CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A novel method for PEGylation of chitosan nanoparticles through photopolymerization

Bozuyuk, Ugur, Gokulu, Ipek S., Dogan, Nihal Olcay, Kizilel, Seda·2019·RSC Advances
DOI 10.1039/c9ra00780fPMC PMC9063996
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

An ultrafast and convenient method for PEGylation of chitosan nanoparticles has been established through a photopolymerization reaction between the acrylate groups of PEG and methacrylated-chitosan nanoparticles.

Overview

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 · 10.1039/c9ra00780f

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Overall strategy for the new method. (A) Synthesis of methacrylamide chitosan from chitosan. (B) Nanoparticle synthesis via ionic gelation method. Interaction between positively charged methacrylamide chitosan and negatively charged TPP crosslinker form nanoparticles. (C) PEGylation of methacrylamide chitosan nanoparticles. UV light triggers the reaction between methacrylic groups on nanoparticles and acrylate-PEG derivative in the presence of photoinitiator. PEGylated nanoparticles are obtained under optimized conditions.
Fig. 1 Overall strategy for the new method. (A) Synthesis of methacrylamide chitosan from chitosan. (B) Nanoparticle synthesis via ionic gelation method. Interaction between positively charged methacrylamide chitosan and negatively charged TPP crosslinker form nanoparticles. (C) PEGylation of methacrylamide chitosan nanoparticles. UV light triggers the reaction between methacrylic groups on nanoparticles and acrylate-PEG derivative in the presence of photoinitiator. PEGylated nanoparticles are obtained under optimized conditions.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Illustration for the aggregation behaviour observed in high PEG mole or PEG chain length groups. At low pH, particles are stable due to strong repulsion force. At higher pH values, nanoparticles tend to be close to each other due to lower repulsion effects. This tendency results in the aggregation of nanoparticles induced by entanglement of conjugated and free PEG macromolecules.
Fig. 2 Illustration for the aggregation behaviour observed in high PEG mole or PEG chain length groups. At low pH, particles are stable due to strong repulsion force. At higher pH values, nanoparticles tend to be close to each other due to lower repulsion effects. This tendency results in the aggregation of nanoparticles induced by entanglement of conjugated and free PEG macromolecules.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Ferrari, 2005, Nat. Rev. Cancer, 5, 161, 10.1038/nrc1566 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Liang, 2008, Curr. Drug Metab., 9, 697, 10.2174/138920008786049230 · DOI
  3. Petros, 2010, Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery, 9, 615, 10.1038/nrd2591 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Saboktakin, 2017, Adv. Mater. Sci., 2, 1, 10.15761/AMS.1000127 · DOI
  5. Sun, 2014, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 53, 12320, 10.1002/anie.201403036 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Zhang, 2008, Clin. Pharmacol. Ther., 83, 761, 10.1038/sj.clpt.6100400 · DOI
  7. Albanese, 2012, Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng., 14, 1, 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071811-150124 · DOI
  8. Aider, 2010, LWT--Food Sci. Technol., 43, 837, 10.1016/j.lwt.2010.01.021 · DOI
  9. Dutta, 2004, J. Sci. Ind. Res., 63, 20
  10. Rinaudo, 2006, Prog. Polym. Sci., 31, 603, 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.06.001 · DOI
  11. Rabea, 2003, Biomacromolecules, 4, 1457, 10.1021/bm034130m · DOI · Paper page
  12. Rodrigues, 2012, J. Funct. Biomater., 3, 615, 10.3390/jfb3030615 · DOI
  13. Tan, 2009, Biomaterials, 30, 2499, 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.080 · DOI
  14. Mohammed, 2017, Pharmaceutics, 9, 53, 10.3390/pharmaceutics9040053 · DOI
  15. Bhattarai, 2010, Adv. Drug Delivery Rev., 62, 83, 10.1016/j.addr.2009.07.019 · DOI
  16. Roy, 1999, Nat. Med., 5, 387, 10.1038/7385 · DOI
  17. Yu, 2007, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part A, 82, 243, 10.1002/jbm.a.31069 · DOI
  18. Amsden, 2007, Biomacromolecules, 8, 3758, 10.1021/bm700691e · DOI
  19. Bozuyuk, 2018, ACS Nano, 12, 9617, 10.1021/acsnano.8b05997 · DOI
  20. Brunel, 2008, Langmuir, 24, 11370, 10.1021/la801917a · DOI
  21. Khachane, 2011, Pharmazie, 66, 334
  22. Dong, 2013, Carbohydr. Polym., 94, 940, 10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.02.013 · DOI
  23. Divya, 2018, Environ. Chem. Lett., 16, 101, 10.1007/s10311-017-0670-y · DOI
  24. Makhlof, 2011, Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., 42, 445, 10.1016/j.ejps.2010.12.007 · DOI
  25. Malhotra, 2011, Int. J. Nanomed., 6, 485
  26. Zhang, 2007, Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem., 46, 197, 10.1042/BA20060163 · DOI
  27. Bozuyuk, 2018, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 10, 33945, 10.1021/acsami.8b11178 · DOI
  28. Casettari, 2012, Prog. Polym. Sci., 37, 659, 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2011.10.001 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bozuyuk, U., Gokulu, I. S., Dogan, N. O., & Kizilel, S.
Venue
RSC Advances
Publisher
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
Published
2019
Volume
9
Issue
25
Pages
14011-14015
ISSN
2046-2069
DOI
10.1039/c9ra00780f
PMC
PMC9063996
Cited by
16
References
0
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (vor, 126 d)
Funders
Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştirma Kurumu (116M995)

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