MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411399363 · doi:10.1016/j.omtm.2025.101518

Rational design of lipid nanoparticles for enabling gene therapies

2025· review· en· W4411399363 on OpenAlexafffund
Cedric A. Brimacombe, Jayesh A. Kulkarni, Miffy H. Y. Cheng, Kevin An, Dominik Witzigmann, Pieter R. Cullis

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Therapy — Methods & Clinical Development · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNanoMedicines Innovation Network
KeywordsRational designNanoparticleComputational biologyNanotechnologyChemistryBiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) technology is increasingly enabling RNA-based gene therapies that can potentially be used to treat most diseases. Further, these LNP RNA therapeutics can be designed and manufactured in a matter of weeks, allowing personalized medicines that can be produced in a time frame relevant to individuals suffering from terminal diseases. Here, we focus on the rational design principles that have successfully enabled LNP small interfering RNA (siRNA) formulations to silence pathogenic genes in the liver and LNP mRNA formulations to express therapeutic proteins for vaccines and gene therapies. These principles have evolved from over 50 years of research into the physical properties and functional roles of lipids in membranes as well as experience gained developing LNP systems for delivery of small molecule drugs. It is expected that these rational design principles will be successful in enabling most forms of gene therapies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Therapy — Methods & Clinical DevelopmentSame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207