logo
CONTENT TYPES

Figure 1Loading Img

Amphiphilic Poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methacrylate]s with OH Groups in the PEG Side Chains for Controlling Solution/Rheological Properties and toward Bioapplication

  • Yuta Koda
    Yuta Koda
    Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, Japan
    ERATO Akiyoshi Bio-Nanotransporter Project, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Katsura Int’tech center, Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8530, Japan
    More by Yuta Koda
  • Daiki Takahashi
    Daiki Takahashi
    Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, Japan
  • Yoshihiro Sasaki
    Yoshihiro Sasaki
    Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, Japan
  • , and 
  • Kazunari Akiyoshi*
    Kazunari Akiyoshi
    Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, Japan
    ERATO Akiyoshi Bio-Nanotransporter Project, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Katsura Int’tech center, Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8530, Japan
    *(K.A.) E-mail: [email protected]. Tel: +81-75-383-2590. Fax: +81-75-383-2589.
Cite this: ACS Appl. Bio Mater. 2019, 2, 5, 1920–1930
Publication Date (Web):April 15, 2019
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.8b00836
Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society
ACS Editors’ ChoiceACS Editors’ Choice
Article Views
3527
Altmetric
-
Citations
LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

PDF (5 MB)
Supporting Info (1)»

Abstract

Poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methacrylate]s with OH groups on the PEG side chains [poly(PEGOHMA)s] were synthesized using ruthenium-catalyzed living radical polymerization (Ru-LRP) to diversify the polymer design of PEGylated methacrylate-based copolymers. Poly(PEGOHMA)s could not be prepared using the approach previously reported for the synthesis of poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate [poly(PEGMA)]; therefore, the polymerization was adapted for poly(PEGOHMA)s. As a result, both homopolymerization and random and block copolymerization of PEGOHMA with other hydrophobic monomers were successfully achieved, resulting in the preparation of amphiphilic random block and star polymers. The solution and bulk properties of PEGOHMA-based (co)polymers were markedly different from those of PEGMA-based (co)polymers. By reacting the OH groups with biotin, protein–poly(PEGOHMA) conjugates were successfully prepared; however, it was not possible to prepare protein–polymer conjugates using terminal biotinylated PEGMA-based copolymers, owing to the steric hindrance of the unreactive PEG side chains.

Introduction

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The use of poly(ethylene glycol)-functionalized (PEGylated) polymers has been growing in a considerable number of fields, with PEGylated polymers being among the most important polymeric materials in both industry and academic research.(1−28) For example, PEGylated diacrylates have been applied in tissue sealant development and the resulting materials such as FocalSeal are commercially available, owing to their biocompatibility.(1−4) In addition, PEGylated polymers have been used in construction materials (e.g., concretes, sealants), cosmetics and detergents, and biomaterials (e.g., DOXIL, CAELYX).(5−8) PEG also shows a lower critical solution temperature (LCST)-type phase separation in water;(9−14) therefore, PEGylated copolymers have been used to develop a variety of functionalized materials such as thermoresponsive micelles and polymersomes in water,(15−17) polymeric catalysts and scavengers,(18−20) protein stabilizers,(21−24) and nanocarriers in drug delivery systems (DDS).(25−28) In particular, poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate (PEGMA) can be polymerized via living radical polymerization (LRP) with a narrow molecular weight distribution (MWD), resulting in the preparation of well-controlled random, block, and star copolymers.(29−31) Owing to the high degree of control possible, PEGMA-based copolymers with well-controlled architectures have been applied in many different fields; for example, poly(PEGMA)-based copolymers have been used in nanocarriers for DDS.(25−28,32,33) The poly(PEGMA)-based copolymers were found to interact more efficiently with cells compared with linear PEG-based polymers.(32−35) The results suggested that diversifying the molecular design of PEGylated (meth)acrylate-based copolymers would allow control of both the cellular and tissue distribution of therapeutic carriers and would contribute to the further development of other bioapplications such as cell engineering.(36)
In spite of the advantages of PEGMA-based copolymers obtained by LRP, such copolymers are limited in terms of postfunctionalization because poly(PEGMA) has no reactive sites in the polymer chains unless reactive initiators are used. In contrast, PEGMA with an OH terminal end on the PEG side chain (PEGOHMA) offers significant promise for diversifying the molecular design of PEGylated (meth)acrylate-based copolymers through postfunctionalization of the hydroxyl group. PEGOHMA was polymerized via copper-catalyzed LRP (Cu-LRP); however, it is difficult to synthesize amphiphilic copolymers based on PEGOHMA because polar solvents [e.g., dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and pure water] are required for efficient catalysis. However, hydrophobic monomers can not then be used, owing to their low solubility.(37−42) In contrast, Sawamoto’s LRP system that uses ruthenium catalysts (Ru-LRP) can be conducted in a variety of solvents [e.g., toluene, N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), ethanol, and H2O], which enables the preparation of a range of amphiphilic copolymers.(29−31) However, the radical polymerization of PEGOHMA via Ru-LRP can not be controlled to prepare well-controlled amphiphilic random, block, and star copolymers based on PEGOHMA.(43)
Based on the previous work described, in this work, PEGOHMA was polymerized via Ru-LRP to introduce functionalizable groups into the molecular design of PEGylated (meth)acrylate-based amphiphilic copolymers for biomedical applications (Scheme 1). We achieved well-controlled poly(PEGOHMA) with a ruthenium catalytic system [RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/HO(CH2)4N(CH3)2] in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C. The EtOH mixed solvent enabled the copolymerization of PEGOHMA and a hydrophobic methacrylate (BMA, butyl methacrylate; DMA, dodecyl methacrylate), resulting in amphiphilic copolymers. In particular, AB-, ABA- and ABC-type diblock or triblock and star polymers were successfully synthesized by in situ addition of second and third monomers, owing to the high controllability of the system. Unlike poly(PEGMA), poly(PEGOHMA) showed no LCST-type phase separation in water. The viscoelastic properties of the polymers in the bulk state were also investigated to show the effect of the OH groups on the PEG side chains. In addition, PEGOHMA-based amphiphilic block copolymers were easily conjugated with model protein streptavidin (SAv) following postfunctionalization of the OH groups with biotin, unlike end-functionalized PEGMA-based amphiphilic block copolymers that did not bind SAv. Therefore, our molecular design strategy for PEGylated (meth)acrylate-based copolymers with OH groups will provide new possibilities for PEGylated functional materials, particularly contributing to the development of biomedical applications such as cell engineering and DDS nanocarrier design.

Scheme 1

Scheme 1. Synthesis of Amphiphilic Homo, Random, Block, and Star (Co)Polymers Based on PEGOHMA via Ruthenium-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization

Results and Discussion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Precision Synthesis

Homo and Random Polymerization

In the classical system, PEG9MA [PEGkMA; CH2═C(CH3)COO(CH2CH2O)kCH3, k = 4.5 or 9] was polymerized with a chloride initiator (ECPA, ethyl-2-chloro-2-phenylacetate) and a ruthenium catalyst system [RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB; Cp*, pentamethylcyclopentadienyl; 4-DMAB, HO(CH2)4N(CH3)2] in EtOH at 40 °C (P1; Figure 1a; Table 1).(30) PEG9MA was smoothly consumed up to 84%, and well-controlled poly(PEG9MA) was achieved with a narrow MWD [P1; Mn (SEC) = 7500, Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.11]. Owing to the high functionality tolerance of the catalytic system, PEG9MA and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) were copolymerized to yield well-controlled PEG9MA/HEMA random copolymers [P3; Figure 1b; Mn (SEC) = 6900, Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.19]. Nevertheless, the polymerization of PEG4.5OHMA [PEGkOHMA; CH2═C(CH3)COO(CH2CH2O)kH, k = 4.5 or 9] could not be controlled using the similar system (P4P8; Figure 1c; Table 1; Mn (SEC) = 20 700–28 700, Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.43–1.91), indicating that the OH group on the PEG side chain behaved differently to the OH group of HEMA.(44) This is thought to be because the OH groups of PEGOHMA interacted with the Ru catalyst in EtOH, making the catalyst inappropriate for the polymerization.

Figure 1

Figure 1. SEC curves of (a) P1, (b) P3, (c) P5, and (d) P12 prepared by Ru-LRP. Conditions: (a, b) PEG9MA/HEMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB = 500 or 250/0 or 250/20/2.0/40 mM in EtOH at 40 °C;(30) (c) PEG4.5OHMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB = 500/20/2.0/40 mM in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 40 °C;(44) (d) PEG4.5OHMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB = 250/10/1.0/5.0 mM in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 25 °C.

Table 1. Synthesis of PEGylated Homo and Random Copolymers via Ru-LRPa
codePEG monomerRMAm/n/pbsolventtemperature (°C)[PEG monomer] (mM)[4-DMAB] (mM)time (h)conversion (%)cMn (SEC)dMw/Mn (SEC)d
P1PEG9MA 0/25/0EtOH4050040278475001.11
P2PEG4.5MA 0/25/0EtOH4050040278675001.15
P3PEG9MAHEMA0/12.5/12.5EtOH40250407881/8669001.19
P4PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O4050002626N/AeN/Ae
P5PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O405001038720 7001.44
P6PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O405002038724 3001.48
P7PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O405004029422 5001.72
P8PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O4050010029228 0001.91
P9PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O402502028228 7001.41
P10PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O02505315N/AeN/Ae
P11PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O025020319N/AeN/Ae
P12PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O252505198224 0001.34
P13PEG4.5OHMA 25/0/0EtOH/H2O2525020198629 4001.34
P14PEG4.5OHMABMA25/0/10EtOH/H2O2520053.553/6311 0001.49
P15PEG4.5OHMABMA25/0/20EtOH/H2O252005553/6613 9001.49
a

P1P3: [PEG9MA]/[PEG4.5MA]/[HEMA]/[ECPA]/[RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2]/[4-DMAB] = 0, 250, or 500/0 or 500/0 or 250/20/2.0/40 mM in EtOH at 40 °C.(30)P4P8: [PEG4.5OHMA]/[ECPA]/[RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2]/[4-DMAB] = 500/20/2.0/0–100 mM in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 40 °C.(45)P9P13: [PEG4.5OHMA]/[ECPA]/[RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2]/[4-DMAB] = 250/10/1.0/5–20 mM in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 0 or 25 °C. P14P15: [PEG4.5OHMA]/[BMA]/[ECPA]/[RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2]/[4-DMAB] = 250/100 or 250/5.0/0.50/5 mM in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C. PEGkMA, poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate [CH2═C(CH3)COO(CH2CH2O)kCH3; k = 4.5 or 9]; PEG4.5OHMA, poly(ethylene glycol) methacrylate [CH2═C(CH3)COO(CH2CH2O)4.5H]; HEMA, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate [CH2═C(CH3)COO(CH2)2OH]; BMA, buthyl methacrylate; 4-DMAB, N,N-dimethylamino-4-butanol [HO(CH2)4N(CH3)2].

b

Targeted degree of polymerization at 100% (P1P13) or 50% (P14, P15) monomer conversion: m = [PEG4.5OHMA]/[ECPA] (P1P13), 0.5 × [PEG4.5OHMA]/[ECPA] (P14, P15), n = [PEG9MA]/[ECPA], p = [HEMA]/[ECPA] (P3), 0.5 × [BMA]/[ECPA] (P14, P15). ECPA, ethyl-2-chloro-2-phenylacetate.

c

Monomer conversion determined by 1H NMR.

d

Number-average molecular weight (Mn) and distribution (Mw/Mn) determined by size exclusion chromatography (SEC) in DMF ([LiBr] = 10 mM) with PMMA standards.

e

Could not be characterized by SEC because the polymerization did not proceed and stopped at a low monomer conversion.

For the controlled polymerization, H2O was mixed with the EtOH solvent to weaken the interaction between the OH groups on PEGOHMA and the Ru catalyst, as well as to activate the Ru catalyst.(44) Pure water was not used as a solvent, owing to the strong hydrophobicity of monomers such as BMA and DMA, which means water would not support the preparation of amphiphilic copolymers. As anticipated, PEGOHMA could be polymerized by the ruthenium catalytic system in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C to yield well-controlled poly(PEGOHMA) [P12; Figure 1d; Table 1; Mn(SEC) = 24 000, Mw/Mn = 1.34]. The H2O content of the mixed solvent was an important factor: low H2O content could not weaken the interaction between PEGOHMA and the Ru catalyst sufficiently, and high H2O content excessively accelerated the polymerization so that there was no control over the catalytic cycle.(44) In addition, reducing both the concentration of the monomers and the temperature, compared with the polymerization conditions for PEGMA, and adding aminoalcohol, enhanced the activity of the Ru catalyst (P4P13; Figure 1c,d; Table 1; [monomer] = 500–250 mM; temperature = 40–25 °C). These results suggest that PEGOHMA interacts more strongly than PEGMA with Ru catalyst and that the interaction must be considered in the polymerization of PEGOHMA.
As a result of our refinements, PEGOHMA was copolymerized with BMA using the Ru catalyst system. The ratio was set as m = PEGOHMA/chlorine (in ECPA) = 25 and p = BMA/chlorine = 10 or 20 to confirm the versatility of that system. Both monomers were smoothly consumed up to 53% (PEGOHMA) and 63% (BMA) (Figure S1). The time–conversion curves indicated that the polymerization was random copolymerization, and well-controlled amphiphilic random copolymers based on PEGOHMA were successfully synthesized [P14, P15; Figure S1; Table 1; Mn(SEC) = 11 000 (P14), 13 900 (P15); Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.49 (P14), 1.49 (P15)]. 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) confirmed the success of the random copolymerization. The spectra clearly showed proton signals attributed to PEGOHMA and BMA, and the Mn (NMR) and DPs were determined and were almost the same as the targeted Mn and DPs [Figure S2; Mn(NMR) = 10 500 (P14), 10 600 (P15); m = 23 (P14), 23 (P15); p = 13 (P14), 22 (P15)].

Block Polymerization: Linear Diblock, Triblock, and Star-Shaped Copolymers

To vary the polymer design based on PEGOHMA, amphiphilic block copolymers were synthesized. Following the polymerization of PEGOHMA as described (conversion ∼ 87%, m = 25) for 16 h, BMA was added to the polymerization solution in situ. An excess of BMA, twice the targeted DP, was added (p = 5 or 25), and the polymerization was stopped when the conversion of BMA reached approximately 50% so as not to reduce the end-functionality through side reactions. BMA was smoothly consumed up to 53% to yield well-controlled AB-type amphiphilic diblock copolymers [P16, P17; Figure 2a,b; Table 2; Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.38 (P16), 1.44 (P17)]. BMA was also polymerized in the same way following the random copolymerization of PEG9OHMA and PEG9MA [P18, P19; Figure 2c,d; Table 2; n = PEGMA/chlorine; Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.27 (P18), 1.24 (P19)]. Using dichloroacetophenone (DCAP) as an initiator in lieu of ECPA, ABA-type amphiphilic triblock copolymers were also successfully synthesized [P20P22; Figure 2e,f; Table 2; RMA, BMA (P20, P21), DMA (P22); Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.28 (P20), 1.25 (P21), 1.58 (P22)].

Figure 2

Figure 2. Time–conversion (PEGOHMA, light blue; PEGMA, blue; BMA, orange) and SEC curves of (a, b) P16, (c, d) P19, and (e, f) P21 prepared by Ru-LRP in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 25 °C. Conditions (ratio): (a, b) PEG4.5OHMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB // BMAadd/4-DMABadd = 25/1/0.1/0.5 // 10/0.5; (c, d) PEG9OHMA/PEG9MA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB // BMAadd/4-DMABadd = 5/20/1/0.1/0.5 // 10/0.5; (e, f) PEG9OHMA/PEG9MA/DCAP/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB // BMAadd/4-DMABadd = 5/20/1/0.1/0.5 // 20/0.5.

Table 2. Synthesis and Characterization of Amphiphilic Block and Nanogel-Core Star Polymersa
codestructurefirst monomersecond monomerthird monomerm/n/pbtime (h)conversion (%)cMn (SEC)dMw/Mn (SEC)dm/n/pobsd (NMR)eMn (NMR)e
P16diblockPEG4.5OHMABMA 25/0/51997/–/5518 4001.3835/0/8.213 800
P17diblockPEG4.5OHMABMA 25/0/251996/0/4420 8001.4435/0/2916 900
P18diblockPEG9OHMA/PEG9MABMA 40/10/59.595/95/36f22 8001.2734/10/6.423 000
P19diblockPEG9OHMA/PEG9MABMA 20/5/51291/91/49f17 3001.2424/6.2/5.416 100
P20triblockPEG9OHMA/PEG9MABMA 40/10/5991/91/44f23 7001.2828/11/8.518 300
P21triblockPEG9OHMA/PEG9MABMA 20/5/5995/95/55f14 2001.2518/4.4/1012 500
P22triblockPEG4.5OHMADMA 75/0/51594/0/67.429 3001.5860/0/5.823 400
P23triblockPEG4.5MABMAPEG4.5OHMA25/25/105055/100/10036 3009.28  
P24triblockPEG4.5MABMAPEG4.5OHMA25/25/255048/87/10040 40011  
P25triblockPEG4.5MABMAPEG4.5OHMA25/25/105353/100/8223 0003.01  
P26triblockPEG4.5MABMAPEG4.5OHMA25/25/255345/100/8922 0001.80  
P27triblockPEG4.5OHMABMAPEG4.5MA25/25/2039100/0/69N/AN/A  
P28triblockPEG4.5OHMABMAPEG4.5MA25/25/2036100/0/80N/AN/A  
P29triblockPEG4.5OHMABMAPEG4.5MA25/10/12.514100/54/8620 9001.4335/12/1318 300
P30triblockPEG4.5OHMABMAPEG4.5MA25/10/2514100/60/8824 1001.4434/11/2920 000
P31triblockPEG4.5OHMABMAPEG4.5MA25/25/12.522100/50/7927 5001.4935/31/1424 400
P32triblockPEG4.5OHMABMAPEG4.5MA25/25/2519100/50/7930 8001.5535/29/3125 900
P33starPEG4.5OHMAEGDMA 25/0/521100/0/9030 1004.06  
P34starPEG4.5OHMAEGDMA 25/0/1021100/0/8941 4002.23  
P35starPEG4.5OHMAEGDMA 25/0/2522100/0/9388 00014.8  
P36gdiblockPEG9MABMA/RhBMA 0/25/5590/88/6513 7001.090/25/6.413 600
P37gdiblockPEG9MABMA/RhBMA 0/25/25580/96/4911 6001.160/26/1915 700
P38hbiotinylatedPEG9MABMA 0/25/5400/85/3618 0001.130/39/5.320 700
a

The detailed procedures are shown in the Supporting Information, and the representative conditions were as follows. P16 (ratio): PEG4.5OHMAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAfinal/4-DMABfinal = 25/1/0.1/0.5 // 50/0.5 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C. P18 (ratio): PEG9OHMAfirst/PEG9MAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAfinal = 40/10/1/0.1/0.5 // 5 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C. P20 (ratio): PEG9OHMAfirst/PEG9MAfirst/DCAPfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAfinal = 40/10/1/0.2/1 // 20 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C. P26 (ratio): PEG4.5MAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAsecond/4-DMABsecond // PEG4.5OHMAfinal = 25/1/0.1/2 // 25/40 // 50 in EtOH (first, second polymn) and EtOH/H2O (= 3/1, v/v; final polymn) at 25 °C. P32 (ratio): PEG4.5OHMAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAsecond/4-DMABsecond // PEGMAfinal = 25/1/0.5/0.2/4 // 20 // 50 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C. P33 (ratio): PEG4.5OHMAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // EGDMAfinal/4-DMABfinal = 25/1/0.1/0.5 // 5/0.5 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v) at 25 °C.

b

Targeted degree of polymerization at 100% (first or second) or 50% (final) monomer conversion: DP = [monomer]/[chlorine] (first or second monomer), 0.5 × [final monomer]/[chlorine] (final monomer; second or third monomer).

c

Monomer conversion determined by 1H NMR (PEGkOHMA/PEGkMA/RMA).

d

Number-average molecular weight (Mn) and distribution (Mw/Mn) determined by size exclusion chromatography (SEC) in DMF ([LiBr] = 10 mM) with PMMA standards.

e

Observed DPs and absolute number-average molecular weight [Mn (NMR)] determined by 1H NMR.

f

Total conversion of PEGOHMA and PEGMA.

g

RhBMA, a methacrylate monomer bearing RhB (see Scheme S2).

h

See Scheme S3.

In general, it is difficult to synthesize block copolymers that comprise more than three segments by sequential in situ addition of monomers, and the order of monomer addition is an important factor. Indeed, PEG4.5MAn-block-BMAp-block-PEG4.5OHMAm–Cl could not be well-controlled, and the third block polymerization of PEG4.5OHMA did not proceed efficiently (P23P26; Figure 3a,b; Table 2). In comparison, well-controlled ABC-type triblock copolymers (PEG4.5OHMAm-block-BMAp-block-PEG4.5MAn–Cl) were efficiently prepared: BMA and PEG4.5MA were sequentially added to the reaction mixture in the stated order following the polymerization of PEG4.5OHMA with the catalyst system in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 at 25 °C [P29P32; Figure 3c,d; Table 2; Mw/Mn (SEC) = 1.43–1.55]. This was thought to be because the in situ addition of water at the time of PEG4.5OHMA addition could affect the Ru catalytic system. In contrast, water in the reaction mixture from the polymerization of the first monomer (PEG4.5OHMA) would afford the appropriate catalyst for the block polymerization. When analyzed by 1H NMR, the block copolymers exhibited proton signals that could be attributed to PEGOHMA, PEGMA, and BMA. The Mn (NMR) and DPs were determined from the area of each peak against the phenyl end group and corresponded to the targeted Mn and DPs [Figure 4; Table 2; Mn(NMR) = 20 900–30 800; m = 34–35; n = 11–31; p = 13–31].

Figure 3

Figure 3. Time–conversion (PEGOHMA, light blue; PEGMA, blue; BMA, orange) and SEC curves of (a, b) P26 and (c, d) P32 prepared by Ru-LRP at 25 °C. Conditions (ratio): (a, b) PEG4.5MAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAsecond/4-DMABsecond // PEG4.5OHMAfinal = 25/1/0.1/2 // 25/3 // 50 in EtOH (first, second polymn) and EtOH/H2O (= 3/1, v/v; final polymn (c, d) PEG4.5OHMAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAsecond/4-DMABsecond // PEG4.5MAfinal = 25/1/0.5/0.2/4 // 20 // 50 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v).

Figure 4

Figure 4. 1H NMR spectra (400 MHz, rt) of (a) P19, (b) P21, and (c) P32 in CD2Cl2; [polymer] = 30 mg/mL.

Finally, gel-core star polymers (P33P35) were synthesized to vary the polymer design based on PEGOHMA.(18−20,45) PEG4.5OHMA was first polymerized with RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2, 4-DMAB, and ECPA in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 25 °C (m = 25). After the polymerization of PEG4.5OHMA (conversion ∼ 88%, 10 h), ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA) was added to the solution in situ (p = EGDMA/chlorine = 5, 10, or 25), and the cross-linking reaction proceeded in accordance with the consumption of EGDMA (Figures S3 and S4). The best ratio of EGDMA was p = 5 to yield star polymers in a high yield (82%) calculated from the area of the SEC curve (P33); however, the best ratio was p ≥ 10 in the case of poly(PEG9MA) arm polymers.(45) This is thought to be because the steric hindrance of poly(PEG4.5OHMA)25 arm polymers was larger than that of poly(PEG9MA) arm polymers and because the hydration of poly(PEG4.5OHMA) affected the star polymer synthesis.
In summary, precision polymerization of amphiphilic random, block, and star copolymers as well as the homopolymer based on PEGOHMA, was successfully achieved by our refinement of the system. Owing to the high block efficiency, ABC-type triblock as well as AB-type and ABA-type block copolymers were efficiently synthesized, and the amphiphilic copolymers based on PEGOHMA will contribute to the further development of PEGylated polymeric materials.

LCST-Type Phase Separation in Water

PEGylated polymeric materials are generally soluble in water, owing to their hydrophilicity, and they often exhibit LCST-type phase separation. Indeed, poly(PEG4.5MA)25 (P2) showed phase separation in water, with a cloud point (Cp) of 77 °C, which depended on the length of PEG side chains (Figure 5a).(13,14) Cps were determined from the transmittance of the solution monitored by UV/vis spectroscopy at λ = 670 nm (heating/cooling rate = 1 °C/min), and Cp was defined as the temperature at which the transmittance became 90%.(13,14,46)

Figure 5

Figure 5. Transmittance of the aqueous solutions of (a) poly(PEG4.5MA) (black, P2) and poly(PEG4.5OHMA) (red, P12), (b) P14 (black) and P16 (red), and (c) the aqueous (black), PBS (blue) and HEPES (red) buffer solutions of P14 monitored at 670 nm by changing the temperature (heating/cooling rate = 1 °C/min) from 20 to 100 °C; [polymer] = 1.0 mg/mL.

Poly(PEG4.5OHMA)25 (P12) did not exhibit any LCST-type phase separation in water; however, poly(PEG4.5MA)25 did because the hydrophilicity of PEGOHMA was strong as a result of the OH groups on the PEG side chains. In addition, amphiphilic random (P14) and block (P16) copolymers based on PEGOHMA exhibited LCST-type phase separation in water, and the Cps were 74 and 98 °C, respectively (Figure 5b). These results suggest that the solution properties could be controlled not only by the PEG length but also by the OH groups on the PEG side chains.
Finally, the effect of buffering agents on LCST-type phase separation was investigated using P14. As shown in Figure 5c, the PBS (phosphate buffered saline; pH = 7.4) and HEPES buffer solution [HEPES, 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid; pH = 7.5] of P14 showed LCST-type phase separation, and the Cps were 65 °C (PBS) and 59 °C (HEPES), respectively. Therefore, Cp depended on the buffering agent, and the Cps were lower in the buffers tested than in pure water (Figure 5c). This is thought to be because the structure of the hydration water surrounding P14 on the molecular scale was different, owing primarily to the interaction of the buffering agents with the PEGOH side chains.

Self-Assembly of Amphiphilic Copolymers in Water

The self-assembled structures of the PEGOHMA-based amphiphilic block copolymers were investigated by dynamic light scattering (DLS) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The hydrodynamic radii (RH) of P16 and P17 in PBS were 15 and 98 nm, respectively (Figure 6a). In comparison, the size of PEGMA-based block copolymers containing the same BMA content (P36, P37; Scheme S1) was smaller than those of P16 and P17, and the RH’s were 2.7 and 10 nm, respectively (Figure 6b). P36 in particular existed as a unimer in PBS and did not form assembled structures.(36) Their self-assembled structures were also characterized by TEM (Figure 6c,d). Spherical micelle structures were confirmed for P16, P17, and P37, whose sizes approximately corresponded to the DLS results. In contrast, an apparent micellar structure was not observed in the case of P36, owing to the unimer structure in water. As a consequence, PEGOHMA-based amphiphilic block copolymers formed spherical micelles in water, and their sizes tended to be larger than the micelles of PEGMA-based amphiphilic block copolymers. This is also thought to be because the hydrated structures of the PEG side chains were different, owing to the presence of the OH groups.

Figure 6

Figure 6. (a, b) DLS intensity distribution of P16, P17, P36, and P37 in PBS, and (c, d) TEM images of P16 and P17 in HEPES/KOH buffer; [polymer] = 1.0 mg/mL.

Viscoelastic Properties

The viscoelastic properties of PEGOHMA-based copolymers were characterized using a rheometer(47−51) to investigate the effects of the OH groups on the PEG side chains and the primary structure. We selected three types of polymers, poly(PEG4.5MA)25 (P2), poly(PEG4.5OHMA)25 (P12), and a star polymer (P33). As shown in Figure 7a, the yield stress increased in accordance with the number of OH groups in the polymer (P33 > P12 > P2), which indicated that intermolecular hydrogen bonding increased with the number of OH groups on the PEG side chains. The shear stress (τ) and viscosity (η) of P2 linearly increased and remained constant, respectively, throughout the shear rate range (0.01 < dγ/dt < 1000 s–1), therefore, P2 behaved as a Newtonian liquid. The shear stress and viscosity of P12 also linearly increased and remained constant, respectively, but the values were higher than those of P2, owing to the intermolecular hydrogen bonding of OH groups on the PEG side chains. However, the values for P12 suddenly decreased to the same values as P2 under fast deformation conditions (>400 s–1), suggesting that the intermolecular hydrogen bonding was disrupted by the faster shear rate. Compared with P2 and P12, the shear stress and viscosity of P33 gradually increased and decreased, respectively. The intermolecular hydrogen bonding gradually weakened with an increasing shear rate. In addition, both shear stress and viscosity discontinuously decreased at around 100 s–1, indicating that the aggregate structure in the bulk state collapsed.(50) The shear viscosity of P33 decreased over 150 s–1 because the star–star interaction decreased with an increasing shear rate.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Viscoelastic properties of P2 (black), P12 (blue), and P33 (green) in the bulk state at 25 °C. (a) Shear stress (τ, filled circle) and viscosity (η, filled square) of the copolymers as a function of shear rate (dγ/dt). Shear storage (G′, unfilled circle) and loss (G″, unfilled square) moduli, and loss tangent (tan δ, unfilled triangle) of the copolymers as a function of (b) strain (γ) and (c, d) frequency (ω) at 1 Hz.

To investigate the linearity of the viscoelasticity of the copolymers, the shear storage and loss moduli (G′ and G″) were characterized by changing the strain (0.1 < γ < 1000%) at 25 °C (Figure 7b). G″ of P2 was constant over the entire range despite G′ not being detected because P2 was too soft. Therefore, the behavior of P2 was linear viscoelasticity over the whole range. P33 also showed linear viscoelasticity under infinitesimal deformation conditions because both G′ and G″ of P33 were constant. As the strain was increased, both G′ and G″ of P33 decreased. These results suggested that the local structure collapsed on the molecular scale. In comparison, P12 exhibited a nonlinear viscoelasticity even under infinitesimal deformation because the G′ and loss tangent (tan δ) decreased and increased over the range, respectively. This supports the observation that the elongation resulting from the intermolecular hydrogen bonding as well as the anisotropic orientation of the polymer chain must be considered even in the case of infinitesimal deformation, and yet the nonlinearity of viscoelasticity regarding graft polymers is generally weaker than that of linear polymers.
Finally, linear viscoelasticity was characterized by changing the angular frequency (0.01 < ω < 1000 s–1) and keeping the strain constant (γ = 1%) at 25 °C (Figure 7c,d). P12 exhibits a slight nonlinear viscoelasticity even under these conditions; however, P12 was characterized under the same conditions to compare the behavior. The slopes of G′ and G″ for P2 were 2 and 1, respectively, at a higher ω (log G′ = 1.971 log ω – 2.1196; log G″ = 1.015 log ω + 0.2624); therefore, the molecular dynamics completely relaxed, and the polymer chains did not entangle with each other. From the results of the terminal relaxation, the zero-shear viscosity (η0), the steady-state compliance (Je), and the second-moment average relaxation time (⟨τ⟩w,G = Jeη0) were determined to be 1.83 Pa s, 2.27 × 10–3 Pa–1, and 4.15 ms, respectively (Table 3). In contrast, both G′ and G″ of P33 gradually decreased because P33 behaves the same as common plastic materials (Figure 7a). The G″ of P12 decreased the same as P2 at a higher ω; however, the G′ of P12 showed a constant value after decreasing at a higher ω. P12 did not locally entangle the same as P2 and formed seminetwork structures on the scale of the global motion, resulting from the weaker intermolecular hydrogen bonding of the OH groups. Indeed, G′ of P12 was slightly larger than G″ at a lower ω (Figure 7c), and the tan δ of P12 decreased after the maximum value as a result of the local relaxation (Figure 7d). The molecular dynamics of P12 are, therefore, markedly different from those of P2, owing to the OH groups on the PEG side chains, and the dielectric as well as the viscoelastic relaxation would have to be considered for the further characterization because P12 has type C as well as type A and B dipoles.(51)
Table 3. Linear Viscoelastic Properties of PEGylated Copolymersa
codestructurePEG monomerm/pbMn (NMR)cMw (calcd)dMw (MALLS)eNarmfRg (nm)eη0 (Pa s)gJe (mPa–1)h⟨τ⟩w,G (ms)i
P2homoPEG4.5MA25/014 50016 700   1.832.274.15
P12jhomoPEG4.5OHMA25/014 20019 000   N/AN/AN/A
P33starPEG4.5OHMA25/5  1 420 00014142ndkndkndk
a

Viscoelastic properties including zero-shear viscosity (η0), steady-state compliance (Je), and second-moment average relaxation time (<τ>w,G) at 25 °C were measured for P2, P12, and P33.

b

Targeted degree of polymerization at 100% (see Tables 1 and 2).

c

Absolute number-average molecular weight [Mn (NMR)] determined by 1H NMR.

d

Weight-average molecular weight (Mw) calculated by Mn (NMR) and Mw/Mn (SEC): Mw (calcd) = Mn (NMR) × Mw/Mn (SEC).

e

Absolute weight-average molecular weight [Mw (MALLS)] and radii of gyration (Rg) determined by SEC-MALLS in DMF (10 mM LiBr).

f

Arm numbers per star polymer: Narm = (weight fraction of arm polymers) × Mw (MALLS)/Mw,arm (calcd).

g

Zero-shear viscosity (η0) determined by linear fitting at the terminal relaxation in linear viscoelasticity: log G″ = log ω + log η0.

h

Steady-state compliance (Je) determined by linear fitting at the terminal relaxation in linear viscoelasticity: log G′ = 2 log ω + log η02Je.

i

Second-moment average relaxation time (⟨τ⟩w,G) determined by η0 and Je: ⟨τ⟩w,G = η0Je.

j

Linear viscoelastic properties of P12 could not be determined because P12 exhibited a nonlinear viscoelasticity.

k

Linear viscoelastic properties of P33 at 25 °C were not determined.

Together these data indicate that both the solution and bulk properties of PEGOHMA-based copolymers were significantly different from those of PEGMA-based copolymers. Poly(PEG4.5OHMA) (P12) did not exhibit LCST-type phase separation in water, yet poly(PEG4.5MA) (P2) did (Cp = 77 °C). This is expected to be because the hydration structure of the water interacting with the poly(PEGOHMA) chains is different from that surrounding poly(PEGMA). The self-assembled structures of PEGOHMA-based block copolymers in water were larger than those of PEGMA-based block copolymers, also as a result of side chain hydration. The viscoelastic properties were also significantly different, owing to the intermolecular hydrogen bonding in the bulk state. Poly(PEGOHMA) exhibited nonlinear viscoelasticity, which suggested that a reversible seminetwork could be formed and deformed via the weaker intermolecular hydrogen bonding; however, poly(PEGMA) exhibited a linear viscoelasticity. Therefore, the low molecular weight poly(PEGOHMA) could be used in lieu of the high molecular weight poly(PEGMA) because the seminetwork resulting from the intermolecular hydrogen bonding would be an alternative to the entanglement of polymer chains resulting from the high molecular weight of poly(PEGMA). For instance, poly(PEGOHMA) could be a candidate for use in cosmetics, pigments, detergents, viscosity modifiers, and construction materials. Therefore, the PEGOHMA-based copolymers obtained in this work could contribute to diversifying the PEGylated polymeric materials in many different fields.

Protein–Polymer Conjugation

Protein–polymer conjugates were prepared to demonstrate the potential bioapplication of the PEGOHMA-based copolymers. Biotin, which binds strongly to avidin, was conjugated to PEG4.5OHMA25-block-BMA5–Cl (P16) by esterification with the OH groups on the PEG side chains (Scheme S2; 3.8 biotins/chain). After purification of the side chain biotinylated P16, an aqueous solution of streptavidin (SAv, 1.0 mg/mL) was added and the solution was incubated at room temperature for 1 h. In comparison, biotin–PEG9MA25-block-BMA5–Cl (P38; Scheme S3) was prepared by Ru-LRP with a biotinylated chloride initiator. P38 was incubated with SAv in the same way, and the formation of SAv conjugates was characterized by sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) after reducing with d,l-dithiothreitol (DTT) at 80 °C for 2 min.
In lane 2, the nonconjugated monomer and tetramer of SAv were detected after staining with Coomassie brilliant blue (CBB), and it was confirmed that the copolymers were not stained with CBB (Figure 8; lanes 2–6). The broad band of SAv was detected in lane 8 only, suggesting that only side biotinylated P16 was successfully conjugated with SAv. In comparison, P38 as well as the nonbiotinylated copolymers (P16, P36) were not conjugated with SAv (lanes 7, 9, and 10). These results indicate that it is difficult to prepare SAv conjugates by reaction with (co)polymers based on PEGMA because of the steric hindrance and that the OH groups on the PEG side chains are useful for preparing SAv conjugates. SAv conjugated with copolymers can further bind to other bioactive substances (e.g., enzymes, antibodies, DNA); therefore, our strategy could contribute to the development of protein–polymer conjugates for bioapplications.

Figure 8

Figure 8. SDS-PAGE visualized by Coomassie brilliant blue (CBB) staining (lane 1, protein ladder; lane 2, SAv; lane 3, P16; lane 4, biotinylated P16; lane 5, P36; lane 6, P38; lane 7, SAv with P16; lane 8, SAv with biotinylated P16; lane 9, SAv with P36; lane 10, SAv with P38).

Conclusion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

In conclusion, PEGylated methacrylate-based copolymers were synthesized via Ru-LRP, resulting in the modification of the polymer design by the addition of OH groups to the PEG side chains. Amphiphilic AB-, ABA-, and ABC-type diblock and triblock as well as homo, random, and gel-core star copolymers based on PEGOHMA were successfully synthesized as a result of the activation of the Ru catalyst by H2O. Owing to the OH groups on the PEG side chains, PEGOHMA-based (co)polymers were more hydrophilic than (co)polymers based on PEGMA. Poly(PEG4.5OHMA) did not show any LCST-type phase separation in water; however, poly(PEG4.5MA) did show phase separation. Furthermore, the viscoelastic properties of the polymers were also markedly different due primarily to OH groups on the PEG side chains. Protein–polymer conjugates were easily prepared using a copolymer with modified side chain OH groups because of the reduced steric hindrance but were not observed for the terminal biotinylated PEGMA-based copolymer. Our strategy for introducing OH groups into PEGylated methacrylate polymers has potential applications in many different fields, including contributing to the further development of self-assembled, thermoresponsive, and biomedical PEGylated materials.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.8b00836.

  • Syntheses, time–conversion and SEC curves, and 1H NMR data (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Author
    • Kazunari Akiyoshi - Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, JapanERATO Akiyoshi Bio-Nanotransporter Project, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Katsura Int’tech center, Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8530, Japan Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Yuta Koda - Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, JapanERATO Akiyoshi Bio-Nanotransporter Project, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Katsura Int’tech center, Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8530, JapanPresent Address: Y. Koda: Department of Applied Chemistry and Bioengineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka City University, 3-3-138, Sugimoto, Sumiyoshi-ku, Osaka 558-8585, Japan
    • Daiki Takahashi - Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, Japan
    • Yoshihiro Sasaki - Department of Polymer Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 615-8510, JapanOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-1333-5347 Email: [email protected]
  • Notes

    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This research was supported by the Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology Department of the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST-ERATO). This work was also supported by the Grant-in Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), KAKENHI grant nos. JP16H06313 (K.A.) and JP16H03842 (Y.S.). We thank Professor Makoto Ouchi (Kyoto University) for supporting SEC-MALLS conducted in DMF. We thank Sarah Dodds, Ph.D., from Edanz Group (www.edanzediting.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 51 other publications.

  1. 1
    Nivasu, V. M.; Reddy, T. T.; Tammishetti, S. In Situ Polymerizable Polyethyleneglycol Containing Polyesterpolyol Acrylates for Tissue Sealant Applications. Biomaterials 2004, 25, 32833291,  DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.091
  2. 2
    Hoshi, S.; Okamoto, F.; Arai, M.; Hirose, T.; Sugiura, Y.; Kaji, Y.; Oshika, T. In Vivo and In Vitro Feasibility Studies of Intraocular Use of Polyethylene Glycol-Based Synthetic Sealant to Close Retinal Breaks in Porcine and Rabbit Eyes. Invest. Ophthalmol. Visual Sci. 2015, 56, 47054711,  DOI: 10.1167/iovs.14-15349
  3. 3
    Ferguson, R. E. H.; Rinker, B. The Use of Hydrogel Sealant on Flexor Tendon Repairs to Prevent Adhesion Formation. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2006, 56, 5458,  DOI: 10.1097/01.sap.0000181666.00492.0e
  4. 4
    Torchiana, D. F. Polyethylene Glycol Based Synthetic Sealants: Potential Uses in Cardiac Surgery. J. Card. Surg. 2003, 18, 504506,  DOI: 10.1046/j.0886-0440.2003.00305.x
  5. 5
    Barenholz, Y. C. Doxil®–The First FDA-Approved Nano Drug: Lessons Learned. J. Controlled Release 2012, 160, 117134,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.03.020
  6. 6
    Wibroe, P. P.; Ahmadvand, D.; Oghabian, M. A.; Yaghmur, A.; Moghimi, S. M. An Integrated Assessment of Morphology, Size, and Complement Activation of the PEGylated Liposomal Doxorubicin Products Doxil®, Caelyx®, DOXOrubicin, and SinaDoxosome. J. Controlled Release 2016, 221, 18,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.11.021
  7. 7
    Koren, E.; Apte, A.; Jani, A.; Torchilin, V. P. Multifunctional PEGylated 2C5-Immunoliposomes Containing pH-Sensitive Bonds and TAT Peptide for Enhanced Tumor Cell Internalization and Cytotoxicity. J. Controlled Release 2012, 160, 264273,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2011.12.002
  8. 8
    Deng, Z. J.; Morton, S. W.; Ben-Akiva, E.; Dreaden, E. C.; Shopsowitz, K. E.; Hammond, P. T. Layer-by-Layer Nanoparticles for Systemic Codelivery of an Anticancer Drug and siRNA for Potential Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Treatment. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 95719584,  DOI: 10.1021/nn4047925
  9. 9
    Aseyev, V.; Tenhu, H.; Winnik, F. M. Non-Ionic Thermoresponsive Polymers in Water. Adv. Polym. Sci. 2010, 242, 2989,  DOI: 10.1007/12_2010_57
  10. 10
    Saeki, S.; Kuwahara, N.; Nakata, M.; Kaneko, M. Upper and Lower Critical Solution Temperatures in Poly(ethylene glycol) Solutions. Polymer 1976, 17, 685689,  DOI: 10.1016/0032-3861(76)90208-1
  11. 11
    Lutz, J.-R. Polymerization of Oligo(Ethylene Glycol) (Meth)Acrylates: Toward New Generations of Smart Biocompatible Materials. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2008, 46, 34593470,  DOI: 10.1002/pola.22706
  12. 12
    Lee, J.; McGrath, A. J.; Hawker, C. J.; Kim, B.-S. pH-Tunable Thermoresponsive PEO-Based Functional Polymers with Pendant Amine Groups. ACS Macro Lett. 2016, 5, 13911396,  DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.6b00830
  13. 13
    Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. LCST-Type Phase Separation of Poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate]s in Hydrofluorocarbon. ACS Macro Lett. 2015, 4, 13661369,  DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.5b00771
  14. 14
    Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Multimode Self-Folding Polymers via Reversible and Thermoresponsive Self-Assembly of Amphiphilic/Fluorous Random Copolymers. Macromolecules 2016, 49, 45344543,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.6b00998
  15. 15
    Elsabahy, M.; Heo, G. S.; Lim, S.-M.; Sun, G.; Wooley, K. L. Polymeric Nanostructures for Imaging and Therapy. Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 1096711011,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00135
  16. 16
    Fernandez-Trillo, F.; Grover, L. M.; Stephenson-Brown, A.; Harrison, P.; Mendes, P. M. Vesicles in Nature and the Laboratory: Elucidation of Their Biological Properties and Synthesis of Increasingly Complex Synthetic Vesicles. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 31423160,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201607825
  17. 17
    Hussain, H.; Mya, K. Y.; He, C. Self-Assembly of Brush-Like Poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate] Synthesized via Aqueous Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization. Langmuir 2008, 24, 1327913286,  DOI: 10.1021/la802734e
  18. 18
    Terashima, T. Functional Spaces in Star and Single-Chain Polymers via Living Radical Polymerization. Polym. J. 2014, 46, 664673,  DOI: 10.1038/pj.2014.57
  19. 19
    Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Fluorous Microgel Star Polymers: Selective Recognition and Separation of Polyfluorinated Surfactants and Compounds in Water. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 1574215748,  DOI: 10.1021/ja508818j
  20. 20
    Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Star Polymer Gels with Fluorinated Microgels via Star–Star Coupling and Cross-Linking for Water Purification. ACS Macro Lett. 2015, 4, 377380,  DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.5b00127
  21. 21
    Pelegri-O’Day, E. M.; Lin, E.-W.; Maynard, H. D. Therapeutic Protein–Polymer Conjugates: Advancing Beyond PEGylation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 1432314332,  DOI: 10.1021/ja504390x
  22. 22
    Krall, N.; Da Cruz, F. P.; Boutureira, O.; Bernardes, G. J. L. Site-Selective Protein-Modification Chemistry for Basic Biology and Drug Development. Nat. Chem. 2016, 8, 103113,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2393
  23. 23
    Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M.; Maynard, H. D. Amphiphilic/Fluorous Random Copolymers as a New Class of Non-Cytotoxic Polymeric Materials for Protein Conjugation. Polym. Chem. 2015, 6, 240247,  DOI: 10.1039/C4PY01346H
  24. 24
    Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Maynard, H. D.; Sawamoto, M. Protein Storage with Perfluorinated PEG Compartments in a Hydrofluorocarbon Solvent. Polym. Chem. 2016, 7, 66946698,  DOI: 10.1039/C6PY01333C
  25. 25
    Matsumura, Y.; Maeda, H. A New Concept for Macromolecular Therapeutics in Cancer Chemotherapy: Mechanism of Tumoritropic Accumulation of Proteins and the Antitumor Agent Smancs. Cancer Res. 1986, 46, 63876392
  26. 26
    Fang, J.; Nakamura, H.; Maeda, H. The EPR Effect: Unique Features of Tumor Blood Vessels for Drug Delivery, Factors Involved, and Limitations and Augmentation of the Effect. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2011, 63, 136151,  DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2010.04.009
  27. 27
    Cabral, H.; Kataoka, K. Progress of Drug-Loaded Polymeric Micelles into Clinical Studies. J. Controlled Release 2014, 190, 465476,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.06.042
  28. 28
    Anraku, Y.; Kishimura, A.; Kamiya, M.; Tanaka, S.; Nomoto, T.; Toh, K.; Matsumoto, Y.; Fukushima, S.; Sueyoshi, D.; Kano, M. R.; Urano, Y.; Nishiyama, N.; Kataoka, K. Systemically Injectable Enzyme-Loaded Polyion Complex Vesicles as In Vivo Nanoreactors Functioning in Tumors. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 560565,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201508339
  29. 29
    Ouchi, M.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Transition Metal-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization: Toward Perfection in Catalysis and Precision Polymer Synthesis. Chem. Rev. 2009, 109, 49635050,  DOI: 10.1021/cr900234b
  30. 30
    Yoda, H.; Nakatani, K.; Terashima, T.; Ouchi, M.; Sawamoto, M. Ethanol-Mediated Living Radical Homo- and Copolymerizations with Cp*-Ruthenium Catalysts: Active, Robust, and Universal for Functionalized Methacrylates. Macromolecules 2010, 43, 55955601,  DOI: 10.1021/ma100589b
  31. 31
    Fukuzaki, Y.; Tomita, Y.; Terashima, T.; Ouchi, M.; Sawamoto, M. Bisphosphine Monooxide-Ligated Ruthenium Catalysts: Active, Versatile, Removable, and Cocatalyst-Free in Living Radical Polymerization. Macromolecules 2010, 43, 59895955,  DOI: 10.1021/ma100871n
  32. 32
    Morimoto, N.; Wakamura, M.; Muramatsu, K.; Toita, S.; Nakayama, M.; Shoji, W.; Suzuki, M.; Winnik, F. M. Membrane Translocation and Organelle-Selective Delivery Steered by Polymeric Zwitterionic Nanospheres. Biomacromolecules 2016, 17, 15231535,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.biomac.6b00172
  33. 33
    Hinton, T. M.; Challagulla, A.; Stewart, C. R.; Guerrero-Sanchez, C.; Grusche, F. A.; Shi, S.; Bean, A. G.; Monaghan, P.; Gunatillake, P. A.; Thang, S. H.; Tizard, M. L. Inhibition of Influenza Virus In Vivo by siRNA Delivered Using ABA Triblock Copolymer Synthesized by Reversible Addition-Fragmentation Chain-Transfer Polymerization. Nanomedicine 2014, 9, 11411154,  DOI: 10.2217/nnm.13.119
  34. 34
    Mann, S. K.; Dufour, A.; Glass, J. J.; Rose, R. D.; Kent, S. J.; Such, G. K.; Johnston, P. R. Tuning the Properties of pH Responsive Nanoparticles to Control Cellular Interactions In Vitro and Ex Vivo. Polym. Chem. 2016, 7, 60156024,  DOI: 10.1039/C6PY01332E
  35. 35
    Sun, H.; Cui, J.; Ju, Y.; Chen, X.; Wong, E. H. H.; Tran, J.; Qiao, G. G.; Caruso, F. Tuning the Properties of Polymer Capsules for Cellular Interactions. Bioconjugate Chem. 2017, 28, 18591866,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.7b00168
  36. 36
    Takahashi, D.; Koda, Y.; Sasaki, Y.; Akiyoshi, K. Design and Synthesis of PEGylated Amphiphilic Block Oligomers as Membrane Anchors for Stable Binding to Lipid Bilayer Membranes. Polym. J. 2018, 50, 787797,  DOI: 10.1038/s41428-018-0055-5
  37. 37
    Matyjaszewski, K.; Tsarevsky, N. V. Macromolecular Engineering by Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 65136533,  DOI: 10.1021/ja408069v
  38. 38
    Anastasaki, A.; Nikolaou, V.; Nurumbetov, G.; Wilson, P.; Kempe, K.; Quinn, J. F.; Davis, T. P.; Whittaker, M. R.; Haddleton, D. M. Cu(0)-Mediated Living Radical Polymerization: A Versatile Tool for Materials Synthesis. Chem. Rev. 2016, 116, 835877,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00191
  39. 39
    Zhang, Q.; Wilson, P.; Li, Z.; McHale, R.; Godfrey, J.; Anastasaki, A.; Waldron, C.; Haddleton, D. M. Aqueous Copper-Mediated Living Polymerization: Exploiting Rapid Disproportionation of CuBr with Me6TREN. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 73557363,  DOI: 10.1021/ja4026402
  40. 40
    Alsubaie, F.; Anastasaki, A.; Nikolaou, V.; Simula, A.; Nurumbetov, G.; Wilson, P.; Kempe, K.; Haddleton, D. M. Investigating the Mechanism of Copper(0)-Mediated Living Radical Polymerization in Organic Media. Macromolecules 2015, 48, 55175525,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.5b01197
  41. 41
    Alsubaie, F.; Anastasaki, A.; Nikolaou, V.; Simula, A.; Nurumbetov, G.; Wilson, P.; Kempe, K.; Haddleton, D. M. Investigating the Mechanism of Copper(0)-Mediated Living Radical Polymerization in Aqueous Media. Macromolecules 2015, 48, 64216432,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.5b01208
  42. 42
    Thomson, D. A. C.; Tee, E. H. L.; Tran, N. T. D.; Monteiro, M. J.; Cooper, M. A. Oligonucleotide and Polymer Functionalized Nanoparticles for Amplification-Free Detection of DNA. Biomacromolecules 2012, 13, 19811989,  DOI: 10.1021/bm300717f
  43. 43
    Pramanik, P.; Halder, D.; Jana, S. S.; Ghosh, S. pH-Triggered Sustained Drug Delivery from a Polymer Micelle Having the β-Thiopropionate Linkage. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2016, 37, 14991506,  DOI: 10.1002/marc.201600260
  44. 44
    Ouchi, M.; Yoda, H.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Aqueous Metal-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization: Highly Active Water-Assisted Catalysis. Polym. J. 2012, 44, 5158,  DOI: 10.1038/pj.2011.59
  45. 45
    Terashima, T.; Ouchi, M.; Ando, T.; Kamigaito, M.; Sawamoto, M. Amphiphilic, Thermosensitive Ruthenium(II)-Bearing Star Polymer Catalysts: One-Pot Synthesis of PEG Armed Star Polymers with Ruthenium(II)-Enclosed Microgel Cores via Metal-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization. Macromolecules 2007, 40, 35813588,  DOI: 10.1021/ma062446r
  46. 46
    Kawaguchi, T.; Kojima, Y.; Osa, M.; Yoshizaki, T. Cloud Points in Aqueous Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) Solutions. Polym. J. 2008, 40, 455459,  DOI: 10.1295/polymj.PJ2007227
  47. 47
    Cao, J.; Wang, K.; Yang, H.; Chen, F.; Zhang, Q.; Fu, Q. Shear-Induced Clay Dispersion in HDPE/PEgMA/Organoclay Composites as Studied via Real-Time Rheological Method. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2010, 48, 302312,  DOI: 10.1002/polb.21881
  48. 48
    Kai, D.; Low, Z. W.; Liow, S. S.; Karim, A. A.; Ye, H.; Jin, G.; Li, K.; Loh, X. J. Development of Lignin Supramolecular Hydrogels with Mechanically Responsive and Self-Healing Properties. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3, 21602169,  DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00405
  49. 49
    Ward, M. A.; Georgiou, T. K. Thermoresponsive Terpolymers Based on Methacrylate Monomers: Effect of Architecture and Composition. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2010, 48, 775783,  DOI: 10.1002/pola.23825
  50. 50
    Iborra, A.; Díaz, G.; López, D.; Giussi, J. M.; Azzaroni, O. Copolymer Based on Lauryl Methacrylate and Poly(ethylene glycol) Methyl Ether Methacrylate as Amphiphilic Macrosurfactant: Synthesis, Characterization and Their Application as Dispersing Agent for Carbon Nanotubes. Eur. Polym. J. 2017, 87, 308317,  DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2016.12.027
  51. 51
    Watanabe, H.; Matsumiya, Y.; Inoue, T. Dielectric and Viscoelastic Relaxation of Highly Entangled Star Polyisoprene: Quantitative Test of Tube Dilation Model. Macromolecules 2002, 35, 23392357,  DOI: 10.1021/ma011782z

Cited By


This article is cited by 3 publications.

  1. Gamze Koçal, Burcu Oktay, Güneş Özen Eroğlu, Serap Erdem Kuruca, Soner Çubuk, Nilhan Kayaman Apohan. Stimuli-responsive smart nanoparticles with well-defined random and triblock terpolymers for controlled release of an anticancer drug. Materials Today Communications 2021, 26 , 101974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101974
  2. Hayato Onishi, Yuta Koda, Hideo Horibe. Thermoresponsive Conductivity of Acrylamide-based Polymers and Ni Microparticle Composites. Chemistry Letters 2020, 49 (10) , 1224-1227. https://doi.org/10.1246/cl.200342
  3. Sónia O. Pereira, Tito Trindade, Ana Barros-Timmons. Biofunctional Polymer Coated Au Nanoparticles Prepared via RAFT-Assisted Encapsulating Emulsion Polymerization and Click Chemistry. Polymers 2020, 12 (7) , 1442. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12071442
  • Abstract

    Scheme 1

    Scheme 1. Synthesis of Amphiphilic Homo, Random, Block, and Star (Co)Polymers Based on PEGOHMA via Ruthenium-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. SEC curves of (a) P1, (b) P3, (c) P5, and (d) P12 prepared by Ru-LRP. Conditions: (a, b) PEG9MA/HEMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB = 500 or 250/0 or 250/20/2.0/40 mM in EtOH at 40 °C;(30) (c) PEG4.5OHMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB = 500/20/2.0/40 mM in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 40 °C;(44) (d) PEG4.5OHMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB = 250/10/1.0/5.0 mM in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 25 °C.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Time–conversion (PEGOHMA, light blue; PEGMA, blue; BMA, orange) and SEC curves of (a, b) P16, (c, d) P19, and (e, f) P21 prepared by Ru-LRP in EtOH/H2O = 3/1 (v/v) at 25 °C. Conditions (ratio): (a, b) PEG4.5OHMA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB // BMAadd/4-DMABadd = 25/1/0.1/0.5 // 10/0.5; (c, d) PEG9OHMA/PEG9MA/ECPA/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB // BMAadd/4-DMABadd = 5/20/1/0.1/0.5 // 10/0.5; (e, f) PEG9OHMA/PEG9MA/DCAP/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2/4-DMAB // BMAadd/4-DMABadd = 5/20/1/0.1/0.5 // 20/0.5.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Time–conversion (PEGOHMA, light blue; PEGMA, blue; BMA, orange) and SEC curves of (a, b) P26 and (c, d) P32 prepared by Ru-LRP at 25 °C. Conditions (ratio): (a, b) PEG4.5MAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAsecond/4-DMABsecond // PEG4.5OHMAfinal = 25/1/0.1/2 // 25/3 // 50 in EtOH (first, second polymn) and EtOH/H2O (= 3/1, v/v; final polymn (c, d) PEG4.5OHMAfirst/ECPAfirst/RuCp*Cl(PPh3)2,first/4-DMABfirst // BMAsecond/4-DMABsecond // PEG4.5MAfinal = 25/1/0.5/0.2/4 // 20 // 50 in EtOH/H2O (=3/1, v/v).

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. 1H NMR spectra (400 MHz, rt) of (a) P19, (b) P21, and (c) P32 in CD2Cl2; [polymer] = 30 mg/mL.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Transmittance of the aqueous solutions of (a) poly(PEG4.5MA) (black, P2) and poly(PEG4.5OHMA) (red, P12), (b) P14 (black) and P16 (red), and (c) the aqueous (black), PBS (blue) and HEPES (red) buffer solutions of P14 monitored at 670 nm by changing the temperature (heating/cooling rate = 1 °C/min) from 20 to 100 °C; [polymer] = 1.0 mg/mL.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. (a, b) DLS intensity distribution of P16, P17, P36, and P37 in PBS, and (c, d) TEM images of P16 and P17 in HEPES/KOH buffer; [polymer] = 1.0 mg/mL.

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. Viscoelastic properties of P2 (black), P12 (blue), and P33 (green) in the bulk state at 25 °C. (a) Shear stress (τ, filled circle) and viscosity (η, filled square) of the copolymers as a function of shear rate (dγ/dt). Shear storage (G′, unfilled circle) and loss (G″, unfilled square) moduli, and loss tangent (tan δ, unfilled triangle) of the copolymers as a function of (b) strain (γ) and (c, d) frequency (ω) at 1 Hz.

    Figure 8

    Figure 8. SDS-PAGE visualized by Coomassie brilliant blue (CBB) staining (lane 1, protein ladder; lane 2, SAv; lane 3, P16; lane 4, biotinylated P16; lane 5, P36; lane 6, P38; lane 7, SAv with P16; lane 8, SAv with biotinylated P16; lane 9, SAv with P36; lane 10, SAv with P38).

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 51 other publications.

    1. 1
      Nivasu, V. M.; Reddy, T. T.; Tammishetti, S. In Situ Polymerizable Polyethyleneglycol Containing Polyesterpolyol Acrylates for Tissue Sealant Applications. Biomaterials 2004, 25, 32833291,  DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.091
    2. 2
      Hoshi, S.; Okamoto, F.; Arai, M.; Hirose, T.; Sugiura, Y.; Kaji, Y.; Oshika, T. In Vivo and In Vitro Feasibility Studies of Intraocular Use of Polyethylene Glycol-Based Synthetic Sealant to Close Retinal Breaks in Porcine and Rabbit Eyes. Invest. Ophthalmol. Visual Sci. 2015, 56, 47054711,  DOI: 10.1167/iovs.14-15349
    3. 3
      Ferguson, R. E. H.; Rinker, B. The Use of Hydrogel Sealant on Flexor Tendon Repairs to Prevent Adhesion Formation. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2006, 56, 5458,  DOI: 10.1097/01.sap.0000181666.00492.0e
    4. 4
      Torchiana, D. F. Polyethylene Glycol Based Synthetic Sealants: Potential Uses in Cardiac Surgery. J. Card. Surg. 2003, 18, 504506,  DOI: 10.1046/j.0886-0440.2003.00305.x
    5. 5
      Barenholz, Y. C. Doxil®–The First FDA-Approved Nano Drug: Lessons Learned. J. Controlled Release 2012, 160, 117134,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.03.020
    6. 6
      Wibroe, P. P.; Ahmadvand, D.; Oghabian, M. A.; Yaghmur, A.; Moghimi, S. M. An Integrated Assessment of Morphology, Size, and Complement Activation of the PEGylated Liposomal Doxorubicin Products Doxil®, Caelyx®, DOXOrubicin, and SinaDoxosome. J. Controlled Release 2016, 221, 18,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.11.021
    7. 7
      Koren, E.; Apte, A.; Jani, A.; Torchilin, V. P. Multifunctional PEGylated 2C5-Immunoliposomes Containing pH-Sensitive Bonds and TAT Peptide for Enhanced Tumor Cell Internalization and Cytotoxicity. J. Controlled Release 2012, 160, 264273,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2011.12.002
    8. 8
      Deng, Z. J.; Morton, S. W.; Ben-Akiva, E.; Dreaden, E. C.; Shopsowitz, K. E.; Hammond, P. T. Layer-by-Layer Nanoparticles for Systemic Codelivery of an Anticancer Drug and siRNA for Potential Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Treatment. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 95719584,  DOI: 10.1021/nn4047925
    9. 9
      Aseyev, V.; Tenhu, H.; Winnik, F. M. Non-Ionic Thermoresponsive Polymers in Water. Adv. Polym. Sci. 2010, 242, 2989,  DOI: 10.1007/12_2010_57
    10. 10
      Saeki, S.; Kuwahara, N.; Nakata, M.; Kaneko, M. Upper and Lower Critical Solution Temperatures in Poly(ethylene glycol) Solutions. Polymer 1976, 17, 685689,  DOI: 10.1016/0032-3861(76)90208-1
    11. 11
      Lutz, J.-R. Polymerization of Oligo(Ethylene Glycol) (Meth)Acrylates: Toward New Generations of Smart Biocompatible Materials. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2008, 46, 34593470,  DOI: 10.1002/pola.22706
    12. 12
      Lee, J.; McGrath, A. J.; Hawker, C. J.; Kim, B.-S. pH-Tunable Thermoresponsive PEO-Based Functional Polymers with Pendant Amine Groups. ACS Macro Lett. 2016, 5, 13911396,  DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.6b00830
    13. 13
      Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. LCST-Type Phase Separation of Poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate]s in Hydrofluorocarbon. ACS Macro Lett. 2015, 4, 13661369,  DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.5b00771
    14. 14
      Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Multimode Self-Folding Polymers via Reversible and Thermoresponsive Self-Assembly of Amphiphilic/Fluorous Random Copolymers. Macromolecules 2016, 49, 45344543,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.6b00998
    15. 15
      Elsabahy, M.; Heo, G. S.; Lim, S.-M.; Sun, G.; Wooley, K. L. Polymeric Nanostructures for Imaging and Therapy. Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 1096711011,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00135
    16. 16
      Fernandez-Trillo, F.; Grover, L. M.; Stephenson-Brown, A.; Harrison, P.; Mendes, P. M. Vesicles in Nature and the Laboratory: Elucidation of Their Biological Properties and Synthesis of Increasingly Complex Synthetic Vesicles. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 31423160,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201607825
    17. 17
      Hussain, H.; Mya, K. Y.; He, C. Self-Assembly of Brush-Like Poly[poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether methacrylate] Synthesized via Aqueous Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization. Langmuir 2008, 24, 1327913286,  DOI: 10.1021/la802734e
    18. 18
      Terashima, T. Functional Spaces in Star and Single-Chain Polymers via Living Radical Polymerization. Polym. J. 2014, 46, 664673,  DOI: 10.1038/pj.2014.57
    19. 19
      Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Fluorous Microgel Star Polymers: Selective Recognition and Separation of Polyfluorinated Surfactants and Compounds in Water. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 1574215748,  DOI: 10.1021/ja508818j
    20. 20
      Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Star Polymer Gels with Fluorinated Microgels via Star–Star Coupling and Cross-Linking for Water Purification. ACS Macro Lett. 2015, 4, 377380,  DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.5b00127
    21. 21
      Pelegri-O’Day, E. M.; Lin, E.-W.; Maynard, H. D. Therapeutic Protein–Polymer Conjugates: Advancing Beyond PEGylation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 1432314332,  DOI: 10.1021/ja504390x
    22. 22
      Krall, N.; Da Cruz, F. P.; Boutureira, O.; Bernardes, G. J. L. Site-Selective Protein-Modification Chemistry for Basic Biology and Drug Development. Nat. Chem. 2016, 8, 103113,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2393
    23. 23
      Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M.; Maynard, H. D. Amphiphilic/Fluorous Random Copolymers as a New Class of Non-Cytotoxic Polymeric Materials for Protein Conjugation. Polym. Chem. 2015, 6, 240247,  DOI: 10.1039/C4PY01346H
    24. 24
      Koda, Y.; Terashima, T.; Maynard, H. D.; Sawamoto, M. Protein Storage with Perfluorinated PEG Compartments in a Hydrofluorocarbon Solvent. Polym. Chem. 2016, 7, 66946698,  DOI: 10.1039/C6PY01333C
    25. 25
      Matsumura, Y.; Maeda, H. A New Concept for Macromolecular Therapeutics in Cancer Chemotherapy: Mechanism of Tumoritropic Accumulation of Proteins and the Antitumor Agent Smancs. Cancer Res. 1986, 46, 63876392
    26. 26
      Fang, J.; Nakamura, H.; Maeda, H. The EPR Effect: Unique Features of Tumor Blood Vessels for Drug Delivery, Factors Involved, and Limitations and Augmentation of the Effect. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2011, 63, 136151,  DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2010.04.009
    27. 27
      Cabral, H.; Kataoka, K. Progress of Drug-Loaded Polymeric Micelles into Clinical Studies. J. Controlled Release 2014, 190, 465476,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.06.042
    28. 28
      Anraku, Y.; Kishimura, A.; Kamiya, M.; Tanaka, S.; Nomoto, T.; Toh, K.; Matsumoto, Y.; Fukushima, S.; Sueyoshi, D.; Kano, M. R.; Urano, Y.; Nishiyama, N.; Kataoka, K. Systemically Injectable Enzyme-Loaded Polyion Complex Vesicles as In Vivo Nanoreactors Functioning in Tumors. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 560565,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201508339
    29. 29
      Ouchi, M.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Transition Metal-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization: Toward Perfection in Catalysis and Precision Polymer Synthesis. Chem. Rev. 2009, 109, 49635050,  DOI: 10.1021/cr900234b
    30. 30
      Yoda, H.; Nakatani, K.; Terashima, T.; Ouchi, M.; Sawamoto, M. Ethanol-Mediated Living Radical Homo- and Copolymerizations with Cp*-Ruthenium Catalysts: Active, Robust, and Universal for Functionalized Methacrylates. Macromolecules 2010, 43, 55955601,  DOI: 10.1021/ma100589b
    31. 31
      Fukuzaki, Y.; Tomita, Y.; Terashima, T.; Ouchi, M.; Sawamoto, M. Bisphosphine Monooxide-Ligated Ruthenium Catalysts: Active, Versatile, Removable, and Cocatalyst-Free in Living Radical Polymerization. Macromolecules 2010, 43, 59895955,  DOI: 10.1021/ma100871n
    32. 32
      Morimoto, N.; Wakamura, M.; Muramatsu, K.; Toita, S.; Nakayama, M.; Shoji, W.; Suzuki, M.; Winnik, F. M. Membrane Translocation and Organelle-Selective Delivery Steered by Polymeric Zwitterionic Nanospheres. Biomacromolecules 2016, 17, 15231535,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.biomac.6b00172
    33. 33
      Hinton, T. M.; Challagulla, A.; Stewart, C. R.; Guerrero-Sanchez, C.; Grusche, F. A.; Shi, S.; Bean, A. G.; Monaghan, P.; Gunatillake, P. A.; Thang, S. H.; Tizard, M. L. Inhibition of Influenza Virus In Vivo by siRNA Delivered Using ABA Triblock Copolymer Synthesized by Reversible Addition-Fragmentation Chain-Transfer Polymerization. Nanomedicine 2014, 9, 11411154,  DOI: 10.2217/nnm.13.119
    34. 34
      Mann, S. K.; Dufour, A.; Glass, J. J.; Rose, R. D.; Kent, S. J.; Such, G. K.; Johnston, P. R. Tuning the Properties of pH Responsive Nanoparticles to Control Cellular Interactions In Vitro and Ex Vivo. Polym. Chem. 2016, 7, 60156024,  DOI: 10.1039/C6PY01332E
    35. 35
      Sun, H.; Cui, J.; Ju, Y.; Chen, X.; Wong, E. H. H.; Tran, J.; Qiao, G. G.; Caruso, F. Tuning the Properties of Polymer Capsules for Cellular Interactions. Bioconjugate Chem. 2017, 28, 18591866,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.7b00168
    36. 36
      Takahashi, D.; Koda, Y.; Sasaki, Y.; Akiyoshi, K. Design and Synthesis of PEGylated Amphiphilic Block Oligomers as Membrane Anchors for Stable Binding to Lipid Bilayer Membranes. Polym. J. 2018, 50, 787797,  DOI: 10.1038/s41428-018-0055-5
    37. 37
      Matyjaszewski, K.; Tsarevsky, N. V. Macromolecular Engineering by Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 65136533,  DOI: 10.1021/ja408069v
    38. 38
      Anastasaki, A.; Nikolaou, V.; Nurumbetov, G.; Wilson, P.; Kempe, K.; Quinn, J. F.; Davis, T. P.; Whittaker, M. R.; Haddleton, D. M. Cu(0)-Mediated Living Radical Polymerization: A Versatile Tool for Materials Synthesis. Chem. Rev. 2016, 116, 835877,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00191
    39. 39
      Zhang, Q.; Wilson, P.; Li, Z.; McHale, R.; Godfrey, J.; Anastasaki, A.; Waldron, C.; Haddleton, D. M. Aqueous Copper-Mediated Living Polymerization: Exploiting Rapid Disproportionation of CuBr with Me6TREN. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 73557363,  DOI: 10.1021/ja4026402
    40. 40
      Alsubaie, F.; Anastasaki, A.; Nikolaou, V.; Simula, A.; Nurumbetov, G.; Wilson, P.; Kempe, K.; Haddleton, D. M. Investigating the Mechanism of Copper(0)-Mediated Living Radical Polymerization in Organic Media. Macromolecules 2015, 48, 55175525,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.5b01197
    41. 41
      Alsubaie, F.; Anastasaki, A.; Nikolaou, V.; Simula, A.; Nurumbetov, G.; Wilson, P.; Kempe, K.; Haddleton, D. M. Investigating the Mechanism of Copper(0)-Mediated Living Radical Polymerization in Aqueous Media. Macromolecules 2015, 48, 64216432,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.5b01208
    42. 42
      Thomson, D. A. C.; Tee, E. H. L.; Tran, N. T. D.; Monteiro, M. J.; Cooper, M. A. Oligonucleotide and Polymer Functionalized Nanoparticles for Amplification-Free Detection of DNA. Biomacromolecules 2012, 13, 19811989,  DOI: 10.1021/bm300717f
    43. 43
      Pramanik, P.; Halder, D.; Jana, S. S.; Ghosh, S. pH-Triggered Sustained Drug Delivery from a Polymer Micelle Having the β-Thiopropionate Linkage. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2016, 37, 14991506,  DOI: 10.1002/marc.201600260
    44. 44
      Ouchi, M.; Yoda, H.; Terashima, T.; Sawamoto, M. Aqueous Metal-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization: Highly Active Water-Assisted Catalysis. Polym. J. 2012, 44, 5158,  DOI: 10.1038/pj.2011.59
    45. 45
      Terashima, T.; Ouchi, M.; Ando, T.; Kamigaito, M.; Sawamoto, M. Amphiphilic, Thermosensitive Ruthenium(II)-Bearing Star Polymer Catalysts: One-Pot Synthesis of PEG Armed Star Polymers with Ruthenium(II)-Enclosed Microgel Cores via Metal-Catalyzed Living Radical Polymerization. Macromolecules 2007, 40, 35813588,  DOI: 10.1021/ma062446r
    46. 46
      Kawaguchi, T.; Kojima, Y.; Osa, M.; Yoshizaki, T. Cloud Points in Aqueous Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) Solutions. Polym. J. 2008, 40, 455459,  DOI: 10.1295/polymj.PJ2007227
    47. 47
      Cao, J.; Wang, K.; Yang, H.; Chen, F.; Zhang, Q.; Fu, Q. Shear-Induced Clay Dispersion in HDPE/PEgMA/Organoclay Composites as Studied via Real-Time Rheological Method. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2010, 48, 302312,  DOI: 10.1002/polb.21881
    48. 48
      Kai, D.; Low, Z. W.; Liow, S. S.; Karim, A. A.; Ye, H.; Jin, G.; Li, K.; Loh, X. J. Development of Lignin Supramolecular Hydrogels with Mechanically Responsive and Self-Healing Properties. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3, 21602169,  DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00405
    49. 49
      Ward, M. A.; Georgiou, T. K. Thermoresponsive Terpolymers Based on Methacrylate Monomers: Effect of Architecture and Composition. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2010, 48, 775783,  DOI: 10.1002/pola.23825
    50. 50
      Iborra, A.; Díaz, G.; López, D.; Giussi, J. M.; Azzaroni, O. Copolymer Based on Lauryl Methacrylate and Poly(ethylene glycol) Methyl Ether Methacrylate as Amphiphilic Macrosurfactant: Synthesis, Characterization and Their Application as Dispersing Agent for Carbon Nanotubes. Eur. Polym. J. 2017, 87, 308317,  DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2016.12.027
    51. 51
      Watanabe, H.; Matsumiya, Y.; Inoue, T. Dielectric and Viscoelastic Relaxation of Highly Entangled Star Polyisoprene: Quantitative Test of Tube Dilation Model. Macromolecules 2002, 35, 23392357,  DOI: 10.1021/ma011782z
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.8b00836.

    • Syntheses, time–conversion and SEC curves, and 1H NMR data (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

OOPS

You have to login with your ACS ID befor you can login with your Mendeley account.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect

This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By continuing to use the site, you are accepting our use of cookies. Read the ACS privacy policy.

CONTINUE