ArticlePharmaceutics2021
Lessons Learned in Protein Precipitation Using a Membrane Emulsification Technique to Produce Reversible and Uniform Microbeads.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The effects of the manufacturing process and the regeneration of Shirasu porous glass (SPG) membranes were investigated on the reproducibility of protein precipitants, termed protein microbeads. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was selected as a model protein to produce its microbeads in seven different cases. The results showed that the hydrophobically modified SPG membrane produced finer microbeads than the hydrophilic SPG membrane, but this was inconsistent when using the general regeneration method. Its reproducibility was determined to be mostly dependent on rinsing the SPG membrane prior to the modification and on the protein concentration used for emulsification. The higher concentration could foul and plug the membrane during protein release and thus the membrane must be washed thoroughly before hydrophobic modification. Moreover, the membrane regenerated by silicone resin dissolved in ethanol had better reproducibility than silicone resin dissolved in water. On the other hand, rinsing the protein precipitant with cold ethanol after the emulsification was not favorable and induced protein aggregation. With the addition of trehalose, the purity of the IVIG microbeads was almost the same as before microbeadification. Therefore, the regeneration method, protein concentration, and its stabilizer are key to the success of protein emulsification and precipitation using the SPG membrane.
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.