The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Differential degradation rates in vivo and in vitro of biocompatible poly(lactic acid) and poly(glycolic acid) homo- and co-polymers for a polymeric drug-delivery microchip
Abstract
The biocompatibility and biodegradation rate of component materials are critical when designing a drug-delivery device. The degradation products and rate of degradation may play important roles in determining the local cellular response to the implanted material. In this study, we investigated the biocompatibility and relative biodegradation rates of PLA, PGA and two poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) polymers of 50:50 mol ratio, thin-film component materials of a drug-delivery microchip developed in our laboratory. The in vivo biocompatibility and both in vivo and in vitro degradation of these materials were characterized using several techniques. Total leukocyte concentration measurements showed normal acute and chronic inflammatory responses to the PGA and low-molecular-weight PLGA that resolved by 21 days, while the normal inflammatory responses to the PLA and high-molecular-weight PLGA were resolved but at slower rates up to 21 days. These results were paralleled by thickness measurements of fibrous capsules surrounding the implants, which showed greater maturation of the capsules for the more rapidly degrading materials after 21 days, but less mature capsules of sustained thicknesses for the PLA and high-molecular-weight PLGA up to 49 days. Gel-permeation chromatography of residual polymer samples confirmed classification of the materials as rapidly or slowly degrading. These materials showed thinner fibrous capsules than have been reported for other materials by our laboratory and have suitable biocompatibility and biodegradation rates for an implantable drug-delivery device.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Cited by
Larrañeta, E., Lutton, R. E. M., Woolfson, A. D., & Donnelly, R. F. (2016) · Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports · doi:10.1016/j.mser.2016.03.001 · Cited by 964
Bessa, P. C., Casal, M., & Reis, R. L. (2008) · Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine · doi:10.1002/term.74 · Cited by 549
Yin, M., Wu, J., Deng, M., Wang, P., Ji, G., Wang, M., Zhou, C., Blum, N. T., Zhang, W., Shi, H., et al. (2021) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/acsnano.1c06036 · Cited by 380
Metadata
- Authors
- Grayson, A. C. R., Voskerician, G., Lynn, A., Anderson, J. M., Cima, M. J., & Langer, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1281-1304
- ISSN
- 0920-5063 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-5624
- OpenAlex
- W2090106027
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Differential degradation rates in vivo and in vitro of biocompatible poly(lactic acid) and poly(glycolic acid) homo- and co-polymers for a polymeric drug-delivery microchip. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/1568562041959991
- The paper
- Grayson, A. C. R., Voskerician, G., Lynn, A., Anderson, J. M., Cima, M. J., & Langer, R. (2004). Differential degradation rates in vivo and in vitro of biocompatible poly(lactic acid) and poly(glycolic acid) homo- and co-polymers for a polymeric drug-delivery microchip. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568562041959991
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.