Cited by 176Advanced Drug Delivery SystemsNanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryPolymer Surface Interaction Studies

Protein–polymer conjugation — moving beyond PEGylation

Open access
Qi, Yizhi, Chilkoti, Ashutosh·2015·Current Opinion in Chemical Biology

Abstract

In this review, we summarize-from a materials science perspective-the current state of the field of polymer conjugates of peptide and protein drugs, with a focus on polymers that have been developed as alternatives to the current gold standard, poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG). PEGylation, or the covalent conjugation of PEG to biological therapeutics to improve their therapeutic efficacy by increasing their circulation half-lives and stability, has been the gold standard in the pharmaceutical industry for several decades. After years of research and development, the limitations of PEG, specifically its non-degradability and immunogenicity have become increasingly apparent. While PEG is still currently the best polymer available with the longest clinical track record, extensive research is underway to develop alternative materials in an effort to address these limitations of PEG. Many of these alternative materials have shown promise, though most of them are still in an early stage of development and their in vivo distribution, mechanism of degradation, route of elimination and immunogenicity have not been investigated to a similar extent as for PEG. Thus, further in-depth in vivo testing is essential to validate whether any of the alternative materials discussed in this review qualify as a replacement for PEG.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cbpa.2015.08.009

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 101 · Cited by 176

Authors
Qi, Y., & Chilkoti, A.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Chilkoti, Ashutosh
Venue
Current Opinion in Chemical Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
28
Pages
181-193
ISSN
1367-5931 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1478059225
Cited by
176
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Chemical Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (R01-DK091789, R01-DK092665)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Surfaces, Coatings and Films › Polymer Surface Interaction Studies
Keywords
protein-polymer conjugation, PEGylation, polyethylene glycol, protein and peptide drugs, drug stability, immunogenicity, in vivo biodistribution, polymer degradation, circulation half-life
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Peptides, Polyethylene Glycols, Polymers, Proteins, Chemistry Techniques, Synthetic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review