Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39266622›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A head-to-head comparison of polymer interaction with mucin from porcine stomach and bovine submaxillary glands.

Mai Bay Stie, Cristiana Cunha, Zheng Huang, Jacob Judas Kain Kirkensgaard, Pernille Sønderby Tuelung, Feng Wan, Hanne Mørck Nielsen, Vito Foderà, Stine Rønholt

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

9 authors.

Mai Bay StieDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. mai.bay.stie@sund.ku.dk.
Cristiana CunhaDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Zheng HuangDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jacob Judas Kain KirkensgaardDepartment of Food Science, Rolighedsvej 26, 1958, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Pernille Sønderby TuelungDepartment of Drug Design and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Feng WanDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Hanne Mørck NielsenDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Vito FoderàDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Stine RønholtLEO Foundation Center for Cutaneous Drug Delivery, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. stine.roenholt@sund.ku.dk.

Funding

Lundbeck Foundation R303-2018-2968Novo Nordisk Foundation NNF16OC0021948Novo Nordisk Foundation NNF19OC0055857VILLUM FONDEN 19175
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Native mucus is heterogeneous, displays high inter-individual variation and is prone to changes during harvesting and storage. To overcome the lack of reproducibility and availability of native mucus, commercially available purified mucins, porcine gastric mucin (PGM) and mucin from bovine submaxillary gland (BSM), have been widely used. However, the question is to which extent the choice of mucin matters in studies of their interaction with polymers as their composition, structure and hence physicochemical properties differ. Accordingly, the interactions between PGM or BSM with two widely used polymers in drug delivery, polyethylene oxide and chitosan, was studied with orthogonal methods: turbidity, dynamic light scattering, and quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation monitoring. Polymer binding and adsorption to the two commercially available and purified mucins, PGM and BSM, is different depending on the mucin type. PEO, known to interact weakly with mucin, only displayed limited interaction with both mucins as confirmed by all employed methods. In contrast, chitosan was able to bind to both PGM and BSM. Interestingly, the results suggest that chitosan interacts with BSM to a greater extent than with PGM indicating that the choice of mucin, PGM or BSM, can affect the outcome of studies of mucin interactions with polymers.

Indexed as

ChitosanGastric MucinsMucinsSubmandibular GlandAnimalsCattlePolyethylene GlycolsPolymersStomachSwineChitosanGastric MucinsMucinsPolyethylene GlycolsPolymersBSMChitosanMucinPGMPolymerQCM-D

Identifiers

PMID39266622
PMCPMC11393313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.