Formulation of antiretroviral nanocrystals and development into a microneedle delivery system for potential treatment of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV/AIDS remains a major global public health issue. While antiretroviral therapy is effective at reducing the viral load in the blood, up to 50% of those with HIV suffer from some degree of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder, due to the presence of the blood–brain barrier restricting drugs from crossing into the central nervous system and treating the viral reservoir there. One way to circumvent this is the nose-to-brain pathway. This pathway can also be accessed via a facial intradermal injection. Certain parameters can increase delivery via this route, including using nanoparticles with a positive zeta potential and an effective diameter of 200 nm or less. Microneedle arrays offer a minimally invasive, pain-free alternative to traditional hypodermic injections. This study shows the formulation of nanocrystals of both rilpivirine (RPV) and cabotegravir, followed by incorporation into separate microneedle delivery systems for application to either side of the face. Following an in vivo study in rats, delivery to the brain was seen for both drugs. For RPV, a Cmax was seen at 21 days of 619.17 ± 73.32 ng/g, above that of recognised plasma IC90 levels, and potentially therapeutically relevant levels were maintained for 28 days. For CAB, a Cmax was seen at 28 days of 478.31 ± 320.86 ng/g, and while below recognised 4IC90 levels, does indicate that therapeutically relevant levels could be achieved by manipulating final microaaray patch size in humans.
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".