4.8 Article

The effect of protein structure on their controlled release from an injectable peptide hydrogel

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 31, 期 36, 页码 9527-9534

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.08.047

关键词

Peptide; Hydrogel; Delivery; Protein; Syringe

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 DE016386-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrogel materials are promising vehicles for the delivery of protein therapeutics Proteins can impart physical interactions both steric and electrostatic in nature that influence their release from a given gel network Here model proteins of varying hydrodynamic diameter and charge are directly encapsulated and their release studied from electropositive fibrillar hydrogels prepared from the self-assembling peptide MAX8 Hydrogelation of MAX8 can be triggered in the presence of proteins for their direct encapsulation with neither effect on protein structure nor the hydrogel s mechanical properties Bulk release of the encapsulated proteins from the hydrogels was assessed for a month time period at 37 degrees C before and after syringe delivery of the loaded gels to determine the influence of the protein structure on release Release of positively charged and neutral proteins was largely governed by the sterics imposed by the network Conversely negatively charged proteins interacted strongly with the positively charged fibrillar network, greatly restricting their release to <10% of the initial protein load Partition and retention studies indicated that electrostatic interactions dictate the amount of protein available for release Importantly, when protein encapsulated gels were delivered via syringe the release profiles of the macromolecules show the similar trends as those observed for non-sheared gels This study demonstrates that proteins can be directly encapsulated in self assembled MAX8 hydrogels which can then be syringe delivered to a site where subsequent release is controlled by protein structure Published by Elsevier Ltd

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