4.8 Article

Evaluating Nanoparticle Hydrophobicity Using Analytical Membrane Hydrophobic Interaction Chromatography

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 94, 期 24, 页码 8668-8673

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.2c00710

关键词

-

资金

  1. Merck Sharp Dohme LLC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new analytical hydrophobic interaction chromatography method was investigated for evaluating the hydrophobicity of nanoparticles, showing good agreement with literature values. The method was used to evaluate the hydrophobicity of various nanoparticles, including a live attenuated viral vaccine, under different conditions. This new method can be implemented on any liquid chromatography system, providing accurate measurements in a short amount of time while avoiding the use of organic solvents.
Nanoparticle hydrophobicity is a key factor controlling the stability, adhesion, and transport of nanoparticle suspensions. Although a number of approaches have been presented for evaluating nanoparticle hydrophobicity, these methods are difficult to apply to larger nanoparticles and viruses (>100 nm in size) that are of increasing importance in drug delivery and gene therapy. This study investigated the use of a new analytical hydrophobic interaction chromatography method employing a 5.0 mu m pore size polyvinylidene fluoride membrane as the stationary-phase in membrane hydrophobic interaction chromatography (MHIC). Experimental data obtained using a series of model proteins were in good agreement with literature values for the hydrophobicity (both experimental and computational). MHIC was then used to evaluate the hydrophobicity of a variety of nanoparticles, including a live attenuated viral vaccine, both in water and in the presence of different surfactants. This new method can be implemented on any liquid chromatography system, run times are typically <20 min, and the experiments avoid the use of organic solvents that could alter the structure of many biological nanoparticles.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据