vitrification prolonged their half‐lives. Additionally, the decrease of T CP of a polymer solution increased the density of the intramuscular depot. Moreover, they detected secondary polymer depots in the kidneys and liver; these secondary depots also followed two‐phase kinetics (depot maturation and slow dissolution), with half‐lives 8 to 38 days (kidneys) and 15 to 22 days (liver). Overall, these findings may be used to tailor the properties of thermoresponsive polymers to meet the demands of their medicinal applications. Their methods may become a benchmark for future studies of polymer biodistribution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".