MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414229707 · doi:10.1088/1748-605x/ae0777

pH controlled release of extracellular vesicles from a hydrogel scaffold for therapeutic applications

2025· article· en· W4414229707 on OpenAlexafffund
Simon Chewchuk, Nicholas Soucy, Fan Wan, James L. Harden, Michel Godin

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicExtracellular vesicles in disease
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsExtracellular vesiclesControlled releaseVesicleScaffoldSelf-healing hydrogelsMicrofluidicsDrug deliveryDrug

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell-based therapies are gaining attention as a promising approach for repairing damaged tissues and organs, offering alternatives to invasive treatments like organ transplants and powerful medications. Recent research has shifted towards extracellular vesicles (EVs), membrane-bound particles that can carry therapeutic compounds like DNA, RNA, and proteins, which may offer advantages over cell-based therapies, such as higher potency and reduced immune reactions. A key challenge in EV therapy is ensuring that the vesicles reach their intended target tissues. While EVs are often delivered via injection, systemic administration can result in off-target effects. To address this, we highlight the microfluidic encapsulation of EVs in hydrogel microcapsules that include a CD9 binding peptide (CD9BP), allowing for controlled EV release in response to a shift in environmental pH. By encapsulating CD9+ EVs in CD9BP hydrogel capsules, we demonstrate the release of their contents in acidified environments typical of damaged tissues. This method allows for targeted, localized EV delivery. The approach promises more effective tissue regeneration while reducing the need for broad, non-specific drug delivery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical MaterialsSame topicExtracellular vesicles in diseaseFrench-language works237,207