| Title |
Controlled release of TGF-beta 1 from RADA self-assembling peptide hydrogel scaffolds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s109545 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ao Zhou, Shuo Chen, Bin He, Weikang Zhao, Xiaojun Chen, Dianming Jiang |
| Abstract |
Bioactive mediators, cytokines, and chemokines have an important role in regulating and optimizing the synergistic action of materials, cells, and cellular microenvironments for tissue engineering. RADA self-assembling peptide hydrogels have been proved to have an excellent ability to promote cell proliferation, wound healing, tissue repair, and drug delivery. Here, we report that D-RADA16 and L-RADA16-RGD self-assembling peptides can form stable second structure and hydrogel scaffolds, affording the slow release of growth factor (transforming growth factor cytokine-beta 1 [TGF-beta 1]). In vitro tests demonstrated that the plateau release amount can be obtained till 72 hours. Moreover, L-RADA16, D-RADA16, and L-RADA16-RGD self-assembling peptide hydrogels containing TGF-beta 1 were used for 3D cell culture of bone mesenchymal stem cells of rats for 2 weeks. The results revealed that these three RADA16 peptide hydrogels had a significantly favorable influence on proliferation of bone mesenchymal stem cells and hold some promise in slow and sustained release of growth factor. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 28% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 7 | 12% |
| Engineering | 7 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 7% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 23 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,091,226
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#813
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,386
of 348,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#26
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.