Dimensional control of DNA nanostructures enhances cellular uptake and guides tissue-regenerative responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precise regulation of cellular functions is fundamental for advancing tissue regeneration and drug delivery systems. Structural DNA nanotechnology enables the design of well-defined nanostructures, emerging as a promising platform in these biomedical applications. However, a clear understanding of how the dimensional properties of DNA nanostructures affect cellular uptake and biological responses remains limited. In this study, we constructed three distinct DNA nanostructures: a one-dimensional six-helix bundle (6HB), a two-dimensional three-point star, and a three-dimensional tetrahedron. We systematically evaluated their endocytic efficiency in five representative cell types: endothelial cells, dermal fibroblasts, myoblasts, chondrocytes, and osteoblasts. Among them, the 6HB exhibited the highest cellular uptake, with minimal variability across cell types in both 2D petri dish cultures and 3D multicellular spheroid invasion models. Moreover, DNA nanostructures were found to enhance cell proliferation in fibroblasts and chondrocytes, support chondrocyte phenotype maintenance, and, in the case of the 6HB, promote myoblast differentiation. These findings provide new insights into structure-function relationships in DNA nanomaterials and offer guidance for optimizing DNA-based platforms for drug delivery and regenerative medicine.
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".