Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32042562›Full record

ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2020

Artificial Inclusion Bodies for Clinical Development.

Julieta M Sánchez, Hèctor López-Laguna, Patricia Álamo, Naroa Serna, Alejandro Sánchez-Chardi, Verónica Nolan, Olivia Cano-Garrido, Isolda Casanova, Ugutz Unzueta, Esther Vazquez and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Coiled-Coil Based Inclusion Bodies and Their Potential Applications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Julieta M SánchezInstitut de Biotecnologia i de Biomedicina Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.
Hèctor López-LagunaInstitut de Biotecnologia i de Biomedicina Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.
Patricia ÁlamoCIBER de Bioingeniería Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN) 28029 Madrid Spain.
Naroa SernaInstitut de Biotecnologia i de Biomedicina Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.
Alejandro Sánchez-ChardiServei de Microscòpia Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.
Verónica NolanInstituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas (IIBYT) (CONICET-Universidad Nacional de Córdoba) ICTA & Cátedra de Química Biológica Departamento de Química FCEFyN, UNC. Av. Velez Sarsfield 1611 X 5016GCA Córdoba Argentina.
Olivia Cano-GarridoInstitut de Biotecnologia i de Biomedicina Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.
Isolda CasanovaCIBER de Bioingeniería Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN) 28029 Madrid Spain.
Ugutz UnzuetaCIBER de Bioingeniería Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN) 28029 Madrid Spain.
Esther VazquezInstitut de Biotecnologia i de Biomedicina Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.
Ramon ManguesCIBER de Bioingeniería Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN) 28029 Madrid Spain.
Antonio VillaverdeInstitut de Biotecnologia i de Biomedicina Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Bellaterra 08193 Barcelona Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2615-4521
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESHospital de Sant Pau · ESConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · AR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial inclusion bodies (IBs) are mechanically stable protein particles in the microscale, which behave as robust, slow-protein-releasing amyloids. Upon exposure to cultured cells or upon subcutaneous or intratumor injection, these protein materials secrete functional IB polypeptides, functionally mimicking the endocrine release of peptide hormones from secretory amyloid granules. Being appealing as delivery systems for prolonged protein drug release, the development of IBs toward clinical applications is, however, severely constrained by their bacterial origin and by the undefined and protein-to-protein, batch-to-batch variable composition. In this context, the de novo fabrication of artificial IBs (ArtIBs) by simple, cell-free physicochemical methods, using pure components at defined amounts is proposed here. By this, the resulting functional protein microparticles are intriguing, chemically defined biomimetic materials that replicate relevant functionalities of natural IBs, including mammalian cell penetration and local or remote release of functional ArtIB-forming protein. In default of severe regulatory issues, the concept of ArtIBs is proposed as a novel exploitable category of biomaterials for biotechnological and biomedical applications, resulting from simple fabrication and envisaging soft developmental routes to clinics.

Indexed as

biomimetic materialscancerdrug releasemicroparticlesrecombinant proteins

Identifiers

PMID32042562
PMCPMC7001620
OpenAlexW2990605542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.