ArticleJournal of biomaterials science. Polymer edition2011
Enhanced mucoadhesive capacity of novel co-polymers for oral protein delivery.
Article in Journal of biomaterials science. Polymer edition, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Graft co-polymer networks have shown promise as devices for oral delivery of proteins. By increasing adhesion of these networks at the delivery site of the upper small intestine by utilizing small covalent chemical linkages caused by the addition of an aldehyde functional group we can make them more viable. These aldehydes bind covalently by way of a condensation reaction with the amines of the amino acids found in the glycoprotein network of the mucus layer of the small intestine to form imines. To investigate the effectiveness of this linkage the co-polymers are prepared in three different percentages of poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) and aldehyde-modified PEG, and characterized through swelling, release and adhesion testing. The percentages of aldehyde-modified PEG used are 0.06, 0.6 and 3.3%. The swelling results indicate that the formulations with the aldehyde-modified PEG maintained the same pH sensitivity and transition around a pH of 5.8 as those formulations without the aldehyde moiety. Release results indicate that the release of insulin of the most promising 3.3% aldehyde formulation was successful with a release of about 80% after 3 h, which compares favorably with the similar release of the controls done in previous work. Adhesion testing was carried out through the use of a mechanical testing apparatus. Data have been gathered and plotted to give a detachment force (N) versus displacement (m) curve, of which the work of adhesion (μJ) was found by taking the area underneath the curve. Adhesion results indicate an increase to the already present adhesion of the co-polymers due to increased percentages of the aldehyde-modified PEG tethers where the 3.3% formulation showed an increase of 10-30 μJ over both control formulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.