4.7 Article

Decisive Role of Hydrophobic Side Groups of Polypeptides in Thermosensitive Gelation

期刊

BIOMACROMOLECULES
卷 13, 期 7, 页码 2053-2059

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/bm3004308

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51003103, 21174142, 50973108, 51021003]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2010DFB50890]
  3. Scientific Development Program of Jilin Province [201101082, 20110332]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thermosensitive hydrogels based on PEG and poly(L-glutamate)s bearing different hydrophobic side groups were separately synthesized by the ring-opening polymerization (ROP) of L-glutamate N-carboxyanhydrides containing different alkyl protected groups, that is, methyl, ethyl, n-propyl, and n-butyl, using mPEG(45)-NH2 as macroinitiator. The resulting copolymers underwent sol gel transitions in response to temperature change. Interestingly, the polypeptides containing methyl and ethyl showed significantly lower critical gelation temperatures (CGTs) than those bearing n-propyl and butyl side groups. Based on the analysis of C-13 NMR spectra, DLS, circular dichroism spectra, and ATR-FTIR spectra, the sol gel transition mechanism was attributed to the dehydration of poly(ethylene glycol) and the increase of beta-sheet conformation content in the polypeptides. The in vivo gelation test indicated that the copolymer solution (6.0 wt %) immediately changed to a gel after subcutaneous injection into rats. The mass loss of the hydrogel in vitro was accelerated in the presence of proteinase K, and the MTT assay revealed that the block copolymers exhibited no detectable cytotoxicity. The present work revealed that subtle variation in the length of a hydrophobic side group displayed the decisive effect on the gelation behavior of the polypeptides. In addition, the thermosensitive hydrogels could be promising materials for biomedical applications due to their good biocompatibility, biodegradability, and the fast in situ gelation behavior.

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

4.7
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