An Activity-Based Sensing Approach to Monitor Nanomaterial-Promoted Changes in Labile Metal Pools in Living Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metal-based nanoparticles are a promising class of materials for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other diseases. However, mechanisms of action of these nanomedicines remain insufficiently understood due in large part to our limited understanding of the dynamic equilibria between solid metal nanoparticles and labile metal ions generated from these nanoparticles within complex biological milieus. Here, we apply activity-based sensing to directly identify and investigate the fate of labile copper pools with metal and oxidation state-specificity generated by anticancer copper nanomedicines. We found that treatment of cells with copper-releasing nanoparticles alter labile Cu-(I)/Cu-(II) ratios through an increase in labile Cu-(II), while overall labile copper levels decrease. Labile copper release triggers compensatory responses in two major antioxidant pathways, glutathione (GSH) and nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (NRF2), as well as in metal homeostasis to limit copper availability via regulation of copper export (ATP7B) and copper import (CTR1) proteins. These findings establish the value of activity-based sensing as a generalizable approach for labile metal imaging to help decipher molecular mechanisms of bioactive metal nanoparticles and guide the development of more effective nanomedicine diagnostics and therapies to target metal-dependent disease vulnerabilities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".