Inhalable Dry Powders for Lung mRNA Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite great promise, application of mRNA therapeutics in the lung has proven challenging. Many groups have reported success instilling liquid mRNA formulations in animal models, but direct intratracheal administration of large liquid quantities to the human lung presents significant safety and distribution concerns. To accomplish safe and effective mRNA delivery to the lung, formulations must be prepared for dosing via inhalation. An inhaled mRNA delivery system for the lung must be both robust enough to survive inhalation conditions and potent enough to deliver mRNA upon reaching the lung. In this work dry powder lipid nanoparticle formulations are developed, using spray-freeze-drying, to produce stable, biologically active, inhalable dry powders for mRNA delivery. The final powders have suitable aerosolization properties, with mean mass aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of 3-4 microns, and fine particle fraction (FPF) ≈40%, allowing for efficient mRNA delivery to the deep lung following inhalation. Importantly, the formulations developed here are suitable for use with different ionizable lipids. Four different ionizable lipid-based formulations are evaluated as powders, and all exhibit in vivo pulmonary mRNA delivery equal to that of instilled liquid formulations. These results lay promising groundwork for the eventual development of an inhalable mRNA dry powder therapeutic.
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".